Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm in favor of permitless carry. Idaho is one of growing number of States that allow both open carry and permitless concealed weapons carry.
I think voting is a nationwide right..thus the fed can, and does, regulate it.
The right to bear arms is not a nationwide right? Do I misunderstand you? The right to vote is nationwide so the federal government should regulate it but guns, also being a nationwide right, should not be?
The right to bear arms is not a nationwide right? Do I misunderstand you? The right to vote is nationwide so the federal government should regulate it but guns, also being a nationwide right, should not be?
Yeah..a little. I do in fact, believe that gun rights and regulation should be a federal mandate...but...as it is currently not, I was pointing out Idaho's solution.
I'm not in favor of States regulating constitutional rights. There should be one standard. ..IMO
Yeah..a little. I do in fact, believe that gun rights and regulation should be a federal mandate...but...as it is currently not, I was pointing out Idaho's solution.
I'm not in favor of States regulating constitutional rights. There should be one standard. ..IMO
In general, when they do they are no longer rights.
2nd amendment---arms for all--yet..why no arms for felons? To protect the public, right?
Free speech--but no 'crying fire in a theater'--why? to protect the public.
The public weal supersedes individual rights..or so the SCOTUS has ruled.
We have the right of free and unfettered movement...we have a right to privacy---Unless one is a sex offender. Again, the public good.
To protect the weak,,those who cannot protect themselves..from the wicked--those who would use their rights..if they had them to the same degree as an ordinary citizen--to prey upon people.
2nd amendment---arms for all--yet..why no arms for felons? To protect the public, right?
The Constitution provides for that.
Quote:
Free speech--but no 'crying fire in a theater'--why? to protect the public.
That is a misnomer. You can yell fire all day. As long as you do not cause harm to anyone, no harm done.
Quote:
The public weal supersedes individual rights..or so the SCOTUS has ruled.
No they haven't.
Quote:
We have the right of free and unfettered movement...we have a right to privacy---Unless one is a sex offender. Again, the public good.
The Constitution provides for that. It's called due process.
Quote:
To protect the weak,,those who cannot protect themselves..from the wicked--those who would use their rights..if they had them to the same degree as an ordinary citizen--to prey upon people.
That is a misnomer. You can yell fire all day. As long as you do not cause harm to anyone, no harm done.
No they haven't.
The Constitution provides for that. It's called due process.
I'm not sure what you think.
LoL..but you're sure that you're against it.
A simple, 'No', proves nothing.
'The constitution provides for that' Well yeah..that's kinda my point...You asked why rights needed to be regulated...the Constitution regulates rights..and you seem..by the form of your rebuttal , to be OK with that.
'The constitution provides for that' Well yeah..that's kinda my point...You asked why rights needed to be regulated...the Constitution regulates rights..and you seem..by the form of your rebuttal , to be OK with that.
Rights can be removed from some for doing things that violate the rights of others, that is not regulating rights.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.