I pose this question...

[Dolomite`s Breezy]

Is that confusing to you?...lol

I think I know what you are saying .. if I am way off , let me know and correct it

It is a priviledge for me to carry a weapon in this country... They could simply say "NO" ...you are not an American Citizen. ..They could also deny me my ability to drive.. They could deny me a lot of things even tho I am a Resident Alien.. so, If I am allowed to have a gun, carry one for my own protection, I would say thats a great priviledge..

It is also a priviledge to reside in this country and work and do all the things most others can.. I would say thats a great priviledge

[daddyo]

I think I know what you are saying .. if I am way off , let me know and correct it

It is a priviledge for me to carry a weapon in this country... They could simply say "NO" ...you are not an American Citizen. ..They could also deny me my ability to drive.. They could deny me a lot of things even tho I am a Resident Alien.. so, If I am allowed to have a gun, carry one for my own protection, I would say thats a great priviledge..

It is also a priviledge to reside in this country and work and do all the things most others can.. I would say thats a great priviledge

To me, the RKBA is just that... a right, and not a privilege. Driving is a privilege. Constitutionally speaking, the state's permission to carry a firearm for self-protection is not required. It is enumerated in the Bill of Rights as God-given and the government, according to that document, is not allowed to infringe on it. Requiring a citizen to pay the government and be subjected to scrutiny before exercising that right is a violation of the Constitution on the part of the government.

That's my take on it and why I posed the question.

The government would like for you to believe that it's a privilege. Don't fall for it.

[Dolomite_supafly]

But for her it is a priviledge because she it not a US citizen. It is a priviledge for her to be in the country for one and two for her to carry a gun.

Either way she has had more background checks done than the average America citizen. As well as holding quite a few clearances in her life.

Dolomite

Edited June 25, 2012 by Dolomite_supafly

[daddyo]

But for her it is a priviledge because she it not a US citizen. It is a priviledge for her to be in the country for one and two for her to carry a gun.

Either way she has had more background checks done than the average America citizen. As well as holding quite a few clearances in her life.

Dolomite

Ah,OK, I wasn't thinking in that context (even though that's the premise of the OP). I stand corrected. Thanks for being patient with an old man.

[TMF]

I didn't know a resident alien could not obtain a HCP in TN. Is this the norm in most SE States?

[McAllyn]

Thank you and Dolo for answering my question. That pretty much narrows my opinion down to that fact that since you can buy a weapon, you should be able to use that weapon to defend yourself and your loved ones.

Learn something new every day

Mac

[BrasilNuts]

I think the question here is how would they know if I was not a bad person in my home country.. because TIC`s is statewide only( I hink) or nationwide.

Those checks should have been done as you were going to through the visa process before being allowed to enter the US.

Since you, like my wife, have your Permanent Resident Card, I think you've been checked out pretty thoroughly.

We had to have background checks from every state in Brazil that she had lived in plus one from the Federal Police.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I didn't know a resident alien could not obtain a HCP in TN. Is this the norm in most SE States?

A resident alien CAN get their HCP just like a citizen or resident of Tennessee. They can also purchase any firearm or NFA items.

Dolomite

[TnShooter83]

Should a NON-US citizen be allowed to possess or carry concealed in the States?( not talking about the illegal aliens..)I am talking about legit green card holders (me )

If they are legal, it is FINE with me.

What's the difference it that and issuing a drivers license?

[TMF]

A resident alien CAN get their HCP just like a citizen or resident of Tennessee. They can also purchase any firearm or NFA items.

Dolomite

Okay, didn't know that. Sounds about right though. As far as I know resident aliens have other rights too; don't see why possessing/carrying a firearm is any different.

[Oh Shoot]

To me, the RKBA is just that... a right, and not a privilege.....

Nice sentiment. But if you can't exercise a right, you don't have it.

It's against the law to carry a gun in TN. You must buy a privilege to do it. Yes, just like a driver's license.

- OS

[Dolomite`s Breezy]

Nice sentiment. But if you can't exercise a right, you don't have it.

It's against the law to carry a gun in TN. You must buy a privilege to do it. Yes, just like a driver's license.

- OS

Could not have said it better myself

<----Quoting challenged

Edited June 25, 2012 by Dolomite`s Ball and Chain

[peejman]

As others have said, if you can legally own a handgun and meet the eligibility requirements, fine with me. A coworker is a resident alien from the UK and a serious gun nut. He typically buys guns 3 at a time because the "instant" part of TICS usually takes 3 days for him.

[daddyo]

Nice sentiment. But if you can't exercise a right, you don't have it.

