• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Why do we pay to have a "license"??

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
“A person cannot be compelled "to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution." [Footnote 9] Blue Island v. Kozul, 379 Ill. 511, 519, 41 N.E.2d 515”

Unfortunately, the SCOTUS disagrees with you. :confused:
 

Jaysann22

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
109
Location
St Louis
Again, as I alluded to earlier, the court has yet to rule that the carry of a concealed firearm is actually something "freely granted by the Constitution".

We should all take notice of the ENTIRE text of the Constitution to understand specific texts. The Constitution does not "grant" privileges or rights. The Constitution RECOGNIZES and acknowledges inalienable rights endowed by the creator (natural law)

In other words, the Constitution just recognizes these rights and demands by law the US authorities to also recognize these laws.

A piece of paper doesn't grant to permission or rights. We know as humans that is law. Just as we know it is law not to murder. Whether we agree or not is left to debate but still doesn't negate the fact the natural law exists.

I find it ridiculous we pay and use drivers licenses as the right to transportation has also been confirmed in the Constitution and even recognized in the Supreme Court....
 

cshoff

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
687
Location
, Missouri, USA
We should all take notice of the ENTIRE text of the Constitution to understand specific texts. The Constitution does not "grant" privileges or rights. The Constitution RECOGNIZES and acknowledges inalienable rights endowed by the creator (natural law)

In other words, the Constitution just recognizes these rights and demands by law the US authorities to also recognize these laws.

A piece of paper doesn't grant to permission or rights. We know as humans that is law. Just as we know it is law not to murder. Whether we agree or not is left to debate but still doesn't negate the fact the natural law exists.

I find it ridiculous we pay and use drivers licenses as the right to transportation has also been confirmed in the Constitution and even recognized in the Supreme Court....

Somehow, you seem to be missing the point. It's unlikely you will get any argument from any of the folks here. We all agree that the 2nd Amendment simply codifies and protects a right with which we were endowed by our Creator. However, until we have some kind of case law to that effect, the society at large has reserved the right to arrest, prosecute, and imprison those who exercise said right in said manner.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Somehow, you seem to be missing the point. It's unlikely you will get any argument from any of the folks here. We all agree that the 2nd Amendment simply codifies and protects a right with which we were endowed by our Creator. However, until we have some kind of case law to that effect, the society at large has reserved the right to arrest, prosecute, and imprison those who exercise said right in said manner.

Heck they imprison people whose rights have already been clearly defined ... we live in a fascist society now...
 

Jaysann22

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
109
Location
St Louis
Somehow, you seem to be missing the point. It's unlikely you will get any argument from any of the folks here. We all agree that the 2nd Amendment simply codifies and protects a right with which we were endowed by our Creator. However, until we have some kind of case law to that effect, the society at large has reserved the right to arrest, prosecute, and imprison those who exercise said right in said manner.

Well then we should all take notice of this right...

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government" (emphasis added).

and if we wait for a case law to define it, we're all screwed anyway.... :(
 
Last edited:

cshoff

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
687
Location
, Missouri, USA
Well then we should all take notice of this right...

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government" (emphasis added).

and if we wait for a case law to define it, we're all screwed anyway.... :(

Your suggestion that we overthrow our tyrannical government, while noble, is about as far fetched as the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Our government is 100 times more likely to collapse under it's own weight than it is to be overthrown by armed patriots. Like it or not, this will have to play out through our system of courts.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
If you do not like the 'fee' to have a 'stay out of jail' endorsement simply go up to your local sheriff and refuse to hand over your money during the 'pay the fee' part of your CCW endorsement initial application/renewal process.

....let us all know how that works out for ya.
 

peterarthur

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
613
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Unfortunately, you are incorrect. Many states, in fact, DO consider a privilege, whether you and I like it or not. Missouri is one of those states. We even spell it out in no uncertain terms in our State Constitution.

But Missouri accepted membership in the union under the Constitution and the 2nd is reserved to the Federal government and therefore NOT in the jurisdiction of the state, even though it is in the State Constitution which should NEVER have been allowed and is legally void by acceptance of the Constitution and membership into the Union. If it came before statehood, statehood nullified it. If it came after, it was a violation of the agreement to become a state and should have been removed. I believe in state powers, but the 2nd amendment is clearly the jursidiction of the Federal Constitution and states.

