Alaska anti-gun-control law goes into effect Wednesday

http://www.helenair.com ^ | 10/15/05 | MATT VOLZ

[Cobra64]

Okey-Dokey. Do you have a magnetrometer stationed at you front door? Do you work for TSA? Do you inspect all goods, either in luggage and otherwise when you allow anyone into your home? Do you have bomb sniffing chemical wands that scour belongings from others coming into your house. Do you have trained bomb-sniffing dogs trained to sniff ordnance that may enter the portal of your house? Do you have radar systems set up 1,000 yards away that will detect a sniper that will not nail your bean (being nice)?

Some people need to go back to bed and dream in the land of... OZ. Or Alice in The Looking Glass.

(rolling eyes in the 10th magnitude)

BTW... have you ever touched a firearm?

That is the cureative question in this dialogue. Answer the question.

[Panic in the Streets]

Jeez dude, you totally miss the point.

The point isn't about gun rights..the point is: Does a private property owner have the right to allow or disallow certain objects on their property?

It's a yes or no question.

This has nothing to do with guns, and yes, I do own a gun and have a CCW permit. It's a Model 96 Beretta .40 cal. Would you like to see a photo of one?

[pillbox_girl]

Once you learn and understand that the Bill of Rights does not apply to private citizens, but to the Government and its relation to private citizens, get back to me.

Oh please. Claiming a "higher understanding" and then a hand-waving dismissal is a sure sign of someone without any real argument to back up their position. I see this all the time at liberal sites I lurk at, but it's a pretty rare thing here. That makes you pretty special.

Once I learn something that's patently untrue?

The Bill of Rights applies to EVERYONE. Plain and simple. The Second Amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". It does not say "except by", or "except for". Anything else is an opening for government abuse and roundabout nullification of the right to keep and bear arms. Which is exactly what we've seen happening.

If your logic was correct, then the owner of this website could not ban a poster...because that would be an infringement on their right of free speech.

No. Once again, you are not getting it. It is not that hard a distinction to understand. The owner of this website can decide who is and is not allowed here. That is not the same thing as deciding what they can and cannot say.

Back to the Second Amendment issue (and away from your attempt at sidetracking): Say you have declared your property to be "gun free". If you do not check everyone at the door, and later find that someone does have a weapon on your private property, the MOST you can do is make that person leave. You are NOT empowered to confiscate their weapon from them or in any other way deny them their right to keep and bear arms.

And besides all that, you'd have to be especially stupid to declare your property "gun free" without specifically checking everyone at the door because all that would accomplish is ensure the only armed people on your property are there with ill intentions. I'm not saying this practice isn't common, just that it's stupid.

[Sam Cree]

You have the right of it my FRiend. Lots of freepers believe, as do the Dems, that our government should play a major role in the ordering and arranging of society. They don't wish to admit that if we give it that power for a just cause, that it will in time use it for one that is unjust.

Not that forcing you to allow something on your property that you don't want is a just cause IMO.

I'm speaking as a life member of the NRA, btw.

[Cobra64]

No problem, provided I knew you, and who you are. I'd give you a cup of coffee, and light you a cigar.

This is not NYC where we live. We are rural bumpkins with a differing set of standards from city slickers and gangsters.

BTW, where do you live? This may cause shade a light on the conversation. Just curious...

[Panic in the Streets]

I live in Coral Gables (Miami), Fla, where CCW was passed in the 80's, to cries of "there will be blood in the streets" if it passes.

By the way, I'm against CCW, because I don't think a law-abiding American should need the permission of the Gov't to carry a weapon. The Govt can pretty much take away any license arbitrarily.

I am in agreement with the Alaska law on that, and in full agreement with the non-laws in Vermont regarding guns.

[Cobra64]

You know what? In my opinion this jerk is a lib with no guts. I tried to reason logic with him... Forget it. When he gets shot in Los Angeles, CA.. wherever, I will have no quallms. My assessment is that he is a looney second grade skrewl-teacher. /endofassessment

[editor-surveyor]

"cool, now how to conceal a .50 cal?"

Remember Chester from Gunsmoke? Just start walking like him ;o)

[Cobra64]

I live in Coral Gables (Miami), Fla, where CCW was passed in the 80's, to cries of "there will be blood in the streets" if it passes. By the way, I'm against CCW, because I don't think a law-abiding American should need the permission of the Gov't to carry a weapon. The Govt can pretty much take away any license arbitrarily. I am in agreement with the Alaska law on that, and in full agreement with the non-laws in Vermont regarding guns.

Well. The answer is simple. Move to Miami, or New Orleans. Then you can throw spitballs at all of your friends when they come in to rape your wife, steal your goods, and subsequently burn down your house.

But... then again, liberals love this process.

[editor-surveyor]

"The handgun permit was intended to eliminate problems in going from one jurisdiction to another since the local rules varied considerably.

Could eliminating the permit system make it more difficult to travel to other states, some of which require that you have a permit from your home state?

[BurbankKarl]

what areas would be considered Liberal in Alaska? Around the universities? Wasilla?

[Panic in the Streets]

Why would I want to throw spitballs at them, when I have a gun?

[US_MilitaryRules]

Please come to California and get it passed here! Please!

[GladesGuru]

"Incredibly enough, there are lots of conservatives on FR who insist that private property 'rights' are being violated by such laws."

Wrong! !

The keeping of a gun inside one's vehicle is a right and as such can not be abridged. Why was this so written? So that some who just stops off enroute to other destinations does not lose his right to keep & bear arms.

However, to enter another's property with a gun can only be don't with the land owner's permission.

That which locked in a visitor's car is considered not to have entered private property in the same sense that a gun on a visitor's person would be.

[Cobra64]

Why would I want to throw spitballs at them, when I have a gun?

Maybe you missed my point. If so, I apologise.

I have, at this point, 7,000 rounds of assorted ammo, featured for 18 varying weapons.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!!

[Shooter 2.5]

I'm asking Freepers to join the NRA and put the initials in their tagline. Thanks.

[stopsign]

Starting Wednesday, a new anti-gun-control law in Alaska will allow handgun owners to carry concealed weapons without a permit in the seven Alaska cities where permits are now required.

WoooHooo!! Way to go Alaska!!! So many more states to go... : ) <<< me

[stevie_d_64]

Thackney ping!

Lucky...

[from occupied ga]

They sure picked a couple of morons to get statements from.

Of course they're morons - They'r heads of police organizations. You don't get to be the head of a police organization by demonstrating independent or non-governmental thought. "I was just following orders" should be these guys' motto.