SD Governor vetoes Constitutional carry bill

[parashootman]

Please show me where it says anything about permits or where, when and what type firearm you can or can't carry in the 2A? Isn't it clear enough! Ware's the "GRAY AREA"?

 

[knownalien]

Please show me where it says anything about permits or where, when and what type firearm you can or can't carry in the 2A? Isn't it clear enough! Ware's the "GRAY AREA"?

oh it's in there. you just have to use a real tiny but strong magnifying glass to see it.

 

[Nubz]

Very well said alucard0822

I also see a few posts(I won't mention names) that make me think a few of us like the idea of a permit so they can be one of the "cool kids with the better toys" group

 

[Zaicran]

Do you truly believe that a permit system keeps prohibited persons from carrying guns? If it doesn't, why support such a system?

Good point..so.

What would you propose instead of a permit system?

 

[Zaicran]

I was actually on the fence and could see both sides.

I'm still on the fence "sort of" , but I made my line in the sand on the Governors decision early on...

Some great points and counter points being made here.

 

[CAS_Shooter]

It's easy for us to be over zealous in support of 2A...there is nothing wrong with denying permits for criminals and mentally ill and those predisposed to violence.

I think you might've missed this point. I think he saying that the permit process in general build a false premise. We have seen in maryland that even with one of the most strict permitting process is the country, crazy people and the criminals still have guns. Denying a permit to crazy people and criminals does not keep them from having guns. Constitutional carry doesn't put any more guns in the hands of criminals than a strict permit process does. So the point is, why not just do away with permitting and have constitutional carry. I will admit that that's a rhetorical question because I understand why we have permit laws. we have permit laws to build a false sense of security for those that think permit laws keeps guns out of the hands of criminals.

 

[teratos]

Neither..I want to be distinguished seperately from a criminal...because we both know crminals will still obtain and carry illegally....

I mean really...how many gun related violent crime is commited by a permit holder? I bet that percentage is incredibly small.

By the way...I also believe my permit is granted by default due to existence of the 2A...but would you agree that certain people in society have no business even owning, let alone carrying into public a deadly weapon?

I agree that certain people in society should not own weapons. We already have laws in place for that, though I can't say I agree that every disqualifying crime should be a disqualifying crime. Because this is a fundamental right, what prohibits you from exercising that right should be very narrowly defined. If you believe your permit is granted by default, you have already negated your prior assertion that a permit is needed.

According to some in this thread...there isnt anyone "legally" prohibited...

And you said it for me: A permit holder is going to be a law abiding citizen.

A case study..while legally permitted to CC in California mid-90's...I was pulled over twice for speeding on 15 north near Lake Elsinore...and both times as soon as i declared, the state troopers suspicion of me relaxed, his attitude changed and I was let go with a verbal.
I believe the "shall carry" process which, most states have, is fair and strikes a fair balance between public safety and our 2A right.

A permit holder is generally a law-abiding citizen. This is true. People who are out to commit mass murder or armed robbery don't give much thought to what the gun laws are. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO GIVE ANY CONSIDERATION TO GETTING PERMITS ARE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS. I would make the assertion that most people who commit gun crimes are prohibited persons. How does a permit, or lack thereof, influence them in ANY way?

Good point..so.

What would you propose instead of a permit system?

Constitutional carry with life in prison or execution for any prohibited person who is in possession of a firearm.

 

[Pushrod]

Good point..so.

What would you propose instead of a permit system?

Look at the four states that presently have permitless Constitutional Carry on their books. They have already proven your concerns foundless. Why would you want to give the government any control over a Constitutional Right? By requiring permits, that right has now become a privilege instead of a Right.

 

[hvymax]

I'm still on the fence "sort of" , but I made my line in the sand on the Governors decision early on...

Some great points and counter points being made here.

A man that straddles the fence soon gets a sore crotch.(Loyd Bridges I believe)

 

[Zaicran]

I think you might've missed this point. I think he saying that the permit process in general build a false premise. We have seen in maryland that even with one of the most strict permitting process is the country, crazy people and the criminals still have guns. Denying a permit to crazy people and criminals does not keep them from having guns. Constitutional carry doesn't put any more guns in the hands of criminals than a strict permit process does. So the point is, why not just do away with permitting and have constitutional carry. I will admit that that's a rhetorical question because I understand why we have permit laws. we have permit laws to build a false sense of security for those that think permit laws keeps guns out of the hands of criminals.

