Should people be required to know concealed carry laws before getting a permit?

[NavyLCDR]

None. Since every concealed carry law - except committing an otherwise criminal act using the gun - is an infringement on the 2nd Amendment. It should be enough to make it illegal to commit robbery, rape, murder, etc. It should never be illegal to simply carry a gun.

Only in your imagination.

What you probably meant to say is that you wished it was that way...but my question was directed at reality as it presently exists.

I answered the question EXACTLY as you asked it. I said exactly what I meant. You didn't ask what IS the punishment for intentionally violating a concealed carry law. What you asked was:

And if caught intentionally breaking a concealed carry law, what should be the punishment?

The punishment SHOULD be none. Entirely different question and answer than what IS the punishment or what WILL the punishment be. And the punishment CAN be none - every heard of Jury Nullification?

Jury Nullification: History, questions and answers about nullification, links

Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty" despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. The jury in effect nullifies a law that it believes is either immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant whose fate they are charged with deciding.

Nice try nogods - you didn't get the answer you wanted so you tried to claim that you didn't ask the question that was answered.

 

[RJT CCW]

Responsibility is the key word. We have a responsibility to follow the law. When was the last time you read a drivers license manual? I know it has been years for me. Do you know all the traffic laws OP, it is your responsibility of course. No different for concealed carry laws. You have to take the responsibility to know the laws and if you do not you pay the price.

 

[SR9]

Absolutely, people should go through not only a NRA approved course, but be very aware of the laws, not only in their home state, but in any state around em or that they may go to. In the spring I went half way across the US and back and took a copy of each states CCW permit and gun laws with me for quick reference. Compiled them all in a folder and stuck them down in a place handy from my drivers seat. I just heard yesterday about a female military that was arrested in New York (bah) for asking at a info desk at the 911 Memorial if she could check her 2 pistols, ( she had a CCW permit from her home state) but New York (bah, pew) doesn't recognize other states carry permit. This could ruin her military career. How stupid is NY. If the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 was in effect, she would have been Legal.

 

[Firefighterchen]

I read the law so I don't break it ignorantly...but if the law is unjust or immoral, I have an obligation to not follow it.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[nogods]

Absolutely, people should go through not only a NRA approved course, but be very aware of the laws, not only in their home state, but in any state around em or that they may go to. In the spring I went half way across the US and back and took a copy of each states CCW permit and gun laws with me for quick reference. Compiled them all in a folder and stuck them down in a place handy from my drivers seat. I just heard yesterday about a female military that was arrested in New York (bah) for asking at a info desk at the 911 Memorial if she could check her 2 pistols, ( she had a CCW permit from her home state) but New York (bah, pew) doesn't recognize other states carry permit. This could ruin her military career. How stupid is NY. If the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 was in effect, she would have been Legal.

If the CCCRA of 2015 was in effect would she be able to carry while in New York State in all the places she would otherwise be prohibited from carrying in her home state of Texas? And would a NYS permitee be able to carry in Texas in all the places otherwise not allowed in Texas but not prohibited in NYS?

 

[Axeanda45]

All these posters claiming "carriers" should obey the "laws" about carrying are actually proving they are AGAINST the 2nd Amendment...... They are actually WORSE than those in the brady camp and all the other anti-gunner hoplophobes because they think they are helping the "RIGHT" to bear arms when in reality, they are advocating the ACTUAL INFRINGING of it......


Sad that they are so ignorant of this FACT........

 

[nogods]

All these posters claiming "carriers" should obey the "laws" about carrying are actually proving they are AGAINST the 2nd Amendment...... They are actually WORSE than those in the brady camp and all the other anti-gunner hoplophobes because they think they are helping the "RIGHT" to bear arms when in reality, they are advocating the ACTUAL INFRINGING of it......


Sad that they are so ignorant of this FACT........

As of today, EST 8:24 pm, the 2A does not require that states allow concealed carry.

You could probably help the cause by getting caught carrying concealed someplace it is not allowed, then taking it all the way to the SCOTUS if necessary to prove your opinion is correct.

Or you just stay home and big talk on the net.

