I thought it was clear that campgrounds are considered one's home(i.e. able to posess/carry). But maybe this is from CA precedent, may not be national, but you can legally posess while in your own domicile, and that includes hotels, motels, campgrounds, etc(doesn't necessarily mean you can carry when away from your camp, i.e. hiking, etc.). Hell most states even consider the vehicle as an extension of the home. Interesting verdict regardless.
Last edited:
We will see what OK AoE says, i sent the link to them.Maybe all AoE will change their policy.
It'd be nice if they'd get their heads out of their kiesters, but I'd imagine that they'd keep to their current line--that the ruling only applies in that court's jurisdiction.
I know here it's a no no to carry in Corps parks and such. Buddy of mine works on Kaw and says "not allowed to carry in the parks" but they don't enforce it.
Also, carrying a pistol on the Nav or Corp lakes is a no no. Of course I still do it, like my BowFishing story from a few months ago...
Maybe I should sent this link to my buddy and see what he says.
Also, carrying a pistol on the Nav or Corp lakes is a no no. Of course I still do it, like my BowFishing story from a few months ago...
Maybe I should sent this link to my buddy and see what he says.
With that case as a precedent, you might be able to fight it here if you got busted. My problem is that I ain't rich enough to make case law...
Maybe if the 171 veiwer would send a nice email to army corp they would take notice.
Too bad GeorgiaCarry.Org, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, wasn't the same outcome.
Since I have come back to Oklahoma I have lost touch with all these 2A cases. Need to dive back in so I can stay in the know. Peruta is still pending and may be vacated, but it may also be incorporated into Richards v Prieto(long shot, but possible). It would be nice to see this get to SCOTUS, but CA9 is biding their time on a ruling.
As a matter of law, the Corps is correct: the ruling does only apply in that court's district.
See above. Precedent is only binding within a court's jurisdiction; it may be persuasive elsewhere, but the degree of weight given to a foreign court's ruling is entirely up to the discretion of the forum court. To wit:
In this case, the district court is properly submitting to the authority of its superior appellate court (9th Circuit). The Supreme Court is superior to the circuit court, but SCOTUS hasn't given us a clear ruling on the specific limits (and likely won't), so the circuit courts get to make that decision until the high court specifically reverses a circuit court ruling.
Similar threads
