• 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.

Civil right to bear arms, carry permits, and foreign language speakers

Status
Not open for further replies.

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
Now that it is a recognized civil right to bear arms what will be the State responsibility to teach carry permit classes in foreign languages? Applications and instructions in foreign languages? It would seem to me in States where the carry of a loaded firearm is allowed only by permit they will now have to offer foreign speakers the option.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
All of those details will have to be hashed out in the states' judicial systems, starting with good cases that will get through the lower courts and make good law. The legal effects of McDonald will not be felt for years, though the political effects will be obvious by 3 November - I hope and pray.
 

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
Lol you said "Right" and "Permit" in the same sentence.

Until the system gets straightened out in Tennessee we're stuck with a civil right that really is just a privilege. My lawsuit is the only one I am aware of challenging tca 39-17-1307 which criminalizes all carry of firearms.
 

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
This is America. English only. My wife is a Croatian and she took her CHP test in ENGLISH.

The point is, if bearing arms is a civil right no one should need to take a State test before exercising that right. However, if the State requires the class to exercise the right, at a minimum it should be taught, administered in many languages or students should be allowed translators.
 

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
Good point! I agree!

The point is, if bearing arms is a civil right no one should need to take a State test before exercising that right. However, if the State requires the class to exercise the right, at a minimum it should be taught, administered in many languages or students should be allowed translators.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
This is America. English only. My wife is a Croatian and she took her CHP test in ENGLISH.
I don't recollect where the constitution said, 'certain unalienable right, for english speakers.'

These rights pre-exist gov't based on our Humanity. They are God given rights. I fail to see how language is an issue. Do you know what language God speaks? Can you name a single prophet who required his followers to speak a different language?

I think anyone living in America should know English. I would never try and make Rights contingent upon it.

You can't legislate morality.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
Only problem with this idea, is that the permit classes are PRIVATE and small companies. Expecting them to have someone who speaks 345 languages is not reasonable.

Just another strike against permitting at all. It's fundamentally elitist in reality.
 

XD-GEM

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
722
Location
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
I've been wondering about something along these lines since the McDonald ruling.

The majority opinion rejected the idea of incorporation under the "Priveleges and Immunities" clause, but accepted it under "Due Process." If I understood correctly, the argument against "Priveleges and Immunities" was that the right to keep and bear arms was not a privilege or immunity of citizenship, but pre-dated the Constitution.

If that's so, then doesn't it mean that the right extends without qualification to non-citizens who are here? By due process, they could lose that right for committing crimes, but up until such time, there should be no prohibition of that right.

Am I seeing this correctly?
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
I don't recollect where the constitution said, 'certain unalienable right, for english speakers.'

These rights pre-exist gov't based on our Humanity. They are God given rights. I fail to see how language is an issue. Do you know what language God speaks? Can you name a single prophet who required his followers to speak a different language?

I think anyone living in America should know English. I would never try and make Rights contingent upon it.

You can't legislate morality.

Joe,

I think you miss understand my train of thought here.
We are currently experiencing the "Balkanization of America" because we are no longer united by a common cause or language. The beginning of the end of the United States as we knew it began when we started identifying ourselves not as Americans but as "African-Anglo-Asian or Hispanic Americans". This serves to DIVIDE and not UNITE us as ONE PEOPLE.

A common language serves to unite us as a common people and as a nation.

CRaig
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I've been wondering about something along these lines since the McDonald ruling.

The majority opinion rejected the idea of incorporation under the "Priveleges and Immunities" clause, but accepted it under "Due Process." If I understood correctly, the argument against "Priveleges and Immunities" was that the right to keep and bear arms was not a privilege or immunity of citizenship, but pre-dated the Constitution.

If that's so, then doesn't it mean that the right extends without qualification to non-citizens who are here? By due process, they could lose that right for committing crimes, but up until such time, there should be no prohibition of that right.

Am I seeing this correctly?

I agree that non-citizens have all rights that do not follow from citizenship. (For example, voting follows from citizenship; non-citizens should not vote.) However, folks who are here illegally, with intent to be here illegally, have committed a crime. So, the determination, following due process, that one is here illegally, would carry with it, as a consequence, all the restrictions on rights legislated against illegals.

However, folks here on visas morally (if not legally; I don't know) have the RKBA.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I agree, but you can't violate someone's civil rights simply because they don't speak your language. It is akin to violating someone's rights because they are not the same race. IMO.

The way to avoid violating their rights is not to require a test or a course. Then language does not matter.
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
I agree, but you can't violate someone's civil rights simply because they don't speak your language. It is akin to violating someone's rights because they are not the same race. IMO.

This is a reason why we need to make English the official language of the United States.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
This is a reason why we need to make English the official language of the United States.
I agree! I do so agree. It needs, too, to be the official language of OCDO forum instead of this post-modern agrammatical unlettered illiterate crap tolerated here.

Replace "race" with culture and there is no problem disparaging Islamists. Anyone using the term 'race' needs be able to properly define and discuss it.
 
Last edited:

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
We are currently experiencing the "Balkanization of America" because we are no longer united by a common cause or language.

I was just watching a show about immigration and naturalization. Second-generation Americans from immigrant parents speak English at a rate of 90%, which is the highest it's ever been.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
WHat a knuckleheaded comment!

This is America. English only. My wife is a Croatian and she took her CHP test in ENGLISH.

What makes you think that you have the right To dictate English Only?

My great grandfather was a Native American, why must I speak only English? The right to bear arms is a universal and god given right. My ancestors had that right BEFORE any English speakers appeared on this continent, and they have treaty rights to maintain our language and culture.

Remember, all men are created equal, not just those that speak English.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
This is a reason why we need to make English the official language of the United States.

As I said earlier, the way to avoid violating rights of non-English speakers is not to require a test or a course.

That being said, I agree that English needs to be the agreed upon language in this nation. That is not to say that other languages cannot be used, but all official communications need only be in English. Warnings in 16 languages on packaging is getting just a tad ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top