Defensive Carry banner

141 - 160 of 229 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
Check the 10th Amendment, I think you'll find states are granted all rights not exclusively enumerated as null and void in the Doc. They can and do make their own states laws.
I'm well aware, as I'm also well aware the 2nd is Clearly enumerated thus the states must follow and every part of the state (including open to the public businesses) exactly as I already explained.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
No, that’s not how it works, nor should it be. Just because you think it should be that way doesn’t mean it’s right.

As far as restrictions on where you can carry...2A does not say you can do whatever, whenever, wherever with a gun, just because it’s a gun. That’s not how THAT works, either.
That is your opinion, so I suspect you actually believe that to bear (carry) was NOT meant to be in ALL public spaces, open to the public places, or to put it another way, YOU would be willing to let all anti 2nd folks make carry impossible by them being able to use FOL to keep every legal person from carrying?

IF you must disarm "constantly" you're not really allowed to bear arms - that pretty simple and straight forward.

You're simply wrong that is "exactly how that works" , the 2nd is NOT a "privilege" depending on even a majority's wishes, (which is why were are not and never were a democracy) not to mention the fact the 2nd didn't even grant the right but simply enumerated it in Fed law. When the law (e.g. GOV) steps in (FOL signs) that is a direct violation of the 2nd - period

Policy of a store or stores should never be law- we do have legal ways of law making, stores don't follow those. They're in business to make $$ Not LAW.....as it should be.

Which is why more & more states signs won't carry FOL; and why they don't now in several states.

ETA:

DO you think criminals obey "no gun signs"? Signs are worthless and foolish, as are those who "believe in their magic power" just another thing that tries to punish the law abiding that were not a danger to begin with. Since most mass murders happen in no gun zones, it's comical anyone would even try to defend "the right to post signs" much less the .Gov being a part of that with FOL Signs.......
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,639 Posts
I'm well aware, as I'm also well aware the 2nd is Clearly enumerated thus the states must follow and every part of the state (including open to the public businesses) exactly as I already explained.
Altruistic view not based on facts in evidence historically. I prefer and have always lived in the real world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
"Not in evidence" - Ok now I know you're not being serious, the BOR is real , existed longer than both of us together by a long shot. It is clear and mentions to bear (that means carry - you know) it doesn't allow for limitations on where or bow to the whims of snowflakes it says we can carry arms, own them & carry them- it does it very clearly in fact. Always has and until recently was not questioned . It was so obvious folks just realized the facts.

Now due to those who think guns are violent, are responsible for killings (murders) we actually it seems have those who should support the 2nd who really do not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
I'm a huge fan of the 10th along with the others btw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AzQkr

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,778 Posts
The Constitution limits the authority of the government. Unless a person or company is acting in the role of a government they are not "state actors" and are not bound by the Constitution and as such are not capable of violating it.
Constitution 101 here folks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,639 Posts
"Not in evidence" - Ok now I know you're not being serious, the BOR is real , existed longer than both of us together by a long shot. It is clear and mentions to bear (that means carry - you know) it doesn't allow for limitations on where or bow to the whims of snowflakes it says we can carry arms, own them & carry them- it does it very clearly in fact. Always has and until recently was not questioned . It was so obvious folks just realized the facts.

Now due to those who think guns are violent, are responsible for killings (murders) we actually it seems have those who should support the 2nd who really do not.
The reality is it's been adjudicated in the courts [ Heller ] that yes, there ARE limitations placed on 2A. The altruistic view is that it can't be restricted.

Anyone should be able to discern the difference between the altruistic and reality. So what may have started altruistically has been converted to the real world, nearly as soon as the ink had dried. As I mentioned, I live in the real world, not that of Mary Poppins.

