Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by NRA80, Sep 25, 2012.
Op-Ed on the proposed Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment:
Here's what I want to know...
Right now it's legal to open carry a handgun at the age of 17 and up in Louisiana (yes, that's not even old enough to buy a Red Ryder at Walmart), and I take advantage of this, because I'm a recent transplant who can't yet afford to PAY MONEY to exercise my INFRINGED right to keep and bear (concealed class and permitting costs $130ish to $200, depending on who you go to for the class).
Now, with this new amendment, would I be able to exercise my very own, individual, highly personal, right to keep and bear as I see fit? Meaning concealed without a permit or class?
For one, I wholeheartedly believe that having to PAY is an infringement (as evidenced by the fact that I currently CAN'T, therefore, my rights are financially out of reach due to legislation, therefore, my rights are infringed), so that really irks me. Also, having been an enlisted Marine grunt, and as avid a shooter as I can afford to be, I'm pretty sure I can handle a firearm better than probably 90% of these "instructors" can, much less teach others.
I'll be voting aye, but this is a question I would like to know the answer to.
Trip, as you grow older, you will come to realize that success in politics is measured by tiny bites, not by big gulps.
No one is going to get everything they want out of one bill or law. The key to success is to support anything that makes things a litttle better, and when you get that passed, start working to get a litttle more.
If there's one lesson we should learn from the anti gun crowd, it's patience. They know they can't pass an amendment to repeal the 2nd amendment. So they nibble at our rights, one little bite at a time.
Short barrel handguns, .50 cal rifles, so-called "assault weapons," gun shows, etc.
If we want to get back the rights we've lost, we need to have patience, and take every little bite we can get, and eventually, all of these little "pennies" will add up to that dollar we're working for.
Truer words have not been spoken!!
I understand that, but it still bears an answer, don't ya think? I've read the language of it several times over the past few months, but I simply can't figure out exactly what it gives, and what it leaves still restricted.
I'm thinking there's a possibility it could actually take away OC by those under 21... Depending on how the so called leaders want to interpret and strictly scrutinize things.
My overall question is, "What does this mean? How does it benefit us? How can/will it be misconstrued to further restrict our rights?"
The question about concealed carry was just a targeted specific I would like to know.
And what will it do to repeal the restrictions already placed upon us? The US constitution already grants each and every one of us the right to keep and bear arms, and we see how that's gone so far...
What I want to know is why our law makers cannot write the laws so that everyone can understand them at first glance? Why must they be written in only a language that lawyers understand? Is this some form of job security?
No one can twist, torture, and torment the Engish language like a lawyer.
Lawmakers must use extremely concise legalese, and even then, some lawyer will figure out a way to make it mean something opposite to the original intent.
So they cannot say what they mean and mean what they say, huh?
Now I know why I joined the Army. At least while I was in uniform, we all spoke the same language and it was easily understood.
Let me try to answer your questions. If you would like more information, feel free to call me at 703-282-5296.
With respect to carry,
Under the current amendment, the legislature could ban your ability to carry concealed all together. Also, there are no laws in Louisiana prohibiting open carry (there are laws prohibiting places you can carry a firearm open or concealed).
That being said, at a minimum, the proposed amendment would prevent a future legislature from banning the carry of a firearm -- including concealed. Further, if the carry statute were challenged, under the current amendment all of the restrictions or subjective qualification criteria would remain. Under the proposed amendment, it would very likely strike "subjective" qualification criteria -- meaning, while it may not overturn the entire statute, it would make it easier for law-abiding Louisianans to exercise their rights. Also, with respects to localities prohibiting carry in public places or certain places already banned, the new amendment, if someone challenged the bans, would likely overturn the rights-infringing bans.
The proposed amendment gives more freedom back to "we the people" by limiting the ability for anti-gun judges and lawyers from "interpreting" or applying a lesser standard to your fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
We all agree "shall not be infringed" is easy to understand. But, unfortunately, as we see in state and federal cases, its whittled away with low standards of review or balancing tests, or plain disregard for the right. Now by expressly making the right fundamental and requiring strict scrutiny -- you are saying "shall not be infringed" -- AND WE MEAN IT!
Well God Bless your fight!!!
Please keep us informed of the outcome.
If successfull, send a copy of it to the NRA rep here in Florida. It would seem that ours needs a little fine tuning.