How did the Right to Carry move "quickly"?

[mrjam2jab]

[tlnzz1]

Momentum and people who care about the Constitution. Individuals, groups and organisations. Now, if we could just get the Pa. Game Commission to move into the 21st century, that would be a win.

[Yellowfin]

The better question is, why did the laws need to get changed considering there's that "shall not be infringed" part of the 2nd.

Short answer is because the Supreme Court effectively blotted the 2nd Amendment out of the Constitution almost immediately, so for the vast majority of our history it wasn't there at all and from slavery to the Segregation Era almost 200 years routine violation of Constitutional rights was considered normal and expected.

1833: Barron v. Baltimore -- ruled the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to the states

1873: the Slaughterhouse Cases -- Effectively nullifying the 14th Amendment which was supposed to apply BoR to the states, said that states only had to respect rights of citizens as part of their being a US citizen, not on matters pertaining to them and the specific state (As in you might have a right to own a gun in the US as a whole, but not specifically for instance in New Jersey)

1879: US v. Cruikshank -- 2nd Amendment doesn't apply vs. actions of state or local governments (Oh, interesting to know, this decision was to let a white sheriff in Louisiana get away scot free for mass murder of over 100 people because they happened to be black.)

1896: Plessy v. Ferguson -- Police and local governments have prerogative to restrict or deny rights as part of maintaining social order, and certain people owe it to society to surrender parts of their rights in exchange for the benefits of being protected under membership of society as a whole.

1938: US v. Carolene Products -- Governments have the prerogative to keep society safe but can't always prove that it's necessary so in order to do their job they have to have free rein to try, so that as long as there's a possible rational basis for the laws according to purposes they claim, laws passed are to be presumed Constitutional. And if it's not a real dire case of absolute necessity, the Supreme Court isn't interesting in hearing any challenges to any laws from now on.

...so there you have it, all the way from almost the very beginning of the Constitution itself, ZERO interest in the Supreme Court at all in sticking up for our rights. Until 2008 with Heller all the way back from at very least 1879 and really 1833 there was ZERO 2nd Amendment at all anywhere, and only 2010 with McDonald anything applied to the states, and even that just barely starting. So less than 40 years at the beginning and now only 2 years out of over 220 years total has been ours, everything else has been in total blackout. Lack of official objection by the Court to anti gun laws was taken as official approval.

[knight0334]

Unless their law has changed very recently, Alabama is technically "May Issue".