Should it be legal for foreign nationals to own & carry guns?

[NYFelon]

Thanks Kirk. NOw I gotta dig out the EL&P CD.

 

[NapalmFTW]

I haven't read all of this thread, just the first four pages and the last two.

I'm a foreign national, and I don't mind telling anyone.

I am here legally and I am married to an American. I love this country and what it stands for, but some of you guys are way off the mark.

Your country was built on immigration, and while I don't like the illegal immigrants and those out to play the system, I don't think you should deny people like me the rights and privileges given to the rest of you immigrants () just because of the illegals.

If you guys knew the hoops we had to jump through in order to stay legal with the US Govt you might actually offer legal immigrants a little more respect. The amount of paperwork we've had to collect in order to prove to the US.gov that we're legit is amazing.

And we're not even through yet - we still have to apply for my GC which is another 6 months down the line and more paperwork etc. etc. (including more background checks).

In the mean time I am legally allowed to buy and carry a handgun if I so wish (I think so, anyway).

In closing let me say this - please don't tar all of us "immigrants" with the same brush - just like America, we're a diverse bunch and we're not all out to play the system and squeeze as much money from you tax payers as possible (in fact I can be in serious trouble with the government if I work (before I get my authorisation), claim medicaid or welfare).


EDIT:

I would like to say - I don't think someone who is here temporarily should be allowed to buy and carry guns, but someone who is intending to:
stay here
live here
contribute to society via paying taxes
etc.

should be given the right to buy guns whilst waiting for their LPR status or citizen status. Citizenship takes years (trust me) and I shouldn't be denied the right to have fun and protect myself in the meantime.
David.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I haven't read all of this thread, just the first four pages and the last two.

I'm a foreign national, and I don't mind telling anyone.

I am here legally and I am married to an American. I love this country and what it stands for, but some of you guys are way off the mark.

Your country was built on immigration, and while I don't like the illegal immigrants and those out to play the system, I don't think you should deny people like me the rights and privileges given to the rest of you immigrants () just because of the illegals.

If you guys knew the hoops we had to jump through in order to stay legal with the US Govt you might actually offer legal immigrants a little more respect. The amount of paperwork we've had to collect in order to prove to the US.gov that we're legit is amazing.

And we're not even through yet - we still have to apply for my GC which is another 6 months down the line and more paperwork etc. etc. (including more background checks).

In the mean time I am legally allowed to buy and carry a handgun if I so wish (I think so, anyway).

In closing let me say this - please don't tar all of us "immigrants" with the same brush - just like America, we're a diverse bunch and we're not all out to play the system and squeeze as much money from you tax payers as possible (in fact I can be in serious trouble with the government if I work (before I get my authorisation), claim medicaid or welfare).


EDIT:

I would like to say - I don't think someone who is here temporarily should be allowed to buy and carry guns, but someone who is intending to:
stay here
live here
contribute to society via paying taxes
etc.

should be given the right to buy guns whilst waiting for their LPR status or citizen status. Citizenship takes years (trust me) and I shouldn't be denied the right to have fun and protect myself in the meantime.
David.

I would venture to say many of us wouldn't care who emigrated to the country as long as they came here legally and paid their own way. Coming here primarily to collect benefits isn't fair to the legal immigrants and it's not fair to the rest of us who pay to support the systems illegals abuse.

That aside, many of us regard your right to self-defense with a firearm to be the same as every other human being's. In our view, our Constitution is recognizing a "natural" series of rights that are innate; not privileges which may be granted or rescinded at the whim of a government.

As a former resident of Chicago/Cook County, I can sympathize with your inability to arm yourself legally; about 3 million other people are in the same situation as you may be.

 

[ryknoll3]

I would venture to say many of us wouldn't care who emigrated to the country as long as they came here legally and paid their own way. Coming here primarily to collect benefits isn't fair to the legal immigrants and it's not fair to the rest of us who pay to support the systems illegals abuse.

That aside, many of us regard your right to self-defense with a firearm to be the same as every other human being's. In our view, our Constitution is recognizing a "natural" series of rights that are innate; not privileges which may be granted or rescinded at the whim of a government.

As a former resident of Chicago/Cook County, I can sympathize with your inability to arm yourself legally; about 3 million other people are in the same situation as you may be.

He IS legally allowed to own firearms.... as it SHOULD be!

 

[cobber]

Foreign nationals aren't all Al-Qaeda. Nor are they all illegal aliens.

I have lived in a country that distinguishes between native born and foreigners. Including access to the courts. Try living in a place like that before you suggest that foreign nationals should not enjoy constitutional protections (not privileges, no one has argued that).

As to the argument that being born here magically entitles you to rights that lawful foreign nationals should not enjoy, you are applying that to children of illegal immigrants born on American soil?

