The Ninth Circus Strikes Again

 Ok, so here is the Ninth Circus we all know and...well...know.  According to Bearing Arms, the Ninth Circus...er...Circuit Rules 2A Doesn't Protect Right to Bear Arms. Wait...what? Doesn't the Second Amendment say " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."? If I understand the English language, then it seems that one of the things protect by the Second Amendment is the "bearing" part. They've already ruled that concealed carry can be infringed, and now they have ruled that open carry can be infringed as well. What, then, do they think "shall not be infringed" means?

The opinion in Young v. Hawaii, taken in conjunction with the Ninth Circuit’s decision a few years ago in a case called Peruta vs. San Diego, means that the largest appellate court in the country has declared that the average citizen has no right to bear arms at all; instead, the state has the privilege and power to grant certain people the ability to carry a firearm in self-defense.

You can read the ruling by going to the article by Cam Edwards and clicking on the 'opinion.' On the other hand, there appears to be at least one judge that can read English as well. Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain dissented from the ruling

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.” U.S. Const. amend. II (emphasis added). Today, a majority of our court has decided that the Second Amendment does not mean what it says. Instead, the majority holds that while the Second Amendment may guarantee the right to keep a firearm for self-defense within one’s home, it provides no right whatsoever to bear—i.e., to carry—that same firearm for  self defense in any other place.

This holding is as unprecedented as it is extreme. While our sister circuits have grappled with—and disagreed over—the question of whether public firearms carry falls within the inner “core” of the Second Amendment, we now become the first and only court of appeals to hold that public carry falls entirely outside the scope of the Amendment’s protections.

Well, there is some sanity at the Ninth Circuit.