The events in Charlottesville have given rise to a lot of discussion about speech and guns. That is, to what extent do protesters who are otherwise exercising their First Amendment rights also have a right to carry assault weapons and other guns as part of their demonstrations? It turns out that this is a complicated and interesting question, for which there is no simple answer.
First, does the Second Amendment give demonstrators a constitutional right to carry their weapons in public? Although the Supreme Court has held that the Second Amendment protects the right of private individuals to keep and bear arms, it has not gone much further in fleshing out the details of this right, and it has not yet considered whether the Second Amendment should be understood to guarantee individuals a right to open carry. If the Court were to hold that the Constitution guarantees individuals a right to walk down the street carrying assault weapons an outcome I think unlikely then that would go a long way to resolving the question. But that is not the law, and I rather doubt it will ever be the law, so we can move on to the next question.
Second, about half the states allow open carry and half prohibit it. Lets assume we are in a state that prohibits open carry. Assuming the Second Amendment does not guarantee such a right, the next question is whether the First Amendment protects the right of individuals to carry assault weapons or other guns as part of an otherwise lawful public demonstration. The best argument that could be made by the would-be gun carriers is that they are carrying their guns as a form of symbolic expression that is a central part of the message of their demonstration. The carrying of the assault weapons, they argue, is meant symbolically to communicate their commitment to their cause. The guns are, in effect, a part of their uniform.
Lets assume that this is credible. That is, lets assume that their purpose is not to threaten violence, but to convey the nature and depth of their beliefs. Symbolic speech is protected by the First Amendment. For example, burning an American flag as a sign of disrespect for the nation is constitutionally protected speech. That being so, is carrying an assault weapon when done for symbolic purposes also constitutionally protected speech? Interestingly, the answer is no.
The Supreme Court has held that symbolic speech is protected by the Constitution when the governments reason for prohibiting the action is to suppress the content of the speech. But if the governments reason for prohibiting the action has nothing at all to do with speech, and the law therefore has only an incidental effect on speech, then the law will almost always be deemed constitutional, even as applied to symbolic speech.
For example, if demonstrators march naked down a public street in order to protest anti-nudity laws, they can constitutionally be punished for violating the anti-nudity laws, which are not themselves directed at speech, even though their nudity in the protest is a form of symbolic speech. Similarly, if an individual urinates on a statue of Robert E. Lee in order to show his contempt for the Confederacy, he can constitutionally be punished for public urination, even though he did his act for expressive purposes.
This is well-settled law, and it would certainly apply to protesters who want to carry guns in violation of a state law that forbids open carry. Thus, in a state that forbids open carry, the demonstrators would not have a First Amendment right to carry their weapons, even if their reason for doing so was to convey a symbolic message.
Third, that brings us to the situation where the state allows open carry generally, but forbids it in demonstrations involving more than X number of people. The reason for this limitation is the states concern that, in large demonstrations, the risks presented by the presence of weapons is too great to permit. In this situation, the state is applying a special rule about open carry that is directed specifically at otherwise constitutionally-protected protests.
In this situation, the demonstrators will argue that this violates their rights under the First Amendment, because the only reason for denying them what otherwise would be the state-recognized right of open carry is that they are exercising their First Amendment rights. What happens here?
As a general rule, the government can regulate the time, place, and manner of speech in public places as long as it does so in a neutral manner and has a reasonable justification for doing so. For example, a city can forbid public demonstrations that might disrupt a school or hospital, it can ban the use of loudspeakers in a residential neighborhood at night, it can refuse to permit a demonstration that will unduly block traffic in rush hour, and so on. Thus, even if the desire to carry assault weapons as part of a demonstration is seen as a form of symbolic expression, such a restriction if applied neutrally to all protests would likely be constitutional.
Fourth, suppose the government allows open carry in public demonstrations, but only for some speakers and not others? For example, suppose it permits Black Lives Matter demonstrators to carry weapons, but not white supremacist demonstrators? Suppose the government argues, for example, that in the particular location, the presence of guns by white supremacist protesters would frighten citizens much more than the presence of guns by Black Lives Matter protesters.
Such a distinction would clearly violate the First Amendment, because the government must regulate speech in an even-handed manner, and cannot treat people conveying one constitutionally-protected message differently than people conveying another constitutionally-protected message, unless it has a truly compelling justification for the distinction a test that is next to impossible to meet. Thus, although it can constitutionally ban all guns in these demonstrations, it cannot constitutionally pick-and-choose which messages to favor and which to restrict, even if it has a reasonable justification for the distinction. Put simply, we do not trust government to make such judgments, because of the risk that, if given that power, government officials will manipulate speech to further their own political and ideological goals.
