Remember that old saying about blind hogs and acorns?  Well, the Ninth Circuit Court found an acorn.   Here are a few stories:

The Blue Steel Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

Concealed Carry in California: A benchmark win in 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

California Ban on Concealed Weapons Overturned by 9th Circuit Appeals Court

Liberal Ninth Circuit Court Upholds Concealed Carry

Here is the actual ruling – read it for yourself.  Source documents should always be examined, as the media rarely gets the whole story right.  This is the money quote from that document (emphasis mine):

We are well aware that, in the judgment of many governments, the safest sort of firearm-carrying regime is one which restricts the privilege to law enforcement with only narrow exceptions. Nonetheless, “the enshrinement of constitutional  rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. . . . Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court [or ours] to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” Id. at 636. Nor may we delegate the bearing of arms to a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees that we have held to be incorporated into the Due Process Clause.” McDonald, 130 S. Ct. at 3044.  The district court erred in denying the applicant’s motion for summary judgment on the Second Amendment claim because San Diego County’s “good cause” permitting requirement impermissibly infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense.

There are a few things that make this ruling significant:

• The liberal Ninth Circuit has affirmed a Supreme Court precedent, namely that the Second Amendment enshrines an individual right to keep and bear arms, and further, that for that right to have any meaning, it must encompass the carrying of arms outside the home.
• Requiring the demonstration of “good cause” represents an unconstitutional infringement of that right.
• No other requirements – say, an unreasonable fee – may be imposed to place the exercise of that right beyond the reach of an average citizen.

It’s entirely possible the entire Ninth Circuit will overturn this decision; that Court is notoriously liberal on issues of this sort.  It is, however, by some wide margin the Circuit Court most often reversed by the Supreme Court, which is plainly where this issue will be headed, one way or the other.  And the Supreme Court, as currently comprised, will almost certainly rule in favor of the right to bear arms.