Gays Got the Right to Marry, Now Can Gun Owners Get the Right to Carry?

Yay! By a 5-4 split decision from the highest court in the land, handed down Friday, it is now lawful for same-sex couples to get married. Woot! Woot! Gay marriage is now legal everybody! Let’s celebrate! Put on your spanx, crank up the Boy George and let the wild rumpus begin!

Okay, I’m being sarcastic. I don’t even know if gays wear spanx or if they listen to Boy George. But the point is that the Supreme Court gave its blessing to gays seeking wedlock.

“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family,” wrote Justice Kennedy in the majority opinion. “In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were.”

“It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage,” Kennedy continued. “Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”

The high court came to its decision by deciding that same-sex marriage was a fundamental right and therefore individuals who wish to exercise that right are protected under the 14th Amendment, which reads in part (in case you forgot):

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities* of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I’m not going to wade into the conversation of whether marriage is a right or a privilege or whether I think the court got the decision right or wrong but what I will say is that if gay marriage is now widely recognized as a right and that citizens are free to exercise that right without interference from states — no more state bans on gay marriage — I think it’s about time that the Second Amendment gets the same treatment.

Let’s face facts, we have several states in this country (California, New York, New Jersey) that have fostered an institutional hostility toward firearms that permeates the state governments and Legislatures resulting in laws that effectively deny one the fundamental right of self-defense and infringe upon one’s Constitutional right to bear arms outside the home.

Specifically, I’m referring to ‘may-issue’ concealed carry laws that permit local law enforcement officers to arbitrarily deny law-abiding citizens their Second Amendment rights. The so-called “good cause” mandate, which means that concealed carry applicants have to, in addition to passing a background check and taking a gun safety course, provide to law enforcement a reason (usually in the form of documentation, e.g. police report of violent threat, restraining order), on why they should be allowed to carry a firearm.

May I state the obvious here? Does one need to provide a “good cause” before they exercise their right of free speech or freedom of religion or, now, their right to marry who they want to marry? I think not.

The constitutionality of may-issue is currently being litigated in California as well as Washington D.C. Back in May, U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. scrapped D.C.’s “good cause” requirement.

“This conclusion should not be read to suggest that it would be inappropriate for the District of Columbia to enact a licensing mechanism that includes appropriate time, place and manner restrictions on the carrying of handguns in public,” wrote Scullin. “The District of Columbia’s arbitrary ‘good reason’/’proper reason’ requirement, however, goes far beyond establishing such reasonable restrictions.”

“Rather, for all intents and purposes, this requirement makes it impossible for the overwhelming majority of law-abiding citizens to obtain licenses to carry handguns in public for self-defense, thereby depriving them of their Second Amendment right to bear arms,” he concluded.

While this latest ruling is a step in the right direction, the Supreme Court has still not weighed in on the matter. In fact, it’s turned down hearing cases that addressed this issue on multiple occasions over the years. The result of not having the high court weigh in on this is that may-issue laws are still on the books in states around the county which means Americans are not being permitted to exercise their rights which, if you’re still following me, appears to be in violation of the 14th Amendment (and, of course, the Second).

I guess that’s where I come out on this. I’m not a legal scholar, so there could be more to it that what I’ve written (I’m actually sure there is more to this). But in terms of what is logical and what is right, it seems to me that recognizing a citizen’s right to carry firearms outside the home without infringements from a state government is long overdue. The gays got their big win today. When will we (gun owners) get ours?

*Immunities, from

For the framers of the 14th Amendment the term of art, “immunities”, meant all those rights recognized and protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, including those of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. The framers of the Fourteenth used the word ‘immunities’ because the rights recognized and protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights are rights against action by government, which are “immunities”, as distinct from contractual or tort rights.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 26 comments… add one }
  • Mark Tercsak April 29, 2016, 9:24 am

