Does the Second Amendment apply outside the home

[hogger129]

Meaning, shouldn't the Second Amendment be your carry permit? Should the government really be "permitting" you to exercise what is your Constitutional right?

Me, personally, I feel that if you can pass a background check to purchase a firearm, you should be "fit" to carry it in public as well. And I think if someone actually did so (carried without a permit), and sued stating that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry without a permit, they would win. That the SCOTUS would agree with that idea.

I just would like to hear what everybody has to say about this and why you feel the way you do. Thanks.

[johnlives4christ]

i agree with you hogger except for the background check part. the 2nd amendment is your permit to own and carry openly or concealed a firearm. some say that it doesnt pertain to concealed carry. but they do not understand the meaning of the word "bear". it is a synonym and means more then "to bring forth" i can mean so many different things,and without knowing exactly the intent the forefathers had in mind when righting it you must take it in its entirety. part of its meaning is "to carry" no specification on open or concealed.

if a person had the right, ambitious lawyer it would be a worthy pursuit and could possibly be won.

tis a shame we aint neighbors hogger... i'd invite you over for supper and an ice cold glass of sweet tea.

[hogger129]

True. If you are a felon, they can't deny your right to trial or your Miranda rights, or right to legal representation, or Due Process, or Fifth Amendment (you don't have to say something that incriminates yourself). It should be fitting that they shouldn't be able to bar you from any other of your legal rights. Good point.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by johnlives4christ

i agree with you hogger except for the background check part. the 2nd amendment is your permit to own and carry openly or concealed a firearm. some say that it doesnt pertain to concealed carry. but they do not understand the meaning of the word "bear". it is a synonym and means more then "to bring forth" i can mean so many different things,and without knowing exactly the intent the forefathers had in mind when righting it you must take it in its entirety. part of its meaning is "to carry" no specification on open or concealed.

if a person had the right, ambitious lawyer it would be a worthy pursuit and could possibly be won.

tis a shame we aint neighbors hogger... i'd invite you over for supper and an ice cold glass of sweet tea.

Yeah I'd invite you shootin some weekend. Or put the guns away and crack open a bottle of Jack with ya.

[johnlives4christ]

dunno bout the jack.. i steer clear of any alcohol cause my pa was a raging drunk. the shooting though... thats right up my alley

[The_Rifleman]

Originally Posted by hogger129

It should be fitting that they shouldn't be able to bar you from any other of your legal rights. Good point.

That is where "God given right," comes into play.
From The Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,"

Rights not granted by government, therefore government can't deny them.

Government cannot decide who can or cannot own the means "to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security". That would defeat the whole purpose of The Second Amendment.

From The Preamble of The Bill of Rights

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Until The Constitution is amended abolishing The Second Amendment, NO US citizen can be denied that right.

[RunningOnMT]

Hogger i couldn't agree more. I've been arguing this point for some time now, but I'm ashamed to admit I haven't had the courage to carry without a permit. I'm afraid of losing my legal right to ever carry in the future, whether the law is constitutional or not.

[johnlives4christ]

i follow the law to the best of my ability. if and when it becomes illegal to own use or carry firearms then i will become a criminal. i would consider this to be a declaration of war on myself and the constitution. in war, you shoot first and ask questions later, if you survive.

[carver]

Originally Posted by johnlives4christ

i follow the law to the best of my ability. if and when it becomes illegal to own use or carry firearms then i will become a criminal. i would consider this to be a declaration of war on myself and the constitution. in war, you shoot first and ask questions later, if you survive.

I stand with you on this one John. I don't like the fact that I have to pruchase a concealed carry permit (a tax), or have to pass a back ground check to carry at all. But it is the law at this time, and though I don't like it, it still provides me with the opertunity to carry, and defend myself, or others, if necessary. I excerise my natural God given rights at the Governments say so, and right now, even though I am taxed to do so, I still can. When they say I can't is when the trouble starts.

[Jeff Midguard]

In a word - Yes.

Background checks and permits are infringements.

[Eddie N]

In my opinion, we should all be carrying right now. As I see it, nobody should be denying us this right. Pay for a carry permit? In these times, I can't see it. In case anybody forgot, we are at war, and we citizens have a right and a duty to defend and protect ourselves and our loved ones.
When and where is the next attack on our soil going to take place? Not if, but when. We all know it is coming and we should all be prepared. Anybody disagree?

