[ClearCase_guy]

By this logic, anyone should be allowed to bring a gun on to an airplane, or into a court hearing. No more metal detectors!

Perhaps some people feel this way, but I think most people recognize some limits. It's like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, you have free speech, but it is possible to push it too far.

[Ravenstar]

Read your second amendment of your Constitution. Then look up the word "infringed". You will find that no laws of restriction are allowed. Remember the second amendment is specifically forbading any laws of restriction at any level for "law abiding citizens". Criminals can get more severe penalties for use of arms but that has no bearing on the second amendment.
Yes you by Constitution are allowed to bring a gun on board an airplane but the Federal Government has gotten so large it routinely ignores the Constitution because it figures it will get away with it by shear inertia.

Notice that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution doesn't say only as long as you are not traveling. It says you are safe from search except by issue of a warrant based on probable cause. It gives no conditions therefore unless they have a warrant to search you for specific items based on probable cause they cannot search you by your God given Constitutional right. They are ignoring this one big time also.

Ravenstar

[cruiserman]

By this logic, anyone should be allowed to bring a gun on to an airplane, or into a court hearing. No more metal detectors!

Why not? My right to self defense should not end at the courthouse or the airport.

[harpseal]

By this logic, anyone should be allowed to bring a gun on to an airplane, or into a court hearing. No more metal detectors!

In the days when such was totally legal there were very few untoward incidents. The piots who carried mail on their planes were required to be armed and to resist any hijacking. That changed in the 1960's when the first law disarming mail transporters was passed. Hijackings to Cuba with a gun or a knife became common. Metal detectors were installed in airports.

Perhaps some people feel this way, but I think most people recognize some limits. It's like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, you have free speech, but it is possible to push it too far.

I for one think that rsponsible people carrying firearms is not a problem anywhere. Irresponsible people will pay no attention and smuggle weapons past any security screening. On September 11, 2001 we saw the results of disarmed victims on aircraft. Since you think that disarming people protects them perhaps you can explain to me why September 11, 2001 was a good thing.

[harpseal]

Most people feeling some way is not a justification for implementing policy. At one time most people felt that disease was caused by evil spirits fortunately or unfortunately we have no come to the understanding that many diseases are caused by microorganisms and genetics.

Think don't just feel.

[an amused spectator]

By this logic, anyone should be allowed to bring a gun on to an airplane, or into a court hearing. No more metal detectors!

Yeah, that's right - the government only allows criminals to carry guns into court hearings. Or did you not read about this? ;-)

[wcbtinman]

Too bad that some of the passengers on the WTC flights didn't have a handgun. We might not have suffered a small dent in the population count.

You go into places all of the time and sit near people who have concealed and non-concealed firearms. Just because they are law enforcement makes them no better or safer than either of us.

Grow a pair.

[alpowolf]

It's like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, you have free speech, but it is possible to push it too far.

I wish people would stop using this example when discussing gun control. It doesn't apply. Think a minute; when you go to a theater, is there a govt agent there, who duct-tapes your mouth shut when you enter? Do they rip out your voice-box? No, as that would be illegal prior restraint. You fully retain the ability to yell anything you want, with the proviso that you will be held responsible for whatever you say. Firearms should not be treated any differently.

[jonascord]

If I were a hijacker, and I KNEW that possibly thirty people on the plane I was planning on flying into the Sears Tower were packing, even if I had a gun, and they said a nightly prayer to God for a chance to shoot me fifty times, dismember my body, and pack the remains in matching pigskin luggage, I might be a little less willing to try.

[teeman8r]

with freedom comes responsibility and we are all free to yell fire in a crowded theater, but the consequences of causing false panic, possible injury and the reimbursement of all those expensive tickets deter would be shouters... as far a a freedom of speech issue... it is a straw argument, because everything we say, we are going to face consequences...

just like in carrying a gun, the bearer must live with the responsibility of useage, good or bad...

if i must go to jail to protect my family, i will. it is knowing the consequences that accompany actions that define responsible gun ownership. the state houses should not be off limits to concealed carry permit holders.... after all, the second amendment was penned to thwart tyrrany in government.