2nd Amendment, what is infringement?

[_Adam_]

As far as gun ownership goes, there's that 2nd amendment Constitution thing, so I'm not too worried about that. 

You should be.   Your 2A right has already been infringed upon in the name of interstate commerce and public safety and crime prevention.

Tell me, can you conceal a handgun without a special license from your state government?  Do you live in a state that allows you to open carry your loaded pistol?
If the answer is no to either question, then maybe you should be worried about that.

[griff61]

You should be.   Your 2A right has already been infringed upon in the name of interstate commerce and public safety and crime prevention.

Tell me, can you conceal a handgun without a special license from your state government?  Do you live in a state that allows you to open carry your loaded pistol?
If the answer is no to either question, then maybe you should be worried about that.

I can do both, so I guess that analogy isn't effective either.

But please, point out which part of the 2nd either of those things violate?
Here it is, for your perusal.

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In neither of your examples is the right to keep or bear arms prohibited. ALso, the Supreme Court recently struck down a ban in D.C., the first time the've actually ruled on a 2nd Amendment case in decades.

We can start a different thread on the 2nd or Constitutional issues if you like. I'd prefere to stick to the topic at hand.

[_Adam_]

You should be.    Your 2A right has already been infringed upon in the name of interstate commerce and public safety and crime prevention. 

Tell me, can you conceal a handgun without a special license from your state government?  Do you live in a state that allows you to open carry your loaded pistol?
If the answer is no to either question, then maybe you should be worried about that. 

I can do both, so I guess that analogy isn't effective either.

But please, point out which part of the 2nd either of those things violate?
Here it is, for your perusal.

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms.  Ratified 12/15/1791. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In neither of your examples is the right to keep or bear arms prohibited.  ALso, the Supreme Court recently struck down a ban in D. C. , the first time the've actually ruled on a 2nd Amendment case in decades.

We can start a different thread on the 2nd or Constitutional issues if you like.  I'd prefere to stick to the topic at hand.

No, you can't do both.   You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights.

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand. . .

[griff61]

No, you can't do both.   You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights.

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand. . .

To conceal and enter an establishment, yes you do, to carry in your pocket etc, not so much.
I think I might start another thread, because there's nothing in a concealed carry law that keeps you from owning or carrying a gun. Keep and bear arms. Nope, nothing in my state's laws infringe on that.

[Winterfire2008]

Griff61 suggested a new thread for 2nd Amendment.  So here it goes:  What is infringement of the 2nd Amendment?

"In 2008, the U. S. Supreme Court, in District of Columbia vs. Heller, struck down a Washington, D.C. ban on individuals having handguns in their homes.  Writing for a 5 to 4 majority, Justice Scalia found the right to bear arms to be an individual right consistent with the overriding purpose of the 2nd Amendment, to maintain strong state militias.  Scalia wrote that it was essential that the operative clause be consistent with the prefatory clause, but that the prefatory clause did not limit the operative clause.  The Court easily found the D. C. law to violate the 2nd Amendment's command, but refused to announce a standard of review to apply in future challenges to gun regulations.  The Court did say that its decision should not "cast doubt" on laws restricting gun ownership of felons or the mentally ill, and that bands on especially dangerous or unusual weapons would most likely also be upheld.  In the 2008 presidential campaign, both major candidates said that they approved of the Court's decision."

Is it an infringement to allow a felon to keep and bear arms?  Is it an infringement to allow the mentally ill to keep and bear arms?  Is an infringement to ban the ownership of grenade launchers to the civilian population?

I would hope one knows the answer to that.  Since the Supreme Court has refused to announce a standard of review this for this particular amendment it will continue to come before the Supreme Court for clarification. 

Meantime those states that allow concealed weapons will continue to do so.  So if you are in Texas and exhibit road rage beware of the person in the next car.  He/She just might pull their weapon in self defense!!!!!

