Court: No right to carry concealed weapons in public

That's right, thank you. That's why they are so dangerous.
Are you seriously telling me that those carrying a concealed gun are more qualified than a cop? They practice more than many cops?! Practice for what? Do people go thru life practicing for an event that is less likely than winning the lottery?! (Please don't quote odds-I don't know what they are (don't care), just making a point)

 

Would you pick up a chain saw and with no knowledge of how to use it use it?

Why do you think guns and common sense safety/practice methods are different?

 

The trouble I have with your argument is you're hinting that an off duty cop is carrying the gun just to protect his family but that's not really the case is it. If that's really how you feel then I would suggest going to your city council and try getting them to not let off duty cops carry. I don't know what to tell you. You frame this as a restriction of your "rights" but the fact is you just want to carry a weapon/gun. All the reasons are simply rationalizations. You are putting down the police when the protection you're talking about is their job, that's what they do. It's not a "special right", it's their job.

 

In many countries around the world one does not have the right to free speech, or a right against unreasonable search and seizure or to freely associate or to have a free press etc. Shall we begin emulating them on that as well?

 

And that is a right. Bearing arms is a right we have. Did you forget that part of 2A or what?

 

That's a good point. People buy guns all the time without a clue how to use them. What point are you making here? Are you saying the police are less qualified than everyday citizens. I really don't know what you're trying to say.

- - - Updated - - -

No, I didn't forget. Did you? You can obviously carry now, so what's the problem?

 

Its called muscle memory... That is why people practice...

 

Often the perps are more qualified because they practice more.

 

Hahahah....thats funny, one could say that about anyone couldnt they? The healthy eater, the non smoker, the exerciser....all scared about their health and well being.


Fricking cowards, just put your life in someone elses hands.

 

What part of 'developed world' did you miss? I'm not talking about North Korea, I'm talking about Germany, Canada, the UK, Australia and other developed countries where nuts don't feel the need to walk around with guns.

 

What would you expect from former subjects unfamiliar with freedom?

 

That's a ridiculous statement Hoosier. Normally I wouldn't respond if it was from one of our forum trolls but you usually post more intelligent stuff.

So to play along I'll give you this to take a look see at.

The US doesn't have a monopoly on nor did she invent freedom.

 

First government of the people by the people. The Constitution codified our freedoms unlike many other governments the claim they are free. Look how they are cracking down on free speech in the EU.

 

Too bad. It's been trending in that direction since 1986 and overall crime rates have been declining in that same time span. The handful of East coast and West coast left-wing states need to "progress" with the rest of America.

States that allow CCW permits from 1986 to Present

When seconds count, cops will be there in minutes.

You do realize that cops always show up after the crime has happened.

So, why not allow people to protect themselves??

 

Australia you don't have the same sort of right against unreasonable search and seizure. Try saying just anything you want in the UK as well (hate speech laws are nucking futz ) etc. Many nations in the "developed world" are not as free as we be. Freedom isn't nice or safe or cheap.

 

7th circuit decided the exact opposite in 2013, which forced Illinois to adopt a shall-issue permit system.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do people not need a gun for protection?

 

they dont need a gun in safe areas

 

That's weird. I could've sworn the 2nd amendment says the right of the people to keep AND BEAR (meaning to carry on your person) shall not be infringed.

 

No, what we don't need is a disarmed populace incapable of defending themselves and fellow citizens from criminals, foreign invasion, or oppression from our own government.

 

Except criminals do it all the time..

And if there ever is a day where carrying in public is against the law... Guess what? I'll carry anyway, like criminals who don't obey the law now do.

 

No country including the US has unrestricted free speech.

 

In other words those that are fearful own guns. Thanks for clarifying.

- - - Updated - - -

That will probably change after Hillary appoints the next justice to the supreme court.

 

Why do you believe people have no legitimate need to own a gun for protection?

 

Of course people carry guns for protection. Who needed any form of clarity for such a Black and White issue....ohhh...thats right, You did lol.

Lemme guess you thought people carried them to match their shoes and belts?

 

The 2nd amendment enables the states to regulate how and when guns may be used. That applies to all rights such as voting, speech, assembly, etc, etc.