Explain this to me like I am 5 years old

[M14 Shooter]

The SCOTUS stated, unequivocally, that we Americans have the right to carry a gun outside the home:
The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry. Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.

Some states require a permit to carry a gun outside the home; most do not.
Most of the states which require a permit recognize the permits from other states as sufficient to legally carry a gun in that state.

A few states – CA, NY, HI – do NOT recognize out-of-state permits.
They do not allow open carry without a permit
They do not allow out-of-state residents to obtain a carry permit.
That is, there is no way for me, a resident oh Ohio, to legally carry a gun in CA NY HI.

How can it be that CA NY HI do not violate my right to carry a gun – and thus, violate the 2nd Amendment?

 

[The Duke]

The SCOTUS stated, unequivocally, that we Americans have the right to carry a gun outside the home:
The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry. Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.

Some states require a permit to carry a gun outside the home; most do not.
Most of the states which require a permit recognize the permits from other states as sufficient to legally carry a gun in that state.

A few states – CA, NY, HI – do NOT recognize out-of-state permits.
They do not allow open carry without a permit
They do not allow out-of-state residents to obtain a carry permit.
That is, there is no way for me, a resident oh Ohio, to legally carry a gun in CA NY HI.

How can it be that CA NY HI do not violate my right to carry a gun – and thus, violate the 2nd Amendment?

They do, but that stuff started in the 1920s AFAIK.

 

[rightwinger]

I support gun carry permits to assure you are not a criminal, have been trained and know the responsibilities of carrying a gun in public.
I also think states should have common standards and recognize a carry permit like they would a drivers license

 

[alang1216]

The SCOTUS stated, unequivocally, that we Americans have the right to carry a gun outside the home:
The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry. Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.

Some states require a permit to carry a gun outside the home; most do not.
Most of the states which require a permit recognize the permits from other states as sufficient to legally carry a gun in that state.

A few states – CA, NY, HI – do NOT recognize out-of-state permits.
They do not allow open carry without a permit
They do not allow out-of-state residents to obtain a carry permit.
That is, there is no way for me, a resident oh Ohio, to legally carry a gun in CA NY HI.

How can it be that CA NY HI do not violate my right to carry a gun – and thus, violate the 2nd Amendment?

Do you have a Constitutional right to go to CA NY HI?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you have a Constitutional right to go to CA NY HI?

Yes.

Freedom of movement under United States law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I support gun carry permits to assure you are not a criminal, have been trained and know the responsibilities of carrying a gun in public.
I also think states should have common standards and recognize a carry permit like they would a drivers license

And the government is going to provide that licencing, training, and everything else free of charge right?

After all we wouldn't want to tax someone for being able to exercise their rights.

SMILE

 

[sealybobo]

The SCOTUS stated, unequivocally, that we Americans have the right to carry a gun outside the home:
The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry. Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.

Some states require a permit to carry a gun outside the home; most do not.
Most of the states which require a permit recognize the permits from other states as sufficient to legally carry a gun in that state.

A few states – CA, NY, HI – do NOT recognize out-of-state permits.
They do not allow open carry without a permit
They do not allow out-of-state residents to obtain a carry permit.
That is, there is no way for me, a resident oh Ohio, to legally carry a gun in CA NY HI.

How can it be that CA NY HI do not violate my right to carry a gun – and thus, violate the 2nd Amendment?

States Rights sweety.

 

[rightwinger]

View attachment 1002233

And the government is going to provide that licencing, training, and everything else free of charge right?

After all we wouldn't want to tax someone for being able to exercise their rights.

SMILE

No, you can pay to be trained and any background check
It is a public safety issue.
Just like you do for a Hunting License

Just like what I have to go through to get a drivers license

 

[M14 Shooter]

States Rights sweety.

You are lying.

 

[sealybobo]

You are lying.

Just like you Republicans lie about abortion being settled and states rights? Wow! Now suddenly you see where I'm coming from with the abortion issue. Only you think it about guns.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Just like you Republicans lie about abortion being settled and states rights? Wow! Now suddenly you see where I'm coming from with the abortion issue. Only you think it about guns.

abortion is not a protected right like the 2nd amendment

 

[M14 Shooter]

abortion is not a protected right like the 2nd amendment

The obvious answer to her intentional nonsense is "States do not have the right to violate the constitution:".
She's not worth the time or effort, however.

