No Carry Permit

[Tony2X]

I am not advocating someone sell to a prohibited person or push someone in at the dam. But if there is a no swimming sigh up it is not my place to enforce the rules at the dam nor is it my place to enforce firearm laws. It is my responsibility not to swim at the dam and to follow the firearm laws. I am not responsible for other adults action.

Nevermind....LOL

 

[summer44]

My mind is clear, cause it didn't come from me.

Well it is your stuff and if that gives u a clear conscience then by all means you should do what u think is right. Just understand a gwcl isn't proof one is not a prohibited person. It isn't even proof they weren't a prohibited person at the time of issuance. Sometimes even the FBI and or the probate court makes mistakes and sometimes jurisdictions are slow to report to ncic. Like I said it is you stuff your rules.

 

[aFarewellToKings]

I wanted to get an idea of what people thought of open ended laws. There are US citizens that have enough money to buy nuclear weapons. Does this right protect their ability to level a major city?

Does the right to keep and bear arms protect their ability to shoot someone? Or dozens of someones?
Assuming your answer to your question is no, that (my extension of the question) is exactly what brings about bans on "assault weapons", "high capacity magazines", etc. There is no difference between the two questions (IMO).

The real questions should not be phrased "Do you think ..." but "Should government be allowed to use force to ...". Because that's what laws do. And the only thing laws do.

 

[aFarewellToKings]

I believe the 9th amendment covers that.

Actually, the 10th covers it.
I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution where it says you do not have the right to drive a car.

 

[WyldeDime]

Actually, the 10th covers it.
I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution where it says you do not have the right to drive a car.

I believe the 9th is more relevant to this conversation exactly because it protects the rights that we have but are not enumerated.

 

[Constitution Hour]

The ONLY RIGHTS you have are those you are willing to Defend, or convince others it is in their best interest to defend. Some rights are more widely accepted than others although they seem to be diminishing by the hour.
The Bill of Rights was/is an attempt to give "NOTICE" of specific "Rights" we the people were not willing to surrender to anyone.

 

[Constitution Hour]

Actually, the 10th covers it.
I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution where it says you do not have the right to drive a car.

Define... ah never mind.

 

[GeauxLSU]

If I can prevent just 1 person, then I have done a good deed for society.

It's so hard to tell when people are being sarcastic in typed text.

 

[bullhog]

The only thing ‘required’ is that you feel right about it. If you think the guy is under 18 or not a resident or a felon....then ask. But if you have it in your ad that nothing is required, i would not try to spring it on them at the last second.
See how easy that is ?

I have had the government “permission slip” and paid extra tax for my rights in the past but i no longer do.
I am not a felon, nor do i ever wish to give the govt any extra money they dont already steal from me.
If a person requires me to have a permit, or sign a bos that does nothing but put my name and info out there needlessly, then i just dont answer their ads. It is that simple.

Ditto to each well stated word that you said 41mag!!

 

[MaconGuns]

Does the right to keep and bear arms protect their ability to shoot someone? Or dozens of someones?
Assuming your answer to your question is no, that (my extension of the question) is exactly what brings about bans on "assault weapons", "high capacity magazines", etc. There is no difference between the two questions (IMO).

The real questions should not be phrased "Do you think ..." but "Should government be allowed to use force to ...". Because that's what laws do. And the only thing laws do.

Common sense never applies universally. A person may say "God" for instance, the only way to get rid of bad people is to flood the planet. Well, Im not God and its impossible for me to flood the planet but, I can weaponise the Corona virus or buy a nuke and do my share. Why should it be against the law to use nerve gas to incapacitate a burglar? Why should people have issues with me having a mine field in my front lawn? If I want to, I should be able to defend myself anyway I want to. Sure a grenade launcher might injure or kill a random person but, so can a stray bullet. I should be able to detonate dynamite for the 4th of July. Its always one extreme no reasonable middle ground. I want to drive 80 in a 40 without being fined. I want to be able to say the F word in ODT forum without getting banned. I want to call out POS over price listings. Remind me again about just how free we are.