AR carry at Atlanta airport

[JayC]

I'm sorry Dolomite, but you're completely wrong on history, and natural rights here...  The right to own and carry arms to protect yourself is a natural right, any restrictions on that right what so ever is an infringement on our God given rights, and a violation of the Constitution.

 

While you and I may feel a pistol is good enough for protection (and I don't completely agree with that statement), someone else may well feel the need for a rifle, and a fourth person may well feel they need to carry a sword.  To try and limit a persons options to carry the weapons they see fit to protect themselves, is an infringement of their God given rights, period.

 

And you're analogy with freedom of speech is completely wrong...  I'm free to say anything I want, but there maybe consequences in very limited circumstances to that speech...  Let's take the commonly used yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater example and compare it to gun control laws.

 

The government can prohibit all speech in a theater for fear that one person may yell fire...  The government can't even prohibit people from using the word fire in a theater...  to do so would be considered prior restraint which is almost always prohibited under current law and SCOTUS rulings.

 

But, gun laws are prior restraint, and therefore always infringe on the peoples free exercise of that right...  These laws no matter what SCOTUS may say violate our natural rights endowed by our Creator, and therefore are immoral and unconstitutional.

 

Ok, the right to self defense is a God given right. The right to keep and bear arms is NOT a God given right unless the founding fathers were gods. The right to keep and bear arms is not a right that is guaranteed forever and is not absolute like the right to self defense is. And just like you cannot say whatever you want wherever you want you cannot carry whatever you want wherever you want. Now anywhere you find yourself you still have the God given right to protect yourself but you sure as hell can be told what tools you are allowed to use when defending yourself.

 

I am speaking in how things are and not how we want them to be.

 

I am very pro second amendment but I also recognize the fact that my rights should not interfere with others rights, especially outside of my own property. My right to carry, either rifle or pistol, does not trump someone else's rights on their own property.

 

You have no clue how many emails I have wrote and phone calls I have made trying to get rifle carry passed here in Tennessee. Anyone who has been on the board for any amount of time knows I have a real need to have as much firepower as I can have. But after seeing what all is happening in other states that have open rifle carry I had a change of heart. I would love nothing more than to tote a rifle around wherever I go but in the end I would rather be able to carry a pistol on my side, and have my rifle in my vehicle, than take a chance on loosing both by carrying a rifle openly. I will gladly leave a rifle in my vehicle in order to have a handgun on my side. Having a bunch of immature idiots walk around with rifles slung in order to scare people will do nothing but cause the majority of people demand a change and those changes in firearms laws might prevent me from carrying ANY firearms, including rifles. Ideally I wish everyone tolerated everything all the time but we, as humans, are intolerant of things we do not like. And no matter how often one might do it those that do not like it will continue to not like it. And when we force people to do something they do not like they will take action and in the case of carrying rifles the action taken might affect more than those who are the ones carrying rifles.

 

We, in Tennessee, are allowed to carry openly or concealed and the vast majority of people are OK with that. But carrying a rifle, which hasn't been in favor since the invention of a pistol, is not something people will ever get accustomed to. And while I embrace their enthusiasm it would be better served talking to people about it than scaring the same people that will eventually take that right away from them.

 

I have probably watched hundreds of hours of these rifle chuckleheads and in the vast majority you can see they enjoy making people uncomfortable or enjoy the conflicts they create. Then afterwards they often revel in the joy it brought them when they think they have won but they do not realize what risks they are putting other gun owners in. I have yet to hear of a single positive thing come out of those that open carry, a lot of negatives but no positives. Imagine, for a second, that open carry of rifles were outlawed in places they are allowed. Do you honestly think those that open carry rifles would not find another way to grief others? I know they will because those bent on causing grief to others will find any means possible to grief others.

 

And as other have said, just because you have a right to do something does not mean you should.