Period. The Fed wins in this instance. Heller affirms this legally.
 
Last edited:

cshoff

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
687
Location
, Missouri, USA
But Missouri accepted membership in the union under the Constitution and the 2nd is reserved to the Federal government and therefore NOT in the jurisdiction of the state, even though it is in the State Constitution which should NEVER have been allowed and is legally void by acceptance of the Constitution and membership into the Union. If it came before statehood, statehood nullified it. If it came after, it was a violation of the agreement to become a state and should have been removed. I believe in state powers, but the 2nd amendment is clearly the jursidiction of the Federal Constitution and states.

Period. The Fed wins in this instance. Heller affirms this legally.

Which brings me back to the point I made earlier; until we have some case law on the issue, our opinions are entirely irrelevant. Heller made no such affirmation that a state Constitution that contains a provision like Article 1, Section 23 is "legally void" under the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. Anyone who would like proof of this is welcome to disregard our state laws regarding concealed weapons and see if they can get a judge to agree with them.
 
Last edited:

Jaysann22

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
109
Location
St Louis
Your suggestion that we overthrow our tyrannical government, while noble, is about as far fetched as the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Our government is 100 times more likely to collapse under it's own weight than it is to be overthrown by armed patriots. Like it or not, this will have to play out through our system of courts.

its only farfetched because too many Americans have become complacent, not because its impossible or improbable. Our forefathers demonstrated that.

Our government collapsing under its own weight? Do you mean bankruptcy? Defaulting on debt? That could mean much worse that fighting a civil war. Defaulting on debt or bankruptcy just makes things worse for the People.

Look what happened with the Geneva convention and the Federal Reserve Act.

Our government wont collapse, it will be overhauled and become under new management (cough) United Nations.....
 

woodja72

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5
Location
Richland Mo
I think the issue lies with US, not any gov't official. I carry when ever I want w/o any stinking permit (that they say is required) ... who's to stop me? No one. I am more than willing and able to protect myself from anyone.

And this is why we have to register. If everyone would just do what is legally right, then it would be easier for us to have more rights. Unfortunatly it is those that buck the system that make it harder for us who support it.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
its only farfetched because too many Americans have become complacent, not because its impossible or improbable. Our forefathers demonstrated that.

Our government collapsing under its own weight? Do you mean bankruptcy? Defaulting on debt? That could mean much worse that fighting a civil war. Defaulting on debt or bankruptcy just makes things worse for the People.

Look what happened with the Geneva convention and the Federal Reserve Act.

Our government wont collapse, it will be overhauled and become under new management (cough) United Nations.....

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The first part of that post is not entirely incorrect. It is US from time to time.

The remainder of his post is not 'advocating', per se, his post states what he does....which poses a different set of issues.
 

Jaysann22

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
109
Location
St Louis
(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here.

I wasn't advocating anything illegal. I posted direct quotes from the supreme law of the land and United States founding documents, recognizing LEGAL and natural rights.

I was stating that if we have to wait for government to recognize basic rights that are CLEARLY black and white law, then we are screwed due to the fact that we are no longer asserting our rights but asking permission to exercise them. Free speech and firearm rights being among many of them.

Now, I am speaking in generalities and reflecting on history. Not insinuating we should "do" anything.

This forum is taken so out of context so often, its getting dangerously close to liberal PC forums where you have to practically explain yourself after every statement you make.... :banghead:

Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

I never said I advocated violence or illegal activity. I am somewhat offended that posting Constitutional law and quotes from the Declaration of Independence is considered "advocating illegal acts" on this forum.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Well then we should all take notice of this right...

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government" (emphasis added).

and if we wait for a case law to define it, we're all screwed anyway.... :(

Your suggestion that we overthrow our tyrannical government, while noble, is about as far fetched as the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Our government is 100 times more likely to collapse under it's own weight than it is to be overthrown by armed patriots. Like it or not, this will have to play out through our system of courts.

Jaysann22;1774045[B said:
]its only farfetched because too many Americans have become complacent[/B], not because its impossible or improbable. Our forefathers demonstrated that.

Our government collapsing under its own weight? Do you mean bankruptcy? Defaulting on debt? That could mean much worse that fighting a civil war. Defaulting on debt or bankruptcy just makes things worse for the People.

