Open Carry as a Civic Responsibility?

[Guest H0TSH0T]

i don't think it matters, people have their own convictions, and make their own choices, but what ever that choice is there is a hidden responsibility, that responsibility is not the burden of the viewer but that of the carrier, your actions while carrying will be judged, and your actions watched and thus may provoke someone to act against you bringing unwanted attention or even creating a negative environment or view of your actions and non actions, it is still the same if concealed however it removes the prejudgment on you due to the ignorance of the common sheeple. IMHO i think you will have to be extra aware and vigilant of how you may be perceived by all around you and keep you on your toes not to falter, giving the irresponsible more ammunition to take more of your rights away.

[Guest .45]

I really like this point. So lets say you are right an OC is not the answer. How does John Q Citizen help "establishing a more gun-friendly mind-set" in his community?

lot's of ways...

1) make shooting, as a fun, safe, competitive sport, more public... (i.e., TV, radio, newspaper, etc, etc,) take the emphasis OFF of human flesh as a possible target... because, as we all know, that is just a worst case scenario, not the normal environment in which shooting is done...

the gun club is usually portrayed by the anti's as a place where "weirdos shoot machine-guns".....we need to do away with this image.

2) take a non-shooter shooting.... people fear what is unfamiliar. introduce everyone you can to the reality that guns are not evil...(you might not want to start them with an AR-15 either... )

3) as others have already stated... VOTE.

4) support/promote hunting as a sport...

5) join/support the NRA...

6) a police-sponsored "intro to guns" class would be awesome... let them get introduced by someone they trust, not us "evil" gun-totin' civvys (however, this idea would never happen, due to cost & liability, & lack of available resources....)

just a few ideas off the top...anyone else have some?

[TNTitan]

excellent points. I do most of those now..but I guess we can always do more.

[Oh Shoot]

...

.. can't believe that some on this site have apparently accepted the incorrect statement that carry is a "privilege"...BS. if this were true, the 2nd Amendment would read, "...the right to keep arms." however, this is not the case...we Americans have the right to "keep AND bear...".

So what?

You can't OWN a handgun, period, at all, nada, zip, under any circumstances, in certain cities in America. Put that in your 2A pipe and smoke it.

It is illegal to carry a handgun in TN, so how can it be a right?

We pay for the PRIVILEGE of carrying one, just as we pay for the PRIVILEGE of driving a car.

- OS

[Guest .45]

So what?

You can't OWN a handgun, period, at all, nada, zip, under any circumstances, in certain cities in America. Put that in your 2A pipe and smoke it.

It is illegal to carry a handgun in TN, so how can it be a right?

We pay for the PRIVILEGE of carrying one, just as we pay for the PRIVILEGE of driving a car.

- OS

you sir, illustrate perfectly, the point that I was trying to make....which is, that far too many of us seem to have accepted the fact that our rights have been, and are being, infringed upon.

you sound almost triumphant as you point to the fact that the state of TN has infringed upon what IS our RIGHT as law-abiding American citizens.... are you for, or against the right to keep & bear arms?

this is exactly my point...that many of us have just accepted infringement upon our rights. the state says it is a "privilege", and we just agree...? even though this is directly contradictory to the Constitution?

I always find it interesting how gun owners themselves will often regurgitate the propaganda that is forced on us by those who would steal our rights...

unless I somehow missed it in the news, the U.S. Constitution is still in effect...which means, that regardless of who says it is a "privilege", it is still the RIGHT of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms.

I understand your point, which is that this right has already been infringed upon. but to hear gun owners themselves agreeing that bearing arms is a "privilege" rather than a right just gives me the willies.... makes it sound like the anti's have already won. and to use that incorrect language will only reinforce their lies...

IMO, we should stop accepting this kind of talk so easily, and start standing up for our RIGHTS.

no offense intended to you Mr. Oh Shoot...just feel that this is an issue that us gun owners need to start speaking up on more.

if we just accept infringement, then total control is the inevitable outcome...

.45

[Guest TackleberryTom]

IMO, we should stop accepting this kind of talk so easily, and start standing up for our RIGHTS.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!

if we just accept infringement, then total control is the inevitable outcome...

Could not be more true!!

Using the terms that are being used by those, not in support of your beliefs, only makes those in opposition stronger. Stop using the enemies language and you will disable one of their strongest weapons. My one example....GLOBAL WARMING or as they call it now CLIMATE CHANGE!!! Stop using their words and actively reject/replace them with the truth and we will WIN!!!

When you tell a lie long enough, you yourself start to believe it is true.

[DaveTN]

you sir, illustrate perfectly, the point that I was trying to make....which is, that far too many of us seem to have accepted the fact that our rights have been, and are being, infringed upon.

you sound almost triumphant as you point to the fact that the state of TN has infringed upon what IS our RIGHT as law-abiding American citizens.... are you for, or against the right to keep & bear arms?

this is exactly my point...that many of us have just accepted infringement upon our rights. the state says it is a "privilege", and we just agree...? even though this is directly contradictory to the Constitution?

I always find it interesting how gun owners themselves will often regurgitate the propaganda that is forced on us by those who would steal our rights...

unless I somehow missed it in the news, the U.S. Constitution is still in effect...which means, that regardless of who says it is a "privilege", it is still the RIGHT of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms.

I understand your point, which is that this right has already been infringed upon. but to hear gun owners themselves agreeing that bearing arms is a "privilege" rather than a right just gives me the willies.... makes it sound like the anti's have already won. and to use that incorrect language will only reinforce their lies...

IMO, we should stop accepting this kind of talk so easily, and start standing up for our RIGHTS.

no offense intended to you Mr. Oh Shoot...just feel that this is an issue that us gun owners need to start speaking up on more.

if we just accept infringement, then total control is the inevitable outcome...

.45

No, you do not have a right to bear arms. You can claim that and you can do all the flag waving you like, but you absolutely do not have the right to bear arms.

The fact that some of us know and acknowledge the law does not mean we agree with it. This is not propaganda this is fact.

How would you suggest that we start standing up for our rights? Because I was arrested and jailed in Illinois for no crime other than having a gun in my car. I was young and dumb and thought I would fight it all the way to the SCOTUS….. You can’t.

Having a right to bear arms would mean that you can strap on a gun and walk down the street in any state in America. That will never happen.

My privilege of carrying a gun in Tennessee does not come from the 2nd amendment; it comes from my legislators. I feel that it is important that people know that and acknowledge it or we run the risk of losing that.

The SCOTUS has acknowledged that you have a right to own guns, but they have also said local government controls how and where you can carry them. We have a system put in place by our founding Fathers to interpret the Constitution and the legality of our laws. If you do not agree with it your Constitutional arguments are pointless.

At the time the 2nd amendment was written it was not seen as a problem for States Rights. Today it is. Several states claim the control of when and where guns are carried as a State Right. Montana and Tennessee (with others following) are leading the country in fighting the Feds over control of things the Feds claim to have. They have started by using firearms.

The SCOTUS does don’t want to rule on the right to bear arms. Why? Because if they rule that it is a right states like Illinois and the City of Chicago will simply defy the ruling. Some gun groups claimed a victory in Heller. Can the people of the city of Chicago legally own handguns now? No, the city claimed that the ruling does not apply to them and they will continue business as usual (as did other cities and states).

If they had ruled that the 2nd amendment is not an individual right it would open the door for states like California, Illinois and New York to totally outlaw guns. They didn’t want that either.

The Constitution changes (and it was designed that way). If it didn’t we would still have slavery and the state could make you take a test to vote (the voting test might be a good thing ).

We have never and will never fight a war over the 2nd amendment. However, we have fought a war over States Rights. (Yes, I know they are teaching in the schools now that we fought it over slavery, but that is just wrong)

So… Do I believe I have a right to bear arms? Yes, but it doesn’t come from the 2nd.

Now a question for you. If a bunch of states (even the pro gun ones like Tennessee) take the stand that gun control is a State Right; which side of that argument are you on?

Since you are implying that we are all sitting on our hands watching our rights being taken away; what do you suggest we do?

[macville]

No, you do not have a right to bear arms. You can claim that and you can do all the flag waving you like, but you absolutely do not have the right to bear arms.

