Posted on 10/16/2005 1:47:00 PM PDT by freepatriot32
Albeit now considered a source of revenue vs a right we should'nt have to pay for I am happy with what we have thus far as it is establishing a record, facts, data etc showing that allowing America's law abidding the ability to defend themselves in an outside of their homes is reducing crimes against persons nationwide.
Incrementally we have made wrongs right and make no doubt that we still have a long way to go and a responsibility or stewardship to be forever vigilant against the social engineers playing reindeer games with lives.....
When asked why I carry it is suggested that I am hoping to kill someone. No more than owning a fire extinguisher creates a desire to see my home on fire or carrying a spare tire for my truck makes me want to get out in the rain on a dark night to change a flat....
Just one more tool available to keep me and mine safe if we can't avoid a serious threat to our lives.
Just my opinion of course......Stay safe !
wrist.. sorry. I guess not then, =o)
Uh, people don't get warrants to search other people.
If I don't want you bringing a gun (or any other thing) into or onto my property, that should be my right.
Gotta love it BTTT!!!
I like it!
Part of the reason of the Second Amendment is to keep government officials in 'fear' of the general public.
Not now that the Government workers can be routinely armed as well.
...an opinion that I heartily share my friend!
I am pro 2A, but if someone doesn't want you bringing a gun onto their property, it should be their right.
Try to understand that my car is ~my~ property.
If you want to stop & search all cars before they enter your property, fine, get a warrant & do so.
Otherwise, live with Alaska's law, -- and with our nations 2nd amendment policy that says no infringements on our right to carry.
Uh, people don't get warrants to search other people.
You are nitpicking the issue.
If I don't want you bringing a gun (or any other thing) into or onto my property, that should be my right.
You have that right. You can put up a gate, and keep everyone out that refuses your search demands.
-- But once you let visitors on your property without a car search, their car is there legally, under the new Alaskan law.
Why would you object to a gun kept in your guests car?
The part of the law that most concerns Alaska police chiefs is the lifting of bans on guns in public buildings. That could leave government workers inside vulnerable to attack, said Anchorage Police Chief Walter Monegan.
---
Uh.... without them they would be vulnerable to attack because the government employees couldn't defend themselves against a criminal who brought a weapon in! Strange thinking for a police chief...
You yourself are your own property...that doesn't give you the right to come onto my property, in other words, just because you or something is your own property, that shouldn't give you the right to bring it onto my property.
The Bill of Rights does not apply to private individuals.
And personally, I would not object to someone carrying a gun on to my property, either on their person or in their car, but since it's my property it should still be up to me whether I want someone to or not.
It has been my contention for some time that
municipal buildings, courts, city halls etc that
prohibit concealed carry holders from their right,
MUST provide gun check facilities, or they are FORCING
citizens to be disarmed between their cars/vehicles and
the said building.
I am pro 2A, but if someone doesn't want you bringing a gun onto their property, it should be their right.
Try to understand that my car is ~my~ property.
If you want to stop & search all cars before they enter your property, fine, get a warrant & do so.
Otherwise, live with Alaska's law, -- and with our nations 2nd amendment policy that says no infringements on our right to carry.
Uh, people don't get warrants to search other people.
You are nitpicking the issue.
If I don't want you bringing a gun (or any other thing) into or onto my property, that should be my right.
You have that right. You can put up a gate, and keep everyone out that refuses your search demands.
-- But once you let visitors on your property without a car search, their car is there legally, under the new Alaskan law.
...that doesn't give you the right to come onto my property, in other words, just because you or something is your own property, that shouldn't give you the right to bring it onto my property.
I repeat, - you can put up a gate and keep me & my car off your property for any reason.
The purpose of the Alaskan law is to prevent 'parking lot' gun bans..
The Bill of Rights does not apply to private individuals.
Everyone is obligated to support & obey our Law of the Land.
Now there's LEO with some good old common sense. I just wish all LE and government officials had as much.
Anyone who thinks a law against carrying guns will stop somebody from carrying a gun who intends to commit a far more serious crime with that gun has to have the IQ of a garden slug.
There are already restrictions on what people may do with other people's vehicles on their property. If I put my car on your property without your permission, in most (all?) cities you are allowed to have it towed and impounded, generally for a price specified by the city. You are not allowed to confiscate property from the car or do anything to deliberately prevent me from redeeming my car, in the same condition and with the same contents as when it was towed, by payment of the legally-defined fee.
Do those restrictions infringe property owners' rights? Are you going to campaign against those?
At least some politicians are prepared to stand behind Corporate Property Rights.
The Browning Hi Power has to be one of the prettiest semi-autos ever made.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.