Posted on 08/16/2010 8:00:56 AM PDT by Pessimist
My 2nd and last vanity (I promise!)
I'd be interested in hearing other's thought regarding the constitutionality of existing CCW laws.
Should a person be required to undergo training and pay licensing fees to ejoy a consitutional right?
Should I be allowed to put a sign on our building stating "No Equal Opportunity Allowed Inside"?
It very much IS a "defined" Constitutional protection for a Right.
“How many people take the mandatory training and then that is the only time they fire their weapon?”
Good point. There were several people in our class who had never handled or shot a gun before.
Kinda scary standing on the firing line next to them!
My thinking and approach exactly!
Further, I think the more of us who go “on the books” the bigger constituency we constitute.
the ccw training is I believe the wisest thing a person can do. It inform you on the legal aspects concerning the actual use of the weapon and your liability.
“I agree. Virginia has an open-carry law, but I believe it should be CC without a permit”
Ohio does too. But the instructor, who was a LEO, said in response to someone’s question about it” “Get ready to meet a lot of policmen” if you try it.
No conflict of interest there, huh? :)
He make a living training for CCW.
“It inform you on the legal aspects concerning the actual use of the weapon..”
As a practical matter, that’s true.
But my point is, why should there be “legal aspects” to my constitutional right?
I think an LEO would be remiss in his job, if he didn’t check you out. I’m all for open-carry, it’s just not something I will do.,,for that very reason and I don’t like being stared at by people. I think open-carry attracks too much attention, and people get the wrong idea about those that do carry. I will carry if I’m in the woods, but not around people.
If you think that the RKBA is a constitutional right - then yes ...
*hint - constitutional rights are granted by the sovereign!
“I think an LEO would be remiss in his job, if he didn’t check you out.”
.
I can’t go that far.
Our constitutional presumption of inocence precludes “checking out” anyone without cause.
We need to proactively assure that police are trained to avoid such behavior. It should be cause for formal reprimand, and dismissal on the third such reprimand.
.
Any such measure makes what is a Constitutional RIGHT into a privilege determined by what the media, bureaucrats, some civic leader or politician, or those administering the law “thinks” is reasonable, or how they interpret the law that day. The RIGHT to bear arms is undermined by people who intentionally play games creating hurdles to block the exercise of a RIGHT. It becomes inconsistent, rules are ad hoc at times and outright irrational (i.e. banning bayonet lugs), the poor are unequally affected, as are those who might benefit the most by being able to defend themselves...... Once you create any such laws, you open a slippery slope, a Pandora’s box out of which more and more silliness comes. Pretty soon everything that goes “boom” is defined as an “assault rifle.” Before long you have “gun free zones,” or as in Scotland you end up with limits on kitchen knives because after all their blade is to long and they could be used as weapons. Once the government has their foot in the door, they can add, delete, change, redefine, what and how they please. Get the right people in the right places and suddenly you have the ATF scrutinizing gun stores and what amounts to harassment. (i.e. forms incorrectly filled out becomes a huge deal) Pretty soon you have the ATF measuring the length of a shotgun barrel (What's the point?), or dictating how you (law abiding citizen) have to store your own guns on your own private property (i.e. Germany).
In reality some issues are zero sum games and are all or nothing. The RIGHT to bear arms is one such issue. There is no middle ground because what people call compromise answers, rational limits and restrictions on the RIGHT to bear arms amount to granting a government may it be federal, state or city the authority to do whatever they please in the long run. As soon as the government (federal, state or city) has the authority to place any restriction on this RIGHT, it is by definition no longer a right and only a privilege granted through some benevolent authority by a government which by decree at some point can change their rules as they please, i.e. Brady Bill, the city of Washington, Chicago..........
If there are any so called “costs” with executing this right, these are only because of a governments self created need to regulate this right. There should be no onus on the owner of a weapon to pay anything to exercise this right except what the market dictates in terms of supply and demand for products and services rendered.
The government should only be allowed to set rules on some of the most elemental aspects such as restricting the ownership of weapons to violent felons, restricting the ownership of weapons that have an area affect through concussive/fragmenting blast, fire etc. Outside of the most basic framework, the macro level rules the government has no business imposing popularist political whims, personal opinions, their ideology into what is granted to every American as a Constitutional right.