 

And what do you think is going to happen because of this guys antics? Think people are going to embrace it or even tolerate it? No, the average person is going to see what he has done, get scared and demand the laws be changed. Then what will be left is yet another place people cannot protect themselves from criminals.

[Dolomite_supafly]

God is what gives us the right to self defense and the Constitution, that was created by mortals, is what gives us the right to keep and bear arms. Without the Constitution, and specifically the 2nd amendment, we would be like the vast majority of the countries in the world and be without firearms but still have the right to self defense. The ONLY document that guarantees our right to keep and bear arms is the Constitution and that was written by mortals, not God.

 

If God is present in England, why do they not have firearms for self defense? Australia? Japan? The reason why is because none of those countries have a document that guarantees the right to keep and bear arms like our Constitution does. The Constitution is what guarantees our right to keep and bear arms, not God.

 

What about those that do not believe in God? Are they not allowed the benefit of a firearm for self defense? Of course not because the Constitution is what gives them the right to keep and bear arms, regardless if they believe in God or not. If the right to keep and bear arms was believed to be a God given right then why did the founding fathers feel the need to specifically guarantee it in the Constitution? They did not create an amendment with the right to self defense because they know that self defense is a God given right and does not need to be protected like the second amendment. Look at all the other amendments and tell me which other ones are God given rights because if one is then they all are. Is the right to vote a God given right? What about the right to unreasonable searches and seizures? Or the right to trial by jury? Those are NOT God given rights but rights given to us in the Constitution. So the right to keep and bear arms is the same as the other amendment.

 

You have no right, God given or otherwise, to carry a weapon on someone else's property for your own self defense unless they specifically give you that right. You still have the right to self defense, because that IS a God given right, but the property owner can dictate what weapon you use on their property. They can dictate ANY conditions, except self defense or those against the law, while on their property including the wearing of a pink tutu with purple dots. So I guess that means the property owner must trump God and the right to keep and bear arms you say he gave you because they can remove your right to use a firearm on their property.

 

I endorse and will stand by anyone's right to carry a firearm any way they choose but when their actions threaten my ability to carry a firearm then they are no a friend of the gun community. And if they are no friend to the gun community then they are the enemy to the gun community. Embody is a prime example of this, nothing he has done thus far is illegal but his actions will eventually impact others and their ability to have a firearm. And that is why we condemn him, not because what he is doing is illegal but because what he is doing is irresponsible and may impact fellow gun owners.

 

The right to keep and bear arms is not a God given right. Self defense is a God given right, the right to keep and bear arms is not.

[Hozzie]

Can we get off of the God gave me rights crap.  No he didn't, you were born in America where your rights are what the constitution and the laws say they are.  Just who's God is dealing out these rights?  If you had been born in France, your rights would be completely different, not because someone there may have a different God, but because they have different rights as defined by the country.

 

I love how when people don't like things they immediately go to, I have a God given right.  BS, you live in America.  Your rights are solely defined by what the country says they are.  We can debate all we want about what the constitution says is allowed and what our government process (i.e courts) interprets as your rights.  I am not saying you have to even live by them, but you may have to defend your actions that confict with those interpreted rights in court and lose even more.  Yours or any other God isn't protecting you from that no matter how much you say it.  In that case, it isn't a right, it's a fairy tale.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Hozzie

[btq96r]

Can we get off of the God gave me rights crap. No he didn't, you were born in America where your rights are what the constitution and the laws say they are. Just who's God is dealing out these rights? If you had been born in France, your rights would be completely different, not because someone there may have a different God, but because they have different rights as defined by the country.

I love how when people don't like things they immediately go to, I have a God given right. BS, you live in America. Your rights are solely defined by what the country says they are. We can debate all we want about what the constitution says is allowed and what our government process (i.e courts) interprets as your rights. I am not saying you have to even live by them, but you may have to defend your actions that confict with those interpreted rights in court and lose even more. Yours or any other God isn't protecting you from that no matter how much you say it. In that case, it isn't a right, it's a fairy tale.

