ACLU sues South Dakota over the right to concealed carry - Page 3

ACLU sues South Dakota over the right to concealed carry

This is a discussion on ACLU sues South Dakota over the right to concealed carry within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I think most of you are spewing your opinion and calling it fact....

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 50

Thread: ACLU sues South Dakota over the right to concealed carry

  1. #31
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Gastonville
    Posts
    6,734
    I think most of you are spewing your opinion and calling it fact.
    A word of warning; if you can afford to do more Bear does not recommend giving your wife two pieces of bubble gum for her birthday.


  2. #32
    Distinguished Member Array TerriLi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,231
    Rights are god given....
    Personally I think he should be able to own firearms and carry concealed.
    Some states would allow him, some don't.
    The Constitution doesn't say that non-citizens can't own and carry at least to my knowledge it doesn't.

    Also lets not forget this gentleman has been carrying for awhile, and was renewing his license, do you really think Terrorists are going to do things legal? That's like the argument the antis have for saying CC will let thugs carry guns, and that guns are bought legally by thugs. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Criminals break the law....so making it illegal isn't the issue its stopping them from doing it.
    Only the Law Abiding Obey Laws!
    I know not what this "overkill" means.

    Honing the knives, Cleaning the longguns, Stocking up ammo.

  3. #33
    VIP Member
    Array sigmanluke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    3,209
    I didn't say that legal residents shouldn't be allowed to own firearms, just that a Concealed Carry Permit should require citizenship. I wouldn't want them to be unable to protect their homes. I know others will disagree with me, that's fine, this is JMHO.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
    Thomas Jefferson

  4. #34
    Member Array CenCal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    288
    Many have made good arguments on both sides of the citizenship issue with regard to obtaining a CCW.

    I happen to know several individuals with Dual Citizenship. Dual Citizenship presents a common ground, luke warm as it may be, to both sides & a pleading I have not read in this discussion.

    So to reiterate, obtaining Citizenship does necessarily omit the individuals previous country of origin. Therefore, whatever culture the individual has indoctrinated within his or her being remains intact as long as it does not supercede the laws of the USA.

    Just wanted to point out that option...

  5. #35
    Member Array hk45c's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    In my own world
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by BikerRN View Post
    Because the Constitution, and the rights afforded under it, should be for citizens.

    It should not be for every Tom, Dick, and Harry. It should mean something to have the protections granted under the Consitution, and the best way to ensure that is to only grant those protections to citizens.

    Biker
    I was about to type another rambling response. Much like my one above, however, Biker, from reading your other posts here I think you are a reasonable man. I also respect your opinions, and I know that this is a bit of an emotional subject.

    So, let's take emotion out. Think about everything in the constitution. All the amendments, everything it protects. Now, if it ONLY applied to citizens of this country what would some of the unintended consequences be? It is not feasible for only citizens to be protected under the constitution. Furthermore, it has been repeated ad nauseam on this board that the right to bear arms is not a constitutional one but a God given one.

    I'm only addressing Biker directly because he was the first to express the sentiment I am replying to, I'm not calling you out or anything brother, this thought is also to those who share the same feelings.

    Again, just a discussion. I eschew confrontations on the Internet.
    Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
    ----
    If not me, then who?

  6. #36
    Distinguished Member Array TerriLi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,231
    I say well said and thanks for service and your words.

    Quote Originally Posted by hk45c View Post
    Just like the vast majority of you have great pride in being American we ex-pats take great pride in our home countries. If I was not able to hold dual citizenship I would have never become a citizen. I am VERY proud of my country and heritage. I did not come over here to escape anything I just came for school and I met a girl and fell in love.

    I agree that non-citizens should not vote, but the right to carry a firearm should not be kept from non-citizens. The sheriff of my old county would not let me get a permit because I only had a green card. Eventhough I am a member of the ARNG.

    Yes, I've said before, and I stand by the posts I've made, that I love the freedoms afforded here. I will also confess that the day I took the oath of citizenship was bittersweet.

    There are many reasons why people do not want to give up their citizenship. I am not sure why it's even an issue here. The fact is a law abiding individual, here legally is being denied the right to protect himself and his family.

    I may lose some friends here with this post but I don't care, this is one of my pet peeves. Just because an individual chooses to live in another county it does not mean they have to become a citizen of that nation. Yes, America is a GREAT country. I would not have chosen to live, defend, and most importantly raise a family here. However, there are other countries in this world that are also great and the citizens of those countries are just as proud to have been born there.

    I could extend this rant...but I'm going to get off the soapbox now before I really offend someone. One last thing before I step down. I know that there is at least ONE person that will be offended and have some retort to this post. Maybe "go back where you came from" or something else just as asinine. Just be sure, if your that person, to remember I've taken an oath to protect this nation. If you haven't well....you don't have anything to say to me.

    There are many things that have been posted here that I choose to ignore. I figure it's a gun forum, it's just par he course. This, I could not let go.
    I know not what this "overkill" means.