 

[Axeanda45]

As of today, EST 8:24 pm, the 2A does not require that states allow concealed carry.

You could probably help the cause by getting caught carrying concealed someplace it is not allowed, then taking it all the way to the SCOTUS if necessary to prove your opinion is correct.

Or you just stay home and big talk on the net.

Actually, I dont have to prove a thing.... The constitution applies to the ENTIRE government, Local, county, state, AND federal.... Anyone who knows a solitary thing about RIGHTS and the Constitution already know this... Whats YOUR EXCUSE MR LAWYER???? Too long at bending the "laws" to prove cases in court to remember the extreme basics anymore?

And WITF makes you think I would EVER have to go to court about it????? Project your fears much? Man up and grow a pair, and STOP thinking others are ******* like yourself...

 

[Axeanda45]

The 2nd Amendment is 100% very plainly written in ENGLISH.... and NOTHING IN IT AT ALL ALLOWS ANY "law" THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW A PERSON CHOOSES TO BEAR THOSE ARMS...........

 

[NavyLCDR]

If the CCCRA of 2015 was in effect

it would still be against Federal law to carry a loaded gun within 1000' of school premises in any state that did not do a background check on her and issue a license to her.

 

[nogods]

The 2nd Amendment is 100% very plainly written in ENGLISH.... and NOTHING IN IT AT ALL ALLOWS ANY "law" THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW A PERSON CHOOSES TO BEAR THOSE ARMS...........

Then you sir, don't understand English, or for that matter, you don't understand language of which English is but a subset.

Words and phrases in our Constitution don't have a any omnipresent and detached meanings.

And you are not the person the founders chose to determine the definitions and meanings of phrases like "infringed" and "the right to bear arms", both of which need meaning and context before they can be applied.

Thankfully our founders were men of intellect, not spewers of child-like rants.

Up to today, the system created and envision by our founders has determined that "the right to bear arms" does not mean "the right to carry any firearm, anywhere, at anytime by anyone."

I get that you hate not being the one who determines what "we the people" decide are the meaning of the words and phrases in our Constitution, but that is exactly what the founders anticipated and the reason we have jails for for people who think they are a law unto them selves.

 

[Axeanda45]

Then you sir, don't understand English, or for that matter, you don't understand language of which English is but a subset.

Words and phrases in our Constitution don't have a any omnipresent and detached meanings.

And you are not the person the founders chose to determine the definitions and meanings of phrases like "infringed" and "the right to bear arms", both of which need meaning and context before they can be applied.

Thankfully our founders were men of intellect, not spewers of child-like rants.

Up to today, the system created and envision by our founders has determined that "the right to bear arms" does not mean "the right to carry any firearm, anywhere, at anytime by anyone."

I get that you hate not being the one who determines what "we the people" decide are the meaning of the words and phrases in our Constitution, but that is exactly what the founders anticipated and the reason we have jails for for people who think they are a law unto them selves.

Actually, WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO DETERMINE WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS AND MEANS BY THE VERY SIMPLE LANGUAGE IT IS WRITTEN IN AND THE ACTUAL WORDS USED...... Since you cannot even fathom that simple fact and are advocating the opposite proves you havent a solitary clue.... EVERYTHING you wrote in the quoted post above is wrong, you are a perfect example of a STATIST..... Look it up...

BTW.... "the right to bear arms" DOES, 100% mean "the right to carry any firearm, anywhere, at anytime by anyone." With very few exceptions.... like prisoners have no 2nd amendment rights while incarcerated.....

 

[whiskycut]

Permits are a source of income for the local sheriff in my state. That's all, he asked me two questions, do you vote in this county, do you have 20 dollars. So I need a permit to have 2nd. Amendment rights,glad I don't need a permit to buy a newspaper.

 

[silent.surface]

So, in Theory, does the Government have the right to restrict ANYONES ability to own and carry a weapon? Convicted felons? The mentally ill? Anyone?
I agree that the founding fathers intent was that Citizens have the right to be as well armed as the Government over them.

