Concealed Carry Permits Should be Treated Like Driver's Licenses

[Skull Pilot]

Concealed Carry Permits Should be Treated Like Driver's Licenses


Except for one thing:

The Constitution does NOT forbid governments in the U.S. from restricting your right to drive on public streets. Such as by requiring you pass tests, granting you a license (which they can refuse if they want to), etc.

It DOES forbid governments from restricting your right to keep and bear arms, such as by requiring you to pass tests, granting you a license (which they can refuse if they want to), etc.

There is no specific right to drive in the Constitution

 

[M14 Shooter]

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.
Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

 

[pepperpot]

I am of the belief that a CCW should be treated like a vehicle driver's license. If you are visiting a state, your CCW issued in your state should be legal and valid, just like your driver's license. If you move to a new state, you should have a set amount of time in which to get a new CCW issued by your new state.

CCW permits, in my opinion, should not be treated like a marriage licenses.

Opinions?

So what happens in a state like mine where we don't have concealed carry licenses, but everyone can open carry?

Vermont OpenCarry.org

 

[nodoginnafight]

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.
Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

"... and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety ..."

the same applies to a gun permit, no?

 

[Little-Acorn]

The Constitution does NOT forbid governments in the U.S. from restricting your right to drive on public streets. Such as by requiring you pass tests, granting you a license (which they can refuse if they want to), etc.
It DOES forbid governments from restricting your right to keep and bear arms, such as by requiring you to pass tests, granting you a license (which they can refuse if they want to), etc.

There is no specific right to drive in the Constitution

Exactly my point.

The Constitution does not create rights.

It creates, and restricts, governments.

See the 9th amendment. It says that, just because a certain right isn't mentioned in the Constitution, that doesn't mean people don't have that right.

9th amendment: The people's rights aren't limited to only what is mentioned in the Constitution.
10th amendment: The Fed govt's powers ARE limited to only what is specified in the Constitution.

 

[martybegan]

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.
Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

Plus, the decisions on who marches and who cannot should not be based on who is marching, but only on the impact on others. Granted this is not always followed, but the ideal principle is that a local government has to have an overwhelming reason to deny a permit, like a group wanting to march across the Veranzanno bridge at 5 PM Friday before Memorial Day.

 

[bodecea]

so should weapons qualification for well regulated militia.

Oh look... "Well regulated militia" nonsense.

It's always something, isn't it?

Hell, I qualified on a range at every post I was ever stationed at, at every Embassy, at Fort Meade, At Bolling AFB, shoot, everywhere. I have been shooting since I was 6 years old - I think I can say, with some authority, that I KNOW how to shoot. Their argument is a little "bogus".

So you have experience with guns. Do you think everybody has that same experience? More importantly than knowing how to shoot a gun is knowing when to shoot a gun. Do you think everybody knows that? Do you think every one of the protesters in Ferguson or Baltimore should have been armed?

Yes. Why not? Not a fan of restrictions myself.

 

[The Rabbi]

Indeed. "May" issue has been struck down in those states where it has been litigated. The other issue (as in states that are abolishing licensing and permits) is that "Either a "right" is a right or it is not" If it is a "right" it shall not be infringed. Permits and a license are all infringements on the "right".

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.

Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Those arent comparable. At all.

Of course they are.

List your distinctions.

Be glad to. You have the right to speak anywhere you like. Say whatever the hell you want. However, when you are going to do it in large groups, at one time, considerations such as traffic, police, cleanup must be taken into account. Not one soul is denying your right to gather and speak. No one. Now, do those in power use that as a means to "control" the process - you bet. Just like they have done with the 2nd for the last 75 years. Difference? Litigation - and a powerful lobby with powerful attorneys.

The EXACT same arguments can be made for a gun permit.
You have not drawn a single distinction.
But I'm sure Rabbi appreciates your coming to his aid.

I didnt need his aid although he made good points.
Parades and rallies present possible public safety threats plus traffic, sanitation and other issues. Carry permits do not. there's your distinction.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The notion that a carry permit is NOT a public safety issue is - on its face - absurd.

 

[The Rabbi]

The notion that a carry permit is NOT a public safety issue is - on its face - absurd.

Translation: I really have no argument but it just seems like it.
It isnt a safety issue. Permit holders in every state have lower levels of crime than police officers.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am of the belief that a CCW should be treated like a vehicle driver's license. If you are visiting a state, your CCW issued in your state should be legal and valid, just like your driver's license. If you move to a new state, you should have a set amount of time in which to get a new CCW issued by your new state.

CCW permits, in my opinion, should not be treated like a marriage licenses.

Opinions?

The irony of this is that there's no Constitutional right to drive but there is to carry a concealed firearm.

 

[The Rabbi]

I am of the belief that a CCW should be treated like a vehicle driver's license. If you are visiting a state, your CCW issued in your state should be legal and valid, just like your driver's license. If you move to a new state, you should have a set amount of time in which to get a new CCW issued by your new state.