[_Adam_]

No, you can't do both.    You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights. 

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand.  .  . 

To conceal and enter an establishment, yes you do, to carry in your pocket etc, not so much.
I think I might start another thread, because there's nothing in a concealed carry law that keeps you from owning or carrying a gun.  Keep and bear arms.  Nope, nothing in my state's laws infringe on that.

Looks like you have been "out drawn"!

[Hoopty]

Gun discussion split from the "Universal Healthcare" topic and merged with Winterfire2008's topic dedicated to the subject.

[flew-da-coup]

Griff61 suggested a new thread for 2nd Amendment.  So here it goes:  What is infringement of the 2nd Amendment?

"In 2008, the U. S. Supreme Court, in District of Columbia vs. Heller, struck down a Washington, D.C. ban on individuals having handguns in their homes.  Writing for a 5 to 4 majority, Justice Scalia found the right to bear arms to be an individual right consistent with the overriding purpose of the 2nd Amendment, to maintain strong state militias.  Scalia wrote that it was essential that the operative clause be consistent with the prefatory clause, but that the prefatory clause did not limit the operative clause.  The Court easily found the D. C. law to violate the 2nd Amendment's command, but refused to announce a standard of review to apply in future challenges to gun regulations.  The Court did say that its decision should not "cast doubt" on laws restricting gun ownership of felons or the mentally ill, and that bands on especially dangerous or unusual weapons would most likely also be upheld.  In the 2008 presidential campaign, both major candidates said that they approved of the Court's decision."

Is it an infringement to allow a felon to keep and bear arms?  Is it an infringement to allow the mentally ill to keep and bear arms?  Is an infringement to ban the ownership of grenade launchers to the civilian population?

I would hope one knows the answer to that.  Since the Supreme Court has refused to announce a standard of review this for this particular amendment it will continue to come before the Supreme Court for clarification. 

Meantime those states that allow concealed weapons will continue to do so.  So if you are in Texas and exhibit road rage beware of the person in the next car.  He/She just might pull their weapon in self defense!!!!!

The question of civilians with grenade launchers, mines, grenades, nukes and the like was cleared up in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). This decision was based on the  National Firearms Act of 1934.

As for Texas and road rage laws. There are several states including Georgia and Florida which have adapted the same law. Basically you can fire on someone outside your car if you feel that your life is in danger. Now we must understand that one would have to prove that their life was in danger. I don't think saying that " He approached my car so he must have had intent to harm me", would stand a chance as a viable excuse.

I am a CCW permit holder and consider myself very responsible. The only infringement on the 2nd Amendment that I see is the "Assualt weapons ban." The problem with the ban is that it outlawed semi-auto rifles.

[jimmyc]

    Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

AWB did not ban semi automatic weapons, only very specific semi automatic weapons and magazines over a certain capacity.  P.S. colts fix to the AR-15 ban, change the name a little and remove the bayonet stud.

[flew-da-coup]

    Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

        * Folding or telescoping stock
        * Pistol grip
        * Bayonet mount
        * Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
        * Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

        * Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
        * Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
        * Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
        * Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
        * A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

AWB did not ban semi automatic weapons, only very specific semi automatic weapons and magazines over a certain capacity.  P.S. colts fix to the AR-15 ban, change the name a little and remove the bayonet stud.

The fact is that they banned semi automatic rifles and called them "Assualt" rifles. I can understand why its hard to own a class 3 weapon, but a semi auto AR15 is the samething with or without a pistol grip or bayonett.

[_Adam_]

No, you can't do both.   You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights.

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand. . .

To conceal and enter an establishment, yes you do, to carry in your pocket etc, not so much.
I think I might start another thread, because there's nothing in a concealed carry law that keeps you from owning or carrying a gun. Keep and bear arms. Nope, nothing in my state's laws infringe on that.

I promise you that if you place your pistol in your pocket, you are now concealing it in the eyes of the law.  If you don't have special permission from your state/local government in the form of a CWP, you are breaking the law.

