-
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.
-
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.
an now the fight begins
- Thread starter range rat
- Start date
pkbites
Regular Member
Good Gawd. Did you hear some of them hacks bringing out the same old arguements how carrying at sporting events, the farmers market, on a bus, etc. would be a recipe for disaster.
. Time after time they beat that same old dead horse, and time after time the soccor mom types lap up that fecal matter. Sheesh!
Motofixxer
Regular Member
AAAAAWE the transit guy feels it would cause massive fear among riders. And the restaurant owner doesn't want to ask customers for their permits.....then don't! Sheesh some people.
A good case cite I found is this. "Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be." Westbrook v. Mihaly 2 C3d 756
and also this one "Constitutional rights may not be denied simply because of hostility to their assertion and exercise. Vindication of conceded constitutional rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them." Watson v Memphis, 375 U.S. 526.
A good case cite I found is this. "Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be." Westbrook v. Mihaly 2 C3d 756
and also this one "Constitutional rights may not be denied simply because of hostility to their assertion and exercise. Vindication of conceded constitutional rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them." Watson v Memphis, 375 U.S. 526.