Does getting your concealed carry permit promote our 2nd Amendment Rights?

[jfh]

my viewpoint says there are more benefits that disadvantages.

Getting a permit (concealed or otherwise for carry) "documents" a particular firearms commitment--i.e., the numbers of permittees have become a viable political base.

Yes, we can fret about government records--but that issue isn't going to go away anytime soon.

Elsewhere (in another thread), the point has been made that politicians consider one voter who writes him to represent the viewpoints of one thousand who don't. That's important political leverage for the pro-gun community.

Next, the wind of public opinion is clearly at our back. No less than six major polls done since the election show that 1) the public in general support for "gun control" to be at its lowest point in 40 years, and 2) we don't need more laws. So, getting a permit--and perhaps even letting your social circle know it--can lead to building higher status in social groups not just among gunnies.

It is this last change--if it can come--among the general public that will lead to 1) firearms once again recognized as a integral part of the American Experience, and with it 2) the defeat of the antigun mentality.

Once the antigun mentality has been muted--when people in conversations (save for small, intimate circles) feel the antigun POV is demonized--that we can worry about the next step. Logically, the next step is reconstructing legislation--i.e, AWBs, FOIDs, 1986, 1968, and the endless stream of micro-management policies.

It's a long haul--but look how far we have come.

As much as I feel one should not register to exercise a fundamental right, that POV, as logical and SCKimberFan pointed out, is not really at issue here--at least if one admits how far the country has gone down the road to the registration and confiscation.

We have to work from where we are at, IMO.

Jim H.

 

[Walkalong]

While I understand and agree with freakshow10mm's arguements, I would have to say that since we don't have a choice right now if we wan't to be legal (and I have for many years now) I would say yes because it helps show our numbers.

In my youth I carried with no permit. I wasn't even legal age, but I have too much to lose these days to do that, so I don't.

my viewpoint says there are more benefits that disadvantages.

Yep

 

[KarenTOC]

I voted yes for all the "show our numbers" reasons previously listed.

 

[rmmoore]

Hey Bill Rights, the 10% CCW was for example only, as I said, a hypothetical example. Some States however, especially the Western States where I am (and that DOES NOT include the left coast), that 10% number is NOT too far off. Of course, we GENERALLY don't have too many anti-gunners to worry about, although they DO seem to appear every election cylce and thank God we "usually" send them back home. Please note the "generally" and "usually".

Even Florida, at the height of the tourist murders when CCW exploded, was pushing their numbers higher than anyone expected. I totally agree that for MOST cases, the 10% is a bit high. It doesn't have to be and quite frankly it SHOULDN'T be. How safe do you feel in the Metro-plex's of today? If even 1 out of 10 was CCW, would you feel safer? There are a lot of people who agree with the sentiment of this poll that they won't get a permit, because they shouldn't "have" too. So, they don't carry (or carry illegally), and will possibly become a victim (physically or in the legal system) because of that position.

For those of you that "won't" get a permit, there are numerous examples of CCW solving the issue in my "part of the country", that is relatively safe for the most part. A Salt Lake City permit holder stopped a Mall killer; a Colorado Springs permit holder stopped a man after killing multiple victims in 2 cities. Where were the police in both instances? On their way to the scene. Does that make you feel better? I am the only one who can provide MY OWN security 24/7. My permit "allows" me to do it legally, like it or not. My wife and kids are happy that I don't snub my nose at "having" to get a permit to carry.

 

[gimlet1/21]

Obtaining a ccw to carry is revolting!, yet I did it and along with my application fee I sent hand written letters to inform the "powers that be" that I was doubling the fee and sending the money to the NRA. As a former Vermonter having to buy my rights was and is galling, and distasteful.

 

[Bill_Rights]

KimberFan,
I agree generally with your points. One detail: While clearly

The 2A does not address Concealed Carry.