[user]

Originally Posted by hogger129

Meaning, shouldn't the Second Amendment be your carry permit? Should the government really be "permitting" you to exercise what is your Constitutional right?....

... "subject to reasonable regulation." Heller v. D.C.

[Jim K]

Well, every right is subject to some regulation. Even voting, the most basic right, is limited to people over 18 and requires registration. I have no problem with some regulation of firearms purchase, possession and carrying. For example, I really wouldn't want it to be legal to sell a handgun to a ten-year old. So I can't just go along with "no laws, no rules, no restrictions" or even worse, those who think that their Second Amendment rights include shooting any one they don't agree with (yes, I have seen a few of those on these sites).

The trouble is that, as always, when we give big government a millimeter, they take a parsec or two. ("Of course you have the right to own a gun. Surely you don't mind the 500 page application, the ten million dollar license, and the ban on ammunition; there is no Second Amendment issue there.")

Jim

[The_Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Jim K

Even voting, the most basic right, is limited to people over 18 and requires registration.

Which is enumerated in The Constitution. See: AMENDMENT XV, AMENDMENT XIX, AMENDMENT XXVI... (not limited to.)

Originally Posted by Jim K

For example, I really wouldn't want it to be legal to sell a handgun to a ten-year old.

Straw Man. Using The Second Amendment as a guide, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,"; I'll go with the adult, "Militia".

Originally Posted by Jim K

So I can't just go along with "no laws, no rules, no restrictions"

The US Constitution is what "law" we'll be going by, thank you! Also a Straw Man, (you really need to check out that web page.)

Originally Posted by Jim K

include shooting any one they don't agree with

Just a wild guess...
Maybe because you are so willing to dismiss your rights and in the process their God given rights... all without any understanding of The Constitution.
Then topping that off proclaiming , 'I can't just go along with "no laws, no rules, no restrictions"'! would have to really get them fired!
But, it's just a guess...

[ofitg]

Originally Posted by hogger129

Meaning, shouldn't the Second Amendment be your carry permit? Should the government really be "permitting" you to exercise what is your Constitutional right?

Me, personally, I feel that if you can pass a background check to purchase a firearm, you should be "fit" to carry it in public as well. And I think if someone actually did so (carried without a permit), and sued stating that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry without a permit, they would win. That the SCOTUS would agree with that idea.

I just would like to hear what everybody has to say about this and why you feel the way you do. Thanks.

Hogger129, a judge in Wisconsin just ruled that your state's CCW ban is unconstitutional!

http://www.wrn.com/2010/10/county-ju...onstitutional/

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by ofitg

Hogger129, a judge in Wisconsin just ruled that your state's CCW ban is unconstitutional!

http://www.wrn.com/2010/10/county-ju...onstitutional/

But nothing is changing. You still have to be law enforcement or former law enforcement to get a permit.

Well, my parents are likely both voting for Walker, so that's three votes (including mine) that will be for an advocate of shall-issue concealed carry. My sister on the other hand is one of those dumb college students that votes for the Democrats.

And even though my parents may not like it, if I still live at home when concealed carry is legal, I am getting a permit one way or another.

[UncleFudd]

It is interesting how we interject words or thoughts based upon our knowledge, experience, backgrounds or perhaps just to make it more understandable or beneficial to our specific needs.

As I understand it, God, alone granted us this right as a result of living in this, the most prosperous, free, bountiful land on the earth. HIS land, living according to His laws and always giving thanks to Him for all that we are and have.

The Constitution only guaranties to each of us living in this land that NO MAN will ever infringe or impede in any way upon His right. We can own arms, (not just guns) and we can bear, (bring them forth) when and if ever necessary in order to maintain harmony and safety in our homes and to assist in overall protection of this, His land. It says nothing about nor even alludes to CCW or any other "specific" event or machination.

Unfortunately we have done at least two things that are now threatening and destroying not only our "rights", including our ability to own and bear arms, but the very thread of the freedoms, prosperity, bounty, and the basic way of life we have all enjoyed.
1. We have removed or allowed (continue to allow) the removal of God from our way of life, schools, homes, businesses, congress, yet we expect Him to continue to Bless us as He promised.
2. We have and continue to elect base, worthless, dishonest, hollow and covetous individuals to represent us and expect them to have our best interests at heart.

