difference between ccw laws - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: difference between ccw laws

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by rohdah View Post
    As for requirements I am meaning things like not having a criminal record, taking a safety training course and an age limit.
    Also like I said We should not have to pay for it because it is a right not a privilege like a drivers license, which has always been a privilege!
    And as far as the 2nd Admendment addressing the concealed carry, yes, I know it does not address it and that is my point, it should not matter where, when, or how we carry or (bear) our arms!
    As far as the national law it shoud be about if you have a permit in one state it should good in all states because we are all in the same country and every state should have the same right.
    We all do have the same right, but the states have decided to infringe upon that right with: mandatory classes, permits, licenses, etc. A National law addressing any sort of a permit would just mire up the already existing infringements of our right. You do realize asking for permission to exercise a right no longer makes it a right, right?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  2.   
  3. A person with a criminal record such as a fellon can not legally own a gun let alone carry!
    The age, anybody old enough to be in the military! I know there are a lot of stupid laws!
    I said the permit should be free not the safety course!
    Where does it mention concealed carry in the 2 A.? Bearing arms means to carry. It does not say how! So again, it should not matter!
    What on earth are you talking about? Since when did we ever have a mandatory drivers license? What is a mandatory drivers lic.?
    That's a new one! Where did you get yours?

  4. The national law would stop the states from their infringment on our rights and It would not be asking permission for something when we all ready have the right, it would just be another way of protecting that right.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by rohdah View Post
    A person with a criminal record such as a fellon can not legally own a gun let alone carry!
    The age, anybody old enough to be in the military! I know there are a lot of stupid laws!
    I said the permit should be free not the safety course!
    Where does it mention concealed carry in the 2 A.? Bearing arms means to carry. It does not say how! So again, it should not matter!
    What on earth are you talking about? Since when did we ever have a mandatory drivers license? What is a mandatory drivers lic.?
    That's a new one! Where did you get yours?
    A person who has reckless driving also has a criminal record and CAN carry. The problem with any infringements, is there is too many opinions. You feel any criminal record strips away someone's rights. That will destroy the 2A.

    So you don't want anyone under 18 to be able to carry a firearm? Does this go for all firearms? What if a 16 year old is working putting up fences for a farmer by himself? To bad for him? That will destroy the 2A.

    But the class is required, so there is a fee associated with the permit. What about the price for your required background checks and finger prints? That will destroy the 2A.

    If you haven't noticed, the 2A has all ready been destroyed.

    Yes bearing arms means to carry. Concealed carrying is carrying (bearing) arms. So, the 2A does indeed cover concealed carry.

    You seriously have no idea what a Right is. You call driving a privilege. Why? Because they require you to get permission to drive by getting a license. That's a mandatory license if you want to drive. You stated, it's ALWAYS been a privilege. Sorry son, before 1913 driving was NOT a privilege, we had the freedom and Right to travel. And soon, we will be saying, before 2020 the RTKBA was not a privilege, but now it is thanks to our mandatory (required) federal permit to carry.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  6. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by rohdah View Post
    The national law would stop the states from their infringment on our rights and It would not be asking permission for something when we all ready have the right, it would just be another way of protecting that right.
    Federal laws can, are, and will be more strict than state laws. Laws don't tell people what they can do, they tell people what they can't do.Laws can not protect the 2A, the People have to.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  7. Quote Originally Posted by rohdah View Post
    As for requirements I am meaning things like not having a criminal record, taking a safety training course and an age limit.
    Also like I said We should not have to pay for it because it is a right not a privilege like a drivers license, which has always been a privilege!
    And as far as the 2nd Admendment addressing the concealed carry, yes, I know it does not address it and that is my point, it should not matter where, when, or how we carry or (bear) our arms!
    As far as the national law it shoud be about if you have a permit in one state it should good in all states because we are all in the same country and every state should have the same right.
    In other words, you want to restrict my rights further than they already are resitricted. Safety course? What safety course? There is no safety course required for my permit in Washington. And we don't have problems due to no safety course required, either.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  8. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    States' rights prevail in the constitution to the extent they don't constitute a ban on firearms. You won't get many states agreeing to give-up control.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    We don't need no more stinking gun laws, 2nd works.

  10. #19
    Whatever happened to the part about "congress shall make no law......"?

  11. Quote Originally Posted by coconuisse View Post
    Whatever happened to the part about "congress shall make no law......"?
    Well, does the First Amendment apply? That's the one that begins "Congress shall make no law..." and it didn't and wasn't intended to prevent the States from having an official religion as there was more than one at the time that had a state religion.

    Now, the Second Amendment says, "... shall not be infringed" and is without limitation. It should apply to Congress, the Executive branch, the Judicial Branch, States, counties, cities, towns and burghs.

    Unfortunately, the ""modern interpretation"" is the the First is completely incorporated and applies to Congress, the Executive branch, the Judicial Branch, States, counties, cities, towns and burghs but the Second may be restricted by all the above and any concerned third parties. Screwy, ain't it?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast