Gun Rights vs. Gay Rights

[NYcarbineer]

Sorry friend, you gun does not earn equal protection.

it does indeed

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Your pistol is a person? You know you are suppose to shoot those things,

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Shouldn't we be denying gays the right to own guns? I mean if gays are such a threat to society...

 

[Redfish]

it does indeed

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Your pistol is a person? You know you are suppose to shoot those things,

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your pistol is a person? You know you are suppose to shoot those things,

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

 

[Freewill]

Sorry friend, you gun does not earn equal protection.

it does indeed

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Your pistol is a person? You know you are suppose to shoot those things,

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

"You Guys?" I don't think any one of the latest SCOTUS was anything but ideiolgically pandering. I thought we guys were for state rights? Besides if they prohibited you as a white man and allowed a black man to carry across state lines you would have a point.

 

[Redfish]

Shouldn't we be denying gays the right to own guns? I mean if gays are such a threat to society...

why would you propose such discrimination? Well I guess because you support state by state discrimination against legal gun permits.

 

[Redfish]

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

 

[Redfish]

it does indeed

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Your pistol is a person? You know you are suppose to shoot those things,

really dude --LOL

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

"You Guys?" I don't think any one of the latest SCOTUS was anything but ideiolgically pandering. I thought we guys were for state rights? Besides if they prohibited you as a white man and allowed a black man to carry across state lines you would have a point.

you are totally missing the point, or refusing to understand it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I thought you people liked states rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

The contradiction is you wanting states to be able to regulate marriage within their state but not be able to regulate guns within their state.

 

[AceRothstein]

Equal protection means the law can't select a certain group to discriminate against. As long as everyone is prohibited from carrying in a school there is no equal protection issue.

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

 

[Redfish]

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

The contradiction is you wanting states to be able to regulate marriage within their state but not be able to regulate guns within their state.

you are posting nonsense. the law should be consistent as to interstate acceptance of licenses. Thats the issue. It is inconsistent to force acceptance of gay marriage licenses, but not CC permits.

I know that may strain your little brain, but its a relatively simple concept.

 

[Redfish]

If I took my gun and Louisiana CC permit into New Jersey or New York, I would be discriminated against because they would not honor it.

You guys opened the box, now you have deal with its contents.

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

no, you are spinning. States have to accept ALL marriage licenses issued by another state, they have to accept drivers licenses issued by another state. It is only logical that they should also have to accept CC permits issued by another state.

This is easy, its not complicated. You are wrong, admit it and move on.

 

[paddymurphy]

As a gun owner and an advocate of concealed carry, I've often wondered about this: Currently all 50 states have some kind of a concealed carry law on the books. The state I live in allows concealed carry just about everywhere except on a school property, within a jail or courthouse, and any business establishment which posts a sign at all of the entrances, prohibiting the carry of weapons into the premise. Of course in my state, disregarding the sign only results in a misdemeanor trespassing charge if the offender refuses to leave.

However, could you imagine what would happen if a business put up a sign reading "Gays Not Allowed"? It seems to me that in one example the business would be attempting to refuse service on the basis of sexual preference and the other case, the business would be putting a person in jeopardy by depriving a person of their right to defend themselves.

In the case of the business which prohibited firearms, it would be easy to say "My business, my rules." But not so much in the other case.

You do understand, don't you, that in the vast majority of the nation a "No Gays Allowed" sign is perfectly legal? The problem is that most Americans would object to that sign; would not want to patronize a store owned by bigots. On the other hand, most Americans would continue to patronize a store that put up a sign that guns were not allowed. They are not dumb enough to believe the silly and unfounded argument that they would be safer if everyone in the Starbucks were armed.

 

[paddymurphy]

As a gun owner and an advocate of concealed carry, I've often wondered about this: Currently all 50 states have some kind of a concealed carry law on the books. The state I live in allows concealed carry just about everywhere except on a school property, within a jail or courthouse, and any business establishment which posts a sign at all of the entrances, prohibiting the carry of weapons into the premise. Of course in my state, disregarding the sign only results in a misdemeanor trespassing charge if the offender refuses to leave.

However, could you imagine what would happen if a business put up a sign reading "Gays Not Allowed"? It seems to me that in one example the business would be attempting to refuse service on the basis of sexual preference and the other case, the business would be putting a person in jeopardy by depriving a person of their right to defend themselves.

