What does the term "Constitutional Carry" mean to you?

[TheDan]

As The Nuge says, the 2nd amendment is my carry permit! I know it's unpopular to say that the general populace should be allowed to have tanks and nukes, but I also feel that "arms" means everything from a pointed stick to stuff that hasn't even been invented yet. At the very least, I wish people would get out of the rut of thinking it ONLY pertains to guns. Knives are "arms", too...

 

[West Texas]

as the nuge says, the 2nd amendment is my carry permit! I know it's unpopular to say that the general populace should be allowed to have tanks and nukes, but i also feel that "arms" means everything from a pointed stick to stuff that hasn't even been invented yet. At the very least, i wish people would get out of the rut of thinking it only pertains to guns. Knives are "arms", too...

^^^this ^^^

 

[Texan2]

There is not a chance any gangbanger would be able to afford a tank. What do they cost? Half a million?

Half a million??? Try 6.21 million...American Dollars. And there are cartels that could afford a fleet of them.

I agree with most of the other posts. Nukes, VX gas and the like....need to be some restrictions or our world would be gone in a matter of hours. As for the rest? let nature do what it does.

 

[MR Redneck]

The term Constitutional Carry means we have a right to wear arms without restriction. Restrictions should only be applied to the rights of those who commit criminal acts. It is important for law abiding citizens to have the choice to wear arm in a manner the individual feel necessary. Law abiding people should not be restricted from carrying firearms anywhere they have a legal right to be. Long Guns, Handguns, and knifes should not be deprived from a person for no reason other than criminal actions.
To prevent crime, we should regulate the wearing of arms for those specific individuals who commit criminal act. Innocent people should not be restricted based upon the actions of criminals.
Every citizens of this state and country has the same rights and freedoms as I do. We should guarantee those rights to anyone who travels,lives, or visits our great state. People should not have to worry about legal issues while carrying arms because the 2nd amendment ensures us that right.
On the state level, I think the law should be focused on restricting people who have misused the right to keep and bare arms.
While in Texas, anyone who can legally own arms should have that freedom without restriction.
I have seen Constitutional Carry and experianced it for myself. I was amazed at the new found freedom I experianced.

 

[KAK]

The term Constitutional Carry means we have a right to wear arms without restriction. Restrictions should only be applied to the rights of those who commit criminal acts. It is important for law abiding citizens to have the choice to wear arm in a manner the individual feel necessary. Law abiding people should not be restricted from carrying firearms anywhere they have a legal right to be. Long Guns, Handguns, and knifes should not be deprived from a person for no reason other than criminal actions.
To prevent crime, we should regulate the wearing of arms for those specific individuals who commit criminal act. Innocent people should not be restricted based upon the actions of criminals.
Every citizens of this state and country has the same rights and freedoms as I do. We should guarantee those rights to anyone who travels,lives, or visits our great state. People should not have to worry about legal issues while carrying arms because the 2nd amendment ensures us that right.
On the state level, I think the law should be focused on restricting people who have misused the right to keep and bare arms.
While in Texas, anyone who can legally own arms should have that freedom without restriction.
I have seen Constitutional Carry and experianced it for myself. I was amazed at the new found freedom I experianced.

Well Said!!!

 

[jsimmons]

Take a look at Arizona's gun statutes, make them nationwide to all law abiding citizens. (But not felons).

And what effect would that have? Felons, by their very nature would still probably find it very easy to get guns, and not be bothered by all those fees and that pesky background check. It's pointless to have a law that says bad guys can't have guns. Besides that, guns aren't used in all crimes.

 

[Cliffh]

My first thoughts upon hearing Constitutional Carry are: any man-portable weapon carried by anyone, in any public place and in any private place where the owner has decided to allow carrying. The carry can be either open or concealed, no licensing or testing required. CC licenses would still be available on request, mainly for those who travel to other states that require government permission slips. Flamethrowers are included under man-portable, but aren't recommended for everyday carry....

Note that I said anyone. This includes felons who have served their sentences, including any probation and/or fines. Once a person has served their sentence they should have all their rights restored, without having to pay a lawyer and go before a judge hoping to get them restored. If the ex-con can't be trusted with a weapon, keep them in jail.

BS restrictions such as being behind on child support or property taxes shouldn't be used to restrict one's ability to carry.

Regarding WMD's; I need a specific definition of the term. Any firearm other than a single shot has the ability to kill more than one person; which would make them a WMD under some definitions. Now that I think about it, even some single shot weapons can kill more than one person, a .50 can penetrate one body & hit a second hard enough to kill.

 

[Texan2]

Allowing convicted felons to legally own guns is, in most cases a really, really, really bad idea. The time someone serves in prison is not the only part of their sentence...losing other benefits is also part of it. That BS line "they served their time" doesn't hold water.
Luckily we are all among friends here. Going out in the general public and pushing for felons to be allowed to have guns would do nothing but cripple our cause and make people think we are insane. there are some battles that you just have to pass on, because there is absolutely no way to win....this would be one of those.

 

[Cliffh]

Luckily we are all among friends here.

That's why I felt safe in expressing my thoughts on the matter.

Going out in the general public and pushing for felons to be allowed to have guns would do nothing but cripple our cause and make people think we are insane.