I'm at a loss for words with regards to how awesomely on point this post is. Hopefully it will sink in, but I'm skeptical.

Regardless, well said, Hozzie. Edited June 9, 2015 by btq96r

[DaveTN]

It’s not a God given right: it’s an inalienable human right. And that doesn’t change whether you are here, England or France.

What changes is what the local laws and the courts recognize. States here claim that they have the right to control where and when an individual will carry. You can disagree with that; but that’s how it is until the SCOTUS rules on that.

[Hozzie]

Dave, while I like the phrase inalienable human right much better, I must say that having or carrying a gun doesn't fall under that for me.  About the only thing I would consider an absolute inalienable human right is the right to life.  In our country, we certainly have some more that could probably be considered an inalienable human right, but in many parts of the world, even the right to life isn't guaranteed.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Hozzie

[Dolomite_supafly]

Dave, while I like the phrase inalienable human right much better, I must say that having or carrying a gun doesn't fall under that for me.  About the only thing I would consider an absolute inalienable human right is the right to life.  In our country, we certainly have some more that could probably be considered an inalienable human right, but in many parts of the world, even the right to life isn't guaranteed.

 

And even the right to life is not guaranteed here in the US. Our government can, and does, kill people regularly so those they are killing do not have the right to life. But their loss of life are the consequences of their actions.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Dolomite_supafly

[Hozzie]

Dolo, while I agree with you in theory, it is apples and oranges in my opinion.  If we simply take it from when a person is born (I will leave abortion out of this for now), most would agree that simply existing is an inalienable human right.  Taking it to consequences for actions is a whole different area.  They don't just kill people to kill people.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Hozzie

[Oh Shoot]

All these claiming of "rights" supposedly granted by either a caring supernatural being or the uncaring natural cosmos itself are fine fare for highfalutin philosophy. But Dolo and Hozzie are spot on -- there's nothing inalienable about anything that can be denied by force, whether "legal" or otherwise.

 

Certainly, even with a specific Amendment assuring us that our keeping and bearing arms cannot be infringed, that promise has been largely proven false. Indeed, that least favorite member of the Bill of Rights could be modified or repealed entirely.

 

Just as when we depended on what we could wrest and protect with our own sinews, the principle of "might makes right" is no less valid today -- it's just that the might is not in our own individual hands anymore.

 

If it pleases you to believe you have these rights by default right before you're shot dead or put in prison for exercising them, I suppose you do have the inalienable right to feel that way.
 

- OS

Edited June 9, 2015 by Oh Shoot

[10-Ring]

Can we get off of the God gave me rights crap.  No he didn't, you were born in America where your rights are what the constitution and the laws say they are.  Just who's God is dealing out these rights?  If you had been born in France, your rights would be completely different, not because someone there may have a different God, but because they have different rights as defined by the country.

 

I love how when people don't like things they immediately go to, I have a God given right.  BS, you live in America.  Your rights are solely defined by what the country says they are.  We can debate all we want about what the constitution says is allowed and what our government process (i.e courts) interprets as your rights.  I am not saying you have to even live by them, but you may have to defend your actions that confict with those interpreted rights in court and lose even more.  Yours or any other God isn't protecting you from that no matter how much you say it.  In that case, it isn't a right, it's a fairy tale.

 

As a Christian I completely agree with this.  You just can't say that God loves all of his children equally yet only gives certain rights to certain people.  Regardless of your religious views that doesn't even make sense.  I have yet to see a passage in the Bible that could even be twisted around to mean that God gave me the right to own a firearm.  It wasn't God, it was the American soldier. 

 

I really don't even know how I feel about the open carrying of a long gun issue.  I do believe that it makes all gun owners look like a bunch a bullies when these events happen, but I feel like restricting ANY kind of gun carry makes me no better than companies like Starbucks, Chipotle, and Target.  I am 100% against any laws that restrict the owning or carrying of any gun, I am also 100% against acting like a fool just because you legally can.