In the case of the business which prohibited firearms, it would be easy to say "My business, my rules." But not so much in the other case.

Sorry friend, you gun does not earn equal protection.

Why not? It's protected by a specific amendment. I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

Show me where sexual perversion is a protected right.

It is protected from Government interference by that Amendment. Constitutional law is really something you right wing clowns have trouble with.

 

[AceRothstein]

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

no, you are spinning. States have to accept ALL marriage licenses issued by another state, they have to accept drivers licenses issued by another state. It is only logical that they should also have to accept CC permits issued by another state.

This is easy, its not complicated. You are wrong, admit it and move on.

They do not. There is a big difference between a marriage license and a conceal carry permit.

 

[paddymurphy]

"Gun Rights vs. Gay Rights"

The situation in your OP has nothing to do with 'rights' since there's no government involvement, no effort by the government to regulate, limit, or restrict the rights of gun owners or gay Americans.

With regard to denying services to gay patrons, it would depend on whether or not the business in question is located in a jurisdiction with a public accommodations law that has as one of its provisions sexual orientation, absent such a provision, the business could deny services to gay patrons with impunity.

With regard to a business owner who disallows firearms on his property, again, there are no gun rights violations because the Second Amendment applies only to the relationship between government and those governed, not the relationship between and among private persons or organizations – including private businesses.

While I essentially have to agree, You have to admit that someone being denied service because he was armed could be an interesting test case of public accommodation laws.
PA laws are there to ensure various protected class citizens have equal access to services.
I won't argue whether it is proper to force a business to serve blacks or gays or Martians, but the fact that only race, gender, sex, disability and sexual orientation are mentioned in PA laws, would ordinarily mean that gun owners are not covered. However, considering the recent SCOTUS ruling extending subsidies to obamacare recipients in states with no exchanges, could one assume that SCOTUS is apt to rewrite laws to fix presumed improper omissions?
The right to bear arms is so plainly protected by the Constitution, might SCOTUS include that right in existing PA laws?

No, it would not be a test case for public accommodation laws since there is not a single public accommodation law that states that private entities cannot determine whether they will allow guns on their property.

 

[paddymurphy]

They don't have to honor it because their gun regulations are constitutional.

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

no, you are spinning. States have to accept ALL marriage licenses issued by another state, they have to accept drivers licenses issued by another state. It is only logical that they should also have to accept CC permits issued by another state.

This is easy, its not complicated. You are wrong, admit it and move on.

You are an idiot. Admit it and move on. "States" have to accept marriage licenses; people don't. And states can enact any restriction on weapons that does not violate the Second Amendment. The conservatives on this Supreme Court made it clear that laws regulating the concealed carrying of firearms are constitutional. There is no requirement that there be uniformity in such laws. You write as if the Supreme Court has not already ruled on the ability of the states to regulate firearms when they have.

 

[Redfish]

and state marriage regulations aren't?

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

no, you are spinning. States have to accept ALL marriage licenses issued by another state, they have to accept drivers licenses issued by another state. It is only logical that they should also have to accept CC permits issued by another state.

This is easy, its not complicated. You are wrong, admit it and move on.

They do not. There is a big difference between a marriage license and a conceal carry permit.

No, they are both licenses issued by a state to a resident/residents of that state. Legally they are exactly the same as a drivers license issued by one state that is accepted in every other state.

 

[paddymurphy]

Not bans on gay marriage. Not now.

OK, lets go slow. All states have to accept other states gay marriage licenses, but all states do not have to accept other states CC permits?

and you don't see the contradiction there?

States have to accept other states gay marriage licenses because they are accepting their straight marriage licenses. It would be similar to one state accepting CC licenses from black people from one state but not the white people from the same state. Critical thinking is hard.

no, you are spinning. States have to accept ALL marriage licenses issued by another state, they have to accept drivers licenses issued by another state. It is only logical that they should also have to accept CC permits issued by another state.

This is easy, its not complicated. You are wrong, admit it and move on.

They do not. There is a big difference between a marriage license and a conceal carry permit.

No, they are both licenses issued by a state to a resident/residents of that state. Legally they are exactly the same as a drivers license issued by one state that is accepted in every other state.

As a matter of settled law, that is not true. But, go ahead and keep posting claims you really know nothing about.