No, WE DO ABSOLUTELY have a right to keep and bear arms. It's there in the Constitution. However, the enforcement of that right has been thrown aside. You've got to remember that just because we have a right doesn't mean that right will be able to be exercised. But it IS a right. We just haven't been able to exercise it the last 80 years way we are supposed to.

I noticed that you haven't stopped saying the 4th is a right even though LEO's violate it every day? Just because it gets violated (which the decision in Heller proved) doesn't mean it's not still a right.

BTW, I totally understand what you are saying. The un-constitutional system has been set up to make it a privileged. But I don't want to further the myth that it's only a privilege. Maybe we should start referring to a carry permit as the un-constitutional handgun carry permit. Because that is FAR more accurate than just HCP.

Matthew

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

Ok my quick . I like the idea’s .45 made in post #52.

It is illegal to carry a handgun in TN, so how can it be a right? We pay for the PRIVILEGE of carrying one, just as we pay for the PRIVILEGE of driving a car. - OS

It may not be right, but it’s the way it is. OS - Maybe you should change your residency to Kentucky. Compare with Tennessee. Look how restrictive Illinois is on firearms. Be thankful you have the ability to carry in TN. Granted you have to pay for a permit and jump through hoops to do so. IMO, not worth continuing to over the subject.

Side note: I'm visiting in KY right now and have been OC'ing the entire time. No funny looks from anyone here.

Edited September 27, 2009 by StreetWK05

[Guest TackleberryTom]

This has become a much more interesting thread than I thought it would!! All kinds of great stuff. I really enjoy this kind of dialogue, with no one getting into name calling. Good honest discussion.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

No, WE DO ABSOLUTELY have a right to keep and bear arms. It's there in the Constitution. However, the enforcement of that right has been thrown aside. You've got to remember that just because we have a right doesn't mean that right will be able to be exercised. But it IS a right. We just haven't been able to exercise it the last 80 years way we are supposed to.

I noticed that you haven't stopped saying the 4th is a right even though LEO's violate it every day? Just because it gets violated (which the decision in Heller proved) doesn't mean it's not still a right.

BTW, I totally understand what you are saying. The un-constitutional system has been set up to make it a privileged. But I don't want to further the myth that it's only a privilege. Maybe we should start referring to a carry permit as the un-constitutional handgun carry permit. Because that is FAR more accurate than just HCP.

Matthew

[DaveTN]

No, WE DO ABSOLUTELY have a right to keep and bear arms. It's there in the Constitution. However, the enforcement of that right has been thrown aside. You've got to remember that just because we have a right doesn't mean that right will be able to be exercised. But it IS a right. We just haven't been able to exercise it the last 80 years way we are supposed to.

And therefore arguing if it is a right or not is moot. If it is illegal for a citizen to carry a gun, as it is in Tennessee; it is not a right.

As I said the 2nd is in conflict with States Rights; pick a side. The city of Chicago and the state of Illinois is charged with maintaining a safe environment for the citizens. To do that the city has chosen to outlaw handguns and the state has chosen to outlaw carry. I do not agree that what they are doing prevents crime; but unless the Feds want to assume that responsibility they don’t have jack to say about it.

I am active in trying to get carry permits in Illinois and it pisses me off when an intelligent discussion is going on with someone and some jack ass turns it into a 2nd amendment debate. That battle has been fought and lost in Illinois. If they want to continue it, fine, but don’t tie it to carry permits.

I noticed that you haven't stopped saying the 4th is a right even though LEO's violate it every day? Just because it gets violated (which the decision in Heller proved) doesn't mean it's not still a right.

If cops violate it every day; those that have been violated have recourse. Because the 4th protects us from “unreasonable†searches, the courts are constantly hearing cases on what is reasonable.

You may not agree with the court’s decision; but until another decision comes along; that is the way it will be.

BTW, I totally understand what you are saying. The un-constitutional system has been set up to make it a privileged. But I don't want to further the myth that it's only a privilege. Maybe we should start referring to a carry permit as the un-constitutional handgun carry permit. Because that is FAR more accurate than just HCP.

You can call it that if you like; it would be more accurate than “The state of Tennessee is acknowledging my 2nd amendment rights.â€

You have been told since your first day of Drivers Education that driving is a privilege; not a right. You have to pay a fee and take a test. If you do not follow the rules your license will be revoked. Just like the HCP. Now how do you think that an HCP is a right in any way, shape or form?