    I have said this many times since This Bolshevik attack on Marriage started, God not man created marriage, he created Adam, and one day thought Adam needed a companion, God did not create Willy, or Billy or Trace, He created Eve, a Female, so Eve could bear Children, which is a small part of marriage, but an Important part of marriage, Thus Marriage is a Religious Right, and the Governmwnt has over reached it’s Constitutional Limitations, and has violated the 1st Amendment. Moving on I have heard supporters of gay marriage saying now we can have children and they would be legal ! How in the {Buck) can you have a child ? if there are two gay men, there is a problem, one of you is lack the neccessary equipment to have children, Like a womb for starters, and if you have two lesbians well you ladies are also lacking the neccessary equipment, I know you have (Dildo’s) and you know even have a hands free one that flys, but you lack naturally produced semen ! So how can you birth a child by natural means ! between two gay people ? you can not, they only way is to adopt, or one of the members of the couple commits adultary, but that no longer matters to the Gay community, and the stright Bolshevik community, I wonder if they have ever heard of HIV or Aids, could it be Gods punishment for those who stray and violate their vow of mariage ? I wonder sometimes ? The fact is there is no escape for a gay couple if one decides they want to father or mother a child by natural means, they must cheat. there for Gay marriage is wrong, wrong and should be banned.

    • Scott L September 19, 2017, 1:48 pm

      Amen Mark!

  • Jay June 30, 2015, 8:05 am

    Well toot my horn and float my boat! The rebel/confederate flag which represents the south wanting to not be apart of the Union and remain separate has become a symbol for the racist and a rainbow one will now replace it! The way the so called Supreme court ruled on the gay marriage law, we now have a very large open can of worms because of their ruling! By using the Constitution in the way they did, the Court argues that the Due Process Clause extends “certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy” saying that what is accepted in a majority of states across the state lines of a handful of states that still banned the practice. The vast majority of states have a law which is “shall issue” on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states. For instance your State (enter name here) has a concealed carry permit, it was recognized as being valid in 36 states, which happened to be the same number of states in which gay marriage was legal. Fourteen states did not recognize your concealed carry permit. Today they must according the way they made the ruling on gay marriage! Now, how many are going to climb on the boat of this ruling with other laws? Like I said, a Large Can of Worms is coming! Wait till the masses figure this one out and see what happens!

  • larry joe June 29, 2015, 6:31 pm

    I’m not a well educated man such as the above comments from others. However, This is biblical. Towards the end times, What is right will be wrong and what wrong will be right. Those responsible will pay the price. This I believe…. I have a 2 year old child. Can you imagen how this will affect the future of our children, I remember my dad asking me after a date with a girl”. Hey son, how did it go”. Can you imagine a gay father asking his son, “Hey son, did you bust that fine young man in the butt”. What a horrible thought.

    • Steve June 30, 2015, 2:33 pm

      #1 – Why would you assume that a gay father would have a gay son?
      #2 – Why would a gay father ask such a personal question? He’d be more likely to ask if the son (gay or not) had a good time on his date. What if, instead of your father asking “Hey son, how did it go?”, he asked “Did she swallow?”. I imagine you’d look upon that as a horrendous invasion of your privacy.
      3 – My son is gay and I would never think of asking him such a personal question. He’s married and you know what? I don’t feel my own marriage is threatened in the slightest. I’m just glad he’s happy.

    • steve July 1, 2015, 11:19 pm

      you’re right. you clearly aren’t a well educated man. pretty ignorant actually.
      also, your particular religious beliefs do not outweigh other peoples civil rights. i hope you have never engaged in masturbation, or oral/anal sex with a female, or pulled out in order to not get your wife/girlfriend pregnant, because your god is just against that as he is against homosexuality(though your god is also against, lobster, and bacon, and commands anyone who works on the sabbath to be stoned to death, and condoned and outlines slavery, so i wouldn’t put so much stock in what your god(and by god, i mean the particular sect of ancient hebrews pretending to write for god thousands of years ago) has to say about morality.

      • Wayne Clark August 13, 2016, 1:03 pm

        You see, that’s the dig right there. It’s not a matter of one’s “particular religious beliefs” outweighing other peoples civil rights…it’s a matter of people thinking their civil rights, outweighs God’s laws.

        I’m not talking about the restrictions He gave the people He chose to be His representatives to the rest of the world, to make them “a special people, set apart”, that they were not to partake of the things that were common among those that worshipped…things, false idols, other people. Some of the restrictions were there to see if they would obey His instructions &, some consequences were pretty harsh.

        What I’m referring to, are the natural laws He established in & for His creation…us. Certain laws were to be adhered to, despite how we, His creation, felt about them. Hence, when they weren’t followed, sin was created. He left it up to us, His creation, to decide if we will or will not follow His laws. Whomever chooses not to, will face the consequences.

