"Keep" , "Bear" , "Infringed"

Discussion in 'Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection' started by Shallnotbeinfringed, Aug 24, 2009.

  1. Shallnotbeinfringed

    Shallnotbeinfringed New Member

    2
    0
    0
    I live in Indiana and I've had a CCW permit for years. I've had some issues however with the State of Indiana's "permission" to carry. I'm starting to realize that the state has no right to restrict, impede or INFRINGE on a right that is guaranteed by the US Constitution. In other words, the right does not belong to the state and therefore it can't give or grant the right to us.
    In fact, no state, or municipality has this right. (the DC gun ban was a good example).

    Three little words are where it all hangs (in my opinion).
    Keep
    Bear
    Infringed

    "Keep" means to own or have in one's complete control.

    "Bear" means to carry. (they came bearing gifts, the burden that I bear)

    "Infringed" means to impede or restrict.

    My CCW just ran out. I'm considering openly carrying to be the lamb willing to take this to the supreme court. (I just can't afford it myself).
    It's my opinion that the constitution was written so that the average person with adequate education could understand and live by it. After all, it was written for of and by the people.
    We MUST set this in stone before the new administration has a chance to appoint any other activist SC Judges. The DC gun ban was only overturned by one vote.
    As I see it, the 2nd amendment IS MY RIGHT TO CARRY.
    PLEASE SOMEONE, tell me where I'm wrong in this. Not your opinion about how evil guns are or if it's applicable to our society today, but what the constitution says.
    What's next? A permit to speak freely? A permit to live? A permit to liberty? They've already taken our right to own property in the state. (if you don't pay your property tax, they take your home, so who really owns it?).

    So the bottom line question that I'm asking is this.

    How does any government institution (state, county, municipality) think that they have the right to restrict or impede my right to bear? Any attempt to do so would seem to me, be an infringement!

    Of course I realize this does NOT apply to someone's private property. I can't walk into a store if they request that no firearms are allowed. It's their property and it's their right to exclude. I simply don't have to do business with them. BUT, peaceable travel in any public setting should not be restricted.


    "A truly sovereign nation is a nation made up of truly sovereign individuals."
    -Kevin Plank
     
  2. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    I don't think you'll find many people here who disagree with your statement. Glad to have you! If you haven't done so, please stop by the introduction area and let everyone know you're here.
     

  3. BigByrd47119

    BigByrd47119 New Member

    3,426
    0
    0
    Your have got it absolutly right. Your in good company here and will find many many like minded fellows. Glad to have you on the forums! :)
     
  4. Gojubrian

    Gojubrian New Member

    6,262
    5
    0
    You are completely right, however, being right doesn't pull much weight anymore. The government does all sorts of stuff they have no right to do according to the constitution. They use the constitution for buttwipe. :mad:
     
  5. BILLYBOB44

    BILLYBOB44 Active Member

    1,259
    0
    36
    You have got a point--BUT--

    Shallnotbe, I am an Indiana boy myself, although by younger years were spent in SW Fla., down by Cane's Home 20. I have held an Indiana Personal Protection Permit since 1978 and just last April, re-newed and got the Lifetime Permit. I suggest you do the same. Yes your ideas are correct, but how much $$ do you have for legal fees to prove it. Trust me the Lifetime Permit will cost WAY less.:eek::confused::p:D
     
  6. Mark F

    Mark F New Member Supporter

    2,918
    0
    0
    There will always be LIBERAL AZZHOLES in government, albeit local, state, or federal. Stand your ground, or lose your liberty. It sucks, but it's a fact of life.
     
  7. BILLYBOB44

    BILLYBOB44 Active Member

    1,259
    0
    36
    Thank you Mark F.

