Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Open Carry for OK
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Poke78" data-source="post: 1103383" data-attributes="member: 4333"><p>Welcome back to the discussion. You open this round with an admission that my 2A argument was correct and then use a 9A/10A argument as a fall-back from a position that you admitted was incorrect. While granting you that the 9A/10A allows for the current political reality of permits at the state/local level, the SCOTUS McDonald case appears poised to incorporate the Second Amendment and render moot those with the most restrictions against firearms (Chicago, et.al.) It will depend on the language within the decision as to how well carry permits and such stand up to further judicial review. As I noted in my previous response, I acknowledged that the limits, permits, and restrictions are based on some societal "concerns" that have passed political muster but will likely see some judicial review post-McDonald.</p><p></p><p>If anybody is confused about the logical connection of the First Amendment to the Second, I believe it is you. I would recommend you re-read my post but I shall summarize my exercises: my point was that the practice of religious liberty (DTE#1) or freedom of speech/press (DTE #2) does not require government permission of any kind, at any level of political sub-division, as that has been ruled by the courts as Constitutionally prohibited. Applying the same logic to the Second Amendment seems reasonable, given the similar language and structure. </p><p></p><p>As to your last paragraph, we are in total agreement as to being all about gun rights and their carry for personal protection. I just have less faith in government control than you and I believe the Constitution and the BoR support my position.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Poke78, post: 1103383, member: 4333"] Welcome back to the discussion. You open this round with an admission that my 2A argument was correct and then use a 9A/10A argument as a fall-back from a position that you admitted was incorrect. While granting you that the 9A/10A allows for the current political reality of permits at the state/local level, the SCOTUS McDonald case appears poised to incorporate the Second Amendment and render moot those with the most restrictions against firearms (Chicago, et.al.) It will depend on the language within the decision as to how well carry permits and such stand up to further judicial review. As I noted in my previous response, I acknowledged that the limits, permits, and restrictions are based on some societal "concerns" that have passed political muster but will likely see some judicial review post-McDonald. If anybody is confused about the logical connection of the First Amendment to the Second, I believe it is you. I would recommend you re-read my post but I shall summarize my exercises: my point was that the practice of religious liberty (DTE#1) or freedom of speech/press (DTE #2) does not require government permission of any kind, at any level of political sub-division, as that has been ruled by the courts as Constitutionally prohibited. Applying the same logic to the Second Amendment seems reasonable, given the similar language and structure. As to your last paragraph, we are in total agreement as to being all about gun rights and their carry for personal protection. I just have less faith in government control than you and I believe the Constitution and the BoR support my position. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Open Carry for OK
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom