-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Requirement to apply for LTCH is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!
- Thread starter hi-pointfan1
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
The Constitution is not flawless; Among other things, it makes citizens of anyone born within our borders. Can you say, "anchor babies"? The point is that there was a process built in to it to allow for changes, because while not perfect, our Founders and the Framers of that document were very wise.
The point, as I see it? If you want to make infringements of the RKBA Constitutional, pass an amendment and get it ratified. That's the proper way, not by regulations enacted by government agents who don't answer to the people. Not by passing laws when the issue those laws address is placed clearly by the text beyond reach of law. Not by executive orders or signing statements.
We've amended an amendment before. The 21st amended the 18th. If you (hypothetical, not you specifically) want to infringe upon the peoples' right to keep and bear arms, start lobbying for an amendment.
My suggestion, however: Pack a lunch. You're in for one hell of a fight.
Blessings,
Bill
cartmanfan15
Shooter
May get some negative feedback for this, but is it really that big a deal? I understand the arguments that noone wants their rights to be infringed, but I just applied for my LTCH last week and it should be here shortly. Seems like the inconvenience is really only minor.
I guess it also seems like people want to go back to the days of the "wild wild west"? Anyone who wants a gun can have one and challenge others in the streets for the right to carry those guns.
I guess it also seems like people want to go back to the days of the "wild wild west"? Anyone who wants a gun can have one and challenge others in the streets for the right to carry those guns.
Prometheus
Master
Sure it is for you. What about in the mean time of saving up the money for it, getting the prints done and then waiting for it to come in a womans stalker grabs her coming out of work late one night... or is that not rising to the level of an "inconvenience"?
Are you delusional? In Vermont, Arizona and Alaska no permit/license is needed to carry openly or concealed (only one of those would count as your "wild west") and in over 2 dozen other states the open carry of handgun is legal without a permit/license.
It is not now, nor was it ever, a "wild west". You are a racist, 10-1 the next statement you make is "cowboys vs Indians"
Yeah, any negative rep you get from that gem is well deserved.
cartmanfan15
Shooter
I understand that. But there are many cases where individuals get guns so fast that they don't know how to use them. The cases where the gun owner is shot by his/her own gun because they dont know how to use it. In that case, the woman with the stalker would not get any benefit at all from having the gun.
As to the open carry issue, there must be some concern about it or all states would allow OC. Wow, no such thing as a wild west? So all those stories about cowboys killing Indians and each other when the settling of the west was occuring was all just "fairy tales." I'm sure all the Indians would love to hear your take on that. I am not a racist, nor ever will be.
Maybe someone else can comment on why open carry is such an issue? Seems most people are oblivious to why this is such an issue.
As to the open carry issue, there must be some concern about it or all states would allow OC. Wow, no such thing as a wild west? So all those stories about cowboys killing Indians and each other when the settling of the west was occuring was all just "fairy tales." I'm sure all the Indians would love to hear your take on that. I am not a racist, nor ever will be.
Maybe someone else can comment on why open carry is such an issue? Seems most people are oblivious to why this is such an issue.
Prometheus
Master
I would postulate that because our Rights are endowed upon us by our Creator that even a constitutional amendment both repealing the second and outlawing the possession of arms, is outside of the scope of the federal government. It would have no power on the moral convictions of the people of this nation or those who have sworn a duty to uphold and defend the constitution, as they would have read it and realized it is not within the power of the legislature to do so.
You see the created (the federal government) can NEVER be more powerful than the creator (the people).
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."
- John Adams, Second President of the United States
There is concept completely alien to those who wish to disarm and subjugate us. That concept is there are people who are willing to not just die for their Rights, but to kill to keep them. Another of my favorite quotes "All we ask, is to be let alone".
Why won't you busy body liberal freaks LEAVE US ALONE!?!?!?!
cartmanfan15
Shooter
Would that not just support the fact that this is all our fault? We vote politicians into power, then they create the laws that are infringing upon our rights as Americans. I am all for the fact that the power of the government comes from the governed as most democracies are. Like the quote from V for Vendetta that people should not fear their government, but the government should fear the people.
Joe Williams
Shooter
- Jun 26, 2008
- 10,431
- 38
How long did it take you to get your license to practice free speech? It's a minor infringement, and unrestricted use of speech can cause riots, suicides, all manner of mischief.
As for the stereotypical "wild west" argument so beloved by anti-gunners, two things:
1) When a person uses it, you know they are a representative of the Brady Bunch. This is one of their favorite red herrings.