, what that is supposed to mean is that the activity in question is reserved to the states to decide upon or reserved to the people themselves to do as they please. In other words, the central government can exercise powers specifically given to it and no others. The fact that most states have a equivalent of the US 2A in their state constitutions means that we're in pretty good shape. I think state constitutions are intended to be interpreted in the same way as the US Constitution, i.e., that if the (state) constitution doesn't mention it, the citizen is free to do it.

It is arguably true that the states beneficially instituted concealed carry laws to encourage citizens execise their 2A rights without being socially disruptive (meaning that open carry would be percieved as disruptive). THIS IS OFF TOPIC, so no one need address it, but you're free to as far as I (the OP) am concerned. However, cynically, most of us see CC regs as the opposite, i.e., unconstitutional efforts to reduce and limit execise of 2A rights.

rmmoore,
Relax. I was not being critical of you or your calculation. I was trying to encourage more people to train and apply for CC permit. Some people wouldn't know the percentage was so small. However, when you think about it, 2% CC holders mean that 1 out of 50 people in any given crowd of people might be carrying. That REALLY DOES deter crime, I think. (However, unfortunately, the places where large crowds gather like schools, churches, sporting events on the grounds of either, etc. are off limits to carry in most states. DRAT!)

 

[The Annoyed Man]

I have my CC permit, but I didn't get it specifically to "promote the 2nd Amendment RKBA," which your opening post seems to suggest should be one of the motives for doing so. The thing is, "concealed" means "concealed," so the fact that I am carrying concealed (if properly done) in no way notifies anyone else that I am an avid supporter of the RKBA. Therefore, it doesn't really promote it.

That said, I am vocally pro-2nd and the RKBA, and I actively promote it at every opportunity anyway. I did so before I ever got my CHL, and I continue to do so since having gotten it.

SCKimberFan, with all due respect, I couldn't disagree more. The 10th Amendment says that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since the 2nd previously establishes that the RKBA shall not be infringed, the Constitution places that issue at the federal level. States may not either restrict free speech, freedom of religion, or freedom of petition or of peaceful assembly (1st Amendment). Nor may they require the quartering of soldiers in your home during a time of peace (3rd Amendment). Nor may they conduct unreasonable searches and seizures (4th). Nor may they prevent you from pleading the 5th; etc., etc., etc.

Be that as it may, the states do often restrict those rights and they get away with it. That they do get away with it doesn't make it constitutional. And even in cases where the SCOTUS has upheld a state's right to abrogate those freedoms, that still doesn't make it definitively constitutional - as what is considered "constitutional" can be reversed by any sitting SCOTUS. If that weren't so, then slavery would still be constitutional. It isn't. State governments get away with it only because our population is largely ignorant of their rights, or they don't care enough about them to defend them. A constitutionally educated voter is a danger to the status quo, so government run schools don't emphasize it because it is not in the interest of their rice bowl to do so.

I highly recommend reading The Founders' Second Amendment: The Origins of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, written by Stephen P. Halbrook. In it, Halbrook gives a detailed history of the RKBA during pre-revolutionary times, through the constitutional conventions, and then the establishment of the federal government. The founders never intended anything except the most libertarian interpretations of the RKBA. The sentiment was universal. There was even great debate over whether or not to include a bill of rights - the federalists believing that to include it would be to give government the power to gradually narrow the definitions of each right; and the anti-federalists believing that omitting a bill of rights would lead to the same result.

BTW, I love Kimbers, and carry a stainless UCII every day.

 

[Rockwell1]

Concealed carry is NOT a right. The 2A does not address Concealed Carry

The Constitution absolutely does address concealed carry. What do you think it means to "bear arms"?

A Salt Lake City permit holder stopped a Mall killer; a Colorado Springs permit holder stopped a man after killing multiple victims in 2 cities. Where were the police in both instances? On their way to the scene.

Ummm, actually in Salt Lake the permit holder was a cop and in Co Springs the permit holder was an ex-cop and the real cops were in the church parking lot when the shooter opened fire

 

[ReadyRob]

I do think that getting a permit to conceal carry does (maybe should) help the 2nd amendment issue, I don't know how we can prove one way or the other.

