Posted on 08/25/2020 6:07:58 PM PDT by CheshireTheCat
"...They simply won't approve them..."
Question is, how many will actually be approved?
if you have to ask permission, it’s not a right.
I support the right of law abiding sane citizens to own a gun but since you need a licence to drive a car because it is a dangerous machine when operated by someone who is incompetent or reckless I don’t see why a gun should be anh different. I dont want incompetent idiots buying guns without proving that they know how to handle them safely and dont have violent criminal records or are insane.
In order to stop the state abusing the licensing system the burden of proof should rest with them on why they refused a permit, rather than simply that they can be refused on an arbitrary whim, in much the same way that they cant just send you to prison without trial. If the state cannot give a good reason to refuse the permit, a court can overrule them.
got 2 done in the past 65 days (both 1911’s) AND
got the 3rd permit extended waiting while for the glock 30 to come off of layaway from buds.
#NoProblemFolks
An “application”, for a “permission”, to buy a gun. In America.
And, what would be your yardstick for this?
’proving that they know how to handle them safely. . .’
What standard of *proof* should be required? Who should be in charge of these thousands of evaluations? What kind of tests will be employed? How will they be normed?
You used liberal ”logic” here. Just toss out some filler that sounds nice. Don’t bother to consider content.
I think a written test like in a driving test where you have to prove knowledge of safety and basic knowledge like assuming all firearms are loaded and not pointing it at people, not having your figure on the trigger until you are ready to fire etc. Also some range time under the supervision of an instructor to demonstrate that you know the basics of shooting before you get let loose on firearms.
They shouldn’t be too onerous to pass for anyone with an average IQ. And if the government did try to use unfair means to try and stop people getting licences by charging an absurd amount for the licence or making the test harder than it needed to be then the law should be constitutionally prohibited to introduce any law that violates the ‘shall issue’ concept. If you are not mentally incompetent or a criminal, the state should find it legally impossible to deny someone a licence, whilst also reasonably restricting access to idiots and criminals who should not be put in charge of dangerous machinery or equipment. I believe it should be at the same standard and levels required to get a driving licence. The state would have a tough time being able to stop people being able to drive a car on an arbitrary whim and it would be the same for guns.
Of course, if they tried to ‘reform’ this law in order to make it nigh-on impossible for a normal person to own a gun, then that should be resisted with full vigour because that would be incredibly suspect as far as their motivations are concerned.
If you imposed a legal impediment to a government abusing the licensing to restrict ordinary folks owning guns then it would be a reasonable means of stopping such abuse. I think there are states that already impose more restrictive rules than the ones I am advocating. If you codified into law a rule tying the states hands on their ability to deny licences “just because” that seems reasonable. They would need to provide evidence and probable cause for denying a licence. You might say such a laws could be ignored or repealed but then you could say the same about the second amendment and the constitution itself in theory.
The 2nd Amendment does not say “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed if they pass the goverment test”.
Good luck New Jersyans. You’ll be waiting a long time for that approval.
My wife couldn’t get hers approved when we lived in Jersey even though she had a stalker back then and we had the FBI involved.
All we heard was “it’s been submitted and being processed.”
Depends on how much money you donate to the "right" candidates. Seriously.
"...To whom do those [NJ residents] subsequently turn to make an appeal..."
You, my friend are a rare breed on FReeRepublic!
You are advocating some kind of guidelines where the government can violate the 2ND Amendment?
BTW: Once those Guidelines are approved for the 2nd .. I’m sure that guidelines for all of the other amendments will follow!
What if the state that you reside in were to pass a law that says: “Guns are a public health menace so they will be confiscated?”
You okay with that too?
“The Second Amendment to the Constitution isn’t for just protecting hunting rights, and it’s not only to safeguard your right to target practice.
It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny ... for the protection of liberty.”
(Ted Cruz)
Yeah, because everybody knows there’s no way to get a gun without a permit. Hello, black market.
You could always constitutionally guarantee the shall issue nature of the licence to ensure that the government cannot arbitrarily pass gun laws that allow them to just take guns away because they hate guns and they can. You say that the government could potentially repeal that law and make it so the state could just grab guns arbitrarily but in theory, they could also repeal the second amendment by the same token.
I live in NYC, I’m sure I have a good idea.
Where is this in the Constitution?
Where is this in the Constitution?
What is the cut-off point for *idiocy*? At what point is an American just too damn dumb to be allowed keep his or her Constitutional rights?
Who will pay for the IQ testing? I would imagine, since you have thought this through so thoroughly, that you would go with WAIS-IV. This is questionable, as the test is not normed to determine ability to handle a firearm safely. But, for a raw score, I am thinking that is the direction you would go. How many psychologists will have to be hired to administer and evaluate?
Then there is the hard part. What is your cut off for *too stupid, let’s thin the herd*. Do you have a points range or will you go by standard deviations?
You don’t get to toss out such nonsense that people believe makes sense on a *feeling* level. Sooner or later, someone will dismantle your argument.
I can’t help but notice your spelling of ”vigour”. Where are you from?
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.