CCW permits, in my opinion, should not be treated like a marriage licenses.

Opinions?

The irony of this is that there's no Constitutional right to drive but there is to carry a concealed firearm.

Check the word "irony" before you use it again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.
Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

"... and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety ..."
the same applies to a gun permit, no?

I said "...make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade..."
In this case. "those in the parade" equate to those carry a gun with a CCW permit.
But you knew that, which is why you left it off.

Either way, carrying a gun in public is not the same as holding a parade - streets do not have to be closed, traffic need not be re-routed, barricades do not need to be put up and extra police officers do not need to be scheduled to work -- and so, the constitutional acceptability of time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 1st amendment rights does not translate to a similar acceptability for time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 2nd amendment rights because the justiofication for the latter does not apply to the former.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The notion that a carry permit is NOT a public safety issue is - on its face - absurd.

Translation: I really have no argument but it just seems like it.
It isnt a safety issue. Permit holders in every state have lower levels of crime than police officers.

100% wrong.

Maybe Flagg can try to bail you out again

 

[nodoginnafight]

Tell that to the guy who has to get a permit for his parade or demonstration.
Time, place, and manner restrictions have long since been accepted - right or wrong.

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

"... and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety ..."
the same applies to a gun permit, no?

I said "...make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade..."
In this case. "those in the parade" equate to those carry a gun with a CCW permit.
But you knew that, which is why you left it off.

Either way, carrying a gun in public is not the same as holding a parade - streets do not have to be closed, traffic need not be re-routed, barricades do not need to be put up and extra police officers do not need to be scheduled to work -- and so, the constitutional acceptability of time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 1st amendment rights does not translate to a similar acceptability for time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 2nd amendment rights because the justiofication for the latter does not apply to the former.

It's a public safety issue - just like the parade permit. The justification is right there.

I respect your right to your opinion, but I believe you're just dead wrong here and that the case you are trying to build to distinguish is about as flimsy as they come.

 

[Missourian]

The states have the right to legislate their own CCW regulations. I may not agree with them, but, as a non-resident, I don't and shouldn't get a say in their policy decisions. That's Federalism.

While the notion is tempting, I have to look farther down the road...there are powers that are reserved to the states, and this is one of them...I wouldn't take kindly to outsiders meddling in the affairs of my state, and for that reason, I'd be hard pressed to meddle in theirs.

 

[The Rabbi]

The notion that a carry permit is NOT a public safety issue is - on its face - absurd.

Translation: I really have no argument but it just seems like it.
It isnt a safety issue. Permit holders in every state have lower levels of crime than police officers.

100% wrong.

Maybe Flagg can try to bail you out again

LOL So we're at mere assertion. You have nothing. No argument, no facts. Just stomping your little foot on the floor. Your defeat here is noted.

 

[kaz]

I am of the belief that a CCW should be treated like a vehicle driver's license. If you are visiting a state, your CCW issued in your state should be legal and valid, just like your driver's license. If you move to a new state, you should have a set amount of time in which to get a new CCW issued by your new state.

CCW permits, in my opinion, should not be treated like a marriage licenses.

Opinions?

What if we require people to get a license and pay a fee to have free speech or to have their home protected from illegal searches?

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes... but these all have to do with the exercise of a right on public property normally used by the public for other purposes.

Yes .....and a CCW permit doesn't?

Not in total, as most of the time people carry on private property - they may very well carry on public property on their way to that private property, but that's not anything like having a parade.

The reason for time/place/manner restrictions on free speech - a parade, for instance - have to do with the disruption of the street and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade as well as the disruption of traffic caused by the parade -- issues that do not apply to concealed carry.

"... and the need for the state to make accommodations for the safety ..."
the same applies to a gun permit, no?

I said "...make accommodations for the safety of those in the parade..."
In this case. "those in the parade" equate to those carry a gun with a CCW permit.
But you knew that, which is why you left it off.

Either way, carrying a gun in public is not the same as holding a parade - streets do not have to be closed, traffic need not be re-routed, barricades do not need to be put up and extra police officers do not need to be scheduled to work -- and so, the constitutional acceptability of time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 1st amendment rights does not translate to a similar acceptability for time/place/manner restrictions on the exercise of 2nd amendment rights because the justiofication for the latter does not apply to the former.

It's a public safety issue - just like the parade permit. The justification is right there.

What is the public safety issue? Detail it, please.

 

[martybegan]

I am of the belief that a CCW should be treated like a vehicle driver's license. If you are visiting a state, your CCW issued in your state should be legal and valid, just like your driver's license. If you move to a new state, you should have a set amount of time in which to get a new CCW issued by your new state.

CCW permits, in my opinion, should not be treated like a marriage licenses.

Opinions?

The irony of this is that there's no Constitutional right to drive but there is to carry a concealed firearm.

There is a right to full faith and credit between the States, which is recognized for Driver's Licenses. You don't have to get a new one every time you cross a state line.