In my gun class I did learn that NO ONE with a carry permit has been convicted of a felony. I have tried to verify that on the internet but have given up. Its seems like an extreme statement.

I have submitted my paperwork and will be legal in 33 states.
Awaiting approval.

 

[Rockwell1]

In my gun class I did learn that NO ONE with a carry permit has been convicted of a felony. I have tried to verify that on the internet but have given up. Its seems like an extreme statement.

Do a search right here there was a case last year of two ccw holders driving down the freeway in Cali blazing away at each other

 

[freakshow10mm]

Woman down state in lower MI pulled her gun and shot at someone while driving. She's sitting in state prison on a felony charge. She had a CPL.

 

[MT GUNNY]

I was just thinking, Could the Federal Government All of the Sudden Revoke all CCP's throughout the states? I bet they would try one day! State Sovereignty Would stop that.

Open Carry Would be Much Harder to Revoke, Beings the 2nd Amendment Exists.

If I could Change my Vote I would Check "No It don't Help 2 Amendment Rights"

 

[SCKimberFan]

How do you get from here:

The Constitution absolutely does address concealed carry.

To here?

What do you think it means to "bear arms"?

No mention of concealed carry. None.

Also, the 2A has NOT YET been incorporated.

 

[Rockwell1]

SCkimberfan

I apologize if I was being too obtuse. The BOR states that the right of the people to bear(To carry or be equipted with) arms shall not be infringed. Please note that no restriction on the manner of carry is mentioned.

Unfortunately my State's constitution specifically does not allow concealed carry so the federal constitution is a moot point.

 

[.cheese.]

I don't think it's good to essentially tell the govt that turning rights into privileges is ok. At the same time, I jump through the hoops and pay the fee like a good little trained monkey - so I'm not really putting my money where my mouth is.

No mention of concealed carry. None

States that only allow 1 type of carry - concealed - like Florida, or states that require a permit for open or concealed carry negate this argument.

 

[mallc]

Maybe...Maybe not.

The wife and I got our carry permits in Iowa two years ago. Had to take a 6 hour class and demonstrate shooting skills at 5 and 15 yds with minimum score of 75.

There were some pretty scary people wanting to carry firearms in the class. One guy asked if he could shoot somebody for stealing his tv. Another asked if he could shoot somebody who walked into his store with a gun under his jacket...the instructor told the guy that it would likely be him (the instructor) and shooting an off-duty sheriff's deputy was not a good idea. Of the 20 people in the class 2 failed the written test another didn't take it.

On the range, one overly nervous type ignored all instructions, loaded 4 mags, went hot, and started walking around pointing his loaded 1911 in various directions. 10 failed the shooting test. One guy with a rusty SW snubbie failed to hit the paper at all from 5 yds and couldn't see the target from 15. The nervous guy got 20 the first try and 25 the second.

I'm guessing that if there's a moral to this story, its that having the constitutional right to bear arms does not automatically qualify someone to do so.

Scott

 

[AKElroy]

Clinton lost both houses early into his first term on the the heals of AWB1; since then, the smart political money has been to support RTC legistation, and we have seen it catch fire nationally as a result. Permits have increased political strength dramatically, and is very likely the single greatest reason for our current political strength. Depriving the millions of current license holders thier RKBA would be even more politically foolish today than it was in the early 90's, and it was devistating for them then. That said, I despise the paradigm that suggest the state holds this right to dispense through the issuance of "permission" slips. I have one, I think everyone able should also, but we gave up a lot of ground when we allowed the state the ability to control, condition and dispense the right.

 

[NotSoFast]

I don't think CCW permits either promote the 2nd Amendment Rights, nor do they limit them.

I think what helps promote our 2nd Amendment rights is standing up and being heard in a reasonable, logical, calm manner.

