Gun Control: Constitutional Rules

In my short lifetime I can think of few times when there has been so much gun violence in the news headlines. Over the past couple years, there have been several sensational shootings across the country. Looking back we remember Jared Loughner for his shooting of Gabby Giffords in 2011. We all recall the evil grin of Loughner's mug shot. Somewhere in between the previous and the upcoming shooting we have the Zimmerman-Martin shooting; here we have one civilian shooting another civilian, bringing Stand Your Ground law into the open for discussion and interpretation. Following this incident we arrive in Aurora, Colorado with James Holmes killing 12 people in a movie theater. Not long after, on August 5th, a shooting occurs at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin. Fast forward to the past two weeks and we have two incidents in New York City. One incident involving a man wielding a knife and theatening civilians; NYPD police officers shoot and kill the man. A week later, a disgruntled unemployed apparel designer shot and killed a former co-worker. Again, NYPD policer officers shoot and kill the man. Jeffrey Johnson, the shooter identified by police, shot his co-worker in the head and next his torso. This past incident left 2 dead and 9 wounded.

Because I live in Upstate New York, I'll include two incidents from NY State. There was a shooting in Binghamton by a naturalized immigrant at an immigrant center. I believe 14 were shot dead by the shooter, including himself. He had two Baretta's legally registered on his pistol permit. And lastly, a disgruntled elderly gentleman decided to shoot up a Verizon store in Rome, NY with a revolver. An off-duty Rome police offer shot and killed him.

As stated above, I reside in Upstate NY. NY State has some of the most restrictive gun regulations in the United States. NYC has even more restrictive gun regulations than the rest of the state. I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I have several firearms, including pistols and rifles. The vetting process in my county takes approximately 6 months. Most of the forms are criminal background checks and requests for medical records, specifically any mental health medical records. Any hint of violence or domestic violence immediately disqualifies an applicant for a pistol permit in my county. While I do believe our 2nd Amendment rights are paramount and important, I do believe there needs to be a resonable vetting process to keep firearms out of the hands of violent felons and the mentally unstable.

While I do believe in a responsible vetting process for gun ownership, what I won't ever condone is, what I have come to term, Feel Good Legislation. Feel Good Legislation is gun regulation put together by lawmakers who truly have no idea what gun ownership means. These politicians don't have the slightest clue how to combat gun violence in this country, as evidenced by two Administrations approving and operating Fast and Furious. Let's look at some other Feel Good Legislation, shall we. In NY I can carry my pistol concealed, loaded, and cocked on my person while driving, however, if I'm transporting my AR-15, the ammunition and the weapon must be locked and separated in different compartments. Additionally, in my county a firearm must be paid for in full before I can submit the receipt to the judge for approval. Typically, owners will put a deposit down on the weapon, then pay for the rest when it is to be picked up. Feel Good Legislation usually only serves to irritate gun owners and does NOTHING to prevent gun violence or keeping firearms out of the hands of those who should never possess them. Let's continue...a pistol permit taking 6 months in the process is required for me to obtain a handgun, however, I can walk out of any Gander Mountain with a shot gun or rifle, including semi-automatic shot guns and assault rifles. Makes no sense. I can do way more damage with my M-4 and a few 30 round Pre-ban magazines than I'll ever be able to do with my handgun. Lawmakers believe these regulations will help them solve more crimes. People should really pay attention to this next point. Criminals do not wait 6 months for a handgun before they murder someone or rob a bank. Criminals Do Not use firearms that are registered to themselves! Even criminals are Not that stupid, however, the politicians who believe these "tricks" will help them catch criminals are that stupid. Looking at all the shootings I just recalled in NY, one of the most restrictive gun control states in the U.S., well, how did that work out for them? Not good. Now lawmakers are talking about Microstamping. Again, more Feel Good Legislation that won't do a damn good of keeping felons and criminals from obtaining firearms.

So it's tragic enough that we have these violent incidents involving firearms across the nation leaving tens of people dead. This list of shootings doesn't even scratch the surface of gun violence in the United States, nor does it capture the true number of dead and wounded. Fareed Zakaria wrote an article for August 20th issue of Time Magazine, titled, The Case for Gun Control: Why Limiting Easy Access to Guns is Intelligent and American. Mr. Zakaria describes gun violence in America as...

...off the chart compared with every other country on the planet.

What he fails to detail in this article is that homocides and injuries resulting from blunt and penetrating trauma, in countries like Great Britain and Canada is "off the chart when compared with every other country on the planet."

