interesting, troubling question about CCW

[Correia]

Tallpine, I was thinking in terms of CCW. Lots of states have open carry with no permit. We have it here also, but it has some specific rules that would surely offend the absolutists.

 

[Old Dog]

Going back to what rb8941 stated in his post:

The government also has an obligation to protect its citizens.

I'm wondering where you came up with this concept? "The government" is not only not capable of protecting its citizens, that was never the intent of those who founded our government, nor is that a function of government.

Another notes:

Some of you people are living under the misapprehension that you still live in a free republic.

Well, it's all relative I suppose. While I don't hold high hopes for the direction this country, in most respects, is headed, you can't sum up our situation with a pithy little comment or an attempt at irony ...

We're doing better than most. Recently had occasion to speak with a relative in Venezuela, where the esteemed Mr. Chavez is working hard to take guns away from every citizen (of a once-proud country with a strong tradition of gun ownership).

I'll take our system over any other country in the world right now. Can we do better? Of course. But this question:

What part of "shall not be infringed" is open to interpretation?

has been debated in this forum ad nauseum, since day one ... just more preaching to the choir -- we all get it -- so don't ask us. And the whole turning up the heat and boiling the frog analogy? I grow weary of that as well.

We would do well to examine the points that Correia stated so well. If you can't see the progress that has been made over the past 15 or 20 years on the front of citizen carry of concealed handguns -- nationwide --, you've not been paying attention.

 

[TallPine]

Tallpine, I was thinking in terms of CCW. Lots of states have open carry with no permit. We have it here also, but it has some specific rules that would surely offend the absolutists.

Despite everything else, Montana has this absolutely stupid law that you can't carry into a bank, even if you have a permit Even though one of the reasons why a person might carry is that they were carrying large amounts of cash to deposit.

 

[wjustinen]

Are you implying drunk, meth-crazed rapists that beat their wives should enjoy the right to keep and bear arms?

I am suggesting nothing of the sort. What should, or should not happen is not germaine to the discussion.

What I am clearly saying is that the creep has a right to keep and bear arms, and that the second ammendment forbids infringing upon that right even though reasonable restrictions may be placed on his other rights.

Do I agree with the second ammendment? Absolutely. Your "drunk, meth-crazed rapist" is more likely to be a cold, dead body on a metal slab where the second is adhered to, than in any place where people are willing to trade their freedom for a perception of safety.

I live in a society where my wife and daughter are not allowed to carry their sidearms because people are stupid enough to believe that our laws will prevent "drunk, meth-crazed rapists" from being armed.

 

[fjolnirsson]

wjustinen,
Immigrate, please. We need more people like you...