        Now, whether you, me or anyone else choose to believe this “fairy tail”, is entirely our choice. It appears you have made yours but don’t believe for one second, that just because others are not like minded, that they are ignorant. You have your “civil rights”…& it’s not my job nor desire to judge your choice, that job belongs to God (my choice)…but if I’m wrong, I’ll just be wrong…with a little egg on my face…but what if I’m not? Are your “civil rights” greater than the consequences?

        Anyway, homosexuals got their weddings. Us gun toters demand our 2A rights be acknowledged as well. Not too much to ask for, is it?

  • hey June 29, 2015, 5:04 pm

    Our government literally makes the rules up as they go. Home security under the 2012 revised patriot act has the right to detain you indefinitely or kill you without due process, if you are on there suspected terrorist list which include stocking up on more than 7 days of food, buying bulk ammo, speaking out against the government. Ridiculous!! However if you are gay and do not do those things you are entitled to the 14th amendment.
    As far as religion goes this country was founded on Christian beliefs, you know back when couples married for a life time and was focus on the important aspects of life. Now our country is founded on Hollywood’s and our lobbied politicians beliefs. No wonder we have a drugged up pill popping parentless worthless generation capable of only doing what they where taught or trained to do. No wonder the average college debt is $35,000, which combined adds up to trillions of dollars. They can’t even keep up with there checking account, if you want to know where America is heading in the future just look at them.

  • Steve June 29, 2015, 12:39 pm

    The LEGAL aspect of marriage has nothing to do with religion. I’ve been married twice (you’d think I would have learned by now), and both times it was in a civil ceremony. (In the case of my first marriage, it was the last time we were civil to each other for 7 years). And NO ONE is suggesting that any religious institution be compelled to perform marriages that go against their beliefs. My son tells me there are plenty of churches that will perform same-sex marriages, and there’s always the civil marriage option. So no one’s religious beliefs are being violated – except the belief that “My religion believes a certain way, therefore everybody else should believe that way,” You don’t believe in same-sex marriage, don’t marry someone of the same sex. Seems simple enough.
    As a previous poster has suggested, the “civilization is doomed because…….” theory is invalid. I grew up in the South when schools were still segregated, and I remember the fuss made when integration was made the law. The world didn’t end then, and it won’t now.
    I humbly suggest that religion has been the cause of more death and destruction than civil/gay rights could ever be. The Inquisition, the Crusades, the Holocaust, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, the KKK, to name a few. All because of the theory that “My imaginary supreme being has a bigger penis than your imaginary supreme being.”

  • dave June 29, 2015, 11:36 am

    those of us that already have carry permits in our states, should now be allowed to carry in ALL other states. our carry permits should now be recognized and legal the same way as scotus affirmed married couples are legal in all other states , dispite individual state laws. after all its only fair. (ha)

    • Gary September 3, 2015, 10:14 am

      I agree, it is only fair, sort a tit for tat situation. One side defined what is right for all!

  • Larry June 29, 2015, 11:09 am

    I must say we are in a sad times when sexual prevererence over rules the ability to protect ones self and property.
    The Surpreme court and their unelected
    Judges discisio only means we the people of this great country have gotten their Opinion
    on marriage, Supreme Court does NOT
    Make the laws of the land our elected offical do that. So i look at the so called
    Ruling as an Opinion not a Law.
    Now we the people have vote to have a Governing body that will take a stand or
    Else we are done!! Larry

  • Mike June 29, 2015, 10:03 am

    Not a sodomite

    Joe – if you want to be a pole smoker you go right ahead. The argument on freedom and equality is specious. Government should not be in the marriage business as a previous poster pointed out it is a sacrament. That’s all the time I am wasting on you lib.

  • joe June 29, 2015, 9:40 am

    It’s ironic that so many conservatives claim to support limited government, but clamor for one powerful and intrusive enough to interfere in how someone chooses to organize their household and enters into the most private and intimidate personal contract we have.

    Freedom is freedom. You don’t have to like gay marriage, but if it neither breaks your leg nor picks your pocket, let them be.

    • Amako June 29, 2015, 11:29 am

      Joe I agree, people enjoy it when due process grants them the rights they want and feel they should be free to have. If it is something they don’t agree with or makes them feel uncomfortable they resort to name calling and mud slinging and talk about how the world is falling apart and society is doomed.

      The ‘sky is falling because the status quo has changed’ rants have happened before such as when blacks and women’s right to vote were recognized and when civil rights were recognized as well…now(aside from some lovely intolerant bigots who need to feel better than someone because they are better than no one) these are things taken for granted and guess what the world isn’t destroyed after all.