Concealed carry, open carry, so called assault weapons, fully automatic weapons, big guns, small guns, suppressors, bayonets, US made, foreign made, high capacity magazines, short barrels, long barrels, light barrels, heavy barrels, plastic, metal, wood, I don't care...... It's your right.
“Here in MA the process goes like this: move to NH.....”
Do you get to pass “Go” and collect $200?
“While I support the NRA in general, I think it’s an unholy alliance between them and the gvt in that they mandate that you take a 12 hour class by an NRA certified instructor.”
.
The NRA is the proximate source of these unconstitutional practices. They support the heavy handed enforcement of all unconstitutional gun laws by written policy.
.
“Any such measure makes what is a Constitutional RIGHT into a privilege...”
They actually called it a privelege in the handout.
Yeah! Really!
Well, you definitely get cheaper cigarettes!
“The NRA is the proximate source of these unconstitutional practices.”
I agree. On the other hand, absent such an organization, we might have even less “rights” than we do.
I would hope, as someone else here said, these are “halfway measures” on the road to true rights.
But I’m cynical. No matter how well intentioned the NRA was at some point, like all organizations they eventually fall in love with their power.
I would be completely shocked if the NRA was not the main lobbier for the rule that the trainer must be NRA certified.
But what can you do?
In PA:
$19.00, no criminal/psychiatric background, and a signature from the local LEO chief (by law, he MUST get it back to you within a couple days)gets you the paper copy, which you should laminate to keep it from getting destroyed in your wallet.
$40.00 plus the above gets you the hard plastic driver license-style card.
And you walk out the door, newly-minted and “officially sanctioned” to exercise your right.
I agree with Old Teufel Hunden on this - we win the battle at this level and prosecute the larger war for the “hearts and minds” of the populace-at-large; people have been “conditioned” to believe that guns are bad, and only police and military (i.e., “professionals”) are supposed to have them. Therefore, if you’re “licensed” you MUST be OK (now, in reality, how some bureaucrat who signs a piece of paper makes you INSTANTLY OK to carry eases peoples’ minds, I’ll never know, but that’s the situation we have to live with - for now).
But - we weren’t robbed of our liberty overnight; it will take time to change minds and educate folks to what was actually stolen from them. They see you carrying, they ask you questions, and it opens chance for educational dialogue and “Well, if you want to go to the range with me sometime, I’d be GLAD to take you”. For the record, it’s worked with some of my neighbors and others I’ve “woken up”.
Of course, you get the sheep-mentality types who FREAK if they know you carry - they’re lost causes. I don’t waste my time on them.
We ALL know that licensing a basic, Civil, Constitutional, and HUMAN right is B.S. But it is part of the real world in which we have to operate and live everyday. This is what Socialists do - they get control of the law-making powers and use legalese to oppress, initimate, harass, silence, and otherwise control people.
To paraphrase the late Colonel Jeff Cooper (God bless him): You can only be controlled if you LET yourself be controlled. When we start ACTING like Free Men and setting the example that Free Men set, it is contagious. Carrying is an act of liberty and an act of defiance of the Socialists.
Concealed carry is a STARTING point on a longer road. We’re 43 states strong right now; when this kicked off back in 1987 (Florida first), who would have thought we’d win as many states back as we already have?
Vermont and Alaska are starting points as well. We need to push and push and push hard to make State legislatures go this route and recognize that the Constitution that they ratified is the LAW of the LAND. And if we have to replace the State legislatures one Lib and one RINO at a time or en masse, we do it.
Make your local congresscritters know that THIS is the issue that determines your vote for them at every opportunity.
We may not get this done in our lifetimes, but that doesn’t mean we stop trying.
On the contrary...push HARDER at every opportunity.
Free Men don’t back down.
“..I don’t like being stared at...”
Not a good reason to be ashamed of a Constitutional right. I would choose concealed carry in most instances, but don’t believe those who choose to open carry should be ashamed of it.
Regarding training - knowing the application of self-defense laws in your state is important. If you are intent on learning on your own, fine. If not, get the knowledge of your rights and responsibilities somewhere.
One of the biggest problems with firearms owners of any type is that hunting and open areas to practice self-defense techniques and shoot at something other than paper targets are not easily available or affordable for your average city dweller or non-landowner. That does pose some longterm risks to firearms ownership.
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.