Look what happened with the Geneva convention and the Federal Reserve Act.

Our government wont collapse, it will be overhauled and become under new management (cough) United Nations.....

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

I wasn't advocating anything illegal. I posted direct quotes from the supreme law of the land and United States founding documents, recognizing LEGAL and natural rights.

I was stating that if we have to wait for government to recognize basic rights that are CLEARLY black and white law, then we are screwed due to the fact that we are no longer asserting our rights but asking permission to exercise them. Free speech and firearm rights being among many of them.

Now, I am speaking in generalities and reflecting on history. Not insinuating we should "do" anything.

This forum is taken so out of context so often, its getting dangerously close to liberal PC forums where you have to practically explain yourself after every statement you make.... :banghead:

I never said I advocated violence or illegal activity. I am somewhat offended that posting Constitutional law and quotes from the Declaration of Independence is considered "advocating illegal acts" on this forum.

Maybe it should have been expressed differently then. You did agree/accept that your "suggestion" to overthrow the government was not far fetched and pointed out that our forefathers had done just that.

As a matter of fact, it is the very content/words chosen that determine in some instances whether a post in appropriate here. When there is a doubt expressed, explanations are good and should not be a source of frustration.

Bottom line though is that OCDO is not a free speech zone where anything goes - some things are looked at more closely than others and for good reason. Thoughts on Constitutional Law, especially as to 2A and RKBA, are always of pertinent here - too that is an area of special interest and dedication of one of the site owners.

Will let your explanation that you are "not insinuating we should do anything" and that you are not advocating such stand as the final word.
 
Last edited:

S&W_Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
28
Location
Kansas City
This forum is taken so out of context so often, its getting dangerously close to liberal PC forums where you have to practically explain yourself after every statement you make.... :banghead:

I never said I advocated violence or illegal activity. I am somewhat offended that posting Constitutional law and quotes from the Declaration of Independence is considered "advocating illegal acts" on this forum.
It is easy to have miscommunication with the written word. Especially on media, such as forums, when in the heat of the moment, someone reads to quickly and either misreads or the original point was poorly written or badly worded. *shrug*

As a proud gun-totting, supporter of the 2nd amendment and a moderate to conservative liberal, its getting really obnoxious how "leftist" and "liberal" gets thrown around like an insult around here.

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”
― Benjamin Franklin
 
Last edited:

REALteach4u

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
428
Location
Spfld, Mo.
If the Federal Constitution guarentees our right to bear arms, and I can see no where where it states concealed or otherwise, the states cannot make it a priviledge and charge you. JMHO

Just like liberal institutions have acted for decades. If it doesn't say we can't, then we will and the people will be forced to fight it at their own expense. This is win-win in the liberal theater. They get to use our tax dollars to restrict our rights and then turn around and use our tax dollars to fight us in court on the matter.
 

REALteach4u

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
428
Location
Spfld, Mo.
Maybe it should have been expressed differently then. You did agree/accept that your "suggestion" to overthrow the government was not far fetched and pointed out that our forefathers had done just that.

As a matter of fact, it is the very content/words chosen that determine in some instances whether a post in appropriate here. When there is a doubt expressed, explanations are good and should not be a source of frustration.

Bottom line though is that OCDO is not a free speech zone where anything goes - some things are looked at more closely than others and for good reason. Thoughts on Constitutional Law, especially as to 2A and RKBA, are always of pertinent here - too that is an area of special interest and dedication of one of the site owners.

Will let your explanation that you are "not insinuating we should do anything" and that you are not advocating such stand as the final word.

If memory serves, an attempt to overthrow the government of the United States is a Federal crime, even though the Declaration of Independence and the Contitution/Amendments would grant us as citizens to remove a government that is tyrranical and out of control. We do so at the ballot box until it's clear that such action no longer works. Sadly, if we examine what the US has done overseas to ensure such action is allowed it only leads us to one outcome and that's not a road very many are willing to travel down.

Keep pressuring our politicians or run for office and do something about it...that's where we are right now. We need to ask ourselves if we are to the point that we need to make it a criminal offense to not exercise your right to vote (we dont' want to wind up here either); examining the low voter turn outs of a miserable 17% on local issues is sickening. It is up to us as a Nation to prevent things from turning so grave that we wind up in another war on our own soil.
 
Last edited:
Top