So the author of this Time article, The Case for Gun Control, reports several laws and politicians that attempted to ban firearms in the early years of this country in several states. While this may or may not be true, Mr. Zakaria loses all credibility as he was suspended by CNN for plagiarizing this information. Sorry Charlie...Busted! Now most anti-gun groups report that the 2nd Amendment was intended for an organized militia and not for the individual. That the Amendment is no longer relevant.

My rebuttal: It seems our Four Fathers had enough sense and direction to place the 2nd Amendment, or the Right to Bear Arms, in the Bill of Rights. Specifically, the Bill of Rights addresses Individual Rights.

The original intent of these first ten Amendments was to restrict Congress from abusing its power

The Second Amendment guarantees the right of adult men to keep their own weapons apart from state-run arsenals. New Hampshire’s proposal for amendment was, "Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion." New York proposed, "... a well regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State." Over time, this amendment has been confirmed by the courts to protect individual rights and used to overturn state legislation regulating handguns.

Mr. Zakaria, it appears you should have a closer look at the Constitution. And learn how to cite your sources.

U.S. Constitution

"Feel Good" legislation is not even about hoping to catch criminals. Its a public display to voters screaming "Hey I care, are I'm tough on crime. Gun control is alot like the way we treat viruses such as the cold. Everyone is always treating the syntoms and never the virus its self. Mental health reform and real prison time for truely violent offenders would go much futher at reducing gun violence than gun control ever will.

I personally would start in places like Chicago where there are more people shot every weekend than in any of these mass shootings, but the MSN dont like to talk about that.

Originally posted by David134
"Feel Good" legislation is not even about hoping to catch criminals. Its a public display to voters screaming "Hey I care, are I'm tough on crime. Gun control is alot like the way we treat viruses such as the cold. Everyone is always treating the syntoms and never the virus its self. Mental health reform and real prison time for truely violent offenders would go much futher at reducing gun violence than gun control ever will...

You're right, 100% right. But by fixing the problem these politicians would have nothing to divide the country with. Nothing to win them votes. Nothing to divide the public with. They're not really interested in real reform. Great analogy by the way. I really like that comparison.

Holy cow, there's a gun rights advocate still living in New York who dares speak up? I grew up in NY state as well, and I am old enough to remember a time when open carry was legal. Our neighbor used to carry this giant revolver with about a 12" barrel tied to his leg.

You're absolutely right - everything you said. The problem with New York is that New York City dictates the political leanings of the rest of the state. Basically, if you live north of White Plains, you have NO say whatsoever in the outcome of any state or national elections in New York State. It's the same situation in many other states that have big cities - look at California.

"Feelgood Legislation" as you and many others call it serves one purpose - to get votes. So the liberals can keep their power. They pass these useless, stupid laws and get all kinds of press so that the liberal sheep who vote for them can feel like their representative is "doing something" about all the gun crime that the liberal media loves to exaggerate. The net result is exactly as you describe. It only serves to disarm citizens and empower criminals.

Carry on, my friend.

I have the opportunity to take a CCW class in the next couple of weeks. My angst is caused by my feeling that if I apply for a CCW, I am ceding my right to bear arms. By filing, I admit that I must be regulated. I do not agree with that statement at all, and am not sure if a I will take the CCW class.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I have the opportunity to take a CCW class in the next couple of weeks. My angst is caused by my feeling that if I apply for a CCW, I am ceding my right to bear arms. By filing, I admit that I must be regulated. I do not agree with that statement at all, and am not sure if a I will take the CCW class.

I went through the same internal debate for years before I got mine. I had a lot of trouble coming to grips with asking the state for permission to be able to effectively protect myself, my family and, by extension, my community.

It didn't matter that I felt that I had the moral high ground in carrying without permission. It didn't matter that I was well within the Founders intentions when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. What finally convinced me was that I would do myself, my family and my community no good at all if I was sitting in jail on a concealed weapons charge.

I hope that helps.

reply to post by Doc Gator



well, i won't carry a gun in public. but i do keep a .40 in my truck. so many places disallowed concealed carry that it makes it hard to even effectively carry an arm into places where people are, and do so legally.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Doc Gator

 

well, i won't carry a gun in public. but i do keep a .40 in my truck. so many places disallowed concealed carry that it makes it hard to even effectively carry an arm into places where people are, and do so legally.

Are those areas disallowed by law or merchants putting up "no concealed carry" signs? If it's the latter, that is a request, not a law. At that point, it would be up to you to honor that request or not. Assuming that you want to spend your money in an establishment that doesn't want you in there.

I live in Georgia and there are very few places here that we can not legally carry in. And, outside of Atlanta, it is very rare to see the "no concealed carry" signs.

Are those areas disallowed by law or merchants putting up "no concealed carry" signs? If it's the latter, that is a request, not a law.

