Either or thinking is not too bright. The choice is not either an unlimited right to carry at will or no right to carry at all. That is a false dichotomy. The true rule being ownership and possession is guaranteed carrying is not at will and one must demonstrate reasonable grounds for doing so.
“Either or thinking is not too bright.”
The above is an either or statement.
At best it’s incoherent, at worst it refutes itself. A concise illustration of the state of all leftist ideology.
Very similar to the statement of postmodernism: “There is no such thing as truth.” If this statement is true, it’s false.
So, what is your legal theory to support this?
That the word "bear" in the Second Amendment was put there by accident and doesn't count?
That the practices of Midwestern towns in the nineteenth century constitute an amendment to the Constitution?
Would not your approach render the entire Constitution null and void? What would prevent that?
What definition of "right" is consistent with allowing the government to dictate whether one may exercise such right? Wasn't the purpose of the Bill of Rights to prevent the government from involving itself in these matters?
If you claim that the Founders intended to permit the government to dictate the circumstances of keeping and bearing, what is it that prevented the Founders from saying so? Under your interpretation, how is the "right" to keep and bear any different from the situation in Russia or Zimbabwe? Your "may issue" approach in Kalifornia has, until recently, been proven identical to "no carry" and still is for most of the population.
The law in Kalifornia is virtually identical to what you propose; that is, the local law enforcement chief gets to decide who has "good cause". Do you really believe that virtually every one of the ten million or so people in Los Angeles County have no "good cause"?
To whom? The Republican House? The Democrat Senate? The Present in the White House? The mayor of one's town? The police chief in one's town?
And who pays when the judgement is wrong and a person suffers great bodily harm or death because of such decision? The taxpayers? The cops? You?
How much expensive jewelry is enough to satisfy the need? If dead pizza delivery people could talk, would they agree with you?