2) Yes, I would dearly love to see this country become like the so-called "wild west." Crime was lower there than it was in the big cities of the time, and MUCH lower than it is in our country today. Freedom was rampant. I understand that freedom isn't considered a desirable thing by gun control advocates, but it is much loved by Americans (I separated those two groups intentionally, btw.) Personal responsibility was high, rewards were high. If this country returned to the ways of the "wild west," it would return to it's former greatness. Again, I understand this isn't necessarily considered desirable by the kind of people that embrace gun control.
Joe Williams
Shooter
- Jun 26, 2008
- 10,431
- 38
snip
It is not now, nor was it ever, a "wild west". You are a racist, 10-1 the next statement you make is "cowboys vs Indians"
Be darned if you weren't right on the money.
You almost did get some negative rep for that one. I had it typed out, actually, but I changed my mind. Only a minor inconvenience? "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall be subject to only minor inconveniences." Hmm. I must have missed where it said that. And who is to decide which inconveniences are minor and which are not? As Prometheus so well put it, it may be only a minor inconvenience for you, but that woman leaving the building or followed home by some nimrod is going to be awfully happy to not have had to wait... Of course, if you come home and are surprised by an attacker in your home, one who's bigger than you, when he has fun raping you, it'll be OK. After all, it's only a minor inconvenience.
A wise person will seek out training in the use of their firearm, but our current system rightly does not require that. It is the individuals responsibility, not that of government to shepherd us from cradle to grave.
There is some concern about OC. It's misplaced, as every shred of credible evidence shows, but yes, there is concern. Then again, I (and I doubt I'm alone in this) have concerns about your exercise of free speech or, since you're typing, your freedom of the press. Surely you should show proof of training to exercise those rights. Was there a push Westward in the 1800s? Sure there was. Were there areas that were lawless or close to it? Sure were. However, the "wild West" is largely a creation of Hollywood. The crimes that did occur have been documented as largely being committed by the rowdy young men in town from cattle drives, and even those were few and far between, largely because there were more good people armed and willing to defend themselves with deadly force. Today, not so much, and the crime rates per capita show it.
As to the "racist" comment, you do understand, don't you, that "gun control" was at its inception not so much to control the guns but to control who had them. Mostly, gun permits were thought up because some people had the wrong ancestry or the wrong accent or the wrong skin color to be allowed to be armed. There's a book on the topic: The Racist Roots of Gun Control by Clayton Cramer. I've not read it but I'm told it's excellent. It is, however, out of print, so you may have some trouble finding it if you even try.
You're correct, of course. I suggested that to him only because 1) the point was raised that there was something wrong with the Constitution, hence the 27 Amendments that have been ratified, and 2) because I know there's no way to pass it. The point you make about the created never being greater than the creator is of course true as well, but recall that the Amendment process by its very nature does not allow legislators to make all the decisions: The states, that is, the People, must be the ones to ratify Amendments. Your point is still true, of course, because rights given by our Creator can no more be relinquished than can our breathing... or at least, no sooner.
This last is the first thing I've seen you say that's wholly correct. I'm pleased to see this all sinking in.
Edit: Whoops. Not wholly. We're not a democracy. We're a Constitutional Republic.
Blessings,
Bill
Last edited:
Theres to many people out there that can go thru all the motions and get their permits and stuff that are mentally unstable and ****, or criminals that havnt been caught, and blah blah blah, but i think we would be surprised at how many people dont have their permits or guns because of a few little steps. if you are that lazy you shouldnt have a gun, and to put a little stipulation on who can have a license, such as age restrictions and things are necessary, some people dont mature till way past 21.
its a few extra steps...... whats the big deal, they arnt saying you cant carry there saying show us u are somewhat capable of doing things and following some rules before you go buying handguns.
its a few extra steps...... whats the big deal, they arnt saying you cant carry there saying show us u are somewhat capable of doing things and following some rules before you go buying handguns.
i guess im saying that times change, when that was written in the amendments they didnt have crazy asians legally buying guns and shooting up colleges.......... some hoops to jump through isnt unreasonable, especially when u can get a life time permit, u only have to jump thru a few hoops one time.
Nothing is written in stone, and everything is ever changing.
Nothing is written in stone, and everything is ever changing.
Joe Williams
Shooter
- Jun 26, 2008
- 10,431
- 38
Gun control has it's roots in racism. Your pro-gun control posts are already demonstrating that those same kind of people are still the ones advocating for gun control.
- Sep 3, 2009
- 7,726
- 38
And yet you can get a LTCH at 18, and an 18 year old can buy a handgun from a private party.
Why should anyone have to prove they are fit to carry a handgun?
