Testing for your rights

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by al45lc, Jan 13, 2011.

  1. al45lc

    al45lc Active Member

    Mar 8, 2010
    colorful colorado
    Is it just me, or do others here (I would expect many do, but have been surprised elsewhere) see the 'testing' that many states require for a permit as discriminatory and unconstitutional?
    In Colorado, I spent roughly $200 and about 6 hours to obtain my permit.
    Is this average?
    After all, we don't test for our right to vote, or for many of our other rights.
    The money and time is of no consequence to me, per se, but what about the single mother with two jobs and the crazy ex-hubby? (This is an actual person I'm aware of through association) If that woman literally has no time nor the money for her take a course to obtain her permit to excercise her Constitutional right, is that not discriminatory?
    Not to mention I see no reason why I should "prove" to anyone that I can or cannot shoot, or handle a gun. After all, are we not each responsible for our own actions? The idea that it's "in the public interest for safety" is a crock, I'm part of that public, and the state certainly doesn't gaurantee my safety.
    The Supreme Court has ruled that no police organization has an obligation to protect any individual , but only the public "at large".( Many may remember that case from '05'{the crime was in '99} right here in Colorado, a terrible tragedy)
    So, in light of that, I wonder where the states get off with this testing nonsense.
    Originally, I came from Indiana, where all I had to do was fill out the application and get fingerprinted for a permit. I'm fine with reasonable licensing procedures, but my experience with the testing and classes was a joke, and a complete waste of time. And as I said, I see it as an infringement of my rights, designed to 'weed out' and discourage those who can't afford it.
    There it is, what are the thoughts and observations of others?
  2. armedandsafe

    armedandsafe Guest

    Poll Tax, anyone? I thought the Supreme Court had ruled on that.

    Found this on another site:

  3. pickenup

    pickenup Active Member

    I was with you, until you got to this.....
    Since I am not a criminal, I am NOT fine with ANY government infringement on my right to keep and BEAR arms. The "permit" itself, is UNconstitutional. Vermont, Alaska, and now Arizona are the only states that have it right.

    As for the training, there are so many types of training, it's a joke. Some instructors "test" your ability to shoot, some don't even do that.

    As with many things, as far as I'm concerned, it's mostly about the money.
  4. johnlives4christ

    johnlives4christ Former Guest

    Apr 28, 2008
    all gun laws/restrictions are a violation of my rights. therefore the government is not to be trusted
  5. Eddie N

    Eddie N New Member

    Apr 23, 2009
    Probably the biggest reason I haven't got my CCW yet. If other states can do it, why can't they all? The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution, doesn't say anything about permits.
  6. al45lc

    al45lc Active Member

    Mar 8, 2010
    colorful colorado
    I agree about the permits themselves, I was just being "reasonable" as some would call it.
    I'm a member of another forum (on motorcycles) and the number who think that my principled stand against 'testing' is unreasonable is enormous.
    The greatest thorn of all is the "it's the law" argument, along with those who think it's OK to allow incremental infringement (testing) of their rights.
    Nearly all use the eliteist argument that people who aren't trained shouldn't carry, for public 'safety'. I've yet to find the part in the Constitution that ensures public safety from others actions, I always thought that we were each responsible for our actions, and were to be held accountable for them.
    Isn't that what the Courts are for?
    I, like many others here I suspect, feel that the Constitution and Bill of Rights is 'the law' of the land, not some legislated half ass attempt to restrain or hobble my rights.
    But I thought I 'd troll the waters for more and varied input, hence the post.
    Keep 'em coming!
  7. Double D

    Double D Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Jul 16, 2009
    North Florida
    I am in agreement with you guys, BUT, I have students that have never held a gun come to take concealed classes. If someone wasnt there to instruct them and teach them safety it could be a disaster.
  8. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio
    Excellent info Pops. I wonder if anyone has ever successfully defended themselves against a charge of concealed carry without a permit, using that ruling.
  9. hogger129

    hogger129 Well-Known Member

    Nov 29, 2009
    In my opinion, any kind of "licensing" is an infringement. I believe that the Second Amendment grants an absolute right to keep and bear arms. It even specifically goes out of its way and says "shall not be infringed." I don't know what's so hard to understand about that.

    As for the people selling them, yes, they should be allowed to do a background check. They should not be forced to sell to anybody they don't want to.

    In my opinion, licensing people to carry a firearm is like the Poll Tax that they used to have for voting. Both are Constitutional rights and anything impeding that is a violation of Due Process.

    I think if you are legally able to buy a gun, you should be able to carry it.

    And there was a judge here in Wisconsin who not to long ago ruled the ban on concealed carry here unconstitutional. I would not be surprised if in the next year or so they legalize it or go to a Constitutional Carry system where you need no permit.