The founders were not infallible
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
The Constitution limits the authority of the government. Unless a person or company is acting in the role of a government they are not "state actors" and are not bound by the Constitution and as such are not capable of violating it.
Constitution 101 here folks.
When a sign has FOL, are you really saying that LEO are not "agents of the .Gov???" I think we all know how it works, but a FOL sign brings the .Gov into the mix of store policy, and that certainly violates the 2nd when infringing on the 2nd and it's very purpose, stating citizens have the right to not only keep arms but to bear(carry ) them also IN PUBLIC - there would be no need for the "bear arms" part IF it was not meant, intended and required for arms to be allowed in public .

Reality 101 folks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
The reality is it's been adjudicated in the courts [ Heller ] that yes, there ARE limitations placed on 2A. The altruistic view is that it can't be restricted.

Anyone should be able to discern the difference between the altruistic and reality. So what may have started altruistically has been converted to the real world. As I mentioned, I live in the real world, not that of Mary Poppins.
Now you're twisting what I said , and not cleverly btw. It clearly states citizens have the RIGHT to carry in public.....(what bear arms means) they're not just allowed to "keep" (at home) and yes Heller made that very, very clear as well.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,639 Posts
Now you're twisting what I said , and not cleverly btw. It clearly states citizens have the RIGHT to carry in public.....(what bear arms means) they're not just allowed to "keep" (at home) and yes Heller made that very, very clear as well.
Show me where 2a enumerates any wording discussing carrying in public. It says the right to keep and bear arms, it does NOT enumerate open carry nor carrying in public, that's a presumption based on your own opinion of the reading of 2a. Nor does it enumerate private businesses and their owners are subject to 2A within their businesses. :scratchchin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,532 Posts
That is your opinion, so I suspect you actually believe that to bear (carry) was NOT meant to be in ALL public spaces, open to the public places, or to put it another way, YOU would be willing to let all anti 2nd folks make carry impossible by them being able to use FOL to keep every legal person from carrying?

IF you must disarm "constantly" you're not really allowed to bear arms - that pretty simple and straight forward.

You're simply wrong that is "exactly how that works" , the 2nd is NOT a "privilege" depending on even a majority's wishes, (which is why were are not and never were a democracy) not to mention the fact the 2nd didn't even grant the right but simply enumerated it in Fed law. When the law (e.g. GOV) steps in (FOL signs) that is a direct violation of the 2nd - period

Policy of a store or stores should never be law- we do have legal ways of law making, stores don't follow those. They're in business to make $$ Not LAW.....as it should be.

Which is why more & more states signs won't carry FOL; and why they don't now in several states.

ETA:

DO you think criminals obey "no gun signs"? Signs are worthless and foolish, as are those who "believe in their magic power" just another thing that tries to punish the law abiding that were not a danger to begin with. Since most mass murders happen in no gun zones, it's comical anyone would even try to defend "the right to post signs" much less the .Gov being a part of that with FOL Signs.......
Nice strawman—actually strawmen, plural. No need for me to address them.

A business has every right to say what items they will or will not allow on their property, and that’s all a gun is—an inanimate object that has no rights.

Dot, period, end of story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-man* and AzQkr

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
Show me where 2a enumerates any wording discussing carrying in public. It says the right to keep and bear arms, it does NOT enumerate open carry nor carrying in public, that's a presumption based on your own opinion of the reading of 2a. Nor does it enumerate private businesses and their owners are subject to 2A within their businesses. :scratchchin:
Where do you think the 2nd mandates to bear (to carry) if NOT in public? Open to the PUBLIC businesses are well, open to the public nothing confusing there is there? Since criminals don't obey laws (much less signs) I'm not clear on why some think signs should be heeded, much less carry fol (and that is where the BOR gets violated) Stores cannot make laws, they make their own policy, LEO should not have to honor those signs, and doing so ONLY punishes law abiding citizens , many who don't see the signs . You don't see the shooters charged with violating signs .... Gang members getting charged? No even the red flag lists cannot contain the thugs.

Upside down world and those who should know better are right here supporting it?

YOU brought up Heller, I assumed you're read the carry in public part, my mistake I guess....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
Nice strawman—actually strawmen, plural. No need for me to address them.

