SCOTUS solidifies its role as a Trump appendage

I absolutely think private property owners should be able to restrict firearms. The ruling does not stop that. 

The law that was overturned made it automatically illegal to carry in all establishments open to the general public unless they posted a sign allowing it.

It also made it illegal to carry on almost all public property owned or maintained by the government. In some areas that even included public sidewalks. 

It is still allowed for private businesses to prohibit firearms if they choose to. All they need to do is either post signage or tell someone to leave.

Also the state is still able to prohibit firearms in some places such as stadiums, bars, hospitals, police stations etc. 

The type of people that would use a a firearm in the scenarios you described are going to be carrying it no matter what the law says. This decision has no effect on them. 

As usual the facts don't backup the liberal fantasy

https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/12/how-deferential-is-the-roberts-court-to-presidential-power/

The SC supports President Trump only 49% of the time, second lowest

So you went rummaging around in the rectum of the Internet until you found something that sounded good to you 

The reality is that SCOTUS has rarely even mildly rebuked Trump, and the vast majority of the time, has heartily endorsed his every action and granted him unlimited power. They've crumpled up the Constitution and tossed it into the trash bin.

Doesn't that make you happy, Tom? No silly ol' Constitution to get in your orange master's way?

Perhaps, but I've alluded before to situations where one or more people involved in some kind of altercation, incident, etc. are armed and the result is far worse than if they weren't. The prohibition on being armed in public places, or in private establishments open to the public, should be the default setting. And yeah, would that stop that "type of people"? Probably not...but it would make their armed presence ipso facto illegal.

I guess we in Big Bad Manly Gun Love Amurrica can't possibly leap over the gulf between us and, say, Europe, where the ordinary person wouldn't dream of carrying a gun and would be at best bemused and at worst, disgusted by the idea. And they have far fewer gun deaths than we do! So I think it's not so much laws as it is culture. Europe vividly remembers how many people were killed by guns in the first half of the 20th century. We, on the other hand, used guns to establish our supremacy over the continent. We view guns as a necessary tool, and ennoble those who use them.

Once again stupid Kevin ignores facts & can't read. 

Only John Marshall's court has supported the administration less since 1787. 

According to your "source." You cherry-pick everything. What you say has no value and no truth.