It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Is Proper Cause?

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear arguments about New York's conceal carry laws requiring license applicants to provide "proper cause" before the state will issue them a license to conceal carry a gun outside of their homes.

Now, I don't usually dip my toes in gun control issues, and I readily admit my ignorance of pretty much all things guns, including gun laws from state to state. But I was surprised to learn of this, because I thought the right to bear arms didn't have to be justified. As long as criminal and legally insane people aren't allowed to own or carry guns and are sifted out through background checks, I don't see why anyone would need to explain why they want to exercise any constitutional right to the government.

I guess in New York, and other states, it's really hard to convince the government of proper cause, because 1000s of people are being denied licenses as their reasons to want to conceal carry are rejected. If simply living and working in New York and walking the streets of New York isn't a good enough excuse, what is?

I get that police can get confused in situations where there's a bad guy with a gun, and 3 or 4 good guys pulling their guns out because of the bad guy, but police confusion doesn't seem like "proper cause" to violate an ordinary citizen's right to bear arms.


www.msn.com...

To me this is a no brainer. SCOTUS needs to strike this law down.
Change my mind.


edit on 3-11-2021 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

There was an instance here in New Jersey were a vending machine operator was denied even after being robbed.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's crazy!



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I think this is why you will find that many 2A people are unwilling to give even an inch, even if it might make sense from a safety perspective. I used to own guns, and just don't any more, but believe very much in the broadest of interpretations of the 2A. I also understand why as a group, gun advocates are hesitant to entertain ANY restrictions as they have been leveraged just like this to take away rights from law abiding persons.

Good to see your face on this commentary. I have no idea what this SCOTUS will do as they have indicated some odd things as of late.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:30 AM
link   
I was hoping you could explain the Democrats reasoning for this. They seem to be ok with not even requiring ID to vote in heavily blue areas, which has far worse implications for the citizens of that state, than a law-abiding citizen trying to exercise a right to feel safe in such a terrible area. Plus, gun laws don't prevent criminals from using them because criminals don't follow laws.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
I think this is why you will find that many 2A people are unwilling to give even an inch, even if it might make sense from a safety perspective. I used to own guns, and just don't any more, but believe very much in the broadest of interpretations of the 2A. I also understand why as a group, gun advocates are hesitant to entertain ANY restrictions as they have been leveraged just like this to take away rights from law abiding persons.

Good to see your face on this commentary. I have no idea what this SCOTUS will do as they have indicated some odd things as of late.


Yup. Slippery slope. Camel gets it's nose under the tent and next thing you know....

I am in the same boat. Not a gun nut, but I know where this is going and how once you give government an inch, they will wind up taking a mile.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear arguments about New York's conceal carry laws requiring license applicants to provide "proper cause" before the state will issue them a license to conceal carry a gun outside of their homes.

Now, I don't usually dip my toes in gun control issues, and I readily admit my ignorance of pretty much all things guns, including gun laws from state to state. But I was surprised to learn of this, because I thought the right to bear arms didn't have to be justified. As long as criminal and legally insane people aren't allowed to own or carry guns and are sifted out through background checks, I don't see why anyone would need to explain why they want to exercise any constitutional right to the government.

I guess in New York, and other states, it's really hard to convince the government of proper cause, because 1000s of people are being denied licenses as their reasons to want to conceal carry are rejected. If simply living and working in New York and walking the streets of New York isn't a good enough excuse, what is?

I get that police can get confused in situations where there's a bad guy with a gun, and 3 or 4 good guys pulling their guns out because of the bad guy, but police confusion doesn't seem like "proper cause" to violate an ordinary citizen's right to bear arms.


www.msn.com...

To me this is a no brainer. SCOTUS needs to strike this law down.
Change my mind.



Has your account been hacked? Did you trip and hit your head? Or maybe we are finally getting to you?



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:35 AM
link   
"Proper Cause" doesn't only vary from State to State, it can vary from County to County or City to City. I live in Western Pennsylvania. In my County as long as you pass the background check it is easy to get a permit. Now if you were in Pittsburgh or Philly, it isn't so easy. As a matter of fact, even though my permit is good for the entire State, some areas will hassle you if your permit isn't from their area. Pittsburgh is notorious for that.
edit on 3-11-2021 by JIMC5499 because: typo



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
"Proper Cause" doesn't only vary from State to State, it can vary from County to County or City to City. I live in Western Pennsylvania. In my County as long as you pass the background check it is easy to get a permit. Now if you were in Pittsburgh or Philly, it isn't so easy. As a matter of fact, even though my permit is good for the entire State, some areas will hassle you if your permit isn't from their area. Pittsburgh is notorious for that.