All of our rights are in grave danger and continue to be eroded day by day and will continue to do so for as long as we continue to ignore 1 and 2.

But more to the point of the original question. Why would anyone ask if or when or where they could cary concealed? Perhaps in my old age I missed something, but does not concealed mean that it is out of sight, no one can see the object nor knows that it is even present?
I have been around now for nearly 70 years and I have carried "concealed" both in my home state of Wy and since I moved to Az. since 1971. It saved my life to have done so many years ago and if God is willing will never again have to do so. But if and when the time comes, I will have at least the ability to try to stop a threat because it remains with me wherever I go and I do not ask permission.

My particular tool/arm is "concealed" out of sight. I don't discuss it and no one ever knows it is there. I have it to protect my life and the life of my loved ones ONLY. I am not a cop and will not go forth to save Gotham city, and it will never again be displayed unless or until those elements dearest to me and given to me by God are threatened with extinction.

Do I have a CCW permit, yes, would I continue to carry "concealed" if there were no such law, YES and I did for the many years prior to any such law being passed.

Just an opinion from this old man on the subject and only for some more food for thought.

UF

[3/2 STA SS]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Hogger i couldn't agree more. I've been arguing this point for some time now, but I'm ashamed to admit I haven't had the courage to carry without a permit. I'm afraid of losing my legal right to ever carry in the future, whether the law is constitutional or not.

Is it hard to get a permit in OH? In Florida they give them away as long you are not a felon. We used to shoot my grandpa's grease gun(M3A1) in the basement in Akron when I was a kid. But that was 30+ years ago on Crosier Street.

[ofitg]

Originally Posted by UncleFudd

Unfortunately we have done at least two things that are now threatening and destroying not only our "rights", including our ability to own and bear arms, but the very thread of the freedoms, prosperity, bounty, and the basic way of life we have all enjoyed.
1. We have removed or allowed (continue to allow) the removal of God from our way of life, schools, homes, businesses, congress, yet we expect Him to continue to Bless us as He promised.
2. We have and continue to elect base, worthless, dishonest, hollow and covetous individuals to represent us and expect them to have our best interests at heart.

UF

I would also point out that the limited federal government conceived by our country's founders has been deliberately and systematically scuttled, and it started over 100 years ago.
The Militia Act of 1903 gave the federal government ultimate control over all organized militia units within the United States.
The 16th Amendment (1913) authorized the federal government to extort money from U.S. citizens, and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 provided the federal government with a "platinum credit card" to boot.
The 17th Amendment (1913) cancelled the ability of state governments to participate in the federal legislative process.

We've got a LONG way to go, if we're ever going to fix this mess.

[millwright]

Can't see where the NCIS comes into play on your proposition ! Nothing in that legislation addresses the Second Amendment ! Personally, if you're not a convicted felon , or adjudicated insane, I have no problem with anyone 'carrying'; however they choose. >MW

[Gun Geezer]

Originally Posted by UncleFudd

It is interesting how we interject words or thoughts based upon our knowledge, experience, backgrounds or perhaps just to make it more understandable or beneficial to our specific needs.

As I understand it, God, alone granted us this right as a result of living in this, the most prosperous, free, bountiful land on the earth. HIS land, living according to His laws and always giving thanks to Him for all that we are and have.

The Constitution only guaranties to each of us living in this land that NO MAN will ever infringe or impede in any way upon His right. We can own arms, (not just guns) and we can bear, (bring them forth) when and if ever necessary in order to maintain harmony and safety in our homes and to assist in overall protection of this, His land. It says nothing about nor even alludes to CCW or any other "specific" event or machination.

Unfortunately we have done at least two things that are now threatening and destroying not only our "rights", including our ability to own and bear arms, but the very thread of the freedoms, prosperity, bounty, and the basic way of life we have all enjoyed.
1. We have removed or allowed (continue to allow) the removal of God from our way of life, schools, homes, businesses, congress, yet we expect Him to continue to Bless us as He promised.
2. We have and continue to elect base, worthless, dishonest, hollow and covetous individuals to represent us and expect them to have our best interests at heart.

All of our rights are in grave danger and continue to be eroded day by day and will continue to do so for as long as we continue to ignore 1 and 2.

