do you want every American to walk down the street holding a loaded machine gun everywhere they go when they leave the house, I think we all have limits the right often wants to take the privilege to have the right away from ex-felons remember, when you have to have the privilege to have a right... it's no longer a right
The protection afforded to the exercise of right to keep and bear arms is "qualified" in that: -You must be part of "the people" -The "arms" in question are "bearable arms" -The use of said "arms" does not violate the rights of others.
Innocent bystanders are already armed also. So the right to bear arms should be totally unregulated? That's nowhere near reasonable. And once you admit regulation is a reasonable idea, you're really talking about how much regulation is necessary.
I'm not anti gun. I think owning one is foolish, but that's my personal opinion and choice. It's the pro gun absolutists that live in the land of Whacko. Who say 'the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun' disproved in Uvalde, Texas and at Stoneman HS in Florida.
So convicts should be allowed to keep and use firearms? After all, they are part of the people. What about the mentally ill? As people, I guess they have that right as well.
My guns have never hurt anyone. I keep them next to my property and life insurance policies. Great to know they are all there if I ever need them. I do see an aspect of gun ownership as a hobby. Competitive shooting is lots of fun. And the only thing I've ever found as relaxing as reloading (turn off the TV and other distractions... concentrate) is sailing. I got my gunsmithing certification for fun and really enjoy puttering around with guns the way other people putter around with a '57 Chevy. There's a LOT more to guns than personal protection.
Why do you anti-gunners always bring up radical, fringe arguments? Can you keep it it rational and calm? No one wants the mentally ill or convicts to have guns. Why do you lefties want everyone to be poor paying for illegal immigrant welfare (see how silly a fringe argument sounds?).
I don't deny there's more to owning firearms than self defense. But that's what comes up when people talk about regulating guns.
It wasn't me that said the right to firearm ownership was absolute and universal. I was simply pointing out some fairly obvious exceptions. And again, once you've agreed that some regulation is needful, the question is no longer 'whether?', but 'how much?'.
So... what's your point? The state is free to regulate the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms so long as said regulations do not infringe on said right. To that end: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”
I am so darned happy I retired to Texas where any lawful gun owner can carry open or concealed without any magazine restrictions, no training restrictions or registration restrictions. e have "Constitutional Carry" freedom here. And I am entertained as heck watching all you blue stateers fight and cajole. I am SOOOO happy I live in TEXAS! WHERE FREEDOM LIVES!
False. The firearm regulatory scheme at issue here is consonant with the concept of equal protection embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, since Congress could rationally conclude that any felony conviction, even an allegedly invalid one, is a sufficient basis on which to prohibit the possession of a firearm. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/445/55 See above. Same law, same text applies.
Ohio is the same. Ohio does offer a CCW permit so we can carry is most of the states that still require one.
I understand that but I am a often attend out of state events to judge competitions and having a permit makes things much easier to carry a handgun
that is like saying that surgery is worthless to treat cancer because it doesn't work with some forms of cancer
I'm retired now but understand. In my day it was easy to transport a handgun for business purposes. Life was so much easier before the leftists took over.
That would have been you. Regulation would include the state's right to ban a person from owning a gun.