NOTE: I have an HCP and I know exactly where it came from and who is responsible for me being able to carry and I appreciate them for it. I am not against it; I am merely pointing out that the state of Tennessee does not recognize the 2nd amendment as an individual right anymore than the state of Illinois. No rights are involved with an HCP. We are a “special Group†with special privileges that are not the rights or the privilege of all Tennessee citizens.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

We are a “special Group†with special privileges that are not the rights or the privilege of all Tennessee citizens.

Any Tennessean can be in the "Special Group" as you call it, as long as they have a clean background and jump through the hoops to obtain a the HCP like everyone else. The way I interupt the TN's gun laws is this: By making it illegal to carry a handgun first, then issuing permits to responsible citizens. That forces criminals to risk breaking one more law when commiting other crimes. Compare with KY, where any citizen (criminals too)can OC without permit. Which set of gun laws would you rather have? My vote is for TN.

[Guest Ssmo]

Any Tennessean can be in the "Special Group" as you call it, as long as they have a clean background and jump through the hoops to obtain a the HCP like everyone else. The way I interupt the TN's gun laws is this: By making it illegal to carry a handgun first, then issuing permits to responsible citizens. That forces criminals to risk breaking one more law when commiting other crimes. Compare with KY, where any citizen (criminals too)can OC without permit. Which set of gun laws would you rather have? My vote is for TN.

In either state a BG could be carrying a gun and how would you know he/she/it is a BG? A permit isnt going to make any differnce. A BG is going to carry in either state regardless.

Whats the BG going to care if he/she/it breaks another law. If you commit armed robbery or murder someone whats the difference in having a CC permit?

Both states have there laws. People see things different throughout the country.

No one should have to have a permit. You should be able to protect yourself. Protecting yourself should be a Right not a privilege.

[DaveTN]

Any Tennessean can be in the "Special Group" as you call it, as long as they have a clean background and jump through the hoops to obtain a the HCP like everyone else.

But that not a right; it a privilege.

Any Tennessean can be in the "Special Group" as you call it, as long as they have a clean background and jump through the hoops to obtain a the HCP like everyone else.

It’s not that I call us a “special groupâ€; it’s what we are. Any time the discussion here is about cops or off duty carry for cops the question is always asked what makes them a special group? The law makes them a special group; just as it does us. We both have special privileges that a citizen does not have.

The poor may not be able to afford the approx $200 it takes to get a permit. The abused Mother fleeing an abusive ex with her children may not have the money and certainly does not have the 90 days it takes to get it.

The way I interupt the TN's gun laws is this: By making it illegal to carry a handgun first, then issuing permits to responsible citizens. That forces criminals to risk breaking one more law when commiting other crimes.

Committing a crime with a gun is a felony. Simple possession without a permit is a misdemeanor. You give criminals too much credit for thinking.

Compare with KY, where any citizen (criminals too)can OC without permit. Which set of gun laws would you rather have? My vote is for TN.

My vote is for Alaska.

I agree with you that we should have the right. But we are talking law here, not how we think things should be.

[DaveTN]

No one should have to have a permit. You should be able to protect yourself. Protecting yourself should be a Right not a privilege.

Exactly

And that right should not be tied to the 2nd amendment.

[robin48]

IMO open is a bad choice. But If you will please use a duty holster with lots of retention built in. I open sometimes and think its a great way to exercise your rights, if you want all the hassles that go along with it. be advised you will cause panic and be arrested for disturbing the peace ( the catch all ) . But you go guy , see you on TV.

There are plenty of times I open carry and have never created panic or been bothered by the police. That argument is the same method used by antigunners against us. Baseless fear.

[robin48]

So what?

You can't OWN a handgun, period, at all, nada, zip, under any circumstances, in certain cities in America. Put that in your 2A pipe and smoke it.

It is illegal to carry a handgun in TN, so how can it be a right?

We pay for the PRIVILEGE of carrying one, just as we pay for the PRIVILEGE of driving a car.

- OS

It is a right. A right that most states have circumvented with unconstitutional laws. As one who served protecting the constitution, I sir, believe your attitude toward the most important document in history since the ten commandments is a sad commentary on you. Edited September 28, 2009 by robin48

[timcalhoun]

And therefore arguing if it is a right or not is moot. If it is illegal for a citizen to carry a gun, as it is in Tennessee; it is not a right.

As I said the 2nd is in conflict with States Rights; pick a side.

It seems that the constitution disagrees with you dave.

ARTICLE SIX OF THE CONSTITUTION

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States..)

Clause two provides that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it and treaties made under its authority, constitute the supreme law of the land. It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be upheld. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law.

[Oh Shoot]

Words on paper do not constitute a right in and of themselves - the citizen's freedom of behavior according to those words constitutes the right.

A right must be de facto, not merely de jure.

If you cannot exercise a right then it doesn't exist.

- OS

[Guest .45]

No, you do not have a right to bear arms.

yes Dave, I absolutely do...and so do you.

again, you illustrate my original point perfectly...that too many of us gun owners have just accepted this infringement. can you hear yourself??? you are a gun owner, telling other gun owners, that you/we no longer have the right to keep & bear arms!!????

You can claim that and you can do all the flag waving you like...

wow... all I can say is, thank God there are a few of us "flag wavers" left...

...but you absolutely do not have the right to bear arms.

hmmm...I guess somebody needs to call the NRA and inform them that it's over, and we no longer have the right to keep & bear arms... they're sure wasting a lot of time & $$$ if you're right.... (but thankfully, you are incorrect)

The fact that some of us know and acknowledge the law does not mean we agree with it. This is not propaganda this is fact.

until the Constitution/2nd Amendment are repealed, it is in fact, propaganda..... and the more of us gun owners who adopt your stance on this issue, the sooner they will take our freedoms from us. as stated, thank God for us "flag wavers".

How would you suggest that we start standing up for our rights?

well Dave, I don't condone doing anything illegal....that's not my point. but I do think we can all do something. for you, a good place to start would be, to stop saying things like "you don't have the right to bear arms."

Having a right to bear arms would mean that you can strap on a gun and walk down the street in any state in America. That will never happen.

again... just, wow... it's a good thing all of us don't share your views, or the anti's would be burning our guns on the White house lawn before Christmas got here. actually, legal carry nation-wide can happen, and I believe it should.

My privilege of carrying a gun in Tennessee does not come from the 2nd amendment; it comes from my legislators.

I am as thankful as anyone for our legislators here in TN; they are doing a great job this year...but make no mistake...they are passing this legislation in order to secure/defend what is already your RIGHT to keep & bear arms.

just where do you suppose these legislators got the idea that we ought to be able to carry guns??? I'm betting they heard it in some crazy document called the 2nd Amendment.....

So… Do I believe I have a right to bear arms? Yes, but it doesn’t come from the 2nd.

you're confusing me Dave...1st you say we have no "right", that it is a "privilege" given by the state of TN. but here, you say that you do have a right??????? can't have it both ways I'm afraid...which is it, right or privilege?

and if it doesn't come from the 2nd Amendment...where the heck does it come from!!!!?

Now a question for you. If a bunch of states (even the pro gun ones like Tennessee) take the stand that gun control is a State Right; which side of that argument are you on?

my allegiance is to the United States of America, not to the state of TN.... my constitutional RIGHT to keep & bear arms comes from being an AMERICAN citizen, not from being a resident of the state of TN.

IMO, it is not TN's or any state's business to control guns...we only need to restore our constitutional rights under the 2A to their full stature, and everything will be fine.

the States Rights approach is a very slippery slope, and not just concerning guns either....

Since you are implying that we are all sitting on our hands watching our rights being taken away; what do you suggest we do?

1st, I don't recall saying everyone was sitting on their hands, watching rights be taken away. I simply stated that we should probably all speak up a bit more...or at least not just accept infringement as fact.

