Originally Posted by
ChamberedRound
Let me preface this, as always, by saying I'm not a lawyer, so take it FWIW.
LRT,
The state constitution also doesn't say that "the right to keep and bear arms in a concealed manner shall not be questioned".
That's not what Statkowski is getting at, IMHO. Because the state constitution and the UFA states that open carry is allowed without restriction or permit needed, the state is not limiting anyone's right to unquestionably carry a firearm. They do question individuals' rights to carry concealed, but carrying concealed is not constitutionally protected. I don't like it, but that's seems to be how they're getting away with it.
Now, if open carry were regulated, or were to be banned, then a case could likely be made, as there would be no method of "keeping and bearing arms" that would be "unquestioned". The state has to protect some method carrying firearms unquestioned in order for the state's constitution to be upheld, but not necessarily all.
End of my $0.02.