Well.....one of those unintended consequences.......if gay marriage is constitutional in all 50 states due to the constitution...then now so is carrying a concealed gun......thanks gay marriage, a silver lining to your gay cloud....
Bearing ArmsSCOTUS Ruling On Same-Sex Marriage Mandates Nationwide Concealed Carry Reciprocity - Bearing Arms
The vast majority of states are “shall issue” on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states.
My North Carolina concealed carry permit, for example, was recognized yesterday as being valid in 36 states, which just so happened to be the number of states in which gay marriage was legal yesterday. But 14 states did not recognize my concealed carry permit yesterday.
Today they must.
Using the same “due process clause” argument as the Supreme Court just applied to gay marriage, my concealed carry permit must now be recognized as valid in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
A good day for gun rights....
So your argument is that if one thing that is protected by the constitution is allowed in all states, then something else which isn't protected by the constitution should also be allowed in all states.
Do you not see the irrationality of such a statement.
Presser said carrying arms was not a right. The Heller case reaffirmed the Presser case ruling. Go figure.
Bear arms means the right to be in the militia.
ROBERTSON v. BALDWIN, 165 U.S. 275 (1897)
“the right of the people to keep and bear arms (article 2) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons;”
Amendment II House of Representatives Amendments to the Constitution
In the House Mr Gerry said:
"Now, I am apprehensive, sir, that this clause would give an opportunity to the people in power to destroy the constitution itself. They can declare who are those religiously scrupulous, and prevent them from bearing arms."
This was in reference to:
"but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms."
If bear arms were to carry arms, then it seems a little strange that the House would be trying to compel people to walk around carrying a gun.
Then Mr Gerry said:
"Now, if we give a discretionary power to exclude those from militia duty who have religious scruples, we may as well make no provision on this head. "
Clearly Mr Gerry was using "bear arms" to mean "militia duty".
"Mr. Jackson was willing to accommodate. He thought the expression was, "No one, religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service, in person, upon paying an equivalent.""
So, again, we have "bear arms" meaning "render military service" as well as "militia duty".
There's plenty of other evidence that supports the same thing.
There is no right to carry arms. Even the NRA has supported Carry and Conceal permits, which if there were a right to carry arms, would be unconstitutional. So why does the NRA support them then?
