Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumCan a state prevent one method of carry (concealed or open) and still comply
With the the Second and Fourteenth? Can they prohibit both?
rrneck
(17,671 posts)when we try to regulate how people look. It just reaffirms my faith in rational, civilized government.
Er, sorry about the sarcasm. Carry on.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that there was no need for concealed carry because open carry of firearms was guaranteed in the Ohio constitution. So then many many groups got together and started open carry rallies. This bothered so many people that they introduced the concealed carry bill that was passed in 2004. In an irony that made the anti gun people spit nails they inadvertently made Ohio a constitutional open carry state and a shall issue concealed carry state.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)but it makes some people uncomfortable. So if you ban open carry you have to provide an alternative. Society decided concealed carry was that alternative.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Open carry is protected by the 2nd amendment. If you openly carry a weapon the police can stop you and see what's up in a polite and professional manner. When you conceal a weapon you take away that ability so you must under go a background check to make sure you're not a criminal before you carry a hidden weapon. I have no issue with that at all.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)unless they have sufficient cause to do so (i.e. suspicion/evidence of actual criminal action or intent). The Courts have long ago stated that mere exercise of a Constitutional RIght was NOT justification for a police stop.
I don't remember the case cites, I'll try to find them.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)I should have said if a person is openly carrying a gun and is doing something suspicious.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)That meme is unfortunately alive and well, but I intend to kick it to death within my life-time.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Consider: you have a right to vote. It doesn't mention how. Could be mail-in. Could be at an actual voting booth.
If the state get's rid of one and leaves the other that is a limitation on your rights but you still kind of have one.
If they decide physically voting is unnecessary, ban it then start talking about how the constitution never explicitly covers mail in voting that would be a bit concerning eh?
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)All rights exist by default.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)It is not in the same class as the right to keep and bear arms.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
It is not in the same class as the right to keep and bear arms.
I believe Warren Stupidity has just disparaged a right that belongs to the people.