• 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.

Obama the Anti

Could a Federal law banning concealed carry actually pass?

  • A. Absolutely not.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • B. Yes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • @. Possibly, but the courts would overturn it on the grounds that it violates states rights.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
I

I_Hate_Illinois

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
237
Location
Joliet, Illinois, USA
imported post

glocknroll wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
Study up on 'incorporation.' The 2A has not been incorporated into the 14th. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_%28Bill_of_Rights%29
Click to expand...
This is what I meant by the "states' rights" argument. Certain states will argue that they have the authority to "infringe" in any way that particular state legislature votes.

This argument makes the Free State Project more appealing to me every day.
Click to expand...
What is the Free State Project?
 
G

glocknroll

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2007
Messages
428
Location
Hampton, Virginia, USA
imported post

I_Hate_Illinois wrote:
glocknroll wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
Study up on 'incorporation.' The 2A has not been incorporated into the 14th. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_%28Bill_of_Rights%29
Click to expand...
This is what I meant by the "states' rights" argument. Certain states will argue that they have the authority to "infringe" in any way that particular state legislature votes.

This argument makes the Free State Project more appealing to me every day.
Click to expand...
What is the Free State Project?
Click to expand...

www.freestateproject.org

This will explain it much better than I can.
 
deepdiver

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

glocknroll wrote:
Did you read Don B. Kates' most recent editorial in Handguns magazine? He states that "there is considerable authority that the right to "bear arms" means carrying them openly, not concealed". Kates is a serious constitutional scholar. I don't know what "considerable authority" he is referring to, but in the past he has been shown to know what he is talking about.

I'm not saying I agree with the premise, but it is a distinct possibility. Remember, under current law, concealed carry is a priviledge, and not a right.
Click to expand...
I'm not surprised by this. Most state constitutions I have taken a gander (maybe 6-8) at have a right to bear arms with an exception for the state to regulate concealed carry of weapons. This has led me to consider that the more original intent leaned towards open, rather than concealed, carry. But I would in no way hold myself as anything resembling a scholar on this matter -- merely an observation I have made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top