Why Do You Carry Concealed?

[corneileous]

So, Navy..

You believe that in this day of age; no, not 200 years ago or so when the constitution was written, that even today, with all the crap that goes down every single day, that there should be no regulation, what so ever? Just because the constitution was written at the beginning of our country's time when things were simpler, in THAT timeframe? Their society back then is no where near what modern life is.

I believe I know already what you are goin to say and that's fine. The reason I say that is because, why have these regulations in place anyways, even the ones that remotely make sense? Only us law abiding citizens follow laws anyway, not criminals. They get to do what they want, why can't we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

Deleted, accidental post.

 

[bofh]

What was inappropriate? You were talking about young adults. I was referring to children.

It's not my fault you assumed different.

Yes it's your fault:

What does kids mean in your case and what does that have to do with carry permits?

And your calling me ignorant? Lol. Kids having carry permits, gee whiz.

Lol, totally not what I was talking about!!

I was talking about the difference in kids- the responsible ones, including the ones who wish to go serve their country, not the degenerate kids or the ones who are being trained by professional military trainers.

Once again a case of reading comprehension. Read your post and them my reply. You mentioned the "the degenerate 18 year old teenager bully who has no self decency or respect for anyone". I meant that your personal opinion of 18 year olds has no bearing on them being able to exercise their rights.

You're right, I didn't, but it's funnier than hell that you assumed I was talking about 18, 19, and 20 year old children. lol.

Can't really laugh about that one, kid.

I know, right? You're trying to blame me with your assumption! Epic!

Who else? If you state things but refuse to clarify, one has to assume things to nail you down to finally get an answer out of you.

Lol no, just your dreamed up nonsense of your assumptions.

You were talking about young adults. I was talking about bonifide children.

You were talking about about a person who probably was mentally unstable long, long ago. I was talking about someone who, IS, NOW.... who is a current danger to themselves and everyone around them. Not somebody who once was.

You were talking about a person who did their time and is out. I was talking about about more or less what the felony was a about regarding earning their right back as a once felon.

You talked in general superficial terms that showed your ignorance to these problems: "kids, the mentally unstable and felons". Only after I told you of these problems, you acknowledged them and realized that you were talking nonsense.

You have obviously never dealt with mental illnesses in any form and have no clue about them other than generic name calling (i.e., "whack job"). Is every vet that suffers or suffered PTS a "whack job" that should be disqualified? An estimated 19 million American adults are living with major depression. Should they be automatically disqualified? When or at what point does the disqualification time out? Who does that determination? But hey, it is just easy to call people "unstable" and "whack jobs" and disqualify them from exercising a right when you have no clue.

First off, it's not me doing it. That's our laws at work. Second, there is no "automatically" about it. Certain mentally unstable people are deemed unstable and considered unworthy of it. Not automatically.

Besides, depression isn't automatically related to suicidal tendencies, right off the bat. There has to be a history of it first. You make it sound like I'm saying every ptsd, depression, or anything else of that matter is automatically the mentally unstable that the law disqualifies a person from being deemed a responsible gun owner and carrier.

As I said, your original statement about "kids, the mentally unstable and felons" was ignorant. Life is more complicated than that. You mentioned the term "mentally unstable". I was just asking questions as I assumed (and know now) that you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to mental illnesses. You also do not understand current laws, as a commitment to a mental institution automatically disqualifies a person from possessing a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4)).

 

[corneileous]

Yes it's your fault:

No, it's not. Again, dumarse, I was talking about young kids! You're the one who started yabbering about "kids" in the frigging army!...lol.

Once again a case of reading comprehension. Read your post and them my reply. You mentioned the "the degenerate 18 year old teenager bully who has no self decency or respect for anyone". I meant that your personal opinion of 18 year olds has no bearing on them being able to exercise their rights.

I don't have to re read anything, bonehead! You're the one who's twisting crap around! When I said, "the degenerate 18 year old teenager bully who has no self respect for anyone", I was explaining the difference between the 18 year old who is being trained in the army and the other 18 year old brat. Not to be assumed I'm saying every other 18 year old is like that, Jiminy Effing Christmas, man!

Can't really laugh about that one, kid.

Neither can you, smartass. I mean, kid.

Again, I was talking about children, not young adults. Please get that though your head.

Who else? If you state things but refuse to clarify, one has to assume things to nail you down to finally get an answer out of you.

I have clarified! It's not my fault you keep dragging this out!

You talked in general superficial terms that showed your ignorance to these problems: "kids, the mentally unstable and felons". Only after I told you of these problems, you acknowledged them and realized that you were talking nonsense.

Whatever man, you're the one who started that with your assumptions.

As I said, your original statement about "kids, the mentally unstable and felons" was ignorant. Life is more complicated than that.

No, your assumptions to what all you thought I was talking about, was what was ignorant.

You mentioned the term "mentally unstable".

Yes, I did. Again, it was your own assumption and your own addition of something clearly that I was not talking about.

I was just asking questions as I assumed (and know now) that you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to mental illnesses.

Whatever, you are so full of **** if you believe that. Im not even going to argue with you on that.

You also do not understand current laws, as a commitment to a mental institution automatically disqualifies a person from possessing a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4)).

Well, yes, the kind of "mentally unstable" people I was talking about was exactly that. Thanks for proving my point.

But about the other part, I never said that every person who was depressed was considered mentally unstable and was automatically admitted to an institution. You we're the one who acted like that was what I meant when you started talking about your friend who lost his wife.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mikestone967]

I did no such thing. Try to read and understand my posts before replying. The real "douchewad" is you, not realizing how ignorant (at so many levels) your comment was.

 

[mikestone967]

Deleted, accidental post.

Like all of your other posts as well......

 

[NavyLCDR]

So, Navy..

You believe that in this day of age; no, not 200 years ago or so when the constitution was written, that even today, with all the crap that goes down every single day, that there should be no regulation, what so ever? Just because the constitution was written at the beginning of our country's time when things were simpler, in THAT timeframe? Their society back then is no where near what modern life is.

I believe I know already what you are goin to say and that's fine. The reason I say that is because, why have these regulations in place anyways, even the ones that remotely make sense? Only us law abiding citizens follow laws anyway, not criminals. They get to do what they want, why can't we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So let's just toss the Constitution because it is 200 years old. Is that your belief corneileous? To hell with it - it's too old. The founding fathers understood that the the Constitution as they wrote it would become outdated over time. That's why they included in the Constitution a method to revise it - to amend it. That is not what happened with the Second Amendment, though, is it? There was never a further amendment to change the Second Amendment - like the 21st Amendment which repealed the 18th Amendment. You want to bring the Second Amendment up to date? Fine. Then do it the Constitutional way. Amend it using the process that is written into the Constitution. But what we have allowed is for the government to enact one unconstitutional infringement upon the right to keep and bear arms on top of another - screw the Constitution.

The National Firearms Act of 1934 should have been the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution enacted by the method allowed for in the Constitution instead of a simple act of Congress. An amendment to the Constitution allowing the Federal government to regulate the bearing of firearms by the People would be the Constitutional way to do it - not the bullsh$$t that we have allowed the government to get away with.

 

[bofh]

No, your assumptions to what all you thought I was talking about, was what was ignorant.

Yes, I did. Again, it was your own assumption and your own addition of something clearly that I was not talking about.

Whatever, you are so full of **** if you believe that. Im not even going to argue with you on that.

Once again, a "classy" reply. If you fail to clarify your statements then one can only assume. That's why I asked questions, over and over again. To get clarifications.

Well, yes, the kind of "mentally unstable" people I was talking about was exactly that. Thanks for proving my point.

Actually, you just proved my point. The automatic disqualification is permanent, while a mental illness may or may not be.

But about the other part, I never said that every person who was depressed was considered mentally unstable and was automatically admitted to an institution. You we're the one who acted like that was what I meant when you started talking about your friend who lost his wife.

Again, you still lack in reading comprehension. The only thing you said was "mentally unstable" people. Then I asked what you mean by that and gave you examples in the form of questions, so that you can clarify your statements.

Again, you talked in general superficial terms that showed your ignorance to these problems. If you can't clearly articulate what you mean, then your statements may be mistaken and may be viewed as ignorant. It is up to you to state your opinions clearly and not up to me to guess them correctly.

 

[corneileous]

Like all of your other posts as well......

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

Whatever, boff. It's clear to say that you are just showin out for the thread. I've explained. If you are going to turn this into another one if your typical, knitpicking arguments, you can count me out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

So let's just toss the Constitution because it is 200 years old. Is that your belief corneileous? To hell with it - it's too old.