Sent from my bunker: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are... I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
~President Ronald Reagan~

 

[TroutKing]

Then you sir, don't understand English, or for that matter, you don't understand language of which English is but a subset.

And you are not the person the founders chose to determine the definitions and meanings of phrases like "infringed" and "the right to bear arms", both of which need meaning and context before they can be applied.

He is exactly the person our founders intended to determine such things. People have been trying to define "right to bear arms" for a very long time. People just like you, me and Axe. Just as his right may not be denied, his opinion may not be stifled.

 

[Stengun]

Howdy,

Then you sir, don't understand English, or for that matter, you don't understand language of which English is but a subset.

Words and phrases in our Constitution don't have a any omnipresent and detached meanings.

And you are not the person the founders chose to determine the definitions and meanings of phrases like "infringed" and "the right to bear arms", both of which need meaning and context before they can be applied.

Thankfully our founders were men of intellect, not spewers of child-like rants.

Up to today, the system created and envision by our founders has determined that "the right to bear arms" does not mean "the right to carry any firearm, anywhere, at anytime by anyone."

I get that you hate not being the one who determines what "we the people" decide are the meaning of the words and phrases in our Constitution, but that is exactly what the founders anticipated and the reason we have jails for for people who think they are a law unto them selves.

I didn't read all 4 pages of this thread but I will agree with nogods post.

Since every one was to "quote" the USC, just remember the Bill of Rights are there to protect Us from the Federal Gov't not Our State Gov't.

Also any power that isn't restricted or reserved to the Fed. Gov't is passed on to the States.

This is what gives the State(s) to enact their own laws.

Sometimes these laws are deemed unconstitutional by the USSC and the State(s) must void out this law, gay marriage is an example.

Anywho........:

Back to the OP's question:

I carry a gun and an iPhone on my person at all times except when at work or at home.

On my iPhone I have an icon that linked to Arkansas' CCW and various weapons laws. I have studied and studied these laws and regulations and am pretty confident in my knowledge of my State's firearm and CCW laws and regulations.

About twice a week someone will tell me something about Our laws and usually I will say to myself "WTF!?!? Where do they come up with this kooky BS.

One man tried to tell me that you did NOT have to inform the cops that you were CCWing ( AR is a must inform state. ) and that you did NOT have to carry your permit with you.

I just shook my head and walked off.

Paul

P.S. The last refresher glass I went to 3 out of 5 people didn't know how to load a 5-shot .38 revolver.

And these were people that ALREADY had a CCW permit.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Since every one was to "quote" the USC, just remember the Bill of Rights are there to protect Us from the Federal Gov't not Our State Gov't.

Wrong, as usual.

Link Removed

The doctrine of selective incorporation, or simply the incorporation doctrine, makes the first ten amendments to the Constitution—known as the Bill of Rights—binding on the states.

 

[Axeanda45]

According to stengon and nogods, the states can forbid freedom of speach, freedom of religion and even 4th and 5th amendment rights with impunity.... Funny how when you think of it that way instead of just 2nd amendment rights, just how bassackwards they and those like them are about rights and laws....

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

 

[nogods]

According to stengon and nogods, the states can forbid freedom of speach, freedom of religion and even 4th and 5th amendment rights with impunity.... Funny how when you think of it that way instead of just 2nd amendment rights, just how bassackwards they and those like them are about rights and laws....

Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app

Does your definition of "freedom of speech" include "falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater"? Does your definition of "freedom of religion" include the right to treat a child with diabetes with faith healing instead of insulin? does your definition of the right to bear arms include the right "to possess any weapon at any time by any person in any place"?

If so, where did you get those definitions from? You just make them up?

Because the system created by our founders has determined that those definitions are not correct.

 

[nogods]

He is exactly the person our founders intended to determine such things. People have been trying to define "right to bear arms" for a very long time. People just like you, me and Axe. Just as his right may not be denied, his opinion may not be stifled.

Dealing with the existing definitions of those terms is not stifling opinion. There is a difference between a person who claims the definition of the right to bear arms should include the right to own any weapon at any time in any place by any person but recognizes that existing law does not so provide, and the person who claims that is the existing definition.