Posted on 01/28/2007 10:18:35 AM PST by Blackirish
Please see http://www.jpfo.org/GCA_68.htm.
What does THAT have to do with a gun license? Gun licenses have been around for more than 100 years in American and yes, I know that every state's gun laws are different.
Licensing makes attempts at confiscation much easier, and therefore is a restriction. The right to keep and bear arms is a God-given civil right. One does not require a license to exercise their freedom of speech.
Frankly, I am pro the Second Amendment; however, you are not making the case, well, for gun ownership.
LOL! Thanks.
Having a dog or driving a car is not a right, you should not have to have a license to exercise a right. Besides that, licenses can be revoked, and don't think for a minute that the issuing body (i.e. the government) wouldn't think twice about doing it either. The problem would be that the folks who chose not to turn in their guns after their licenses were revoked would become instant criminals.
Funny you should mention it, during the time that the Alaska pipeline was being built, there were so many gold diggers marrying the really highly paid workers and divorcing them just to get their money, that Alaska began issuing marriage licenses with an expiration period, if you couldn't get along you just let it lapse, and if you so desired you could renew the license or get a non-expiring one. Just a bit of trivia.
Marriage poses little threat to government compared to an armed citizenry, so it would be quite natural for the government to want to be able to regulate the firearms that could be used against it. OK, I'll admit that I'm a cynic, but I find it akin to the fox watching the henhouse.
Do dogs and hunting and fishing and driving a car pose threats to the government? You have to have licenses for all of that as well.
Interesting and weird story about Alaska.
Do dogs and hunting and fishing and driving a car pose threats to the government? You have to have licenses for all of that as well.Obviously not (depending of course on what you are hunting ;~) ). My point is that I do not want the government restricting me from carrying whatever I need to defend myself and my family from wild animals, criminals, or super-criminals (er...ah...politicians). Keeping and bearing arms is a constitutionally protected right and it is my opinion that you shouldn't have to have a license to exercise a right.
Do dogs and hunting and fishing and driving a car pose threats to the government? You have to have licenses for all of that as well.
Obviously not (depending of course on what you are hunting ;~) ).
My point is that I do not want the government restricting me from carrying whatever I need to defend myself and my family from wild animals, criminals, or super-criminals (er...ah...politicians). Keeping and bearing arms is a constitutionally protected right and it is my opinion that you shouldn't have to have a license to exercise a right.
re-posted with proper markup
I guess it's just the principal of the thing. I see it as registration, and my fear is that registration leads to confiscation. Sure if things remain status quo I personally won't have anything to worry about, but I don't know how long the status quo will remain unchanged.
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.