That's not what I was suggesting but, what you say below is kinda what I meant.
The founding fathers understood that the the Constitution as they wrote it would become outdated over time.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NavyLCDR]

That's not what I was suggesting but, what you say below is kinda what I meant.
The founding fathers understood that the the Constitution as they wrote it would become outdated over time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I wrote a whole lot more below that. The Second Amendment should be enforced the way it is written, "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" - or it should be amended using the method provided to amend the Constitution. None of this "reasonable regulation" bullcrap should be accepted.

 

[corneileous]

And I wrote a whole lot more below that.

I know you did but you're trying to discuss all this this with the wrong person.

As long as the government doesn't take away my right to own and carry guns, I got better things to worry about. If I thought buying a permit was such an infringement, I'd live where it didn't exist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NavyLCDR]

I know you did but you're trying to discuss all this this with the wrong person.

As long as the government doesn't take away my right to own and carry guns, I got better things to worry about. If I thought buying a permit was such an infringement, I'd live where it didn't exist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The government has already taken away your right to own and carry guns. You're just satisfied that you have enough money to pay the government for your permission slip.

 

[corneileous]

The government has already taken away your right to own and carry guns. You're just satisfied that you have enough money to pay the government for your permission slip.

Well, I have a permit I keep in my wallet that allows me to carry. I'd say I have my rights to own and carry. What do you suggest I do, carry anyways, without one? I don't know about you but jail is not a place I want to be and until the law gets changed, if it ever does, this is it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NavyLCDR]

Well, I have a permit I keep in my wallet that allows me to carry. I'd say I have my rights to own and carry. What do you suggest I do, carry anyways, without one? I don't know about you but jail is not a place I want to be and until the law gets changed, if it ever does, this is it.

The first step is to quit calling something that you have to pay the government for permission to do a right. If you have to pay the government for permission to do it it is a privilege that you paid for, not a right. Stop deluding yourself. "By God, I'm exercising my right to carry a gun because I paid for this card in my wallet which says I have the government's permission to do it!" No, you aren't. And I don't either. I am a member of a privileged elite club that I paid the government to become a member of. I have a CPL in my wallet to. That doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make it Constitutional - but I am not going to lie to myself and to others and say I am exercising my rights because I'm not. I can exercise my right and, if caught, go to jail. Or I can pay the government for the privilege of them not putting me in jail. I choose the latter. But I won't sugar coat it and say, "well - that Second Amendment - it's outdated - so maybe we should give the government an excuse on this one..."

 

[mikestone967]

So, Navy..

You believe that in this day of age; no, not 200 years ago or so when the constitution was written, that even today, with all the crap that goes down every single day, that there should be no regulation, what so ever? Just because the constitution was written at the beginning of our country's time when things were simpler, in THAT timeframe? Their society back then is no where near what modern life is.

I believe I know already what you are goin to say and that's fine. The reason I say that is because, why have these regulations in place anyways, even the ones that remotely make sense? Only us law abiding citizens follow laws anyway, not criminals. They get to do what they want, why can't we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey, ya big dummy!

Mattox v. U.S., 156 US 237, 243: “We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted.”

S. Carolina v. U.S., 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905): “The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.”

Read it and understand it ... please.

 

[mikestone967]

As long as the government doesn't take away my right to own and carry guns, I got better things to worry about. If I thought buying a permit was such an infringement, I'd live where it didn't exist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow......

Unequivocally..... wow!

I can't believe people can be this friggin stupid....

 

[Reba]

. . . You believe that in this day of age; no, not 200 years ago or so when the constitution was written, that even today, with all the crap that goes down every single day, that there should be no regulation, what so ever? Just because the constitution was written at the beginning of our country's time when things were simpler, in THAT timeframe? Their society back then is no where near what modern life is....

I take it that you are not a U.S. history major. Probably not a student of any history or philosophy, nor a reader of biographies of the Founding Fathers.

OK.

Believe it or not, complex sophisticated thought did happen prior to the digital age.

 

[mikestone967]

I take it that you are not a U.S. history major. Probably not a student of any history or philosophy, nor a reader of biographies of the Founding Fathers.

OK.

Believe it or not, complex sophisticated thought did happen prior to the digital age.