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.
Sixteen states already have Constitutional carry, so if you can own a gun you can also carry it. The 2nd Amendment supersedes all State laws, but corrupt courts uphold state and local passed nonsense. This should be a national initiative.
The 2nd is restricted all the time, that is not new. For instance it does not have an exception to the right it grants for criminals and the insane, yet all states have laws to not allow those people to buy or possess guns. Nobody complains about that because most people believe that is reasonable. And many people think it is also reasonable to restrict who can concealed carry. So I don't see a problem.
The 2nd is restricted all the time, that is not new. For instance it does not have an exception to the right it grants for criminals and the insane, yet all states have laws to not allow those people to buy or possess guns. Nobody complains about that because most people believe that is reasonable. And many people think it is also reasonable to restrict who can concealed carry. So I don't see a problem.
Once they pay off their debt to society, I have no problem with someone being able to buy or own a gun, the second chance is one of the founding principles of the US system of justice! If you start changing that, you change what the US stands for imo. Branding someone a 'criminal' FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES is from medieval times!
Cops prove all the time how poorly trained they are. Most shoot at unarmed civilians and hit things besides their target. And many areas have 10-15 minute response time. They just show up to write a report.
Really ? So easy to be an armchair quarterback, isn't it ? Tell you what, go out and become a cop and see what they go through daily and see if you still have the same low opinion of them. We ask these brave men and women to take care of the people the rest of us do not want to know about. Every day, when they put on that uniform, they never know if they will be coming home that night.
I would rather take my chances on some cop being involved in a bad situation than some bookkeeper who doesn't even know where the safety is on their weapon, and much less for the insecure people who have to own stupid weaponry like AR's.
You can post all the statistics and stories you want, and I can counter them with stories and statistics that show Joe Average is not trained and proficient in using his weapon enough to defend himself. Law enforcement is a different matter, they train and practice regularly and know the proper way to handle and use those weapons.
If you want every Tom, Dick, Harry, and Jane out there, carrying a gun and trying to shoot some bad guy, I would rather take my chances with the bad guy. The last thing we need are inexperienced, untrained civilians spraying lead all over the place, thinking they are John Wayne.
Shooting paper targets at a shooting range is totally different from reacting in a panic situation and hitting the right person.
Concealed carry is for self protection not as a tool to aid vigilantes.
Really ? So easy to be an armchair quarterback, isn't it ? Tell you what, go out and become a cop and see what they go through daily and see if you still have the same low opinion of them. We ask these brave men and women to take care of the people the rest of us do not want to know about. Every day, when they put on that uniform, they never know if they will be coming home that night.
I would rather take my chances on some cop being involved in a bad situation than some bookkeeper who doesn't even know where the safety is on their weapon, and much less for the insecure people who have to own stupid weaponry like AR's.
So you don't like hunters either? The AR is one of the most popular hunting rifles on the market. It has been around since 1959.
Try shooting on a range with a cop. They are, for the most part,the worst shots there.
Cops prove all the time how poorly trained they are. Most shoot at unarmed civilians and hit things besides their target. And many areas have 10-15 minute response time. They just show up to write a report.
Yet you seem to think that armed untrained civilians will do a better job than trained police.
Another example of American ignorance of law.
Note: the right to bear arms in self defense is NOT based on the Constitution. It is derived from one's endowed right to life, as stated in the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
(FYI - all state constitutions restate the self evident truths of the DoI, making it the source of all American law)
In plain inglitch, there's no such thing as a constitutional right to bear arms.
BUT as we all know, "something" changed our endowed rights so that we need licenses, permits, pay taxes, etc, etc.
Hint #1 : People have the right to bear arms.
Hint #2 : Citizens have no rights, having surrendered them by consent to be governed.
. . .
“ Our theory of government and governmental powers is wholly at variance with that urged by appellant herein. The rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that they have been VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP to the agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen, except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the democracy.”
- - - City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944
https://casetext.com/case/city-of-dallas-v-mitchell-1
. . .
The rights of the individual / national / non-citizen / inhabitant / non-resident are not derived from government, but are Creator endowed.
But once consent to be governed is granted, via citizenship, that endowment has been surrendered / waived by the citizenry. Why? Because mandatory civic duties abrogate endowed natural rights, natural and personal liberty, absolute ownership of private property, etc, etc.
For example, citizenship involves mandatory civic duties such as militia duty... the obligation to train, fight and die, on command. (And why the draft - Selective Service - is not involuntary servitude)
If that is not a violation of one's right to life and liberty, what is it? Ergo, it can only be authorized by CONSENT, as part of asserting citizenship.
Coincidentally, all gun restrictions are worded so as to only apply to "persons liable" and not the people at large.
DO not believe me - go read the law for yourself.
WRITE a polite questionnaire to your public servants in the legislature and judiciary.
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.
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.
