We urge you to restore the right to open carry handguns... [More]No man has authority to do that, and we don't want to encourage anyone to think they do. You need to insert "recognition of" in there.
We acknowledge that limiting the privilege to conceal handguns in Florida to those over 21 years of age via a fee based permit system is a reasonable exercise of our state's police powers...No, no, no. I don't acknowledge that at all.
Sorry, Sean. I don't mean to rain on your parade, and I'm glad you're showing initiative and leadership, but this could benefit from some review and revision work.
[Via Ed M]
With hat in hand and on bended knee, we humbly petition for restoration of PART of what is already ours, so please don't take the rest away too.
ReplyDeleteNo wonder they don't respect us. Or think they need to.
If an information technology professional can't or won't find all the arguments against even "reasonable regulations" of an essential right...
ReplyDeleteOr maybe he did, but is afraid of being pegged as an "extremist."
"We acknowledge that limiting the privilege to conceal handguns in Florida to those over 21 years of age via a fee based permit system is a reasonable exercise of our state's police powers, but only if the core right to carry, i.e. "open carry," remains available to all."
ReplyDeleteThe supreme court decision in Heller is VERY clear that limitations on CONCEALED carry are constitutional.
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott 333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n.
11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
Constitutional Carry is a worthy goal and our approach is a first step in the right direction. Camping out on the steps of the legislature screaming "shall not be infringed" and shaking your fist isn't going to get positive laws passed.
The gun banners did not take our rights away overnight, we won't get them back overnight. One step at a time.
Sean,
ReplyDeleteThis *might* be a first step. If so, it's a timid half-step at best. As a fellow Floridian, this does nothing for me. I still have to petition the State to exercise a universal human Right, that of armed self-defense.
What you're proposing means I *still* have to ask persission and pay fees to the State. A baby half-step sideways. Sorry, this is a fail. Beter then nothing, but not by much.