But more to the point of the original question. Why would anyone ask if or when or where they could cary concealed? Perhaps in my old age I missed something, but does not concealed mean that it is out of sight, no one can see the object nor knows that it is even present?
I have been around now for nearly 70 years and I have carried "concealed" both in my home state of Wy and since I moved to Az. since 1971. It saved my life to have done so many years ago and if God is willing will never again have to do so. But if and when the time comes, I will have at least the ability to try to stop a threat because it remains with me wherever I go and I do not ask permission.

My particular tool/arm is "concealed" out of sight. I don't discuss it and no one ever knows it is there. I have it to protect my life and the life of my loved ones ONLY. I am not a cop and will not go forth to save Gotham city, and it will never again be displayed unless or until those elements dearest to me and given to me by God are threatened with extinction.

Do I have a CCW permit, yes, would I continue to carry "concealed" if there were no such law, YES and I did for the many years prior to any such law being passed.

Just an opinion from this old man on the subject and only for some more food for thought.

UF

That sums it up pretty well!

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by 3/2 STA SS

Is it hard to get a permit in OH? In Florida they give them away as long you are not a felon. We used to shoot my grandpa's grease gun(M3A1) in the basement in Akron when I was a kid. But that was 30+ years ago on Crosier Street.

No. You have to take a 13 hour CCW class, obtain a passport photo from drivers license bureau, apply to local Sheriffs dept. w/$60.00 fee, then wait about 60 days for a background check.

I don't have mine yet because there is a warrant out for my arrest in another state for falure to appear in traffic court. I've had rather hefty fines levied which I have put off paying for quite awhile. I plan on paying them here shortly. Until then I'd never pass the background check.

[chaplain tom]

Originally Posted by millwright

Can't see where the NCIS comes into play on your proposition ! Nothing in that legislation addresses the Second Amendment ! Personally, if you're not a convicted felon , or adjudicated insane, I have no problem with anyone 'carrying'; however they choose. >MW

All though I hate going through the background check EVERYTIME I go to purchase a gun (of any kind), I would not want to see convicted felons, or adjudicated insane persons even owning a fire arm let alone carrying one in the streets of my community. Without the background check how do we prevent this from happening? It's kind of a catch 22. If you are not one of the above mentioned then I believe the 2nd Amendment IS your permit to own and carry. I think it will probably be tested someday, but I have my doubts that it will become law as a result of that test. I hope I'm very wrong about that though.

And as an ordained minister myself, I must agree with Uncle Fudd about his thoughts on 1. and 2. of his post. Our nation only survived as long as it has because for the first 100 years or so of our existance, God was at the center of how we made laws and governed ourselves. With the erosion of our Godly principles right and wrong have become relative in the minds of a large percentage of the people.

William Penn said it best I think when he said..."Right is right even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong even if everyone is for it."

[papawed]

I would not want to see convicted felons, or adjudicated insane persons even owning a fire arm let alone carrying one in the streets of my community. Without the background check how do we prevent this from happening? It's kind of a catch 22.[/I]

I am certainly no expert on this matter. I do believe however that we cannot legislate anything that will prevent "convicted felons, or adjudicated insane persons" from possessing and/or carrying firearms.

That is precisley why we should never be "legislated" out of our right to protect ourselves!

I have had a CCW for many years, and generally only carried when I thought there might be reason to believe I needed it. Since the shooting on the Texas military base, I have changed my attitude totally. I try to never leave my home without one of my carry guns.

I had occaaision to spend a long weekend in Philly, and had to pass through states where my firearm was not allowed. Instead of locking in the trunk, unloaded, I left them at home.

There were times in Philly when I really wished I had not done that. I will not make that mistake again.

We, as a Nation, do need to get back to #1 and #2 listed earlier. That will be our downfall if we lose God's protection.
Ed

[willywonka]

Originally Posted by hogger129

Meaning, shouldn't the Second Amendment be your carry permit? Should the government really be "permitting" you to exercise what is your Constitutional right?

Me, personally, I feel that if you can pass a background check to purchase a firearm, you should be "fit" to carry it in public as well. And I think if someone actually did so (carried without a permit), and sued stating that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry without a permit, they would win. That the SCOTUS would agree with that idea.

I just would like to hear what everybody has to say about this and why you feel the way you do. Thanks.

Absolutely! As far as I'm concerned, the gov't, even local gov't has no place telling me that I need a permit to conceal carry. If the worse should happen, chances are high it's not going to be in your home. It's probably far more likely to happen when you're out and about.