    Honing the knives, Cleaning the longguns, Stocking up ammo.

  7. #37
    Ex Member Array BikerRN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    State of Discombobulation
    Posts
    5,253
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Although it is clearly your opinion (which you are certainly entitled to) that the BOR should apply only to citizens, we have 200 years of practice, custom, law, and court rulings which say the opposite.

    One time when I went through Edmonton, Canada, the guy who inspected my passport made a point of saying something to the effect that while in Canada I have the same rights as anyone else; and welcome. It was a nice little canned speech designed to make visitors welcome.

    We could of course have our officials tell everyone who enters, welcome, but btw you get no protections which we afford our citizens. If we take that position I would not want to be in the hotel, restaurant, tourism, travel, or hospitality industry.

    Folks keep harping on, "read the constitution." What good is that if after reading it you want to insist that it says something it doesn't say.

    So, to those who think a Permanent Resident doesn't have 2A rights, or shouldn't have 2A rights, how about you get into bed with the Brady's and push for a Constitutional change. I'm sure you'll find plenty of support among the anti-immigrant crowd, and you might even succeed at cutting off your nose to spite your face.
    While it is my opinion, and not one that may be shared by many, I am entitled to it.
    There are a lot of people that "cut off there nose to spite their face" in regards to the Second Amendment. Some gun owners, the kind we could do without I think, voted for the current occupier of the white house. Need I say more? I merely gave my opinion, as I am entitled to have and to do.

    Biker

  8. #38
    Member Array CenCal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    288
    May I also humbly submit...

    What chess move is this from the ACLU?

    I have an inclination it has nothing to do with protecting the rights of the "permanent resident."

    Could the argument of requirement of citizenship, a "condition" lead to the argument of implied conditions to the Bill of Rights, etc.

    Addtionally, leading to the argument that 2A has implied conditions and does not explicitly mean what it says, but is up to interpretation based on implied conditions?

    So, where is the ACLU going with this???

  9. #39
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by goldshellback View Post
    This is kinda what I was thinking..............AMERICAN Civil Liberties Union.
    The ACLU hasn't been very 'warm' to anything 2A related in the past.......why do this for someone whose been here for 30 years and not taken the effort to become a citizen?

    Having said that, I wonder if this sets a standard for future ACLU involvement in anything 2A related?
    The ACLU sticks its nose into everything leaning left. I suggest its related more to the legal immigrant status getting discriminated against, in their opinion, that their hanging their hat on. If it were an American citizen you wouldn't hear a peep. The ACLU is no longer about civil liberties as it has become a political activist machine. Rights are secondary unless there's an agenda leaning left. I doubt they care at all if it's related the the second amendment. Second amendment is in the constitution. I didn't read anywhere that extended the benefits of American Citizenship to non citizens. And before anyone speaks out, remember, the Supreme court did rule the 2A is an individual right. The constitution was writen by American citizens for American citizens. Thirty years is a long time to think about becoming a citizen since the systems already caters to those who wish to do so within the guided law outlined by the federal government. Millions have done it and were proud to do so. I'm personally tied of all this entitlement attitude. You want to carry and protect yourself if your a legal immigrant, take the citizenship test. Then go take the CCW test just like I/WE had to. The ACLU has an agenda. We should ask AG Holder what it is. If the courts dont throw this out then our constitution is not worth the paper its written on. It will reinforce how the courts are difining and writing law from the bench. IMHO
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  10. #40
    Distinguished Member Array INccwchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,786
    But if a United States citizen renounces their citizenship but still lives in the US, they are not allowed to own or carry a firearm, why should it be any different for anyone else who is not a citizen. Personally I feel the constitution and its legal protection applies only to citizens of the United States and those in the process of becoming citizens.
    "The value you put on the lost will be determined by the sacrifice you are willing to make to seek them until they are found."

  11. #41
    Member Array phair12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    tennessee
    Posts
    108
    I dont know where I stand. On one hand I don't believe owning a gun should be so complicated. Many people intending to do harm go armed everyday without a permit. He is a law abiding PR. So at the end of the day if he does what it takes to get a Permit I think he should get it. However if you are here illegally there is a completely different situation. You are committing a crime while armed.
    in tn they placed these retarded signs everywhere saing gun crimes = hard time. So if illegal aliens get permits would that mean they are to do hard time? :)

  12. #42
    Member Array rstrainii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by hk45c View Post
    Just like the vast majority of you have great pride in being American we ex-pats take great pride in our home countries. If I was not able to hold dual citizenship I would have never become a citizen. I am VERY proud of my country and heritage. I did not come over here to escape anything I just came for school and I met a girl and fell in love.

    I agree that non-citizens should not vote, but the right to carry a firearm should not be kept from non-citizens. The sheriff of my old county would not let me get a permit because I only had a green card. Eventhough I am a member of the ARNG.

    Yes, I've said before, and I stand by the posts I've made, that I love the freedoms afforded here. I will also confess that the day I took the oath of citizenship was bittersweet.

