maestro pistolero
New member
. . . like Chicago? So far, there is just enough ambiguity in the case law to prevent their shenanigans from hurting them in any meaningful way.
Soon, once carry outside the home has been made clear, we will see Chicago and others erect new and novel obstacles to the exercise of the right. There will be lines drawn to which they will either acquiesce, or not. I think, not.
If they refuse to allow carry, or make it so burdensome that it suppresses the right, what is the recourse?
At what point in this scenario, does stupid begin to hurt in any meaningful way? Put another way, what will it take to get complete protection from recalcitrant state and local government who would rather deny the right altogether?
Soon, once carry outside the home has been made clear, we will see Chicago and others erect new and novel obstacles to the exercise of the right. There will be lines drawn to which they will either acquiesce, or not. I think, not.
If they refuse to allow carry, or make it so burdensome that it suppresses the right, what is the recourse?
At what point in this scenario, does stupid begin to hurt in any meaningful way? Put another way, what will it take to get complete protection from recalcitrant state and local government who would rather deny the right altogether?