Federal court rules against concealed carry permits

second-amendment1The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the Second Amendment does not afford Americans the right to a concealed weapons permit, according to a Fox News report.

Washington state resident Gray Peterson filed a lawsuit against Denver and its Department of Public Safety, claiming that being denied a concealed weapons permit because he was not a Colorado resident violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. A federal judge tossed out Peterson’s lawsuit in 2011, and Peterson appealed.

While Colorado recognizes weapons permits issued by other states, Washington state is not one of them because it does not recognize Colorado permits.

Colorado Attorney General’s Office spokeswoman Carolyn Tyler said the agency was “gratified that the 10th Circuit Court has upheld Colorado state law.”

The three-judge panel cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, saying:

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons.”

“In light of our nation’s extensive practice of restricting citizen’s freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this activity does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections,” the judges ruled.

Peterson, who had permits from Florida and Washington, said he needed to carry a firearm during his visits to Denver, according to the report.

Read the entire Fox News report here.

Cheryl Carpenter Klimek

Cheryl Carpenter Klimek

Cheryl Carpenter Klimek has been a political consultant handling public affairs, political campaigns and PAC management for nearly 20 years.
Cheryl Carpenter Klimek


5 thoughts on “Federal court rules against concealed carry permits

  1. Luther Henry says:

    Depending on the subjects necessity to carry concealed in Colorado and the veracity of the perceived threat to his safety or the safety of others., I would say that it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

  2. Tony says:

    So does this mean the judge would have to conclude that prohibiting open carry does violate the 2nd Amendment?

    1. Hudmar says:

      I rather understand it as, we don't need a permit to carry a weapon. The second Amendment clearly states that our rights to own one shall not be infringed, therefore we should carry one where ever.

  3. Rifraffe says:

    It's a Constitutional right to own and "bear" arms, not "bare" arms. The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms. Have a weapon on our person. Unless a citizen has been prohibited by law (felon, adjudged mentally incompetent) then carrying a weapon should be protected by the Constitution. For NYC or any state or municipality to over-ride that constitutionally given right is, to me, the more serious question. Colorado shouldn't worry. When you are high on good weed all you want to do is laugh and munch out….if memory serves 🙂

  4. StandUp4YourRights says:

    Ok great, lets all just open carry then. I prefer that anyway and open carry when i can here in Iowa.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts