Excellent article. I have a license to carry here in Indiana and am glad this state went to what they did. I believe criminals are going to have guns anyway, because they don't care. They're criminals and don't follow the law.
Criminals already do, however to give the law abiding citizens constitutional Carry is a must. Again checks and balances. Great piece some people just don't want to understand how important it is. 💪😎🇺🇸
I agree with this Permitless vs Constitutional Carry position. I don't believe in limits on firearms. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty straight forward. If there are moral reasons to bar someone from owning a firearm, then we need to look at what we need to do better within society to correct that moral issue. It's a much, much harder approach for sure. Society would be more dangerous more than likely, but I don't view that as a negative. I think some danger is good for overall fortitude of its individuals. I don't think the point of the government is to protect against all threats. I think we as individuals must shoulder some, or much, of that responsibility ourselves. I know that I'm in the minority on this one, but I honestly believe our forefathers placed a much greater responsibility on the individuals than most people are prepared for. I think our society will fall one day, and it will more than likely be due to having too many weak individuals. There are always tradeoffs - safety now for progressively weaker generations or danger now for a continuously rugged generations. However, nature always takes the path of least resistance.
Going by this, no state would ever be constitutional carry because there will always be restrictions as to where you can carry. For instance I don't know of any state where you can carry open or concealed into a bar. Which makes sense to me, Imagine what could happen in the event of a fight in the bar. A couple of drunk guys with guns would be dangerous to not only themselves but others as well.
I believe and think that I understand this approach for the definitions of each phrase!? Not quite sure, however. If there are any restrictions at all, which would be infringements, that does not qualify as "Constitutional Carry", no doubt!
Permit less carry, on the other hand, has always kinda seemed back buttwards to me, if I'm understanding it right!? It just seems to me that if you're going to carry concealed, no one can see it, no one can be concerned, worried or scared. I can't rationalize the need for a permit to carry concealed!? On the other hand, if you open carry, letting it all hang out there, no permit required!? To my way of thinking, if infringements/restrictions are imposed on the former, then that would qualify as neither Constitutional Carry or permit less carry. Open carry would be Constitutional Carry then, would it not? A number of other considerations are in the oft, of course, but what am I still missing here? 🤔 🙄🇺🇲
I feel if someone wouldn’t pass the High Moral Fiber test , then they shouldn’t be allowed to carry , it be like letting people with multiple firearms violations Constitutional Carry !! There has to be moral limits !! Would you want a known Pedifile to Consstitutional Carry !!! Patrick from Commy Ct. 😷💥🔫
Excellent article. I have a license to carry here in Indiana and am glad this state went to what they did. I believe criminals are going to have guns anyway, because they don't care. They're criminals and don't follow the law.
Criminals already do, however to give the law abiding citizens constitutional Carry is a must. Again checks and balances. Great piece some people just don't want to understand how important it is. 💪😎🇺🇸
I agree with this Permitless vs Constitutional Carry position. I don't believe in limits on firearms. "Shall not be infringed" is pretty straight forward. If there are moral reasons to bar someone from owning a firearm, then we need to look at what we need to do better within society to correct that moral issue. It's a much, much harder approach for sure. Society would be more dangerous more than likely, but I don't view that as a negative. I think some danger is good for overall fortitude of its individuals. I don't think the point of the government is to protect against all threats. I think we as individuals must shoulder some, or much, of that responsibility ourselves. I know that I'm in the minority on this one, but I honestly believe our forefathers placed a much greater responsibility on the individuals than most people are prepared for. I think our society will fall one day, and it will more than likely be due to having too many weak individuals. There are always tradeoffs - safety now for progressively weaker generations or danger now for a continuously rugged generations. However, nature always takes the path of least resistance.
Going by this, no state would ever be constitutional carry because there will always be restrictions as to where you can carry. For instance I don't know of any state where you can carry open or concealed into a bar. Which makes sense to me, Imagine what could happen in the event of a fight in the bar. A couple of drunk guys with guns would be dangerous to not only themselves but others as well.
I believe and think that I understand this approach for the definitions of each phrase!? Not quite sure, however. If there are any restrictions at all, which would be infringements, that does not qualify as "Constitutional Carry", no doubt!
Permit less carry, on the other hand, has always kinda seemed back buttwards to me, if I'm understanding it right!? It just seems to me that if you're going to carry concealed, no one can see it, no one can be concerned, worried or scared. I can't rationalize the need for a permit to carry concealed!? On the other hand, if you open carry, letting it all hang out there, no permit required!? To my way of thinking, if infringements/restrictions are imposed on the former, then that would qualify as neither Constitutional Carry or permit less carry. Open carry would be Constitutional Carry then, would it not? A number of other considerations are in the oft, of course, but what am I still missing here? 🤔 🙄🇺🇲
I feel if someone wouldn’t pass the High Moral Fiber test , then they shouldn’t be allowed to carry , it be like letting people with multiple firearms violations Constitutional Carry !! There has to be moral limits !! Would you want a known Pedifile to Consstitutional Carry !!! Patrick from Commy Ct. 😷💥🔫