Well put and you make a compelling argument...let me digest that for a while...

I also appreciate you not making your point with a veiled insult...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Walter]

Good point..so.

What would you propose instead of a permit system?

Well I'd say that there's no need for a carry permit system. Quite simply: if you're legally allowed to purchase the gun, then you should be able to carry it without a permit.

Criminals are prohibited from legally possessing and purchasing firearms, yet they still own guns. Its also illegal for them to rob and murder, yet they steal and kill. If they aren't dissuaded by laws that make it illegal for them to own guns, steal and kill, then they will equally disregard a law that says they need a permit to carry a gun.

 

[MDFF2008]

Vermont has a simple standard.

If you are legally able to own a gun, you may carry it except were forbidden by statute.

Vermont doesn't even have a system to issue permits, because if you are disqualified from owning a gun, everything else is a branch off that tree.

If they were carrying and a prohibited person, they would go down for having the gun.

After all, we know that criminals are actually EXEMPTED from gun registration and carry permits by the Supreme Court case US vs Haynes (1968.)

A criminal cannot be compelled to register a gun or apply for a permit to carry, because they would have to admit illegally owning the gun, which would violate the self incrimination clause of the Constitution.

 

[MJD438]

Vermont has a simple standard.

If you are legally able to own a gun, you may carry it except were forbidden by statute.

Vermont doesn't even have a system to issue permits, because if you are disqualified from owning a gun, everything else is a branch off that tree.

If they were carrying and a prohibited person, they would go down for having the gun.

After all, we know that criminals are actually EXEMPTED from gun registration and carry permits by the Supreme Court case US vs Haynes (1968.)

A criminal cannot be compelled to register a gun or apply for a permit to carry, because they would have to admit illegally owning the gun, which would violate the self incrimination clause of the Constitution.

Always loved that spin - 5A is treated as important for criminals, but 2A does not mean what it says for the law-abiding citizenry...

 

[Zaicran]

A man that straddles the fence soon gets a sore crotch.(Loyd Bridges I believe)

Agree..and I have reconsidered based on what I am reading here...

Here's an update on my position:

The very existence of 2A is my permit...and a permit system does nothing to prevent crime..all it does is infringe/interfere with my constitutional right to carry and places an undue burden on my inalienable right to self defense.



Is this an acceptable position? No longer on the fence?

 

[MDFF2008]

Pretty much, since we know criminals will carry regardless.

But that needs to be what you believe; not just saying.

It took me a while to think about it to really process it.

 

[Zaicran]

Pretty much, since we know criminals will carry regardless.

But that needs to be what you believe; not just saying.

It took me a while to think about it to really process it.

Yeah, took me most of the day but I am comfortable with that position.

 

[randian]

Looks like SD got suckered by a bunch of double-dealing liars. The vote to pass: a veto-proof 50-18. The vote to override the veto: 27-40. Almost 1/3 of the House changed their vote from Yes to No.

 

[Walter]

Yeah, took me most of the day but I am comfortable with that position.

Yea.. takes a while to sink in.

But now that you've come to your new realization, just make sure to take it easy when conversing with people neutral or on the fence about carrying guns. Like I told a guy on here a while back: you can go around Constitution-thumping all you want - yelling at the top of your lungs that the 2A is your carry permit - but that's not going to win people over to our side. It might even hurt us, as they'll probably just see us as crazy. So when dealing with neutrals/fencesitters, I'll go along with the permit idea because I know it helps them feel more at ease and more willing to accept the idea of law abiding citizens carrying guns.

It's all baby steps.. today Shall Issue, tomorrow Constitutional Carry.

 

[iSHOOT]

Wouldn't it be wild to have a completely federal standard instead of all these states making their own up? almost like a right that the government couldn't infringe upon? maybe we could even make it an amendment one day so everything is nice and official...

 

[Zaicran]

Yea.. takes a while to sink in.

But now that you've come to your new realization, just make sure to take it easy when conversing with people neutral or on the fence about carrying guns. Like I told a guy on here a while back: you can go around Constitution-thumping all you want - yelling at the top of your lungs that the 2A is your carry permit - but that's not going to win people over to our side. It might even hurt us, as they'll probably just see us as crazy. So when dealing with neutrals/fencesitters, I'll go along with the permit idea because I know it helps them feel more at ease and more willing to accept the idea of law abiding citizens carrying guns.

It's all baby steps.. today Shall Issue, tomorrow Constitutional Carry.

Well said