    I take that as a compliment Mark, that you do NOT place me in that category of LIBERAL AZZHOLES. I wish you also to have a GREAT day.:confused::D:confused:
     
  8. TRAPPER1

    TRAPPER1 New Member

    41
    0
    0
    I HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOU BUT WHAT ABOUT THE NUT CASE THAT JUST BUTCHERED ALL THOSE CHILDREN DON'T YOU BELIEVE A BACK GROUND CHECK OF EVERYONE WOULD STOP THese SEN LESS ACTS . I SUPPORT THE NRA ALSO I LIVE IN CANADA I HAVE A BACK GROUND CHECK ON ME EVERY DAY 365 DAYS OF THE YEAR BECAUSE I OWN A HAND GUN . AND I THINK THAT IS A GOOD IDEA . IF I'M NOT FIT TO HAVE A GUN . YES THE LAW CAN HAVE IT . BUT I WILL ALWAYS PUT A CHILD A HEAD OF MY PRIVILEGE TO HAVE A GUN God love them all .trapper1
     
  9. deadsp0t

    deadsp0t New Member

    1,470
    0
    0
    No need to yell... Damn..
     
  10. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    August of 2009 was the last post until today; kinda dusty here.

    I do wish they had chosen a word other than "bear".
     
  11. MisterMcCool

    MisterMcCool Well-Known Member Supporter

    12,957
    368
    83
    In the U.S. we do not trust the few in government to decide who should be permitted or denied the right to arms. Only those CONVICTED of crimes forfeit their rights in this country.
     
  12. MisterMcCool

    MisterMcCool Well-Known Member Supporter

    12,957
    368
    83
    Just some Canadian troll looking for a fight. And dammit I bit.
     
  13. phildenton

    phildenton New Member

    853
    0
    0
    Just so you know, to get our license to carry we go through extensive background checks. Secondly, in the usa it is a right, not a revocable priveledge,third, the psycho was already prohibited, had failed a background check, he killed his mom and broke into her gunsafe, fourth, canada can go F* itself.
     
  14. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    Owning a modern handgun in Canada is a useless drill. My good friend who ranches in Canada finally surrendered his handgun permit and sold his Ruger .22 Auto. Your home can be entered by the Federal Police without warning day or night if you own a modern pistol.
    He owns thousands of acres and lives 50 miles from any town. He can not fire the handgun any where except on an approved range. The nearest range is an hour away from his ranch. :(
     
  15. AR10

    AR10 New Member

    2,264
    0
    0
    Couple things

    Your forum name here, is mine on a Glock forum. Small world. AR10 was taken there, and your name popped into my head.

    Secondly, welcome to these gun forums.

    Third, open carry is foolish, and it brings gun owners into a bad light, every time another you tube video pops up.

    Guns are like a dick, keep it hidden till you need it.
     
  16. phildenton

    phildenton New Member

    853
    0
    0
    Cops open carry, why shouldnt civilians have the option? They both have pros and cons. Only a foolish person would dismiss oc without any critical thinking, assuming they are capable of such.
     
  17. AR10

    AR10 New Member

    2,264
    0
    0
    Show me one case where open carry worked out well for all involved?

    There are several hundred videos on you tube, and they range from dumb to dumber.

    I will retract my foolish comment once you post one video where, in the USA, all went well.

    In Switzerland, you may find babes strolling along a beach, or lounging in a park, reading a book, while they have a full auto rifle at their side. However, our culture, is not their culture. In our culture, the guns strength is in their silence.

    I am all for a complete Second Amendment, however, I do not need to see a gun, to know people carry.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    Gees what gun? I didn't see any guns in that picture.:D
     
  19. phildenton

    phildenton New Member

    853
    0
    0
    A smart person wont be confrontational, and will be judicious about when to and not to oc. I like to go backpacking in the summer, i carry a service size revolver, so to cc would mean wearing extra heavy clothing, not desirable. Besides the heat factor, you dont want to have that additional split second when facing off with a mountain lion. Along the same lines as a person who chooses to carry a 1911 in condition 1, to save time. There is a time and place for most things. And with all that said, it is a right in many jurisdictions, just as your right to make uneducated remarks. Now, what about the youtube clips, albeit few they are, where both the individual and leo were polite to eachother?
     
  20. TRAPPER1

    TRAPPER1 New Member

    41
    0
    0
    background check

    Dear Sir you say you need a background check to carry . but do you need a background check to purchase a firearm with a mag . that will hold 30 rounds ? do not come to a battle of wits with me because you come on armed. Trapper1