What a CCW permit does, imo, is to allow us to practice our 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[chemist308]

Perhaps my biggest reason for getting one was simple. It provides politicians with a clear idea of just how many people won't be voting for them if they attempt any anti 2A crap.

 

[Bill_Rights]

Chemist,

Yes, that was kinda the point of the poll, that and seeing what the forum thinks about the whole complex set of facts and ideas surrounding armed citizens and their right to stay armed and their political power to do so.

I agree with everyone who said that concealed carry is not the only, or even a primary, way of achieving political influence. I do write both my state and federal legislators and executive branch officials. I support 2A organizations, vote, give money and train new shooters. Some other stuff too....

Mallc made an undeniable point others have touched on. Some people are obviously not, uhhh, ready to carry a live firearm. We know it takes some learning, lots of practice and a certain kind of willingness and thoroughness (attitude) to do it right. Besides concealed or open carry, I've seen some dangerous activity at the shooting range and on the hunting grounds. Been guilty of minor stupidities myself; luckily I caught myself before damage occurred. I am sure the Framers of the Federal and all the state constitutions knew all this would happen too. But the Framers and Founders decided to give us these 2A rights anyway. They apparently thought that the evil of overly-powerful government was worse than these practical difficulties with bearing arms. Figured we'd work it out, I guess. More to the point, practical difficulties with law-abiding citizens bearing arms are limited (to a few people) and tend to be self-correcting on a social scale.

 

[Cuda]

Carrying a gun promotes our 2nd Amendment Rights. Getting permission to exercise my rights does not.

C

 

[christcorp]

Getting a CCW permit doesn't ID anyone any more than they have already been ID'd. MOST weapons that are bought by citizens are bought from dealers. Therefor, paper work has been done on you and the weapon. In other words, they know you have the gun. Whether or not you are carrying it is irrelevant. I have some guns I bought from private individuals. But the majority came from a dealer either in a shop or at a gun show. Also; if you EVER have to use a particular gun you have, for self defense; (Or even brandishing it and the police get involved); then that gun and it's serial number will be documented as belonging to you.

The main purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to ensure that the people could protect themselves from tyranny by the government. Currently, there is an estimated 80 million gun owners. That's roughly 25% of the population. In the recent months, since the election, it's been estimated that the number may be significantly higher. But again, the majority of these guns had paperwork filled out on them for the original buyer. Getting a concealed weapons permit doesn't cause any negatives at all. And as already stated by others, it actually promotes pro-gun political issues at the local level. FFL forms done when you purchase a gun are federal in nature. CCW paperwork is generally at the local county level. That will have an impact come voting time. 10% may not sound like a lot of carrying people; but gun owners "Tend" to be more conservative and "TEND" to vote more often. And when voting turn out is generally only at or around 50%; that 10% CCW can easily formulate to actually being approximately 20% of the actual voting turnout. That is quite significant.

 

[Rockwell1]

But the Framers and Founders decided to give us these 2A rights anyway.

We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal. And that they are endowed by their Creator with certain, inalienable rights

The founders and framers didn't give us anything but a Republic, if we can keep it.

My rights exist totally independent of the Constitution. They will continue to exist if the entire doccument is repealed tomorrow.

 

[christcorp]

You are given the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness by God. Depending on the interpretation, is the reason for the Bill of Rights in the constitution. You might believe that the God given right of "LIFE" means you are allowed a gun to protect yourself; but that doesn't HAVE to be interpreted by others to mean that. Only the Bill of Rights in the constitution guarantees those rights. "As long as they too aren't misinterpreted".

 

[Rockwell1]

Inalienable Rights

The right to life & liberty are natural human rights. They descend to us from God (or nature if you prefer) alone and they exist wholly & totally separate from any Government or Law or Court or Document. This was proven in the Warsaw Ghetto and at Sobibor and at Treblinka. Incumbent to these rights is the right to defend them by any means necessary or available, regardless of what any government says or how any court interprets.

I have the right to openly defy any government that moves to rob me of the means to defend these rights.