Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 314

Thread: Should NON US citizens get Concealed permits?

  1. #1
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522

    Should NON US citizens get Concealed permits?

    I dont know if I like the fact non US citizens being able to carry concealed in out country. I would rather they carry openly so I can see who has a firearm. Criminals get away with enough, whats to stop a green card holder from commiting a crime and then going home with no recourse.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/06...est=latestnews
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  2. #2
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    If they are in the country legally with a green card, and meet all the same background requirements as citizens, yes.

    Someone who has not proven themselves to be a threat, and has broken no laws, I believe should be guaranteed the same second amendment right as the rest of us.

    The right to self defense is a basic human right after-all, and until a person shows by their own actions that they cannot be trusted, they should be able to exercise that right.

    If the person is in the country illegally however, hell no!

    I make no assumptions about the circumstances that prompted an individual to sneak into this country, but the fact remains they have already committed a crime by being here in the manner they chose to enter.

    There is a legal process, they chose to ignore it, so what other legal process will they choose to ignore while they are here? Illegals have every expectation to get away with anything and simply be deported as an ultimate result, short of perhaps cold blooded murder.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by amzbrady View Post
    I dont know if I like the fact non US citizens being able to carry concealed in out country. I would rather they carry openly so I can see who has a firearm. Criminals get away with enough, whats to stop a green card holder from commiting a crime and then going home with no recourse.
    Because if there's one lesson we've seen in this country, it's that someone who is intent on committing a crime with a concealed firearm cares about the permit.

    Seriously, this should be an easy answer for anyone who cares about the constitution:
    14th amendment
    Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    6
    My FIL is a non US citizen in this country legally. How would you know if he was a legal citizen or a permant resident alien? He no longer has an accent unless he goes back to Canada or France (he holds dual citizenship) in which case his accent shows up. Why worry about someone who has gone through the legal process? Your comparing illegal activity to someone legaly being here.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Prove you are a citizen

    Have you ever purchased a firearm from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP)?
    Eligibility Requirements include proof of citizenship, is this really any different ?

    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I think they should be able to. If I remember correctly I could be wrong but a Canadian guy who was on this forum, said they used to be able to get Utah permit. And carry were allowed.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    to say they are guaranteed all the right US citizens is crazy. The point of the right to keep arms is to protect the rest of your rights, which they do not get all of them. If they get to carry a weapon....why doesn't an 18 year old, ADULT CITIZEN?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Winlock, , USA
    Posts
    501
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    Have you ever purchased a firearm from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP)?
    Eligibility Requirements include proof of citizenship, is this really any different ?

    ~Whitney
    Yes, entirely different. Art 1, sect 24 of the state constitution applies to the state CPL. As many have said, the right to self defense is a fundamental human right.

    The CMP is run under the direction of Congress. Congress made the rules about selling off old US military equipment. They (Congress) can make what ever rules they want to make about selling their stuff.

  9. #9
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by amzbrady View Post
    whats to stop a green card holder from commiting a crime and then going home with no recourse.
    Perhaps you have a "green card" confused with Diplomatic Immunity. The Green Card only gives a non-US Citizen the right to live and work in this country. It does not exempt them from our laws and punishment for breaking them. They can be arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, and jailed, just like any other Citizen. The only difference is that when the punishment is complete, a "resident alien" can be deported and we're stuck with the Citizens that have chosen lives of crime.

    I say that they have the right to carry, open or concealed, until such time as they do something to loose that right.

    Ditto all the comments about illegals. As far as I am concerned the only right they should have in this country is the right to leave.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran ak56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Carnation, Washington, USA
    Posts
    748
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
    Because if there's one lesson we've seen in this country, it's that someone who is intent on committing a crime with a concealed firearm cares about the permit.

    Seriously, this should be an easy answer for anyone who cares about the constitution:
    14th amendment
    Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
    +1

    Let's change the original question a little bit: Should NON Washington citizens get Washington CPL's? Or Washington citizens be restricted from getting permits in other states?

    All of the reasons I have seen for not allowing NON-US citizens to get permits could be argued on a state level.

    Let's not go there.
    No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law. Union Pacific Rail Co. vs Botsford as quoted in Terry v Ohio.


    Talk to your cats about catnip - before it's too late.

  11. #11
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196

    40,000 non-citizens serve in the US military

    40,000 non-citizens ensure that everyday remains independence day:


    http://armed-services.senate.gov/sta...2007-10-06.pdf

    "Today, more than 40,000 non-citizens serve in the military (active and reserve) and about 8,000 permanent resident aliens enlist for active duty every year. They serve world-wide in all Services and in a variety of jobs. They represent the United States both at home and abroad even on the front lines in the Global War on Terrorism.

    Over 100 have made the ultimate sacrifice in war and have given their lives for this nation since September 11, 2001."

    If non-citizens can serve this country, they should be able to protect their families. With the same rights as a citizen.

