I do not own a gun, I'm actually looking to find out what the people on this forum feel about the 2 gentleman in this article that was printed in my hometown paper.
Link Removed
Read it and let me know if you feel about the situation.
I have a CPL and consistently carry concealed when and were legal.
Sometimes I get tired of large baggy clothing and just put the Glock on and go about my business. There are many reasons to get a CPL
I consider CPL holders part of the solution, not the problem.
Every LEO I have discussed open carry with has acknowledged they know it's legal.
I read stories about LEO's using anything else to cause people open carrying problems. You need to be squeaky clean. A good one is tinted windows in your car, expensive and points. Respectfulness politeness and a cooperative attitude go a long way with every LEO I have ever met. Golden Rule: It's difficult to treat a person that is polite, respectful and cooperative poorly.
I do not own a gun, I'm actually looking to find out what the people on this forum feel about the 2 gentleman in this article that was printed in my hometown paper.
Link Removed
Read it and let me know if you feel about the situation.
That's the problem: they give the state a carte blanche to DECIDE when and where it's legal.
Unless you CAN'T get one, for reasons that are entirely arbitrary on the part of the legislature-- which says that one person't life is NOT equal to another's.
No, they're part of the problem, because democracy MUST be based on the premise that all men are created equal. By turning basic rights into elite privilege, then CPL-holders are no longer equal, and thus society is no longer democratic-- i.e. these CPL-holders enjoy SPECIAL rights and privileges over others, and so they don't care about basic riights anymore,and won't fight for them; in fact, they will tend to ejoy their unfair advantage, and fight to KEEP it that way.
By refusing CPL licenses at whim, lawmakers turn democracy into elite aritocracy.
CPL-laws are NOT legal, since they violate the 2nd, 4th and 9th amendments concerning the right of the people to be scure in bearing arms on their persons without public scrutiny-- as well as the 10th Amendment regarding state-powers that are prohibted by the Constitution.
if you're a SLAVE-- which you ARE, if it makes any difference beyond the amount of cooperation required by law.
This is the clear pattern I mentioned above, when rights devolve into elite privilege: i.e. the trembling lackey blames the victim, having sold out his rights for elite privilege; and he thinks it can't happen to him, as long as he's a good little boy.
As Ben Franklin said, "trading liberty for securtiy, costs you both and gets you neither.
Wrong.... So in analogy people that get drivers or pilots licenses have "Special Elite Privileges"? .
NON-SEQUITUR analogy. Those licenses are issued to people who have demonstrated a required level of skill at what they're doing-- here, we're talking about concealing a firearm, what's so skillful about that? We've already established that open-carry is legal in Michigan, so why not CONCEALED carry? The only answer: HARASSMENT.
Likewise, they don't DENY driver's and pilot's licenses to people, based on arbitrary stigmas and public medieval hysteria which have NOTHING to do with their ability to drive or fly-- like they do with CPL's.
Finally, I don't see anything in the Constitution about "the RIGHT of the people to drive motor-vehicles on public roads."
You're comparing apples and atom-bombs, I won't take up that fool's argument.
No skill hummm... So either you choose for personal reasons not to have a CC or have some issue in your past that disallows you from being issued one....
Hence you place blame on those that take the time to spend the time, money, take the training, and in some cases additional training the gain the skill sets needed to obtain and maintain their permit....
Just as with any permit if you mess up you will be denied, and a Drivers license (or Pilots for that matter) is no different, mess up, become a felon and you loose your gun rights... Not a US citizen, DUI, or multiple other criminal acts, no DL for you.....
As to being able to drive a vehicle in public not being a right, just for giggles look up the laws WRT interstate commerce, and you will find a group that is of very similar issue but their point is with government issued licenses to drive a vehicle. They strongly feel that it is indeed a right and will post a very similar argument should you disagree
The STATE disallows people from it. It has NOTHING TO DO with anything in anyone's past.
Get a load of this.
This shows the arrogance of the CPL-law, i.e. it makes CPL-recipients feel superior for earning a privilege, when it's actually a RIGHT.
And he thinks it takes time, money, and training, simply to CONCEAL something?
Ok: the ONLY difference between CPL and open-carry, is CONCEALING it. Is that REALLY so hard to understand?
Does he NOT REALIZE that Open-carry is legal in Michigan? Or can't he even READ the title of the thread he's posting in?
Yep-- there we have it, folks-- dummies get CPL's, but rational people get barred.
And so, we see the subtle hand of dictatorship at work.
J
Now he's the CPL-Nazi: "NO CPL FOR YOU!"
He still doesn't even realize the principle at work: that we're talking about a RIGHT, here... and yet he thinks that it can be justifiably subjected to arbitrary whim and caprice of the state.
It just doesn't register with his kind, what kind of FIRE he's playing with-- his opinion is just as I said: that CPL-holders are superior, and that everyone else is a 2nd-class citizen.
THIS is why CPL holders are the problem-- they blame the victim rather than the state, and feel that they DESERVE their elite privileges to carry concealed weapons while others are forced to open-carry.
THIS is the elitist-mindset at work: it compromises equality, by giving elite privilege to some, and turning the rest into second-class citizens.
Look how he BRAGS about how he supposedly EARNED the privilege by "taking the time, money, training" etc-- while totally dishing those who are DENIED it, calling them "mess-ups."
