Kansas Concealed Weapons Bill
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 31, 2024, 06:55:31 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Kansas Concealed Weapons Bill
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Poll
Question: Do you support the right of law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons on their persons?
#1
Democrat -Yes
 
#2
Democrat -No
 
#3
Republican -Yes
 
#4
Republican -No
 
#5
independent/third party -Yes
 
#6
independent/third party -No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 37

Author Topic: Kansas Concealed Weapons Bill  (Read 13086 times)
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2006, 06:06:35 PM »


The second amendment does not cover "how" arms can be kept.  Even ignoring the first half of the sentence (which is completely relevent to the discussion), it says the right cannot be infringed, which means denied.  That does not mean the government cannot place limits on how the arms, or what kind of arms, can be kept.  So, to say concealed weapons is protected under the second amendment is inaccurate.
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2006, 06:28:12 PM »

The second amendment does not cover "how" arms can be kept.
The First Amendment does not explicitly cover "how" the freedom of speech can be exercised. But if someone wishes to write a book, can the government tell him that he must make a speech instead? Under your theory, the government would not be regulating the right to freedom of speech itself, but only "how" that right is exercised.

But I doubt that any court of law would agree that the government can force someone to make a speech instead of writing a book. Why? Because when the Constitution states that an individual possesses a substantive right, it implies the individual possesses the authority to determine how that right shall be exercised. The First Amendment guarantees not only the right to freedom of speech, but also the right to determine the manner in which speech shall be made; likewise, the Second Amendment guarantees not only the right to bear arms, but also the right to determine the manner in which arms shall be borne.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
To quote from the decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Bliss v. Commonwealth:

"[T]o be in conflict with the constitution, it is not essential that the act should contain a prohibition against bearing arms in every possible form--it is the right to bear arms ... that is secured ... and whatever restrains the full and complete exercise of that right, though not an entire destruction of it, is forbidden."
Logged
Nation
of_thisnation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,555
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: May 10, 2006, 11:13:53 PM »

Yes (D)
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: May 10, 2006, 11:15:59 PM »


That does not mean the government cannot place limits on how the arms, or what kind of arms, can be kept.  So, to say concealed weapons is protected under the second amendment is inaccurate.

Especially true since it mentions a well-regulated militia.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: May 11, 2006, 12:13:49 AM »


That does not mean the government cannot place limits on how the arms, or what kind of arms, can be kept.  So, to say concealed weapons is protected under the second amendment is inaccurate.

Especially true since it mentions a well-regulated militia.

Well, if the people of the states were really allowed to have a well regulated militia then individuals would be allowed to start their own military regiments comprised of civilians. Much like before the Civil War regiments were formed from gentlemen in hunting clubs, fire stations, and the like. I doubt the govt will ever let that happen again because it's to much of a threat to their retention of power.
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,596


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: May 11, 2006, 04:34:36 AM »

I support concealed carry.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.215 seconds with 13 queries.