There are plenty of threads here lambasting the police. Can you imagine having two sets of rights, if the police thought your house was inhabited by foreign nationals (not illegal aliens) they could kick the door in, seize your property without warrant, force you to testify against yourself, deny you access to counsel for an undetermined period. And the police and state could freely torture you. (These things sometimes happen in America, and it's outrageous. But I would submit this is because the constitution enumerates natural rights, that are not native to America, but come from the Creator.)

Denying constitutional protections to foreign nationals, while the constitution still protects American criminals also seems a bit weird to say the least.

Freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? If not freedom to defend oneself, why freedom to speak or worship?

The constitution in protecting foreign nationals, as well as illegal aliens and even terror suspects, protects YOU from an overreaching government.

 

[Sylvain]

Foreign nationals aren't all Al-Qaeda. Nor are they all illegal aliens.

I have lived in a country that distinguishes between native born and foreigners. Including access to the courts. Try living in a place like that before you suggest that foreign nationals should not enjoy constitutional protections (not privileges, no one has argued that).

As to the argument that being born here magically entitles you to rights that lawful foreign nationals should not enjoy, you are applying that to children of illegal immigrants born on American soil?

There are plenty of threads here lambasting the police. Can you imagine having two sets of rights, if the police thought your house was inhabited by foreign nationals (not illegal aliens) they could kick the door in, seize your property without warrant, force you to testify against yourself, deny you access to counsel for an undetermined period. And the police and state could freely torture you. (These things sometimes happen in America, and it's outrageous. But I would submit this is because the constitution enumerates natural rights, that are not native to America, but come from the Creator.)

Denying constitutional protections to foreign nationals, while the constitution still protects American criminals also seems a bit weird to say the least.

Freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? If not freedom to defend oneself, why freedom to speak or worship?

The constitution in protecting foreign nationals, as well as illegal aliens and even terror suspects, protects YOU from an overreaching government.

+1
Well said.

 

[Ragenarok007]

One step further...

I'll go as far as to say that gun ownership should be compulsory in the United States as it is in Switzerland. You can't take every single gun off the street, but you can give everyone the same advantage. I heard that there was legislation in the UK to ban knives with points. That is just ridiculous. Eventually when they don't see crime totally disappear they will get frustrated and ban sharp sticks and cricket bats. Remember, God didn't make all men equal. Colt did.

I actually have a plan for low income families to qualify for government surplus firearms and confiscated weapons deemed safe. You would have to demonstrate a legitimate need and go through background checks and pay a minimal processing fee. The weapon would be registered to each person and being found with a weapon which did not belong to you would be an additional felony. Also the weapon would be surrendered for violation of the agreement and could not be sold or transferred in any way. Most importantly, you would have to go through a reasonable safety training program and be issued a lock. You would see so many inner city neighborhoods cleaned up if the honest citizens weren't so easily victimized.

 

[Sylvain]

I'll go as far as to say that gun ownership should be compulsory in the United States as it is in Switzerland. You can't take every single gun off the street, but you can give everyone the same advantage. I heard that there was legislation in the UK to ban knives with points. That is just ridiculous. Eventually when they don't see crime totally disappear they will get frustrated and ban sharp sticks and cricket bats. Remember, God didn't make all men equal. Colt did.

I actually have a plan for low income families to qualify for government surplus firearms and confiscated weapons deemed safe. You would have to demonstrate a legitimate need and go through background checks and pay a minimal processing fee. The weapon would be registered to each person and being found with a weapon which did not belong to you would be an additional felony. Also the weapon would be surrendered for violation of the agreement and could not be sold or transferred in any way. Most importantly, you would have to go through a reasonable safety training program and be issued a lock. You would see so many inner city neighborhoods cleaned up if the honest citizens weren't so easily victimized.

Yes it could become a duty to own a gun, not just a right.
Just like I think the right to vote should be a duty.
And when you think about all those good guns destroyed each year by the ATF you could arm lots of good people.
Guns are simple tools, they destroy them once they were owned illegaly or used in a crime like to prevent this tool from doing it again.
At least they could sale those guns, some are rare and expensive guns, sale them to good gun owners and use the money to fight crime.

 

[ryknoll3]

Yes it could become a duty to own a gun, not just a right.
Just like I think the right to vote should be a duty.
And when you think about all those good guns destroyed each year by the ATF you could arm lots of good people.
Guns are simple tools, they destroy them once they were owned illegaly or used in a crime like to prevent this tool from doing it again.
At least they could sale those guns, some are rare and expensive guns, sale them to good gun owners and use the money to fight crime.

Great, so all the welfare-receiving hood-rats that are currently too lazy to vote will be compelled to do so.... as if the electorate isn't ignorant enough already!

Neither should be compulsory. They are rights, and should be exercised freely by those who have at least taken the minimal responsibility to take it upon THEMSELVES to exercise those rights.