• 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.

Missing the Point

SlackwareRobert

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
1,338
Location
Alabama, ,
imported post

Hate to show the bad logic.....
But the gang banger drive by, is the same as with the cop.
Both armed individuals are trying to get them.
They don't spray the sidewalks just because someone is wearing a gun
window shopping.

And I still maintan it is the CC that is dangerous, too many stories to count
of cc'ers shooting themselves. None that I know of for OC. A few of those
leo brandishing shootings, but not LAC OC.
 

Basic Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
129
Location
, ,
imported post

TatankaGap wrote:
CC is a privilege
This is what the powers that be would have us believe. If you read the 2nd amendment you would see that there is no mention of either open or concealed.
 

TatankaGap

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
193
Location
Buffalo Gap, South Dakota, USA
imported post

The language quoted by Scalia in Heller points out that the right of self-defense does not necessarily include right to conceal weapons ~ it's an open issue; what is clear is that the founders were definitely talking about open carry, at a minimum, because that's how most people carried their weapons in that day and age.

I will not argue against the 2A protecting a right of concealed carry but there is that Supreme Court language to get past on a legal level anyways -
 

arentol

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
383
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

TatankaGap wrote:
The language quoted by Scalia in Heller points out that the right of self-defense does not necessarily include right to conceal weapons ~ it's an open issue; what is clear is that the founders were definitely talking about open carry, at a minimum, because that's how most people carried their weapons in that day and age.

I will not argue against the 2A protecting a right of concealed carry but there is that Supreme Court language to get past on a legal level anyways -
Well, if the constitution were a law it would be definition include the right to carry concealed because in law anything not specifically excluded is assumed to be included. However, the constitution is written broadly, unlike most laws, and is not intended to be interpreted like a law. It is still generally accepted that the constitution should be read to guarantee rights as broadly as possible. If it is not absolutely necessary to take away a right that "could" be interpreted as being guaranteed by the constitution then taking away that right is unnecessary and wrong.

When it comes to CC, there is NO reason for anyone with the right to carry arms to not have the right to carry a concealed weapon....

Someone intending to commit a crime will concealed carry regardless of the law so CC regulation is entirely useless for limiting intentional crimes.

Those who intend only to defend themselves should clearly be able to do so in whatever way makes them most comfortable without infringing on the rights of others. Society has changed and open carry is not as socially acceptable as it was (as much as we want to change that) so CC should actually be MORE legal now than it was back when the constitution was written.

As to CC as a way to ensure those carrying weapons are trained properly. Again, if a training requirement is not absolutely necessary to carry a weapon safely then it shouldn't be required. In Washington State there is no training requirement for any form of firearm carry and we do not have any more problems with CC'ers than any other state has. The truth is that almost nobody carries a concealed weapon for self defense without getting some kind of training first because we all know how much damage a firearm can do. Not to mention OC is legal without training in most places (and should be in all places).
 
Top