Fifth, suppose the protesters in a particular demonstration carry guns not just to express a symbolic message about the nature and strength of their views, but as a way to threaten others that if they criticize or mock them during the demonstration they will be shot. If the protesters literally told counter-demonstrators that it they criticize or mock them during the protest they will be shot, that would clearly constitute an express threat of violence that is not protected by the First Amendment. It is well-established that such true threats can be punished.
The question, then, is whether carrying assault weapons can in itself be understood to constitute such a threat. Is it sufficient that counter-demonstrators reasonably understand this as a true threat, do the speakers have to specifically intend this to be a true threat, are the speakers protected by the First Amendment unless they expressly utter a true threat? This remains an open question under the First Amendment. How, then, should we decide whether the carrying of assault weapons is just symbolic speech, whether it is done merely to deter violence against the protesters, or whether it is an implied true threat designed to intimidate others from exercising their own First Amendment rights to criticize or mock the protesters?
Sixth, to add to the confusion, suppose the protesters are openly carrying their guns not for their own self-protection, and not to unlawfully threaten others with violence, but allegedly to incite counter-protesters to be violent themselves. It is possible that the very presence of weapons would so infuriate counter-protesters that they would be incited to respond with violence, as intended by the demonstrators. Why might the demonstrators want this? Well, the outbreak of serious violence would certainly get them on the news, make them appear to be victims, and give their views lots of publicity and visibility.
So, if this was their actual reason for openly carrying the weapons, can they then be punished for inciting unlawful conduct by the counter-demonstrators? In this situation, the carrying of assault weapons would be like carrying especially offensive and infuriating signs for the purpose of inciting a riot. Can people who do that be punished consistent with the First Amendment? The Supreme Court held in 1969 in a case called Brandenburg v. Ohio, which involved a Klan rally, that even express incitement to violence can be punished only if it is specifically intended to cause violence and the violence is likely to happen imminently.
In theory, that could be the situation in highly-emotional protest situations, but even there the speakers (in this case, the protesters carrying assault weapons with the specific intent to incite a violent response) can be held accountable only if the police have done everything reasonably in their power to forestall the violence. That, of course, depends on the circumstances.
So, where does all this leave us? I hope Ive provided at least a bit of clarity, But I also hope Ive demonstrated why much of the commentary on the Charlottesville situation in terms of the issue of open carry and assault weapons has been inconsistent and confused. That is, in short, the state of the law.
Follow this link:
The Lessons Of Charlottesville: Speech And Guns - HuffPost
- Assemblyman Tim Donnelly Introduces Sweeping Handgun Carry License Reform Bill AB 1563 - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Ex-Supreme Court justice pushes gun grab, 2nd Amendment rewrite - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Party of guns: 2016ers speak to NRA - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Michigan 2014 Second Amendment March - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Georgia Governor Signs Law Allowing Firearms In Public Places - Andrew Napolitano - Stuart Varney - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Tony DeTora's Second Amendment Commitment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Second Amendment Man Drug PSA - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Do you exercise your Second Amendment Rights while riding? - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Kira Davis - My 2nd Amendment Story - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Gabby Franco for NRA News: "Freedoms Are Not Untouchable" - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- SafeandVaultStore GS592820 Second Amendment Gun Safe - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Oathbreaking Tyrant: Justice John Paul Stevens Wants To Change The Second Amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Dear LiberalViewer: Second Amendment Response - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Justice John Paul Stevens Wants To Change The Second Amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- God & The Second Amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Amend The Second Amendment? - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Justice John Paul Stevens on the Second Amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- CCRW Televised Forum - Mental Health, Second Amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Obama lying supporting second amendment - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Second Amendment Rally Saturday - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Second Amendment and other t-shirts support the cause - Video - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- 2nd Amendment - Laws - April 27th, 2014 [April 27th, 2014]
- Second Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw - April 27th, 2014 [April 27th, 2014]
