Open or Conceal Carry? - Page 9 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Wallaroo · #**121** (**permalink**) 06-29-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

Not so.

You might not have noticed, but the case the court just decided overturned the handgun ban in DC......

Matt

The court interprented (if thats the right word) the 2nd amendment to be about handguns, but what if they didnt?

MattLarson · #**122** (**permalink**) 06-29-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

The court interprented (if thats the right word) the 2nd amendment to be about handguns, but what if they didnt?

No, the case before the court was about handguns, and the court held that individuals have a right to own them.

So when you say Obama can ban handguns, that is not correct.

Matt

DammitBoy! · #**123** (**permalink**) 06-30-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imperator

A demonstration of need is all I am saying. I just don’t see the need for them to pack, just because they can.

I don't see a need for your post. Have you demonstrated a need for free speech and have you registered with your local government officials to express your opinions?

I don't see a need for everyone to speak or post their opinion just because they can...

DammitBoy! · #**124** (**permalink**) 06-30-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViolaLee

Where's the proof his stay at the mental hospital was not reported? I've never heard that.

In Virginia at the time, it was not required to report voluntary stays at mental hospitals or voluntary counciling by a mental health councilor.

This was covered extensively in the news, what cave were you hiding in at the time?

Steve · #**125** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

The court interprented (if thats the right word) the 2nd amendment to be about handguns, but what if they didnt?

What a nonsensical question.

What if they interprented [sic] that barber shop chairs not fitted with seatbelts need to have pillow top matress pads?

Asking "What if they didn't?" is to ask a question for which there is no answer that's either worthwhile or sensible. They decided as they did, and that's pretty much the end of the discussion...

Steve · #**126** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

Concealed? Try this if you can get it out on the black market...

Something like this:

John Drake · #**127** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

An armed society is a polite society.

How often is a convenience store held up? How many times are the patrons in those stores threatened or harmed? Well, those patrons are people who "just ran out for a pack of smokes".

I support both open and concealed carry...

Thank you Mr Heinlein

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

The reason I don't care for open carry is that it exposes the weapon to being grabbed, and makes the bearer a target. You don't know how much cash is in someone's wallet, but you know the handgun they are carrying openly is worth some serious coin. It also helps the bad guys select an unarmed target.

With concealed carry, the predator can never be certain if their prospective victim (or a bystander) is armed.

I was in a local bookstore the other day with my laptop, doing some work and sipping a drink. At the table next to me, a couple people were discussing Heller, and commenting on how they can't believe anyone carries a gun, and how they would know they if someone nearby was carrying a gun, etc.

I was sitting ~5 feet away, in plain view of both of them, carrying a full-sized pistol on one side (the side closest to them) and a spare mag on the other side, under a t-shirt.

Matt

But same applies for CC as well. Basically it means the mugger will no longer confront you and demand your money but simply shoot you in the head from a distance and rob your corpse. Real good protection.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daddio

if you know that the object of your disaffection may be armed, you'll think twice about demonstrating your feelings.

Unless, of course, you're also armed and and as crazy as a bedbug

Si modo · #**128** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Drake

....

But same applies for CC as well. Basically it means the mugger will no longer confront you and demand your money but simply shoot you in the head from a distance and rob your corpse. Real good protection....

And that mugger would be carrying an arm illegally anyway. Crack down on illegal weapons - leave the legal ones alone - and worries about this type of situation would minimal.

MattLarson · #**129** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Drake

But same applies for CC as well. Basically it means the mugger will no longer confront you and demand your money but simply shoot you in the head from a distance and rob your corpse. Real good protection.

Got any examples of this happening? Concealed carry has been lawful in some form in the majority of the country for years.

If there is any factual basis to your theory, it should be easy to document some examples, no?

Matt

John Drake · #**130** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

No, the case before the court was about handguns, and the court held that individuals have a right to own them.

So when you say Obama can ban handguns, that is not correct.

Matt

Own but not carry. Unless I misinterpreted the reading they were quite clear that they were not overturning any laws except the specific one under question in DC nor speaking at all to the idea of guns outside the home, except for hunting, which I think was specifically mentioned.

MattLarson · #**131** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Drake

Own but not carry. Unless I misinterpreted the reading they were quite clear that they were not overturning any laws except the specific one under question in DC nor speaking at all to the idea of guns outside the home, except for hunting, which I think was specifically mentioned.

Right - because only that law was under consideration in the case.

Now that the 2A indisputably secures an individual right, future challenges to other restrictions will have to be examined in the context of restricting an individual right protected by the Constitution.

That is completely new legal territory.

The Heller decision states some restrictions may still pass constitutional muster. It emphatically does not say all restrictions currently in place are upheld.

Matt

John Drake · #**132** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

Got any examples of this happening? Concealed carry has been lawful in some form in the majority of the country for years.

If there is any factual basis to your theory, it should be easy to document some examples, no?

Matt

Seeing as most spontaneous murders are not even solved let alone have the motivation of the murderer established I don't see how this should be easy to document. To me it does seem at least as logical as your idea that concealed carry will make all muggers take up honest work out of fear.

John Drake · #**133** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

Right - because only that law was under consideration in the case.

Now that the 2A indisputably secures an individual right, future challenges to other restrictions will have to be examined in the context of restricting an individual right protected by the Constitution.

That is completely new legal territory.

The Heller decision states some restrictions may still pass constitutional muster. It emphatically does not say all restrictions currently in place are upheld.

Matt

It does mention "public safety" in a way definitely implying that laws with this as a legitimate reason are Constitutional. This seems in keeping with what appears, to me, a common sense interpretation of a Constitutional right.

I'm not buying a carry sling for the Thompson just yet, in other words

MattLarson · #**134** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Drake

It does mention "public safety" in a way definitely implying that laws with this as a legitimate reason are Constitutional. This seems in keeping with what appears, to me, a common sense interpretation of a Constitutional right.

I'm not buying a carry sling for the Thompson just yet, in other words

Nor should you be.

But, for instance, the outright and de-facto bans in places like NYC, Chicago and San Francisco are history.

As for "public safety", restrictions claiming that as a basis will still have to pass a much tougher standard now. Before, there was debate over the meaning of the second amendment and whether it protects an individual right, or a right of "the militia".

That debate is over, and restrictions to the individual right secured in the second amendment will have to be as strictly scrutinized as restrictions to the individual right in the first amendment.

Matt

EricOKC · #**135** (**permalink**) 07-01-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

Problem is the 2nd amendment doesnt specify what kinda arms people are allowed to carry. So Obama should be able to take away the right to carry handguns, if he still allow people to carry long guns (for instance), which extremely few people would do for obvious reasons.

What you seem to have missed is, the 2nd Amendment doesnt have to specify squat with regards to the people.

It specifically says government cant do a thing about it.

We live in a society where the people may do whatever they wish unless specifically prohibited. Government is prohibited from doing anything not specifically permitted. I realize this is exactly opposite of most nations - and that is part of what makes the USA the unique nation it is.

View Poll Results: Open or Conceal Carry?
I do not support any carrying of handguns by the public	3	10.34%
I support open carrying	1	3.45%
I support concealed carrying	4	13.79%
I support both - it is the choice of the carrier	19	65.52%
I don't know or have another idea	2	6.90%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode