I just paid $80 for the Government to give me the right to carry my own Handgun

[indago]

I know I'm going to take some heat for this from some, but I'm not convinced that this is a Second Amendment issue. I think the Second Amendment was meant to ensure the presence of military style long guns in private homes, not handguns in public.

There is some evidence to suggest that hand guns in the possession of law-abiding citizens can raise the level of public safety, but I'm just not sure that concealed carry is a Constitutional right. Let the flaming begin

In the case of Bliss v Commonwealth, the Court declared: "The provision contained in this section, perhaps, is as well calculated to secure to the citizens the right to bear arms in defence of themselves and the state, as any that could have been adopted by the makers of the constitution: If the right be assailed, immaterial through what medium, whether by an act of the legislature or in any other form, it is equally opposed to the comprehensive import of the section. ...That the provisions of the act in question do not import an entire destruction of the right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the state, will not be controverted by the court; for though the citizens are forbid wearing weapons concealed in the manner described in the act, they may, nevertheless, bear arms in any other admissible form. But to be in conflict with the constitution, it is not essential that the act should contain a prohibition against bearing arms in every possible form; it is the right to bear arms in defence of the citizens and the state, that is secured by the constitution, and whatever restrains the full and complete exercise of that right, though not an entire destruction of it, is forbidden by the explicit language of the constitution. If, therefore, the act in question imposes any restraint on the right, immaterial what appellation may be given to the act, whether it be an act regulating the manner of bearing arms or any other, the consequence, in reference to the constitution, is precisely the same, and its collision with that instrument equally obvious. And can there be entertained a reasonable doubt but the provisions of the act import a restraint on the right of the citizens to bear arms? The court apprehends not. The right existed at the adoption of the constitution; it had then no limits short of the moral power of the citizens to exercise it, and it in fact consisted in nothing else but in the liberty of the citizens to bear arms. Diminish that liberty, therefore, and you necessarily restrain the right; and such is the diminution and restraint, which the act in question most indisputably imports, by prohibiting the citizens wearing weapons in a manner which was lawful to wear them when the constitution was adopted."

This was a case in Kentucky in 1822, and it involved the State Constitution. But considering the right involved, and the fact that it is as relevent today as it was then, the weight of the opinion of the judge at that time is as timeless as the Constitution.



-

 

[editec]

ACtually, as much as I believe that handguns should be banned from civilian use, I agree with you that demanding a licensing fee to carry is wrong.

Either you have the right to bear arms or you do not.

And if the government can impose a tax on you to bear them, then you don't have a RIGHT, you merely have a license.

 

[Annie]

ACtually, as much as I believe that handguns should be banned from civilian use, I agree with you that demanding a licensing fee to carry is wrong.

Either you have the right to bear arms or you do not.

And if the government can impose a tax on you to bear them, then you don't have a RIGHT, you merely have a license.

Agreed. We disagree that it should be a right.

 

[elvis]

Isn't that nice of them?

$20 Certificate of Training fee.
$60 License fee.

It was just a renewal, so it wasn't as expensive.

Concealed Handgun Carry License Renewal Application Form

So you don't think people who own guns need to be trained to use them? Or pay a renewal fee, like we do on insurance? Don't you think your gun is a kind of insurance? Aren't you willing to pay for that?

We don't have to ask the government for insurance. We don't pay them $80 every time we renew our policy.

 

[Annie]

Seems like a good item to begin a petition. Don't you agree? I don't have a gun, but I do think it's a 'right', not a 'privilege', to be able to defend oneself, and shouldn't cost a dime.

 

[xsited1]

It's important to see the bigger picture:

View attachment 6841

See, this is what I don't get.

I never said one thing about wanting guns to be outlawed. I support the second amendment, yet again, there you go with your assumptions!

I support the governments right to have a person be trained to use a gun, and to be registered to have one. I don't get why you don't.

Hold on there, Tiger! I wasn't referring to you when I posted that picture. The 'bigger picture' has to do with the government confiscating weapons. We obviously agree that is wrong. We disagree on the point about the government having the right to register handgun owners.

My point is very simple. Keep the government out of my private life. If I want to carry a handgun, they shouldn't require me to pay for that right. If I have to pay for it, it's not a right. If I choose to use that handgun to cause harm to someone else, I should lose my right to carry and own a handgun and be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[indago]

My point is very simple. Keep the government out of my private life.

If you really felt that way you wouldn't be revealing to government your "private life" come April 15.

From Article Four, Bill of Rights: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ...shall not be violated"

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So you don't think people who own guns need to be trained to use them? Or pay a renewal fee, like we do on insurance? Don't you think your gun is a kind of insurance? Aren't you willing to pay for that?

Of course people who own guns should be trained to use them. My dad taught me how to use a gun when I was 5 years old. The government is just doing this to make extra revenue and to track law-abiding citizens who own a gun. It's yet another attack on our 2nd Amendment rights.

And if you are law abiding, why would you be worried about being tracked? You do know we are all tracked one way or the other, gun owners or not.

I hope it also is to track those who aren't law abiding, aren't you?

The fear is that the Government will use those lists to confiscate weapons.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

My point is very simple. Keep the government out of my private life.

If you really felt that way you wouldn't be revealing to government your "private life" come April 15.

From Article Four, Bill of Rights: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ...shall not be violated"

Wrong. The Government has a duty and a right to collect taxes. It is a direct power granted IN THE CONSTITUTION. Further an amendment was passed to cover income tax. Or direct taxation of individuals. Tax collection does not violate your person, your homes, your papers or your effects.

As to the payment for concealed carry, be glad your not in North Carolina, as I understand it the mandatory class you must take is at least 400 dollars and usually higher. You have to take the class BEFORE you apply. When you apply the Sheriff can disprove your request for a number of reasons. So at that point you would be out the 400 bucks for the class and the fee to submit the license request. Further businesses can put up signs and forbid you to carry on their premises. You can not carry in any Bank or Credit Union by law. You can not carry in any State or Federal Government building or on State or Federal property unless it is posted to allow it. So no parks, no Recreation sites, no Rest stops, etc etc etc.

 

[indago]

My point is very simple. Keep the government out of my private life.

If you really felt that way you wouldn't be revealing to government your "private life" come April 15.

From Article Four, Bill of Rights: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ...shall not be violated"

Wrong. The Government has a duty and a right to collect taxes. It is a direct power granted IN THE CONSTITUTION. Further an amendment was passed to cover income tax. Or direct taxation of individuals. Tax collection does not violate your person, your homes, your papers or your effects.

As to the payment for concealed carry, be glad your not in North Carolina, as I understand it the mandatory class you must take is at least 400 dollars and usually higher. You have to take the class BEFORE you apply. When you apply the Sheriff can disprove your request for a number of reasons. So at that point you would be out the 400 bucks for the class and the fee to submit the license request. Further businesses can put up signs and forbid you to carry on their premises. You can not carry in any Bank or Credit Union by law. You can not carry in any State or Federal Government building or on State or Federal property unless it is posted to allow it. So no parks, no Recreation sites, no Rest stops, etc etc etc.

Maybe you can find somewhere in the posting that I had made where I said anything about taxes. I just wrote about keeping your private business to yourself. It's nobody else's business what you do, especially government.

And, why do you so luv being a toady?


-

 

[Ravi]

Isn't that nice of them?

$20 Certificate of Training fee.
$60 License fee.

It was just a renewal, so it wasn't as expensive.

Concealed Handgun Carry License Renewal Application Form

So you don't think people who own guns need to be trained to use them? Or pay a renewal fee, like we do on insurance? Don't you think your gun is a kind of insurance? Aren't you willing to pay for that?

Of course people who own guns should be trained to use them. My dad taught me how to use a gun when I was 5 years old. The government is just doing this to make extra revenue and to track law-abiding citizens who own a gun. It's yet another attack on our 2nd Amendment rights.

I hope this means you are against the national id as well.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If you really felt that way you wouldn't be revealing to government your "private life" come April 15.

From Article Four, Bill of Rights: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ...shall not be violated"

Wrong. The Government has a duty and a right to collect taxes. It is a direct power granted IN THE CONSTITUTION. Further an amendment was passed to cover income tax. Or direct taxation of individuals. Tax collection does not violate your person, your homes, your papers or your effects.

As to the payment for concealed carry, be glad your not in North Carolina, as I understand it the mandatory class you must take is at least 400 dollars and usually higher. You have to take the class BEFORE you apply. When you apply the Sheriff can disprove your request for a number of reasons. So at that point you would be out the 400 bucks for the class and the fee to submit the license request. Further businesses can put up signs and forbid you to carry on their premises. You can not carry in any Bank or Credit Union by law. You can not carry in any State or Federal Government building or on State or Federal property unless it is posted to allow it. So no parks, no Recreation sites, no Rest stops, etc etc etc.

Maybe you can find somewhere in the posting that I had made where I said anything about taxes. I just wrote about keeping your private business to yourself. It's nobody else's business what you do, especially government.

And, why do you so luv being a toady?


-

Ahh yes I remember you now, you make mention of not paying your taxes and then when called on it claim you did no such thing. It is simple really. The Federal Government has a duty and a right to collect taxes. You either pay through personal income tax or the State taxes you and pays a tithe to the Federal Government. The old way was to cumbersome and non responsive. The Constitution is clear, each State pays based on population and the taxes have to be uniform through out the several States. A personal Income tax is uniform and taxes based on population. Actually it provides a means for a State not to be taxed for its non working population. Under the old system the State would have had to pay based on population whether working or unemployed. The States would have had to tax those able to pay even more under that system in order to meet their tithe owed the Federal Government. Not to mention since Census only occur every 10 years States that lose population would be paying for people they no longer had and States that gained people would be paying less then their fair share.

Again personal Income taxes do not violate any section or portion of the US Constitution. Go ahead don't pay and see what happens when they catch you. Advocate vocally that others not pay their taxes and see what happens then too.

And do not claim in one breath you support the Constitution and in the same breath claim one should not pay their taxes. The toady would be you. Do not claim protection under the document while claiming you have no responsibility to pay your taxes.

 

[indago]

The Constitution is clear, each State pays based on population and the taxes have to be uniform through out the several States. A personal Income tax is uniform and taxes based on population. Actually it provides a means for a State not to be taxed for its non working population. Under the old system the State would have had to pay based on population whether working or unemployed... (and other and sundry aberrations, ramifications, fixations, lamentations, hallucinations, and incantations)

There you go with the tax thing again. I have already noted: "Maybe you can find somewhere in the posting that I had made where I said anything about taxes. I just wrote about keeping your private business to yourself. It's nobody else's business what you do, especially government." Did you actually read what you just wrote? Ramblings!

 

[editec]

We didn't have income taxes until 1913. Mostly we ran our government on TARIFFS.

We didn't have a FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM until 1913, either.

Interesting coincidence isn't it?

 

[xsited1]

And if you are law abiding, why would you be worried about being tracked? You do know we are all tracked one way or the other, gun owners or not.

I hope it also is to track those who aren't law abiding, aren't you?

Oh my. That's a horrible thing to say. I'm guessing you supported the Patriot Act. Those people always love to say, "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." Sorry, but Big Brother is dangerous and I don't want my civil liberties trampled. The Founders of this country had a distrust of government and so do I. Call me an extremist, but I like freedom.

We all like freedom. But tell me, when have we ever been really free?

You don't like the government, but you live in America, home of the biggest government there is.


Also, don't make assumptions of what I do and don't support because I'm trying to have some dialogue with you about this. I expect better from you.

My sincerest apologies. It was wrong for me to assume.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The Constitution is clear, each State pays based on population and the taxes have to be uniform through out the several States. A personal Income tax is uniform and taxes based on population. Actually it provides a means for a State not to be taxed for its non working population. Under the old system the State would have had to pay based on population whether working or unemployed... (and other and sundry aberrations, ramifications, fixations, lamentations, hallucinations, and incantations)

There you go with the tax thing again. I have already noted: "Maybe you can find somewhere in the posting that I had made where I said anything about taxes. I just wrote about keeping your private business to yourself. It's nobody else's business what you do, especially government." Did you actually read what you just wrote? Ramblings!

Ya cause people just randomly send information to the Government on April 15th.

 

[xsited1]

So you don't think people who own guns need to be trained to use them? Or pay a renewal fee, like we do on insurance? Don't you think your gun is a kind of insurance? Aren't you willing to pay for that?

Of course people who own guns should be trained to use them. My dad taught me how to use a gun when I was 5 years old. The government is just doing this to make extra revenue and to track law-abiding citizens who own a gun. It's yet another attack on our 2nd Amendment rights.

I hope this means you are against the national id as well.

Of course! However, I am FOR giving the government the power to implant a computer chip into each person's forehead or right hand for the purposes of buying and selling.

 

[indago]

I am FOR giving the government the power to implant a computer chip into each person's forehead or right hand for the purposes of buying and selling.

WOW! What a REVELATION...

 

[Tech_Esq]

Isn't that nice of them?

$20 Certificate of Training fee.
$60 License fee.

It was just a renewal, so it wasn't as expensive.

Concealed Handgun Carry License Renewal Application Form

So you don't think people who own guns need to be trained to use them? Or pay a renewal fee, like we do on insurance? Don't you think your gun is a kind of insurance? Aren't you willing to pay for that?

Of course people who own guns should be trained to use them. My dad taught me how to use a gun when I was 5 years old. The government is just doing this to make extra revenue and to track law-abiding citizens who own a gun. It's yet another attack on our 2nd Amendment rights.

Which is why the home of the Anti-Federalists don't make you license your weapons. They actually "get" that whole Constitution thing. (Although I have a sickening feeling that won't be for long).

Licensing is just a phone book for the Government to know where all the gun owners are.

 

[Tech_Esq]

We didn't have income taxes until 1913. Mostly we ran our government on TARIFFS.

We didn't have a FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM until 1913, either.

Interesting coincidence isn't it?

If you do some research, you'll find we did a whole bunch of idiotic things in about a 2-4 year stretch around that time. My general feeling is we ought to throw everyone of those things out and reconsider if it even makes sense.