- Rep. Larry Pittman talks about Second Amendment - Video - April 27th, 2014 [April 27th, 2014]
- billkeyz talking about gun control the Second Amendment NRA - Video - April 27th, 2014 [April 27th, 2014]
- US Senate Candidates Iowa - Second Amendment - Video - April 27th, 2014 [April 27th, 2014]
- NRA leadership uses Bloomberg gun control push to rally members - April 28th, 2014 [April 28th, 2014]
- Open Carry Or Concealed Carry In California & Does The NRA Oppose - Video - April 28th, 2014 [April 28th, 2014]
- Greg Brannon Nuke Second Amendment right - Video - April 28th, 2014 [April 28th, 2014]
- SafeandVaultStore GS724027 Second Amendment Gun Safe - Video - April 28th, 2014 [April 28th, 2014]
- Supreme Court Gun Carry Rights; Drake v. Jerejian, Pending petition - Video - April 29th, 2014 [April 29th, 2014]
- Letter: NRA opposes reasonable responses - April 30th, 2014 [April 30th, 2014]
- Common sense calls for repeal of second amendment - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- GUNS: Amendment words to fight over - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Gun lobby group receives open government award - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- NFL Player Brags About Shooting a Skunk to NRA - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Disgruntled Motel Owner Uses Second Amendment To Fight Government Officials #ZHG - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Psychiatrists to push NWO gun control - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Second Amendment Action Day 2014 - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Second Amendment Action Day 2014 at the Pennsylvania Capitol - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Second Amendment Action Day - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Second Amendment Action Day Rally - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Pyro Planet Second Amendment & Star Spangled Blast - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Gun rights: Times have changed since the creation of the Second Amendment - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Billy Johnson for NRA News: "Infringed Rights" - Video - May 3rd, 2014 [May 3rd, 2014]
- Second Amendment group marches in El Paso - May 4th, 2014 [May 4th, 2014]
- The Second Amendment (Part 1 of 2) - Video - May 4th, 2014 [May 4th, 2014]
- New Jersey Gun-Carrying Limit Left Intact by High Court - May 5th, 2014 [May 5th, 2014]
- Supreme Court Wasnt Serious about the Second Amendment - May 5th, 2014 [May 5th, 2014]
- Staying away from guns and Gitmo - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- US Supreme Court refuses to consider gun-rights case - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- Success For Gun Owners & 2nd Amendment Defenders In 2014 - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- Yen on Second Amendment - Video - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- Second Amendment Shootout - Video - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- Gun Depot USA Second amendment target shooting. - Video - May 6th, 2014 [May 6th, 2014]
- Second Amendment in real time boils down to politics - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- Second Amendment - Laws - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- Alan Gottlieb Supporting Compromise of your Second Amendment Rights - Video - May 9th, 2014 [May 9th, 2014]
- Lawmakers divided on bill that restricts EBT use - May 10th, 2014 [May 10th, 2014]
- Defenseless Nigerian Men, No Second Amendment #BringBackOurGirls Boku Haram - Video - May 10th, 2014 [May 10th, 2014]
- The Second Amendment (Part 2 of 2) - Video - May 10th, 2014 [May 10th, 2014]
- Flawed argument I - May 11th, 2014 [May 11th, 2014]
- Minera Panama S.A. and Petaquilla Minerals Limited Sign $60 Million Agreement - May 11th, 2014 [May 11th, 2014]
- Interview Interrupted by State Highway Administrator - Video - May 12th, 2014 [May 12th, 2014]
- Lawmakers debate proposed EBT restrictions - Video - May 12th, 2014 [May 12th, 2014]
- N.J. Gov. Chris Christie under the gun over ammo bill, as White House beckons - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Guns and Supreme Court: Is Second Amendment a Privilege, Not a Right? - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Guns to be focus of rally - May 15th, 2014 [May 15th, 2014]
- DHS Says "Hands Off" VIP Terrorist - Video - May 15th, 2014 [May 15th, 2014]
- INFOWARS Nightly News: with David Knight Monday May 12 2014: Plus Special Reports - Video - May 15th, 2014 [May 15th, 2014]
- Gun rights advocates hope for convention impact - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Det Bowers on the Second Amendment - Video - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Trevor Stewart - V18 - AUDIO - THE RACIAL NETWORK & THE SECOND AMENDMENT - Video - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Trevor Stewart - V17 - THE RACIAL-NETWORK & THE SECOND AMENDMENT - Video - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- The Second Amendment: A Biography - Video - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Knowing Your Rights.... Yes we have them! - Video - May 18th, 2014 [May 18th, 2014]
- The Second Amendment (Game) - Video - May 18th, 2014 [May 18th, 2014]
- We Have Rights! An Animation On The Second Amendment - Video - May 18th, 2014 [May 18th, 2014]
- Letter: 2nd amendment purposes - May 20th, 2014 [May 20th, 2014]
- Senator Ted Cruz's father Rafael Cruz on the Second Amendment - Video - May 20th, 2014 [May 20th, 2014]