 

[rightwinger]

Explain this to me like I am 5 years old​

OK, let me explain this like I would to a 5 year old

Guns kill people
We do not want bad men to have guns
We want people carrying guns to know how and when to use them
We don’t want people shot by accident

 

[sealybobo]

abortion is not a protected right like the 2nd amendment

Oh sweety, honeybunny. Can you take your gun into a Trump rally? Why not? It's a protected right.

 

[sealybobo]

Explain this to me like I am 5 years old​

OK, let me explain this like I would to a 5 year old

Guns kill people
We do not want bad men to have guns
We want people carrying guns to know how and when to use them
We don’t want people shot by accident

When they wrote the constitution

And even this gun. I doubt Trump would let a white guy with one of these into one of his rallies. Front row.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

No, you can pay to be trained and any background check
It is a public safety issue.
Just like you do for a Hunting License

Just like what I have to go through to get a drivers license

There's nothing in the Constitution that says you have the right to drive.

Imposing a tax on my right to bear arms though is a violation.

However we can compromise... How about a $5000 dollar fee for being able to exercise your right to vote? That'll pay for the voter ID required to vote, along with the: people, ballots, counters, training, etc, etc, etc,... required for you to exercise that right.

SMILE

 

[sealybobo]

Explain this to me like I am 5 years old​

OK, let me explain this like I would to a 5 year old

Guns kill people
We do not want bad men to have guns
We want people carrying guns to know how and when to use them
We don’t want people shot by accident

Remember when Michigan allowed nutjobs to open carry assault rifles into the Capitol building? After they tried to kidnap Whitmer and after Trump's insurrection, we don't allow that anymore. But we did.

Oh I'm sorry does the constitution say we are violating their rights?

How about the right for 6 liberals to go there armed and stand like that on the other side of the hall?

 

[sealybobo]

View attachment 1002242

There's nothing in the Constitution that says you have the right to drive.

Imposing a tax on my right to bear arms though is a violation.

However we can compromise... How about a $5000 dollar fee for being able to exercise your right to vote? That'll pay for the voter ID required to vote, along with the: people, ballots, and counters required for you to exercise that right.

SMILE

This says you are wrong

The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 heavily regulate certain weapons at the federal level. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) enforces these laws and refers to these weapons as "NFA firearms".


NFA firearms include:

• Machine guns: Fully-automatic firearms
  
  
  
• Short-barreled rifles: Rifles with a barrel under 16 inches
  
  
  
• Short-barreled shotguns: Shotguns with a barrel under 18 inches
  
  
  
• Firearm sound suppressors: Also known as silencers
  
  
  
• Destructive devices: Explosive ordnance and devices like bombs or grenades
  
  
  
• Any other weapon (AOW): Disguised or improvised firearms, and certain smooth-bore handguns
  
  

The NFA requires the registration of these weapons with the federal government and imposes an excise tax.

 

[rightwinger]

View attachment 1002242

There's nothing in the Constitution that says you have the right to drive.

Imposing a tax on my right to bear arms though is a violation.

However we can compromise... How about a $5000 dollar fee for being able to exercise your right to vote? That'll pay for the voter ID required to vote, along with the: people, ballots, and counters required for you to exercise that right.

SMILE

Sorry Skippy
But if you want to carry a gun in public, I want you not to be a criminal, know how to use it, know how to handle and de-escalate a confrontation, stand your ground, be aware of other people
I would also like you to demonstrate shooting skill

Nothing in the Constitution says otherwise

Think what a “well regulated militia” needs to know

 

[alang1216]

Yes.

Freedom of movement under United States law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Maybe.

In Hendrick v. Maryland (1915), the appellant asked the Supreme Court to void Maryland's motor vehicle statute as a violation of the freedom of movement. The court found "no solid foundation" for the appellant's argument and unanimously held that "in the absence of national legislation covering the subject, a state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and order..."

If you had such a right there would be no need for the HR 38 Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. A law that has yet to pass.