2nd, since you seem to have it nailed down so well, what would you suggest Dave??? just watch our freedoms/rights taken, then simply agree that they are now "privileges"...? let them take away free speech? or freedom of religion?

what would you say if the state of TN suddenly told you it was a "privilege" to speak a certain opinion?

again, I'm not condoning anything illegal, but I do think we can all do something...even if it's just trying to convince a fellow gun owner that he still has the right to keep & bear arms.......

what I do know, is that if we do nothing, we will have all of our rights taken from us. this issue/subject is much bigger than just carrying a pistol.

no offense intended to you by any of this Dave...you're as welcome to your opinion as I am to mine. these are just my for whatever they're worth....

.45

[Guest .45]

No, WE DO ABSOLUTELY have a right to keep and bear arms. It's there in the Constitution. However, the enforcement of that right has been thrown aside. You've got to remember that just because we have a right doesn't mean that right will be able to be exercised. But it IS a right...

...The un-constitutional system has been set up to make it a privileged. But I don't want to further the myth that it's only a privilege. Maybe we should start referring to a carry permit as the un-constitutional handgun carry permit. Because that is FAR more accurate than just HCP.

Matthew

well said Matthew... in fact, you said it better than me.

why would we want to further the incorrect myth that carry is a privilege...?

[Guest .45]

it pisses me off when an intelligent discussion is going on with someone and some jack ass turns it into a 2nd amendment debate....

hey Dave, see excerpt below, of the OP's original post....

Whew.. I know this is a can of worms, but I was hoping to get some polite discussion about the idea of Open Carrying as a method by which the General Public can be exposed to law-abiding citizens exercising their rights.

ummm...it's a discussion about carrying a gun... and, our rights to do so. as such, I hardly think the 2nd Amendment is "off-topic" in any way...

I was merely responding to your incorrect statement that carry is a privilege.

...and some jack ass turns it into a 2nd amendment debate. That battle has been fought and lost in Illinois. If they want to continue it, fine, but don’t tie it to carry permits.

this is not Illinois...this is Tennessee. sorry ya'll lost that battle, but we're choosing to still claim that we have rights here in TN. we may not be able to exercise them to the fullest currently, but if we just admit that they are not our rights, then....well, I've already been through that.

and as far as not tying it to carry permits...this entire thread is about carrying so.......

sorry to be such a jack-ass Dave...

[macville]

Our right to bear arms DOES exist. Unfortunately, our Federal Government has been FAR too busy spending our money over the last 80 years instead of telling the states that gun bans/carry permits/etc are unconstitutional. But I guess we shouldn't expect much out of them since they have done bans on firearms that are unconstitutional.

When you consider the Federalist papers, and quotes from some of the founders of the country, you can not take the right to bear arms any other way.

John Adams: "Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self

defense." (A defense of the Constitution of the US)

George Washington: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the

people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than

99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very

atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes,

we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)

Thomas Jefferson: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (T. Jefferson papers,

334, C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950)

And here's the the best quote:

James Madison: "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of

other countries, whose people are afraid to trust them with arms." (Federalist Paper #46)

Considering that James Madison wrote the original 2d amendment I think he probably has the best idea about what it was supposed to mean. In fact, ALL the versions that were considered contained, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". I think that point is VERY important.

It's time to stand up and tell both the state and the feds that the 2d means EXACTLY what it says. We are tired of it being infringed!

Matthew

Matthew

[DaveTN]

sorry to be such a jack-ass Dave...

45… If you think I was calling you a jack ass, I apologize; I was not.

If you look at what I wrote I think you will see that I was referring to the Illinois carry conversations. If a state recognizes your right to carry, carry permits are not required.

I am active in trying to get carry permits in Illinois and it pisses me off when an intelligent discussion is going on with someone and some jack ass turns it into a 2nd amendment debate. That battle has been fought and lost in Illinois. If they want to continue it, fine, but don’t tie it to carry permits.

I was jailed in Illinois for carrying without a permit. If a citizen in Tennessee carries without a permit they risk being jailed. Therefore there is no right.

But carry on your 2nd amendment fight. I surely don’t want anyone to stop doing that. But my point was that if carry privileges are tied to the second amendment; that battle is over before it gets started.

Yes, this is Tennessee and I don’t expect you to give a rip about Illinois. But I do. I also know that states like Illinois and California stand directly in the way of any meaningful reconizition of the 2nd amendment or any National Carry laws. If states like Illinois can get carry privileges it will help us all.

Edited September 28, 2009 by DaveTN