In the swing state of Florida, a gun rights group formally requested on Monday for the Supreme Court to take up a case involving the Second Amendment and the constitutional right to open carry — and if they rule in their favor, gun-control snowflakes will be furious.
According to Sunshine State News, Florida Carry filed an appeal with the nation’s highest court in the matter of Dale Norman v. Florida, a case which raises issues about the constitutionality of open carry and whether an individual can be charged if a legally-concealed firearm is accidentally brandished.
Normal was arrested in Fort Pierce back 2012 when his clothing did not conceal his firearm, apparently by accident. An individual informed the police and he was arrested, eventually being convicted of a second-degree misdemeanor.
Advertisement – story continues below
The case went all the way to the Florida Supreme Court, where WLRN-FM says the court ruled 4-2 against Norman. In court filings obtained by Breitbart News, the ruling said that the Second Amendment “does not guarantee a right openly to carry a firearm in public” and upheld Norman’s conviction.
However, in his dissent, Florida Supreme Court Justice Charles Canady noted that the two most significant recent cases regarding Second Amendment constitutional law — District of Columbia v. Heller, which established that the Second Amendment established the right to individual firearm ownership, and McDonald v. City of Chicago, which established that due process clause of the 14th Amendment applied to gun ownership — meant that the court’s ruling was erroneous.
“Three elements of the Supreme Court’s reasoning in District of Columbia v. Heller … illuminate the constitutional question here,” Canady’s dissent read. “The third element establishes that the Second Amendment right is a right to openly carry firearms.”
Advertisement – story continues below
The first element was the already-established right to bear arms outside of the home. The second, surprisingly, was Heller’s notion that “the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.”
Finally, this meant that in the light of other litigation involving the Second Amendment, case law “point(s) strongly to the conclusion that the constitutional right is best understood historically as a specific right to carry arms openly.”
Now, Florida Carry — which is funding Dale Norman’s defense — has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. If four justices decide to pick up the case, the constitutionality of open carry could be on the docket.
“The issue is whether a prohibition on peaceably and openly carrying a lawfully-owned handgun infringes on ‘the right of the people to . . . bear arms’ protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Florida Carry’s petition to the Supreme Court reads.
“That issue also involves the extent to which a restriction on a constitutional right may be upheld, under a proper standard of review, on the basis of a post hoc argument of counsel with no foundation in the legislative or factual record.”
It’s worth pointing out that getting a writ of certiorari may be difficult. Just recently, the court declined to hear a case involving the concealed carry rights of a California man who was denied a license under the restrictive rules of both the state and San Diego County.
However, if it does go to court, this could mean a major victory for the Second Amendment — and a huge defeat for gun-grabbing snowflakes.
Advertisement - story continues below
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you hope this gets picked up by the Supreme Court.
What are your thoughts on this case? Scroll down to comment below.