Out in public is rightly a wholly different legal situation. It’s all together different in every practical sense. Older SCOTUS decisions, the origin of stand your ground only had any validity at home, at your place of business and on your land. Not on the way to anywhere. Not on the back from anywhere. Like it or not out in public is going to much more tightly regulated than at home. And that is how it should be. Later we can get into what does justify a CCW or open carry permit, like what we already do for armed guards.

Now here is where New Jersey gets it totally wrong, IMHO. CCW should be a legal option given good reason pr “good cause”. Well New Jersey denied an ex cop a permit. They also denied a man who re stocks ATM machines with cash a permit. I can see diamond and gold dealers would also be denied.

With reasonable requirements for background, skills, training etc available this is a violation of that nebulous right we do have to defend ourselves adequately.

This is a good call by SCOTUS, as a blanket right to CCW has perilous implications. A CCW for good cause and by way of a properly qualified person in terms of training really needs to be there.

The US Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a case that many analysts believed might have delivered another landmark Second Amendment decision expanding gun rights in the United States.

The court took the action in a one-line order without further comment. It affirms lower court decisions upholding a New Jersey gun permit statute that critics say is too restrictive.

The question in the case was whether the New Jersey gun regulation violated a fundamental right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

The issue arrived at the high court at a time of heightened public concern about the prevalence of guns in US society and a seeming stream of mass shootings at schools, job sites, and other public places.

More: Strict N.J. Rule on Gun Permits Stands, as Supreme Court Refuses Case