Oooops. You are correct! I did not read carefully enough. She is in violation of an unconstitutional law, isn't she?<br /><br />Illinois is in serious need of a complete makeover, from head to foot!
Dogsdad, I guess for me personally, I would be afraid that I might use such a weapon when it really wasn't necessary......I don't trust myself enough to be sure that I would over react to a perceived threat......<br />So I guess that means that I don't trust your judgement in that situation either
<br />Washington has a concealed/carry law, but you cannot posess a firearm in a bar, maybe under those circumstances it might be O.K., but I just don't see a real need for it....<br />There is a certain someone who will attack anything I say, 'cuz he got flamed a while back.... <br />Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, I say .....JK
Another problem is that when they drafted the First Amendment we only had ink and quill.Originally posted by tommays:<br /> The problem is that when they drafted the second amendment we only had muzzle loaders
Gun control laws, which most certainly are in violation of the Second Amendment, became fashionable and got a toehold in the USA right after the conclusion of the War of Northern Aggression. The laws came onto the books as measures to attempt to prevent blacks from owning firearms. Take note that at that time, the Southern states were under what amounts to martial law administered by scalawags and carpetbaggers from the North.<br /><br />The Second Amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, will not be infringed. Notice the syntax: "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms..."<br /><br />The "well regulated militia" phrase is referring to a militia that is well trained, not regulated in the sense that proponents of government oversight promote. Another use of the term "regulate," as it realtes to firearms, refers to the sights of a weapon. When adjusted properly, they are "regulated" correctly. And when a weapon is well-pointed at a target, it is said that the sights are "trained" on the target.<br /><br />The entire Constitution is about the limitations to be placed upon government. It does not grant rights to the people, those are God-given. The Bill of Rights was adopted to appease certain forces at the Constitutional convention who refused to ratify the document without a Bill of Rights. Those in opposition did oppose the Bill of Rights because of their concern that any right not specifically mentioned in the first ten Amendments might be assumed to be non-existent.<br /><br />One last point for you...the "Militia" refrred to in the Second Amendment is NOT the National Gaurd or any organized force. It is simply the entire collection of all able-bodied males between the ages of 17 and (I think) 44.<br /><br />Hope this clears it up for you.
If everyone carried, there wouldn't be a rush hour.Originally posted by tommays:<br /> i have no problem with guns BUT really dont want everybody on Long Island packing one.<br /><br /><br />There would be way to many shootings during rush hour
I now understand your point of view. You'd definitely want some education to take place. In Texas, a ceratin amount of training is required in order to get the permit. I'm sure such requirements are not at all uncommon, which is probably a part of the reason the concealed carry programs have succeeded in all 38 states where they have been enacted.<br /><br />It's unfortunate that some people just can't get past their emotional responses to the idea of an armed citizenry. That has unnecessarily cost the lives of a lot of innocent people who were unable to defend themselves from attack and emboldened the criminal element.
