Shouldn't the second amendment be our carry permit
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Shouldn't the second amendment be our carry permit

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-31-2012, 06:35 PM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
cswann1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Austin,TX
Posts: 179
Liked 26 Times on 19 Posts
Likes Given: 18

Default Shouldn't the second amendment be our carry permit

I was watching an interview with Ted Nugent the other day and he said something that made a fair bit of sense.

He said: "The second amendment is my concealed carry permit". That got me to thinking. The second amendment tells me that I have the right to bear arms to defend myself. I'll just leave it right there and not go into what I need to defend myself from. Point is: 1) I really don't think I should have to have a constitutional amendment to tell me what I already know, but if it gives government a sense of self-worth to have it in writing, that's OK. And 2) I don't think the second amendment meant that this right only applies while in my own home or on my own land.

Why do I have to have a state issued permit for something that is confirmed (not given) by the constitution?

__________________
cswann1 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 08-31-2012, 06:38 PM   #2
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

I think that is how it should be, but it is a loooong road to there from here.

__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 07:22 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,904
Liked 401 Times on 284 Posts
Likes Given: 9

Default

I agree, to a certain extent. What you are suggesting is that any american wether he is a criminal, a drunk, a drugee, crazy, or just plain stupid could walk into a gun shop, purchase a gun, stick it in his belt and be on his way. We need laws yes, to keep the idiots from carry around a gun. Should the laws be as strict as they are? Hell no. But without those laws a lot of weapons that are being carried legally would do more harm than good.

__________________
ineverFTF is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 07:47 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SSGN_Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,253
Liked 2108 Times on 1241 Posts
Likes Given: 457

Default

The 2nd amendment wasn't written to tell us (the people) what we should already know. It was written to tell the government that the right is guaranteed to the people and no right with it's regard is guaranteed to the federal government. The Bill of Rights does not "grant" rights from the government it is suposed to inform the government of gthe areas that it has no governance over. "The people" unfortunately can vote to restrict their own rights and grant more power to the government. Once that is done, it is hard to get it back.

If the people of a state within the union have decided to further regulate things then it is the state's right guaranteed in the 10th amendment, to do so. This is why there is no federal carry permit. So, New Yorkers and Californians can feel safer with the gun laws they have until they realize that criminals already have a knack for disobedience of the law. Teh 10th amendment that guarantees that those areas of government not granted to the Federal government shall be left to the states, lost a lot of traction with the civil war after Lincoln put Federal troops on a states land to force the hand of the commonwealth of Virginia. Then proceeded to make constitutional violations. Since the Union won, the power of the central government over the states has increased, and the teeth of the states to exert their own powers have been dulled.

Vampire hunter or not, Lincoln was not the greatest republican president we ever had. He had a tough position to hold. He had to try to keep a nation together against a divisive topic of the day. Slavery was a horrible and immoral institution. It's days were numbered even in the south. Unfortunately not on a short enough political timeline, and the constitution took some hits. Any time that happens it is hard to recover.

__________________
SSGN_Doc is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 07:59 PM   #5
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
I think that is how it should be, but it is a loooong road to there from here.
Yeah, that.

2A is an acknowledgment - an understanding - by and of the government that individuals, as the true force in this nation, have a right to own and carry weapons if they so choose.

The reality is that since Lincoln, government has overtly said it does NOT acknowledge or understand our right and has worked piecemeal to restrict it. Our job is to restore that understanding peacefully, if the government will let us.
__________________
bkt is offline  
opaww Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 09:30 PM   #6
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ineverFTF View Post
I agree, to a certain extent. What you are suggesting is that any american wether he is a criminal, a drunk, a drugee, crazy, or just plain stupid could walk into a gun shop, purchase a gun, stick it in his belt and be on his way. We need laws yes, to keep the idiots from carry around a gun. Should the laws be as strict as they are? Hell no. But without those laws a lot of weapons that are being carried legally would do more harm than good.
It is not the fault or responsibility of the 2nd Amendment to limit access to firearms, only to keep the Feds from restricting it. I see no reason for a criminal who has not committed a violent or gun-related offense to be restricted from owning a firearm.

Let's punish violent acts FULLY and not try to limit non-offenders to safety scissors.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 09:58 PM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,904
Liked 401 Times on 284 Posts
Likes Given: 9

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello

It is not the fault or responsibility of the 2nd Amendment to limit access to firearms, only to keep the Feds from restricting it. I see no reason for a criminal who has not committed a violent or gun-related offense to be restricted from owning a firearm.

Let's punish violent acts FULLY and not try to limit non-offenders to safety scissors.
Alright im with ya on that one.
__________________
ineverFTF is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 09:59 PM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,904
Liked 401 Times on 284 Posts
Likes Given: 9

Default

I still luuuuuuuuuuv bears though

__________________
ineverFTF is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 10:02 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
The_Kid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 564
Liked 14 Times on 14 Posts
Likes Given: 94

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ineverFTF View Post
What you are suggesting is that any american wether he is a criminal, a drunk, a drugee, crazy, or just plain stupid could walk into a gun shop, purchase a gun, stick it in his belt and be on his way.
Yes, that is a present day reality.

For instance, all adults can purchase a Pieta replica of a Remington, 1858 New Model Army 44. Because it is considered "Arms" as written in The Second Amendment.
I can walk in with no ID and walk out with it, no questions asked.

The Second Amendment protects the citizens right to "Arms" not "firearms;" it was people that were hand wringing about, "do[ing] more harm than good" that spurred this statement from Benjamin Franklin.
Quote:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
__________________
...nuff said.

Last edited by The_Kid; 08-31-2012 at 10:04 PM. Reason: format
The_Kid is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2012, 10:03 PM   #10
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ineverFTF View Post
I still luuuuuuuuuuv bears though
It's all good, most people thought i was weird when i had a free-range 6' burmese python roaming my apartment.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Concealed Carry permit Rhodesian Legal and Activism 4 06-30-2011 09:42 AM
Concealed Carry Permit Bigjo23 Glock Forum 7 10-25-2010 07:42 PM
can i get a pa carry permit? surfgod247 Politics, Religion and Controversy 1 04-18-2009 04:30 AM
Carry permit rlmcat The Club House 8 09-03-2007 11:53 PM