rushcreek2
Regular Member
Precisely ! Who pays any attention to " house keeping" chores ?
I wouldn't quite equate " journey " , or " travel " exemptions to = constitutional carry, but I guess it is to the extent that a person who is traveling/on a journey enjoys a special waiver from the application of some infringements.
The clarification of what UNLAWFUL carry means is probably the REAL KEY to the "constitutional carry" equation.
The criminal justice community has overreached in interpreting UNLAWFUL carry in the absence of UNLAWFUL INTENT.
It should not be necessary to sneak one through in order to "re-educate" the courts concerning the definition of CRIMINALITY. I naively have always thought that was the job of our attorneys general to provide advisory opinions to law enforcement, and state attorneys for the purpose of maintaining uniformity in the administration of JUSTICE. The courts should never have to wrestle with the task of deciding upon what "traveling" on a "journey" MEANS.
The lack of AG input into the applicability of the criminal statutes eventually leads to legal voids that end up getting filled by a maze of " Rules of Thumb" , and "common understandings" none of which constitute law.
I wouldn't quite equate " journey " , or " travel " exemptions to = constitutional carry, but I guess it is to the extent that a person who is traveling/on a journey enjoys a special waiver from the application of some infringements.
The clarification of what UNLAWFUL carry means is probably the REAL KEY to the "constitutional carry" equation.
The criminal justice community has overreached in interpreting UNLAWFUL carry in the absence of UNLAWFUL INTENT.
It should not be necessary to sneak one through in order to "re-educate" the courts concerning the definition of CRIMINALITY. I naively have always thought that was the job of our attorneys general to provide advisory opinions to law enforcement, and state attorneys for the purpose of maintaining uniformity in the administration of JUSTICE. The courts should never have to wrestle with the task of deciding upon what "traveling" on a "journey" MEANS.
The lack of AG input into the applicability of the criminal statutes eventually leads to legal voids that end up getting filled by a maze of " Rules of Thumb" , and "common understandings" none of which constitute law.
Last edited: