…gets it right.
A Mississippi judge had held up the state’s recently passed firearm open carry law, insisting that it was unconstitutionally vague. The law, in a burst of logic unusual for politicians [/snark], says in essence that “adults don’t need a permit to carry a gun that’s not concealed.” The Mississippi Supreme Court overruled the state judge—by unanimous opinion—and allowed the law to take effect. Justice Randy Pierce, writing for the Court, had this in part:
This court now finds that the circuit judge erred as a matter of law when he found House Bill 2 to be vague and, therefore, unconstitutional. He also erred when he stated that a “reasonable person reading the bill could not discern what the law allows and what it prohibits[.]”
Indeed, that judge seems to have simply rubber-stamped the artificial and disingenuous argument that
it has caused confusion about where people may carry guns that aren’t concealed. They also say it could put law enforcement officers in danger if people with no training are carrying guns.
This, of course, cynically conflates two separate arguments. The first is deliberately obtuse. There is no confusion: existing Mississippi laws clearly describe locations where guns are proscribed. Not requiring a permit to carry a gun openly in no way permits carrying a gun where it’s banned.
The second argument is relevant to the open carry matter only to the extent that the cop who’s “in danger” knows it because the gun is in plain sight. It’s the cop who’s dealing with a man with a concealed weapon who’s in danger—no matter the training of that man.
As an aside, the state circuit judge seems, himself, to have been willfully obtuse. That’s dangerous to the rule of law, allowing a judge to overlay his whim on a law. It’s good that wiser heads prevailed, this time.