Do some states call it a "permit"? - Page 5

CowboyKen · August 9th, 2008, 06:44 PM

Nevada - Concealed Firearms Permit

Not needed for open carry.

Ken

JerryM · August 9th, 2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccw9mm

Because that allowance can be yanked by whim, when that should absolutely NOT be the case, particularly given the gravity of what's being protected (life), and most particularly because that is enshrined in the founding documents as a hands-off area for our the governing wad.

Do you think you are better protected from a whim by what it is called?

Best,
Jerry

ccw9mm · August 9th, 2008, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryM

Do you think you are better protected from a whim by what it is called?

Irrelevant to the question I answered.

The letters used to represent the concept don't alter the fact the concept is abused by calling it one thing and in fact treating it as something else entirely. The word isn't at issue. The abuse is.

JerryM · August 9th, 2008, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccw9mm

Irrelevant to the question I answered.

The letters used to represent the concept don't alter the fact the concept is abused by calling it one thing and in fact treating it as something else entirely. The word isn't at issue. The abuse is.

Unless I misread your post, you objected to it being called a permit as you implied that a permit could more easily abused or withdrawn.
If that is true, they you must feel more secure by calling it a license instead of a permit. Either can be abused or withdrawn by the stroke of a pen of the governor of the state signing a law rescinding the license or permit.

We can all object and say that we have an unlimited right to carry and own any gun we desire. But even the Supreme Court disagrees with that mindset. I can almost guarantee if the Dems get the Presidency, and retain the congress we will see some more stringent laws including "assault weapons" and limitations on magazine capacity.

Regards,
Jerry

cphilip · August 9th, 2008, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryM

But the Supreme Court did not say it was without limitations. It is, therefore, an individual right instead of a collective right, but still subject to limitations. You do not need a permit to speak your mind, but you can be fired or even arrested for doing so if you threaten the President it seems.

I do not think we will ever see the 2nd without limits, and I do not think it should be without some limits. The problem is what should they be, and who should determine reasonable limitations.

Regards,
Jerry

And where do limitations start Jerry? In this case a permit starts with the abiitlity to even start "speaking". Thats not a "limitation" at all. It is permission to have a right! Limitations are "no carry in the court house"... not "no carry unless I say so". Thats not a limitation at all. Plain and simple... it is an "Infrigement" to make someone ask permission to have a right. Restrictions start AFTER that.

ccw9mm · August 9th, 2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryM

Unless I misread your post, you objected to it being called a permit as you implied that a permit could more easily abused or withdrawn.
If that is true, they you must feel more secure by calling it a license instead of a permit.

What it's called isn't relevant. What's true, is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccw9mm

Carrying "by your leave" is just that ... so long as permitted/licensed/approved by the good graces of the legislative weenies.

I most specifically equated permitting with licensing with approval, implying nothing. Rather, I feel these are the exact same thing.

Any permitting or licensing process is one thing, and one thing only: it's doing something by the "king's" approval only. Such things are NOT rights, in all practicality.

In short, we're being done no favors by the licensing process. In reality, we are allowing creeping incrementalism to destroy the underlying right. That's what I object to.

"Right" by whim is just that. It can be taken away at the flick of a pen. THAT is what I object to.

Ram Rod · August 9th, 2008, 11:29 PM

Arkansas is a CHL (concealed handgun license). I call it my permit cause concealed handgun license is way too long for this southern boy to convey...especially to my fellow home-staters. It doesn't matter to me which way it's pronounced, I think it's all the same thing. The government state or federal is allowing us to exercise our God given constitutional rights, and just like a driver's license is a privilege that can be revoked any time, so is the license that 'permits' me to carry. It may go against the grain, but in my opinion, those terms are one and the same since they are 'granted' through the establishment. CHL or CHP....there's not any difference to me other than we've been bowing to the powers that be. Geez! That rhymes! I'm a poet and didn't know it!

ccw9mm · August 9th, 2008, 11:36 PM

Longfellow.

NCHornet · August 10th, 2008, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LongRider

I added the emphasis because we need not be ALLOWED to carry. God (or nature if you prefer) gave us the right to defend our lives. The Constitution protects that right. All laws and requirements that require license permit or others wise "allows" us to have the means to defend life are are contrary to the laws of God, nature and the Constitution. They are no more appropriate than requiring a permit or license to be "allowed" to breath

I understand and agree with what your saying. However in the real world we live in carrying a handgun without a license, permit, whatever you want to call it will get you into some big trouble, so therefore the small business sized card we all carry allows us to carry a concealed handgun without breaking the law. Don't believe me , try it!!
NCH

Coldwarvet · August 10th, 2008, 11:30 AM

I would say don't confuse your permit/license with your right. When you bare your underbelly before the "law" in applying for "permission" to exercise what you know is your right, you are simply performing an expedient act to make concealed carry convenient and limit the harrassment (or imprisonment) you would face by exercising your actual right.
This in no way reflects upon that right, nor does it mean you have waived it by asking "permission" to carry. If the situation is such that you must carry without a permit, you can rest easy in the knowledge that you are exercising your rights as recognized by our Constitution. That may be cold comfort if the "law" decides to imprison you for exercising that right. Hence, we get permits.

Just keeping it all straight!

August 9th, 2008, 11:29 PM	#47
Ram Rod VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: crawford county, arkansas Posts: 4,960	Arkansas is a CHL (concealed handgun license). I call it my permit cause concealed handgun license is way too long for this southern boy to convey...especially to my fellow home-staters. It doesn't matter to me which way it's pronounced, I think it's all the same thing. The government state or federal is allowing us to exercise our God given constitutional rights, and just like a driver's license is a privilege that can be revoked any time, so is the license that 'permits' me to carry. It may go against the grain, but in my opinion, those terms are one and the same since they are 'granted' through the establishment. CHL or CHP....there's not any difference to me other than we've been bowing to the powers that be. Geez! That rhymes! I'm a poet and didn't know it! __________________ RamRod-----sans remords

August 9th, 2008, 11:36 PM	#48
ccw9mm VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Oregon USA Posts: 5,929	Longfellow. __________________ Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it. Reports: CZ P01 pt1, pt2. Thoughts: Justifiable self defense. Reality: Disarming citizens only results in more victims. Tip: Use the <search> feature.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

August 9th, 2008, 06:44 PM	#41
CowboyKen Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Nevada Posts: 126	Nevada - Concealed Firearms Permit Not needed for open carry. Ken

August 10th, 2008, 11:30 AM	#50
Coldwarvet Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: VA Posts: 32	I would say don't confuse your permit/license with your right. When you bare your underbelly before the "law" in applying for "permission" to exercise what you know is your right, you are simply performing an expedient act to make concealed carry convenient and limit the harrassment (or imprisonment) you would face by exercising your actual right. This in no way reflects upon that right, nor does it mean you have waived it by asking "permission" to carry. If the situation is such that you must carry without a permit, you can rest easy in the knowledge that you are exercising your rights as recognized by our Constitution. That may be cold comfort if the "law" decides to imprison you for exercising that right. Hence, we get permits. Just keeping it all straight!