I am a Texan and I do concealed carry. But it seems there ought to be some minimal requirements for someone to be walking around with a deadly weapon. We don’t just tell everyone to drive a car.
No one reads anymore. Read the article. There is a link in this excerpt.
Texans need to be informed. Short cutting the information is a huge problem.
Driving a car, unlike carrying a gun or going to church, is not a Constitutionally Protected Right.
We don’t just tell everyone to drive a car.
Freedom is the reason for the bill of rights, we need to protect it with our lives if necessary.
And where is the right to drive a car in the Constitution?
Perhaps you'd like there to "be some minimal requirements" on the free exercise of religion? How about the right to peaceably assembly to petetion the government for redress of grievances? How about some "minimal requirements" on VOTING?
And finally, we in the FREE STATES have been carrying openly without "minimal requirements" for decades, and in some cases, SINCE STATEHOOD.
Some people just have the desire to tell others what to do, I guess.
In Vermont we have ‘minimal requirements’ - one has to be at least 16 years of age to carry concealed. If younger, they must also carry a note from Mom or Dad stating they have permission.
How much should meeting such requirements cost and who should pay? Who is the beneficiary of such requirements? Isn't it mostly those who fear being harmed by irresponsible gun carriers?
When I attended the eight grade one of the hurdles facing the students was the necessity of passing the "Constitution Test". The school recognized a responsibility to educate students sufficiently in the functioning of the government that it would withhold qualification to attend high school to those who failed to learn the material.
I think our schools have the same responsibility to teach gun rights and gun safety to our youth. If they can't learn the basics of safe gun handling at age 10, then they need to be held back or given extra attention so that they can become responsible citizens.
If that is what you have in mind, then I agree.
If, instead, you support training certificates, psychological testing, good-moral-character testing, and "good cause", to which I was subjected, then I disagree.
So, what is your proposal and what minimum income would be needed to meet such requirements?
There will be blood in the streets! .. /sarc
Ok for me but not for thee. Got it.
The right to vehicular transportation is not a God-given Right.
We need to be careful with our language. Our rights do not come from The Constitution, they come from God.
The Constitution is just a written acknowledgement of such so we don't forget.
You use a leftist argument. Driving is a privilege, the 2A is a right.