That's not his theory -- he merely is made uncomfortable in the presence of firearms. Perhaps he was scared by a gun at an early age, maybe his parents were wimpy-ass liberals and taught him guns were scary, I don't honestly know. I have tried to argue him out of his belief, unsuccessfully.
Ok, - it is his ~belief~ that armed citizens are threats to his concept of 'property'; - thus he [and millions like him] believe that their property rights give them the power to infringe on our enumerated right to carry; - anywhere on their private property, - home/business/leaseholds/condos, etc.
Oh well. It's a simple matter of courtesy, as I see it.
He does not object to our right to carry, only with carrying on his private property. Well, I respect that, you do not.
I respect the 'private home as a ~castle~ doctrine', but not when it is used to infringe the carrying of arms on all private property.
I see these infringements on carrying arms as a refusal [by millions of our peers] to abide by constitutional principles, not as ~mere~ differences of opinion between polite people.
"-- I hope this clears up your understanding of my position. --"
Okay, seems pretty simple to me, and we (you and I) can "agree to disagree" on which is the better tack, with no harm to either of us.
Seeing we both believe in our right to carry, can't you understand we are both being harmed by those who disagree, and who pass 'laws' or make 'rules' to that effect?
> I see these infringements on carrying arms as a refusal [by millions of our peers] to abide by constitutional principles, not as ~mere~ differences of opinion between polite people.
So I gather.
I suppose our discussion hinges on the presumed extent of the word "infringed". I have generally taken it to apply to those in a position of federal power. You claim it applies to all citizens, even on their own private property.
I must say, I don't see anything in the Second that denies your claim.
> Seeing we both believe in our right to carry, can't you understand we are both being harmed by those who disagree, and who pass 'laws' or make 'rules' to that effect?
I certainly understand the harm from those who pass laws and make rules that restrict my right to carry. OTOH, simple disagreement -- difference of opinion -- does me no harm per se.
What you have convinced me, though, is that I need to ask my neighbor how he would vote on state and local restrictions on the RKBA. In the past, his statements have always related only to his own property, and he claims to have no problem with my RKBA in all other places. But I will ask him, to be sure he isn't voting against my rights.
Thank you, tpaine, for an illuminating exchange!