• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

MS:Judge Blocks Mississippi Constitution from Taking Effect on Open Carry of Arms

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
In a surprise move, circuit Judge Winston Kidd ruled the law that restores the open carry rights guaranteed by the Mississippi Constitution as vague, and that an injunction is needed to stop irreparable harm.

This bizarre interpretation of the law comes late in the process. The law clarified a strange interpretation of the Mississippi concealed carry law that defined any kind of carry as concealed carry. According to that interpretation, even carrying a pistol by a thong around the neck was defined as "concealed carry" because the the thong "concealed" a tiny part of the pistol.

No other state in the union has such an interpretation of what "concealed" means.

Open carry of weapons has always been protected by the Mississippi Constitution. Concealed carry of weapons was protected until the Constitutional amendments of 1890, when the legislature was granted the power to regulate concealed weapons.

Here are the changes that have been made in the Mississippi Constitution regarding the right to bear arms since statehood:

1817 Mississippi: Every citizen has a right to bear arms, in defence of himself and the State.

1832 Mississippi: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defence of himself and of the State.

1868 Mississippi: All persons shall have a right to keep and bear arms for their defence.

1890 The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.

The clarification of the law passed the legislature with overwhelming margins, was signed by the governor, and was to go into effect on 1 July, 2013.

In support of the injunction, State Senator John Horhn, Democrat, of Jackson said "we don't believe that the constitution provides for open carry."

A hearing is scheduled for 8 July for more arguments to determine if the injunction should be extended for more time.

A lawyer for the Southern Poverty Law Center, played the tired old "wild West" card, claiming mayhem woud follow if the Constitution was enforced and open carry protected as it is in most states.

The Mississippi Constitution seems clear.


http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/06/msjudge-blocks-mississippi-constitution.html

Links are live at the original article
 

Eeyore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
551
Location
the meanest city in the stupidest state
Ignorami

IIn support of the injunction, State Senator John Horhn, Democrat, of Jackson said "we don't believe that the constitution provides for open carry."

Aside from Horhn, who is this "we" that is demonstrating their complete ignorance of Article 12 of the MS Constitution?

Clearly the District Attorney is every bit as incompetent as the deputy AG that authored the OC opinion last year:

"If it's unconstitutional for an individual to drink and drive, there should be some clarity about an individual drinking and carrying a loaded firearm," said Lewis. DUI is unconstitutional? Really?

But the best one of all: "We do believe there are several issues that have to be explored to see whether or not the legislature was allowed to vote and regulate on anything other than concealed weapons," said Smith. At what point did they vote or regulate on anything other than concealed weapons? All they did was clearly define "concealed," which is specifically within their purview. The fact that some people don't like the implications doesn't make it unconstitutional.

What a moron.
 
Top