    There are many reasons why people do not want to give up their citizenship. I am not sure why it's even an issue here. The fact is a law abiding individual, here legally is being denied the right to protect himself and his family.

    I may lose some friends here with this post but I don't care, this is one of my pet peeves. Just because an individual chooses to live in another county it does not mean they have to become a citizen of that nation. Yes, America is a GREAT country. I would not have chosen to live, defend, and most importantly raise a family here. However, there are other countries in this world that are also great and the citizens of those countries are just as proud to have been born there.

    I could extend this rant...but I'm going to get off the soapbox now before I really offend someone. One last thing before I step down. I know that there is at least ONE person that will be offended and have some retort to this post. Maybe "go back where you came from" or something else just as asinine. Just be sure, if your that person, to remember I've taken an oath to protect this nation. If you haven't well....you don't have anything to say to me.

    There are many things that have been posted here that I choose to ignore. I figure it's a gun forum, it's just par he course. This, I could not let go.
    I have to take my hat off to you. The difference I see between you and the individual in discussion is you may be a citizen of another country BUT you have chosen to defend the constitution of this country by taking up arms in the ARNG. If an individual decides to come to America and defend this country by serving, they should be afforded the opportunity WITHOUT question to become a citizen and/or afforded the same rights guaranteed under the Constitution. I am upset that the local LEO would not issue you a permit to defend yourself because you are not a citizen after you swore an oath to defend this country and the Constitution against all enemies. As to the ACLU, it is not about the 2nd amendment it is a political statement.

  13. #43
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief1297 View Post
    Sorry. In my opinion non-citizens should not be able to carry/own firearms...PERIOD. They have no allegiance to this country and I just imagine the 9/11 pukes with weapons and what they could do if they were so inclined.
    Wow. Maybe you just haven't had much opportunity to interact with lawful permanent residents. And, I think we have had more than a few instances in which US citizens have shown no allegiance to this country; including instances of trusted service members selling secrets.

  14. #44
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    4,049
    I knew this one was going to get folks thinking. It certainly has made me ponder both sides quite a bit.

    I guess the only real conclusions I've been able to come to internally is that we have a history of applying Constitutional rights across the board to folks that are in this country, even the illegal ones get Constitutional protection for due process. I can see how it would turn bad if some extremist had citizenship here, got a concealed carry permit and then went on some shooting spree somewhere; but since a criminal by definition isn't law abiding anyway, I don't see that having a carry permit would actually enable anything; they'd shoot someplace up regardless.

    The other thing that I keep coming back to is my natural aversion to any law that restricts firearms to any non-criminal. I'm always afraid that anything that restricts person A from owning/carrying a firearm, will somehow start being applied to person B too.

  15. #45
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,108
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Although it is clearly your opinion (which you are certainly entitled to) that the BOR should apply only to citizens, we have 200 years of practice, custom, law, and court rulings which say the opposite.

    One time when I went through Edmonton, Canada, the guy who inspected my passport made a point of saying something to the effect that while in Canada I have the same rights as anyone else; and welcome. It was a nice little canned speech designed to make visitors welcome.

    We could of course have our officials tell everyone who enters, welcome, but btw you get no protections which we afford our citizens. If we take that position I would not want to be in the hotel, restaurant, tourism, travel, or hospitality industry.

    Folks keep harping on, "read the constitution." What good is that if after reading it you want to insist that it says something it doesn't say.

    So, to those who think a Permanent Resident doesn't have 2A rights, or shouldn't have 2A rights, how about you get into bed with the Brady's and push for a Constitutional change. I'm sure you'll find plenty of support among the anti-immigrant crowd, and you might even succeed at cutting off your nose to spite your face.
    This is very well-said, and I definitely agree with this post.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. South Carolina's Concealed Carry bill.
    By SCfromNY in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 10th, 2011, 06:53 PM
  2. South Dakota Enters into Right-to-Carry
    By Loadedtech in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 14th, 2009, 03:04 PM
  3. South Carolina concealed carry of knives
    By Uechi in forum Defensive Knives & Other Weapons
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 24th, 2009, 08:23 PM
  4. Concealed Carry in South Carolina Questions ????
    By mi2az in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: November 18th, 2008, 03:13 PM
  5. South Dakota - Carry in State Parks?
    By climber in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 24th, 2008, 06:04 PM

Search tags for this page

aclu brazos county 2011
,
aclu concealed carry
,
aclu of south dakota represents the plaintiff smith v. state of south dakota
,
aclu south dakota smith v nelson
,
aclu starbucks right to carry
,
aclu suing south dakota over concealed carry
,
ccw driver privilege card
,
concealed carry south dakota
,

never become a citizen

,
smith v. state of south dakota concealed
,
south dakota aclu concealed carry
,
south dakota aclu right to bear arms
,
south dakota aclu sues over right to carry
,
south dakota concealed carry
,
south dakota let illegal imigrants to have concealed carry
Click on a term to search for related topics.