There really needs to be a universal CCW laws / permits that over ride state and local laws. It is ridiculous that you can be perfectly legal in one city or state and then find yourself facing a felony just by driving your car from A to B while carrying.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Sookie seems to be following the truth wherever it leads. 🍺

If we ain't growing along the way we ain't doing it right.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Halfswede

As I've stated elsewhere, I'm actually in favor of safety training and some restrictions, but I don't want them because of the "by any means necessary" crowd.

Those who claim that we need tighter gun laws really need to look into the Virginia Tech shootings. If the Student Medical Service at Virginia Tech had complied with the Law, the shooter would not have been able to pass the background check to purchase the weapons he used. These are the same Liberal asshats who are crying for tighter gun laws, not following the existing Law, because they didn't want to label the shooter as somebody with "mental issues".



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well this is an easy one.

This is what is called double speak.
Using this method it's easy to convince people something is not as bad as it could be.

Just cause
Common sense gun laws
Fair share
Living wage

All these terms are ambiguous intentionally.

Yet, the media has no problem using the term protestor instead of rioter.


Basically using such a vague term as just cause is the ability to deny people their rights for vague reasons.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

As long as criminal and legally insane people aren't allowed to own or carry guns and are sifted out through background checks, I don't see why anyone would need to explain why they want to exercise any constitutional right to the government.

Under these kinds of laws, the people you mentioned above, will be the only ones with guns.
Law abiding citizens generally abide by the law, Criminals do not, so.........who is this law really protecting?



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well this is an easy one.

This is what is called double speak.
Using this method it's easy to convince people something is not as bad as it could be.

Just cause
Common sense gun laws
Fair share
Living wage

All these terms are ambiguous intentionally.

Yet, the media has no problem using the term protestor instead of rioter.


Basically using such a vague term as just cause is the ability to deny people their rights for vague reasons.


This is exactly why the left is so dangerous, but also effective. They know how to use language in an ambiguous way so that the average person is fooled.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Listening to some of the Justices discuss this case makes me think it will be struck down which would not only impact New York but several other states with the same restrictive requirement.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
I think this is why you will find that many 2A people are unwilling to give even an inch, even if it might make sense from a safety perspective. I used to own guns, and just don't any more, but believe very much in the broadest of interpretations of the 2A. I also understand why as a group, gun advocates are hesitant to entertain ANY restrictions as they have been leveraged just like this to take away rights from law abiding persons.

Good to see your face on this commentary. I have no idea what this SCOTUS will do as they have indicated some odd things as of late.


That's a great point. I have wondered why people would be against some laws that seem to make sense but have to do with Gun restrictions, but when you see how far "they" try to go each time, I can understand the hesitation. And it's a shame, because some things might actually make a difference. But when you get down to it, criminals don't care what the laws are, that's why they are criminals. The only one's who follow the law are the responsible gun owners, and they are the least likely to cause issues.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:34 PM
link   
NC has what I consider to be a well managed CC system. You have to do a good bit of paperwork to get the initial permit, but once you get it, you can carry without issue in any state with reciprocity, and buy in NC without hoops or other permits. So I could on a whim, go grab a canik 9mm and be back at the house shooting within the hour. (TP9 elite, nice weapon)



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Halfswede
I think this is why you will find that many 2A people are unwilling to give even an inch, even if it might make sense from a safety perspective. I used to own guns, and just don't any more, but believe very much in the broadest of interpretations of the 2A. I also understand why as a group, gun advocates are hesitant to entertain ANY restrictions as they have been leveraged just like this to take away rights from law abiding persons.

Good to see your face on this commentary. I have no idea what this SCOTUS will do as they have indicated some odd things as of late.


That's a great point. I have wondered why people would be against some laws that seem to make sense but have to do with Gun restrictions, but when you see how far "they" try to go each time, I can understand the hesitation. And it's a shame, because some things might actually make a difference. But when you get down to it, criminals don't care what the laws are, that's why they are criminals. The only one's who follow the law are the responsible gun owners, and they are the least likely to cause issues.


This is why many gun advocates don't like background checks. They fear it would turn into a registry which could then lead to confiscation. I think most people aren't against background checks per se, but how do we prevent abuse of that information? We've already seen how the FBI and IRS have been weaponized, so I can see how a tyrannical government could use that information to lead to gun confiscation.



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

If you want to find the hypocrisy in all of this, just switch Amendments.

Would we require "proper cause" to speak or protest?



posted on Nov, 3 2021 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I recently had a post removed on ATS where I said " No liberals should be allowed to own or even handle firearms".

Pretty foolish thing for me to say huh?

About a week later, a very outspoken progressive anti gun advocate, shot and murdered a poor middle aged mother.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join