SavageOne
Regular Member
I was just wondering how all these jurisdictions that allow OC only with a CCW permit can do so legally. CCW is basically a privilege granted by the state to citizens who have met the requirements established by the state. OC is the right that every citizen is born with. This right is enumerated in both the COTUS and the MO Constitution. In fact, in the MO Constitution it is illegal to "bear arms" concealed, meaning the only way to legally "bear arms" is openly. We are all aware that the legislature allowed for CCW in 2003 with a permit.
So, now we have communities saying that the only way a person can OC is if they acquire a CCW permit. In other words, the only way we can exercise a right is by paying for a privilege. I realize that on a state level we don't have pre-emption, but how on a federal level is this not the same as a Poll Tax? Since instructors can and do demand payment(and rightfully so) for providing the required instruction, and County Sheriffs can and do demand processing fees(not so sure of how rightfully), and since the Highway Patrol can and does demand a processing fee for running a back ground check(again not so sure this is "rightful"), how does this not keep access to the right to "bear arms" from those who are not able to pay these "fees" if they live in one of these jurisdictions? Has anyone ever challenged this in a federal court? Is this just a case of our rights being violated, because no one has had the monies necessary to challenge it? I was just wondering.
So, now we have communities saying that the only way a person can OC is if they acquire a CCW permit. In other words, the only way we can exercise a right is by paying for a privilege. I realize that on a state level we don't have pre-emption, but how on a federal level is this not the same as a Poll Tax? Since instructors can and do demand payment(and rightfully so) for providing the required instruction, and County Sheriffs can and do demand processing fees(not so sure of how rightfully), and since the Highway Patrol can and does demand a processing fee for running a back ground check(again not so sure this is "rightful"), how does this not keep access to the right to "bear arms" from those who are not able to pay these "fees" if they live in one of these jurisdictions? Has anyone ever challenged this in a federal court? Is this just a case of our rights being violated, because no one has had the monies necessary to challenge it? I was just wondering.