In Texas, it is a law. The sign has to have very specific wording though.

The best way to deter all form of crime? Proliferation of small arms and training. Might get a little crazy for the first few months, but i think it would settle into a great atmosphere.

Originally posted by roadgravel

Are those areas disallowed by law or merchants putting up "no concealed carry" signs? If it's the latter, that is a request, not a law.

In Texas, it is a law. The sign has to have very specific wording though.

I just looked it up and you are 100% correct. I am very surprised by that, actually. That is the first time that I have seen a merchant prohibition with the backing of law. Is it being used as a backhanded way of restricting concealed carry?

I think it allows for someone to have their property as a gun free zone, just as a person can have guns on their property. Seems reasonable. If a person doesn't like the idea of being unarmed at that place, visit, shop, whatever, some where else.

How often is any gun store robbed? I doubt if the successful count is greater than one.

Originally posted by roadgravel
I think it allows for someone to have their property as a gun free zone, just as a person can have guns on their property. Seems reasonable. If a person doesn't like the idea of being unarmed at that place, visit, shop, whatever, some where else.

I understand that and agree. What I'm asking is if this is being pushed by political groups or other organizations in order to hinder concealed carry? Or are individual merchants making the decision based on their own beliefs? I'm just curious how much (if any) pressure is being applied to the merchants.

I do not think politics and agenda is involved.

Some companies tried to prevent employees from keeping weapons in their vehicles in company parking lots. The state passed legislation that made it legal to do so. Otherwise a person could not reasonably have a weapon as they traveled to work.

Laws were also changed concerning the carrying pistols in vehicles without CH permit.

Then this

Previous legislation (H.B. 823) enacted in the 2005 session of the Legislature had modified TPC 46.15 ("Non-Applicability") to include the "traveller assumption"; a law enforcement officer who encounters a firearm in a vehicle was required to presume that the driver of that vehicle was "travelling" and thus the Unlawful Carry statute did not apply, absent evidence that the person was engaged in criminal activity, a member of a gang, or prohibited from possessing a firearm.

However, attorneys and law enforcement officials in several municipalities including DA Chuck Rosenthal of Houston stated that they would continue to prosecute individuals found transporting firearms in their vehicles despite this presumption, leading to the more forceful statement of non-applicability in the 2007 H.B. 1815.

So there isn't, IMO, a lobby gaining ground to restrict firearms,

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Wow, I don't remember why open carry was legal in NY! Yeah, there are a few of us around still.

...So the liberals can keep their power. They pass these useless, stupid laws and get all kinds of press so that the liberal sheep who vote for them can feel like their representative is "doing something" about all the gun crime that the liberal media loves to exaggerate. The net result is exactly as you describe. It only serves to disarm citizens and empower criminals...

This sums it up 100%. I had to laugh the other day the governor was talking about how microstamping will help them solve more crimes. Laughable. Pretty soon the other people armed will be the criminals and we'll be arming ourselves with baseball bats.

Originally posted by Doc Gator

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Doc Gator

 

well, i won't carry a gun in public. but i do keep a .40 in my truck. so many places disallowed concealed carry that it makes it hard to even effectively carry an arm into places where people are, and do so legally.

Are those areas disallowed by law or merchants putting up "no concealed carry" signs? If it's the latter, that is a request, not a law. At that point, it would be up to you to honor that request or not. Assuming that you want to spend your money in an establishment that doesn't want you in there.

I live in Georgia and there are very few places here that we can not legally carry in. And, outside of Atlanta, it is very rare to see the "no concealed carry" signs.

Generally the 'no carry zones" are instituted by corporations with few ties to the area. They have a corporate policy and they follow it regardless of location (yeah, i am looking at your Wal Mart).

I may be incorrect, but there is criminality in Texas with carrying a concealed gun where it is posted that you cannot. I have never worried about it because in my truck, I can be as armed as I like. And in public, if my size/strength doesn't do the trick, my Spyderco or Benchmade will.

Originally posted by roadgravel
How often is any gun store robbed? I doubt if the successful count is greater than one.

In most gun stores I have found the store clerks open carry. In NY, open carry is illegal, so I'm wondering how is it legal for them to open carry? I would certainly want to open carry if I owned or worked in a gun shop. I wonder if Castle Doctrine applies to a store or shop?

The intention of this thread was to bring to light the fact that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, as included in the Bill of Rights. The opposition states the intention of the 2nd Amendment was for militias only, not the individual, but that is not historically correct. That is a lie.

reply to post by Cosmic911

In Texas, a person can open carry a weapon on their premise (property, business). In a vehicle it must be concealed.

CHPs must carry concealed.