Such arrogance is always how the dictators divide and conquer the people, by making the elite faction feel superior to the oppressed... and clearly, they start with the less intelligent members who can't figure it out:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
--Franklin H. Littell
And now, for the grand finale of irrationalism, he compares an fringe-group opinion, with plainly written and guaranteed RIGHTS in the state and federal Constitutions, as well as established state and federal LAW.
This is why I don't take up a fool's argument: only a fool would.
yes any moron can CC but not legally
Obviously, my point stands; the idiot ADMITS that he blames the victim, validates the state, and exalts himself as having EARNED something which is expressly stated as a RIGHT in the Constitution.
Again, I won't take up a fool's argument-- and every word proves him to be a fool indeed. And since there's no fool like an old fool, from his talk then he must be 100.
And his best line of all?
Again, note the thread-title: "open carry legal in Michigan". So he's claiming that simply CONCEALING a carried gun, takes some special skill that should require making it illegal without a permit.
And he calls OTHERS "morons..." irony of ironies.
This, people, is the mentality behind CCW laws. I guess he thinks the Jews in the Holocaust weren't "politically active" enough either... fools never learn.
Sheldon,
You are correct about the evolution of our gun rights in Michigan. I remember appearing before the Oakland County Licensing Board attempting to get a Non-Restricted CCW. Nothing in my history disqualified me for that permit, however I'm sure you know the results. I received a permit for "hunting and target". In those days you needed that permit to legally remove the gun from your house to go hunting or to the range.
Mr. Anderson,
I have taken a little time to respond to your insults. I think a little more Michigan history is in order.
Prior to the passage of MCL 123.1102, Michigan Firearm Laws Preemption Act, in 1990 every local unit of Govt. had the right to create any firearm laws they wanted. Open Carry was a guarantied trip to prison, CCW's were impossible to get if you were not politically connected.
During the 80's the City of Ferndale would only process "Applications to Purchase a Pistol" about 2 hours per week. Every city had it's own rules.
Until the A.G. Opinion from Jennifer M. Granholm in February of 2002 that carrying a firearm open in a holster was not "brandishing a firearm in public" That was just another trip to jail for the brave attempting to OC.
The point about Florida changing the laws to "shall issue" opened the door. They issued 100k permits and nothing bad occurred. Concealed carry in Florida had a dramatic effect on crime. Criminals started picking on those they knew would not be armed, remember all the tourists being carjacked and shot leaving the airport in rental cars. This was occurring so often that laws were passed prohibiting any markings on rental cars rented in Florida. The next time you rent a car in Florida look for the labels, they don't exist.
The Politicians that passed Florida's new laws understood what was at stake. They didn't just pass a law allowing anybody to CC. They established reasonable restrictions in an attempt to avoid an occurrence that would have doomed the movement for many years.
You seem to have a problem with people that followed the process to get a CPL. Describing CPL holders as part of the problem is ridiculous. Does it sound like the CPL holders on this site don't take the responsibility of carrying a firearm seriously? Most of us are aware of the political consequences of our actions and how we represent our cause. It is this responsibility that continues to provide ammunition for the continued loosening of the firearm laws that violate our rights of self defense.
I think an endorsement on our DL would serve the same purpose. All a CPL represents is you are not disqualified from legally CC a firearm. Just think about what a hassle an LEO encounter could be without the CPL process. How about LEO's performing back round check while you wait on the side of the road.
I don't know and don't care about the reasons you don't get a CPL. The restrictions generally follow the same restrictions for the purchase of firearms. In my eyes those restrictions don't seem unreasonable. If you think they should be different then become politically involved. We live in a society that all opinions count, not just ours.
Your rants don't change anybodies mind.
SS~Gold, Good post. I got my 6 Gun in '89 and had to watch what, where I was. Mich is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like this, MGO, MCRGO Let Lansing (Or what ever other state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are...
Happy Fathers Day all
Sheldon,
You are correct about the evolution of our gun rights in Michigan. I remember appearing before the Oakland County Licensing Board attempting to get a Non-Restricted CCW. Nothing in my history disqualified me for that permit, however I'm sure you know the results. I received a permit for "hunting and target". In those days you needed that permit to legally remove the gun from your house to go hunting or to the range.
Mr. Anderson,
I have taken a little time to respond to your insults.
I think a little more Michigan history is in order.
Prior to the passage of MCL 123.1102, Michigan Firearm Laws Preemption Act, in 1990 every local unit of Govt. had the right to create any firearm laws they wanted.
Open Carry was a guarantied trip to prison, CCW's were impossible to get if you were not politically connected.
You seem to have a problem with people that followed the process to get a CPL.
Describing CPL holders as part of the problem is ridiculous. Does it sound like the CPL holders on this site don't take the responsibility of carrying a firearm seriously?
Your rants don't change anybodies mind.
SS~Gold, Good post. I got my 6 Gun in '89 and had to watch what, where I was. Mich is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like this, MGO, MCRGO Let Lansing (Or what ever other state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are...
Happy Fathers Day all
BradA - I've read your rant through this thread.
I understand you feel the Constitution codifies your right to carry.
I even agree with you on that point. However, in the reality of today's world the state and Federal Supreme Courts are currently allowing gun laws such as the requirement for a permit to CCW to stand.
I hope that your discussions with the Anti-gun crowd is more rational and less insulting than what you've posted here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?