    I'm sure that if someone had the time and money to challenge permits as a violation of Due Process, it would get appealed to the SCOTUS. And right now, I don't know how they would vote on that since Kagan is now on the court and I can tell she is no friend to the Second Amendment.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2011
  10. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio
    I agree 100%. I would think that stare decisis would have to be followed in any ruling the court would make, regardless of who was on it.
  11. al45lc

    al45lc Active Member

    Mar 8, 2010
    colorful colorado
    As an update, I was rather thoroughly 'trounced' on that motorcycle forum by many who carry (including the admin) for my anti-testing stance, proving that just because some are fond of guns, they might still be brainwashed by the 'in the interest of public safety' garbage.
    I was treated quite rudely, in fact.
  12. ofitg

    ofitg Active Member

    Feb 25, 2010
    They sound like "authority worshippers".

    A common failure of the human mind.
  13. Hatch

    Hatch Former Guest

    Sep 24, 2010
    your community of motorcycle enthusiasts is just as vulnerable to their rights being marginalized, regulated and outright nullified as gun owners.

    I've been gone for some time so please forgive me because I don't know if you've posted that you are sport bike or cruiser rider, rare sure, but possibly it's both?

    You dont "NEED" that Ninja, Busa, Gixxer...
    It's loud
    People stunt bikes
    YOU could get hurt

    How loud does your cruiser have to be?
    you could get hurt
    people stunt bikes (please recall that Indian Larry died while being filmed for national TV on a 5 mph stunt on a cruiser)

    And thats just off the top of my head, and what you probably don't know is I have a 12R in the garage.

    I understand your concerns about losing your gun rights, as well as the random attacks on m/c and other groups... how many people would vote FOR a tax on cigarettes because smoking is bad for you, it's costing money in hospitals and insurance... why not stop TAXING cigarettes and start passing laws that say if you do this "thing" you are not entitled to public welfare. and same goes with motorcycles, if you want to ride without a helmet, and then get in a wreck, it's your problem, if you dont have insurance, or if you do, but they never authorized you to ride without a helmet and you lost half your face doing the asphalt slide... too bad.

    Ever ask the guys on the m/c forum if they want to brick up all the windows that people get pushed out of, put fences on every roof in America, ban every car that isnt made out of NERF foam?

    See what I'm getting at?
  14. al45lc

    al45lc Active Member

    Mar 8, 2010
    colorful colorado
    I see it, and agree. It's a Dual-Sport (road/dirt) forum actually, and interestingly enough that you bring it up, one of the industry magazines (Friction Zone) just recently had an article on how insurance companies are trying to get certain types of motorcycles restricted or outright banned, due to high insurance claims on those machines.
    I'm against helmet laws, but never ride without full gear (ATGATT) including and always a helmet.
    Funny, but I think very few people would be injured by citizens carrying without training as compared to the number injured by poor drivers, yet our driving tests for licensing are often a joke, and it seems they hand them out to whomever.
  15. Crpdeth

    Crpdeth Well-Known Member

    Apr 23, 2002
    Location location
    Somehow I missed this thread as well, but in reading through it, I thought the same as Hatch did... I wonder how your friends on the other forum liked it years back when helmets were made mandatory, then it was decided that you could go without one if you had so much insurance. To me, a motorcycle makes me feel free, gives me the ability to get out in the wind and exercise that feeling (Not that I have one atm). Then the government steps in and says "If you want to ride the roads that your taxes have built, you will wear this big gaudy ball to protect your dumb head", oh I understand some of the reasons, but it should be my choice, not theirs... Who do they think they are?

    My fear is that they are striving for total dictatorship, one little piece at a time... If they can get us used to being told what to do "for our own good", as the years roll by and children are born into this world feeling that it is normal, then there wont be a total revolt by the sheep as they quietly place their thumb on us.

    As far as the CCL class goes, hell I enjoyed it, the instructor is a friend of mine, and the question and answer portions are easy for firearm enthusiasts, but honestly, it is mostly common sense stuff that anyone here could "instruct". The instructor knew beforehand who was to attend the class, that we had no felonies and told us up front that we would all pass... I saw one girl put a round in the dirt, 10' in front of her man size silhouette and she passed, so the nice feeling that I was supposed to have because all mine were grouped nicely center mass kinda lost it's luster. :p

Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Nuclear Testing ??? Aug 17, 2006
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Did Wisconsin just lose the 4th amendment rights Sep 18, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum thoughts on 2A rights of minors Mar 19, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum These Hillary Supporters Want Her to Repeal the Bill of Rights if She's Elected President Aug 4, 2015
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Supreme Court Agrees To Hear New Gun Rights Case Oct 20, 2014