A law-abiding citizen should not need special permission to maintain the element of surprise against those who wish to do him harm.  Licenses are an infringement upon your rights.

Also, 2nd Amendment has not been incorporated against the states through the 14th Amendment, so Heller means little to people in the individual states until it is incorporated.

[griff61]

No, you can't do both.   You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights.

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand. . .

To conceal and enter an establishment, yes you do, to carry in your pocket etc, not so much.
I think I might start another thread, because there's nothing in a concealed carry law that keeps you from owning or carrying a gun. Keep and bear arms. Nope, nothing in my state's laws infringe on that.

I promise you that if you place your pistol in your pocket, you are now concealing it in the eyes of the law.  If you don't have special permission from your state/local government in the form of a CWP, you are breaking the law.

A law-abiding citizen should not need special permission to maintain the element of surprise against those who wish to do him harm.  Licenses are an infringement upon your rights.

Also, 2nd Amendment has not been incorporated against the states through the 14th Amendment, so Heller means little to people in the individual states until it is incorporated.

You are welcome to promise all you desire, hoever I am well aware of my rights. Please point out the part of the 2nd that guarantees you a right 'of surprise'.

[_Adam_]

No, you can't do both.   You can open carry without a permit in AZ, but to conceal you need permission, which is an infringement upon your 2A rights.

I agree, we should stick to the topic at hand. . .

To conceal and enter an establishment, yes you do, to carry in your pocket etc, not so much.
I think I might start another thread, because there's nothing in a concealed carry law that keeps you from owning or carrying a gun. Keep and bear arms. Nope, nothing in my state's laws infringe on that.

I promise you that if you place your pistol in your pocket, you are now concealing it in the eyes of the law.  If you don't have special permission from your state/local government in the form of a CWP, you are breaking the law.

A law-abiding citizen should not need special permission to maintain the element of surprise against those who wish to do him harm.  Licenses are an infringement upon your rights.

Also, 2nd Amendment has not been incorporated against the states through the 14th Amendment, so Heller means little to people in the individual states until it is incorporated.

You are welcome to promise all you desire, hoever I am well aware of my rights. Please point out the part of the 2nd that guarantees you a right 'of surprise'.

Obviously that is not a stated right.  The 2A merely asserts that your rights are not to be infringed upon, but they have.  And they will continue to do so.  As long as there is registration and special licensing, your rights have been infringed upon.

[Winterfire2008]

ahh you gotta love Mae West  "Is that a pistol in your pocket or you just glad to see me? 

So the key here is that concealing the pistol is so you can surprise the criminal?  I can hear the criminal now.... "Dang by concealing that gun that shot me my rights were infringed upon!!!!!!!!

[avg_joe]

I know this will just rile up the pro-gun crowd, but I'm really just curious. . .

How does an amendment that qualifies a right with:  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" translate into a right for anyone to carry guns wherever you go?  Who here is in a Militia?  Who thinks that a Militia is still even necessary in this day and age?  I'm not against gun ownership, and own a few, but I never carry one and could live without them.   I really think that this amendment was meant for different times.   You can spin it however you like, but the Militia was necessary at one time in our history, now it's not.   (Unless maybe you're one of those that think the gov't is out to get you and take your guns away like some folks do these days. . . )

Also, talk of law-abiding citizens and responsible gun owners being infringed upon.   These laws aren't meant for you.   It is my opinion that laws are written for the knuckle heads that would otherwise be running around wreaking havoc if they weren't there.   Take for instance guys like Plaxico Burress carrying a loaded pistol in the waistband of his sweat pants.   The sweet irony of his situation is that he ended up shooting himself, but it could have easily been anyone else in that club.   I would prefer not to be in public with those idiots like that myself.   So if a concealed weapon law makes it less likely that they will not have one tucked in their waistband, I'm all for it.