      Finally on marriage itself, it is not a christian invention nor even an exclusively christian custom. Pagans, monotheists, polytheists, atheists, as well as Jews/Christians/Muslims all practice this custom of joining people into a family. It is a growth and evolution of human thinking and just like we finally acknowledged the rights of minorities and women after thousands of years of not doing so we can do it for others.

      I am for freedom and cannot stand it when people take it upon themselves to shout themselves hoarse for freedoms they personally want to have but cannot wait to silence others talking about the freedom they wish for and is relevant to them. Don’t worry the world won’t end…after all the institution of marriage hasn’t been obliterated by the intensely high divorce rate in the last 50 years so I don’t think letting a bunch of people who have been fighting for decades to get into that club will do that either.

      As gun owners we can be our own worst enemy.

  • Big Willie D June 29, 2015, 8:01 am

    Wouldn’t it be such irony to have the left win one debate only to have guns rights benefit? God bless the law of unintended consiquences.

  • We're Toast--Better Own A Gun June 29, 2015, 6:09 am

    Well, this ruling and the Obamacare/SCOTUScare ruling officially marks the end of the Constitution. Obama has been chipping–no dynamiting–away at the Constitution and it finally falls. We now have no one to represent the people. Repugnantcans and DemocRATS–all of congress (small cap “c”)–and the not-so-supreme court (also small caps) and of course, the EOTUS (emperor of the US) are all colluding to control our lives. We had better fight more than ever for the 2nd because that’s all that stands between us and a “tyrannical government” whose objective now is to completely control our lives.

    • miller July 2, 2015, 2:00 pm

      You have already lost your second amendment rights in 1933. Taking a 6 gun to a tank fight.

  • Vinny June 29, 2015, 6:08 am

    It’s about time for 1 bill covering CCW,
    Nationally. No May, no states, straight CCW if you clear FBI checks. No special reasons, just issue on presentation once cleared.

  • Dr. Strangelove June 29, 2015, 5:21 am

    You can bet SCOTUS will find a way to reinterpret the 14th amendment to exclude firearms. In the cases of McDonald v. Chicago and DC v. Heller, the decisions are just ignored anyway, so don’t hold your breath.

  • Will Drider June 27, 2015, 12:17 am

    Give them all the benifits, GREAT! They also get the persuit of divorce, alimony, property settlement, child custody ans support Thats on them. This was done in the continuing idoligy of political correctness. Here is the problem: If your faith and beliefs don’t support this new “civil right” and your conduct would be civilly and criminally charged as discrimination. So your prior legal choices to perform or deny any service is now an illegal act. JUST AS THE GOVERNMENT WANTS TO CREATE LAWS TO MAKE LAW ABIDING GUN OWNERS CRIMINALS THROUGH REGISTRATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. This Ruling placates a minority at the expense of religous freedoms of the majority. Seperation of Church and State does not mean to allow persecution of Faith and exercice of a persons beliefs.
    SCOTUS Has once again forgotten the why this Country was founded. Before the Constitution and Bill of Rights, people came and setteled on this Continent to exercise religious freedom and escape religous prosecution. In 1620 the Mayflower landed. Shortly there after they created the Mayflower Compact. It was the the first seed of democracy planted. 

    Now 395 years later SCOTUS decides same sex marriage is a “Right” to be upheld throughout the U.S. and its Territories. Anyone with religous faith, moral objection, social behavior or vocal objection to same sex marriage will be procuted for violating their civil rights. 
    395 Years to go full circle and open the door for religous prosecution on our soil.

    Of the three Branches of federal Government, only Congress is allowed to write Laws. They have been spineless when Obama’s Executive Branch writes and imposes them. Now SCOTUS, instead of interperting the Law as is their only mandate; writes a decission that now creates Law imposing rules upon the States and Territories. This is another extremely dangerous breach of Governmental power. The Congress must specifically void the the application of this “decission” to be interpeted as Law. 

    Where will this perversion of law lead. Surely the same logic that led to this ruling coud be applied to legalizing polygamy and polyfidelity marraiges, mother and son, grandfather and granddaughter; whatever allows your pursuit of happiness. It is not a slipery slope we are being pushed down, it is over a cliff.

    Look in the business trade listings for a contract to chisel the Ten Commandments off the front dooss of the Supreme Court Building.