It's against the law to carry a gun in TN. You must buy a privilege to do it. Yes, just like a driver's license.

- OS

And unfortunately, there are too many people who are completely comfortable with that.

Edited June 25, 2012 by DaddyO

[Oh Shoot]

You sound as though that's perfectly OK with you.

I expressed no point of view, just the facts.

The People's Republic of China has a constitution also, and it guarantees that "citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession, and of demonstration." Sure.

Words on paper are not rights if they can not be practiced on the society's streets.

Our 2A "rights" are infringed in every state in the union; just a matter of degree.

- OS

[BigK]

I think that if you are legal, pay taxes, can pass the background check, and are able to pay for it...you ought to be able to get a permit to tote it!

[Oh Shoot]

I think that if you are legal, pay taxes, can pass the background check, and are able to pay for it...you ought to be able to get a permit to tote it!

What taxes? Are not the HCP tax and the safety course tax and the sales tax and 4473 tax on the firearm enough?

- OS

[Mike.357]

there is no right to carry, certainly not in TN.

I personally believe I do not need the blessing of any governing body to have a right to self defense. Nor does anyone anywhere that draws breath.

Unfortunately the goobermint does not agree. We got to pay for the priviledge.

Aliens, illegal or otherwise should be able to carry, period.

[Sam1]

Aliens, illegal or otherwise should be able to carry, period.

I agree with this as well, except the illegal aliens should only be allowed to carry 400 yards outside our border

[BigK]

Are not the HCP tax and the safety course tax and the sales tax and 4473 tax on the firearm enough?

The bottom half of workers in this country aren't paying any income taxes at all. Illegal aliens fit into this category of people.

Legal immigrants, however, typically play fairly and aren't here to game the system. Like many of us, they are law-abiding, tax-paying, decent folks that deserve more privileges than the others.

So, no those additional taxes/fees that are incidental to the purchase of a handgun and the class is not enough.

[G27]

there is no right to carry, certainly not in TN.

I personally believe I do not need the blessing of any governing body to have a right to self defense. Nor does anyone anywhere that draws breath.

Unfortunately the goobermint does not agree. We got to pay for the priviledge.

Aliens, illegal or otherwise should be able to carry, period.

Yah, it seems that some people think "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable Rights; that among these, are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" only applies to US citizens and legal residents.

[Dolomite`s Breezy]

But an illegal alien allready broke the law by entering the US by illegal means. I can understand that they want to leave their country because of no work, better life etc..I am very sympathedic to their plight..BUT...If you start out here as a Illegal Alien , you should not have more rights that someone that is here legaly and went thru the propper channels.

So.. it is OK to break the law , and then cite the declaration of Indenpendance /Constitution/Bill of Rights ?...

Edited June 26, 2012 by Dolomite`s Ball and Chain

[G27]

But an illegal alien allready broke the law by entering the US by illegal means. I can understand that they want to leave their country because of no work, better life etc..I am very sympathedic to their plight..BUT...If you start out here as a Illegal Alien , you should not have more rights that someone that is here legaly and went thru the propper channels.

So.. it is OK to break the law , and then cite the declaration of Indenpendance /Constitution/Bill of Rights ?...

Two separate issues - if the right to life is truly unalienable, given by 'their Creator', then as DaddyO and Mike pointed out above, the government shouldn't have the right to regulate it (or the defense thereof) regardless of the the person's legal status or citizenship.

I applaud you for doing things legally and in the correct manner and believe we need more people like you, not people sneaking across the border. But that said, no matter how they get here, if the rights are truly (supposed to be) unalienable, then I'm not in favor of any citizenship-based laws curtailing those rights.

It shouldn't surprise me anymore, but it still does that so many here seem to be will to draw a line in the sand, essentially suggesting 'this person has unalienable rights, but that person does not'. Makes me wonder if they even understand what unalienable means. Or maybe they consider the government their 'creator'.

[Dolomite`s Breezy]

Perpahs you are right.. Where do you draw the line on who should be afforded what?...

Either all of us and them or no one.. BUT why have laws then?

I do not undestand all the laws and some upset me because it protects people who have no morals or are just plain criminals but get away with it because they are protected because they are here illegaly..

But anyway..I guess it doesnt matter how you got here.. trying to protect yourself or your loved ones remains one and the same after all.

[G27]

Perpahs you are right.. Where do you draw the line on who should be afforded what?...

IMO, unalienable rights, if they truly are unalienable, apply to all.

Just because someone breaks the law doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed freedom of speech, freedom from self incrimination, freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, or freedom to protect their own life.