A business has every right to say what items they will or will not allow on their property, and that’s all a gun is—an inanimate object that has no rights.

Dot, period, end of story.
The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,639 Posts
Where do you think the 2nd mandates to bear (to carry) if NOT in public? Open to the PUBLIC businesses are well, open to the public nothing confusing there is there? Since criminals don't obey laws (much less signs) I'm not clear on why some think signs should be heeded, much less carry fol (and that is where the BOR gets violated) Stores cannot make laws, they make their own policy, LEO should not have to honor those signs, and doing so ONLY punishes law abiding citizens , many who don't see the signs . You don't see the shooters charged with violating signs .... Gang members getting charged? No even the red flag lists cannot contain the thugs.

Upside down world and those who should know better are right here supporting it?

YOU brought up Heller, I assumed you're read the carry in public part, my mistake I guess....
So you can't show anyone where in the 2a it addresses private businesses, got it. All the rest is simply your opinion, yes, I brought up Heller, before that ruling in 08. Some 200+ years it was NOT part of 2A.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,869 Posts
Sooo, @Aceoky -- I take it you'll come here to NC and defend me in court when I take my gun into a place with a legal No Guns sign (which carries the force of law in NC), get charged, fined, and immediately lose my CC permit?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,532 Posts
The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
Tell me—does a business have the right to tell someone they may not hold religious services on their property? How about hand out religious or political pamphlets?

Or is that violating their 1A rights?
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-man* and AzQkr

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,639 Posts
The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
So explain to me in lay terms how a gun can be infringed as an inanimate object? And with that bolded, we've entered the twilight zone. I knew we'd get there eventually. Only a matter of time before some 2a zealot extended infringement to the inanimate object. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
Heller & McDonald struck down long standing "laws" (that were in fact never laws) because they clearly violated the 2nd, SCOTUS didn't really need to rule for most everyone who knew the COTUS & BOR could easily know that, they did NEED to rule because folks ignored common sense and long standing laws and passed BS off al "law" knowing it clearly violated the 2nd.

These are not just MY RIGHTS, they belong to each of you folks too! IF you want to pretend they're something they're not and willingly give them up not only for yourselves but your kids, grandchildren and on down the line that is your choice to make freely.

YES you 100% have the RIGHT to carry arms out in PUBLIC, it's sad SCOTUS had to actually write that down in recent rulings........it was SO clearly stated a very , very long time ago in the BOR!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,909 Posts
So explain to me in lay terms how a gun can be infringed as an inanimate object? And with that bolded, we've entered the twilight zone. I knew we'd get there eventually. Only a matter of time before some 2a zealot extended infringement to the inanimate object. :rolleyes:
Read the 2nd.......

"Arms" are protected

Those who KEEP & BEAR(carry arms) are protected to the point of Shall NOT be Infringed

Now read (very slowly) take notes even

Heller & McDonald

Now simply TRY to convince yourself it's "only my opinion" ; it was clear for more than a century and it's still quite clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,532 Posts
Heller & McDonald struck down long standing "laws" (that were in fact never laws) because they clearly violated the 2nd, SCOTUS didn't really need to rule for most everyone who knew the COTUS & BOR could easily know that, they did NEED to rule because folks ignored common sense and long standing laws and passed BS off al "law" knowing it clearly violated the 2nd.

These are not just MY RIGHTS, they belong to each of you folks too! IF you want to pretend they're something they're not and willingly give them up not only for yourselves but your kids, grandchildren and on down the line that is your choice to make freely.

YES you 100% have the RIGHT to carry arms out in PUBLIC, it's sad SCOTUS had to actually write that down in recent rulings........it was SO clearly stated a very , very long time ago in the BOR!

Scalia also wrote in the Heller decision that 2A rights were not absolute, and some restrictions were Constitutional.

And kindly answer the questions I posed above...
 
141 - 160 of 229 Posts
Top