Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. The petition for cert in this case says:
Perhaps the single most important unresolved Second Amendment question after this Court’s landmark decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is whether the Second Amendment secures the individual right to bear arms for self-defense where confrontations often occur: outside the home.
This gets right to the heart of the matter as to why concealed weapons had a long standing status of being prohibited. Having those confrontations turn deadly.
What seems to be seriously neglected in all this debate is not only does the US Constitution NOT mention self-defence, the use of deadly force was seriously proscribed at the time the US Constitution was drafted.
I'm disappointed at the State of New York's petition against the granting of cert because it fails to mention that the Heller decision clearly stated that prohibitions on concealed weapons were acceptable under the Second Amendment. Not only that but the US Supreme Court already stated in the dicta to Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275 (1897) that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms (Art. II) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons;"
If using the dicta in Dred Scott v Sanford is OK to establish this right, then using the dicta in another Supreme Court case should be more than acceptable to limit that right.
The problem here is that New York's law was adopted in 1913 and is one of the "presumptively lawful regulatory measures" that fall under the scope of acceptable limitations on their reinterpretation of the Second Amendment. I would add that Heller and McDonald were not cases of first impression despite the courts pretence that they were.
The problem with this case is that there is (1) a long standing law which is being challenged and (2) there is a substantial public purpose for that law.
But then again, my blognomen does come from the fact that my dog had been in court far more than Harriet Miers ever had. I don't have too much respect for what finds itself on the court.