Wouldn't do that, it wouldn't be prudent.

There are some battles that you just have to pass on, because there is absolutely no way to win....this would be one of those.

True.

Allowing convicted felons to legally own guns is, in most cases a really, really, really bad idea.

I might be convinced to agree, in most cases. But there are still many, many cases where a person has committed a white-collar and/or non-violent crime which has resulted in their loss of gun ownership rights. It is way too hard for those persons to get their rights restored. And for those felons who've committed a violent crime, how many still own firearms? Most? I'd bet they're not too concerned about gun laws....

 

[Texan2]

Looks like we are mostly on the same page.

 

[Cliffh]

Looks like we are mostly on the same page.

Guess that's better than not even reading the same book ;-)

 

[Bithabus]

Allowing convicted felons to legally own guns is, in most cases a really, really, really bad idea. The time someone serves in prison is not the only part of their sentence...losing other benefits is also part of it. That BS line "they served their time" doesn't hold water.
Luckily we are all among friends here. Going out in the general public and pushing for felons to be allowed to have guns would do nothing but cripple our cause and make people think we are insane. there are some battles that you just have to pass on, because there is absolutely no way to win....this would be one of those.

You are right because now sentences are far too lenient. If convicted burglars did 10 years hard labor instead of probation I believe they should be released as full citizens. Never happen, of course.

 

[Texan2]

You are right because now sentences are far too lenient. If convicted burglars did 10 years hard labor instead of probation I believe they should be released as full citizens. Never happen, of course.

If you rape women or rob banks, serve your time and get out of prison, (most prisons teach you how to be a better criminal)...most prefer you dont get to own a gun legally or get to vote for that matter. but dont get me started on that. I haved some different views on who should be qualified to vote.

 

[MR Redneck]

Allowing convicted felons to legally own guns is, in most cases a really, really, really bad idea. The time someone serves in prison is not the only part of their sentence...losing other benefits is also part of it. That BS line "they served their time" doesn't hold water.
Luckily we are all among friends here. Going out in the general public and pushing for felons to be allowed to have guns would do nothing but cripple our cause and make people think we are insane. there are some battles that you just have to pass on, because there is absolutely no way to win....this would be one of those.

I kinda agree with you, but I also disagree. As we all know, some felons are not violent criminals. If a man does time for business froud or somethin like that, I really see no need to take away his rights after he serves his time.
I really think if we had a good procedure for " blue collar" felons to establish a trust, its would be fine. Establishing a trust would involve someone to sponser that trust.
Hell, you have seen people get thrown in prison for crap that dont amount to nothin and you know it.

 

[Texan2]

Hell, you have seen people get thrown in prison for crap that dont amount to nothin and you know it.

Why the adversarial tone?
For every one person that gets thrown in prison for "nothin"...1000 get to walk after a lazy prosecutor doesnt have the gonads to pursue a prosecution. It is these people that, when they finally do get convicted, have usually been committing felonies for years. These are the ones I am focusing on.

If someone has 17 felony arrests and one or two convictions, that tells me something....I dont really want him LEAGALLY wandering around with a gun.
I am not saying you have to agree. Those are just my feelings on the subject.

 

[MR Redneck]

If you rape women or rob banks, serve your time and get out of prison, (most prisons teach you how to be a better criminal)...most prefer you dont get to own a gun legally or get to vote for that matter. but dont get me started on that. I haved some different views on who should be qualified to vote.

Again I agree and disagree with you and Bithabus.
Rapist, well I think they should be killed for the first offense! Bank robbers are violent criminals and dont need to have gun right. Prisons that dont " WORK" need to be changed!
Sentences?? Thats a BIG problem!! Criminals need Strict Harsh punishment. The kind that will make them wish the would have gotton a job instead of being a POS dirtbag!
You two need to realize the same thing that I have. Legislature aint making laws that work for the general public and if they dont work for us, they damn sure wont work for yall. There is a reason yall keep chasing the same people around time and time again.

 

[MR Redneck]

Why the adversarial tone?
For every one person that gets thrown in prison for "nothin"...1000 get to walk after a lazy prosecutor doesnt have the gonads to pursue a prosecution. It is these people that, when they finally do get convicted, have usually been committing felonies for years. These are the ones I am focusing on.

If someone has 17 felony arrests and one or two convictions, that tells me something....I dont really want him LEAGALLY wandering around with a gun.
I am not saying you have to agree. Those are just my feelings on the subject.

Im not trying to be adversarial, simply stating my point. And what your describing is a repeat offender. My opinion on repeat offenders will have to be left up to your imagination because its way too harsh to post in this topic.
Dont get me started on prosecutors either.. I really dont like the way that being handled.

 

[Texan2]

They are only a repeat offender if they have multiple convictions, not multiple arrests. I will concede this: you get the prison system and the criminal justice system and the legislature all straightened out and working the way it should, and I will reconisder my point about felons with guns.

 

[MR Redneck]

They are only a repeat offender if they have multiple convictions, not multiple arrests. I will concede this: you get the prison system and the criminal justice system and the legislature all straightened out and working the way it should, and I will reconisder my point about felons with guns.

I agree...

 

[West Texas]

Guys, PLEASE go back and read the FIRST POST.