    Gant's comment in the Fox article, that this is a measured reaction to 9/11, is an insult to permanent residents, particularly those who do/ have served. It is also a load of hogwash - the perpetrators of 9/11 were not permanent residents and concealed firearms bore no relevance to the atrocity.
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Blaine, Washington, USA
    Posts
    28
    I am a green card holder and I've been one for 18 years now. When most people meet me they have no idea I wasn't born in this country I don't have an accent even though I speak fluent Russian I am for the most part an American. The only difference is that I can't vote, I can't run for a political office, I can't be a LEO and if I commit a felony I can be deported. I don't know about the rest of you but getting kicked out of the country I love and call home scares me more than prison and is more than enough of a deterant to crime. Taking away the rights of all Permanent Resident Aliens to carry a firearm and defend our families will do nothing more than set the gun rights movement back even further.

  13. #13
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzle2 View Post
    to say they are guaranteed all the right US citizens is crazy. The point of the right to keep arms is to protect the rest of your rights, which they do not get all of them. If they get to carry a weapon....why doesn't an 18 year old, ADULT CITIZEN?
    I thought the point was to "bear arms in defence of himself, or the state" - WA Constitution Art 1 Sect 24.

    Good question on an 18 year old, though. Indeed if an 18 can vote, join the army and die for his/her country; they should be able to bear arms in defence of themselves, in line with every other law abiding adult. I believe there is a thread somewhere in the WA forum where a member is lobbying for this.
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  14. #14
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    I thought the point was to "bear arms in defence of himself, or the state" - WA Constitution Art 1 Sect 24.

    Good question on an 18 year old, though. Indeed if an 18 can vote, join the army and die for his/her country; they should be able to bear arms in defence of themselves, in line with every other law abiding adult. I believe there is a thread somewhere in the WA forum where a member is lobbying for this.
    yeah greenisfaster i believe has a thread on that. My POV, why the hell should a non-citizen have the right to obtain a cpl while as a 18y old citizen cant...?

  15. #15
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzle2 View Post
    yeah greenisfaster i believe has a thread on that. My POV, why the hell should a non-citizen have the right to obtain a cpl while as a 18y old citizen cant...?
    Because it is not relevant in law. There are other things a non-citizen can do that an 18 year old can't. For example, drink alcohol. One has zero bearing on the other.
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  16. #16
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    Because it is not relevant in law. There are other things a non-citizen can do that an 18 year old can't. For example, drink alcohol. One has zero bearing on the other.
    yes but drinking alcohol isnt guaranteed by the constitution .

  17. #17
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzle2 View Post
    yes but drinking alcohol isnt guaranteed by the constitution .
    And the 2nd Amnd is extended to permanent residents via the 14th, in the same way as all the others covered by the Bill of Rights.
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    Have you ever purchased a firearm from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP)?
    Eligibility Requirements include proof of citizenship, is this really any different ?

    ~Whitney
    Yes.

    The CMP is not the .gov.

    The CMP was created by the U.S. Congress as part of the 1903 War Department Appropriations Act. The original purpose was to provide civilians an opportunity to learn and practice marksmanship skills so they would be skilled marksmen if later called on to serve in the U.S. military. Over the years the emphasis of the program shifted to focus on youth development through marksmanship. From 1916 until 1996 the CMP was administered by the U.S. Army. Title XVI of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106, 10 February 1996) created the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice & Firearms Safety (CPRPFS) to take over administration and promotion of the CMP. The CPRPFS is a tax-exempt non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation that has been Federally chartered by the U.S. Congress, but is not an agency of the U.S. Government (Title 36, United States Code, Section 40701 et seq). Apart from a donation of surplus .22 and .30 caliber rifles in the Army's inventory to the CMP, the CMP receives no Federal funding.
    http://www.thecmp.org/
    Last edited by wrightme; 01-07-2011 at 08:11 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzle2 View Post
    to say they are guaranteed all the right US citizens is crazy. The point of the right to keep arms is to protect the rest of your rights, which they do not get all of them. If they get to carry a weapon....why doesn't an 18 year old, ADULT CITIZEN?
    Really? What Rights do you deny them? Even the government does not deny other Rights to them.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  20. #20
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    And the 2nd Amnd is extended to permanent residents via the 14th, in the same way as all the others covered by the Bill of Rights.
    not exactly...All persons BORN or NATURALIZED...it doesnt say anything about permanent residency.

  21. #21
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightme View Post
    Really? What Rights do you deny them? Even the government does not deny other Rights to them.
    i thought that was already established...not being able to vote, run for office of presidency, etc.

  22. #22
    Regular Member NavyMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastside, Washington, USA
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by dizzle2 View Post
    not exactly...All persons BORN or NATURALIZED...it doesnt say anything about permanent residency.
    It's the last part of Amndt XIV Sect 1 that has been used to extend the meaning beyond citizens, in settled case law:

    "..... Nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
    cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt

  23. #23
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    It's the last part of Amndt XIV Sect 1 that has been used to extend the meaning beyond citizens, in settled case law:

    "..... Nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
    which would include children and 18y old us citizens

  24. #24
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyMike View Post
    It's the last part of Amndt XIV Sect 1 that has been used to extend the meaning beyond citizens, in settled case law:

    "..... Nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
    There is a reason why the word "protection" is used and not "application" or another more generic word.

  25. #25
    Regular Member dizzle2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lacey
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by FMCDH View Post
    There is a reason why the word "protection" is used and not "application" or another more generic word.
    what do you mean?

Page 1 of 13 12311 ... 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
  •