tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post1261401838828428335..comments2024-01-05T12:03:52.460-05:00Comments on No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money: Open Carry In North CarolinaJohn Richardsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03151468462458613615noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146148016062694502.post-68062716218321813932013-03-08T10:52:24.683-05:002013-03-08T10:52:24.683-05:00"The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court v..."The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court verdict, noting the distinction between the right to keep and bear arms and the right to carry concealed weapons."<br /><br />I know many states have distinctions like that, but I don't find it credible. For starters, "bearing arms" can be open or concealed. I find nothing in the language that prevents that. Second, many states clarified in their state constitutions that bearing arms for that state does not cover concealed weapons. If it didn't anyway, why the extra disclaimer? <br /><br />We need to start making the argument that carrying is carrying, open or concealed, and that both are protected by the 2nd amendment. Sounds like the 7th US Court of Appeals has a similar argument. Patrick Henry, the 2ndhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10875023999017392196noreply@blogger.com