    • Al June 27, 2015, 6:16 pm

      Gays were never discriminated against in regard to marriage: Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is Holy Matrimony, a religious sacrament. They were always allowed to find a spouse of the opposite sex and often did so to hide their true identities and lifestyle. But that wasn’t good enough: They want mainstream recognition of a selfish, pestilential and sybaritic lifestyle that spreads disease; and whose legal acceptance undermines the family as an institution. Where is the fundamental right to have a father and mother as per this 14th Amendment interpretation?…Certainly, you don’t have that right if you are adopted by a gay couple or sired by a lesbian couple and a sperm donor. What will happen when that 14th Amendment challenge is applied to the 2nd amendment? They will refuse to hear the case.

      The family is and always has always been the seed of civilization, and the homosexual lobby wants to destroy it – oblivious to the fact that they are sawing off the branch they are sitting on. We are all behind the times they claim; a quaint and hollow echo of a romanticized past when we all sat together watching ‘Ozzie and Harriette’. But alas, The Creator is older than time itself and HE will issue the final judgment: Brace yourself and hold your head high in deliverance, because it’s on the way.

      • steve July 1, 2015, 11:10 pm

        you are both ignorant, hateful retards. how does allowing 2 people of the same sex to get married affect anyones freedom of religion? this law does NOT force churches to perform gay weddings. you say marriage is a religious(by which i assume you mean christian) institution, but people have been getting married long before the bible was written, and people and societies who don’t believe in religion, or who have never even heard of the bible still get married. atheists, agnostics, non-believers, BILLIONS of them, still get married. wether you like it or not, marriage has legal implications. the government is discriminating against gay people by refusing them the right to get married. religion does not have a monopoly on marriage(especially since if obtain your definition of marriage from the bible, than marriage is between one man, and as many wives, and/or concubines as he can afford. not to mention that your god is clearly ok with incest, since the second marriage in history(after adam and eve, even though the bible says nothing about them getting married) was incestuous.)
        i find it ironic how so many gun owners are always ranting and raving about freedom, and the government restricting their rights, yet are so quick themselves to deny basic rights to an entire group of people. pathetic. i truly hope you never have a gay son/daughter/family member/friend, because you sound like the type of person that would disown them, and shame them. religion(as well as intolerance) is a far, far, far greater problem in this country, and especially the world, than homosexuality is.

        • Ron July 3, 2015, 11:34 am

          I think that “Steve” does bring up some good points when looking at the whole marriage issue from a global perspective. Personally, I believe in TOLLERATING gay/lesbian lifestyles in our society, but I do not think we should ENDORSE the lifestyles by legalizing the same sex marriages…..think it’s total bullshit matter of fact! I think the Bible thumpers are so damn caught up in their own self-rightousness that they can’t really make logical sense of ANY issue without spouting off some ( often irrelevent ) verses from book so-and-so of the King James… alot of personal experience within my own family. This whole same sex marriage ruling is just another step our government has taken toward SOCIALISM. To support my point, the next several sentences are a direct quote from Wikipedia that I found most fitting. “Variant of democracy; social democracy rejects the “either/or” phobiocratic/polarisation interpretation of capitalism versus socialism. It claims that fostering a progressive evolution of capitalism will gradually result in the evolution of capitalist economy into socialist economy. Social democracy argues that all citizens should be legally entitled to certain social rights. These are made up of universal access to public services such as: education, health care, workers’ compensation, public transportation, and other services including child care and care for the elderly. Social democracy is connected with the trade union labour movement and supports collective bargaining rights for workers. Contemporary social democracy advocates freedom from discrimination based on differences of: ability/disability, age, ethnicity, sex, gender, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and social class.” Now, tell me this isn’t the path this country has been going down for at least the last 30 years or so……

        • A Sane Man March 3, 2017, 8:54 am

          Steve, your comment “you are both ignorant, hateful retards” is laughably ironic. The relevant issue in this argument is “why does the government have ANYTHING to say about marriage”. The term “marriage” has many meanings, legal and religious being the ones that seemed to be argued about most frequently. The responses to this article highlight my point. My position is why does my government have any say in what I do personally, as long as my actions do not harm someone else? Conversely, how long do you think it will be before the government will determine what churches can preach to their congregation. Do you believe that is not a possibility? It has already happening in Houston. No, the argument is not do gays have the right to marry legally, and not those who argue that the Bible frowns upon homosexuality, the real question is why should that matter to our government.

  • Aaron June 26, 2015, 5:00 pm

    Fascism doesn’t require logic or logical consistency to govern.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend