Ruger Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
1. if we make the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right to bear arms subject to identity checks, why not do the same for voter registration?
2. if is unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to purchase a firearm, why not apply same rules to welfare recipients?
3. if state-issued driving and same gender marriage licenses are nationally recognized, why not same for state-issued ccw permits?

im just asking what i hope are reasonable questions.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,158 Posts
Sounds reasonable to me!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,940 Posts
The constitution doesn't give you the right to keep and bear arms. The constitution just forbids the govt. from violating that natural right which existed before the bill of rights was written. Last time I checked the 2nd amendment doesn't say the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed once an identity check and background check is done. There's no need to do that if we keep violent criminals locked up. If someone " serves their time " or " pays their debt to society " and is deemed to be safe to be released back into public they should get all their rights back. Releasing people back into society that are deemed unsafe to own a gun doesn't make sense because those same people could still use a million other weapons that aren't guns to hurt people. Keep them locked up or release them and give them all their rights back and stop throwing people into cages for non-violent crimes where there is no actual victim. People own their own bodies and they should have the right to do whatever they want to it as long as they don't harm anyone else. If they want to do foolish things to their own body they should have every right to do so. Just as much of a right as you have to drink alcohol and smoke tobacco.
As far as a national CCW permit I would support that even though a permit shouldn't be needed in the first place.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,940 Posts
As far as welfare recipients with guns go. I think the problem is with welfare and not them having a right to own and carry guns. If welfare was funded by 100% voluntary donations instead of theft by way of govt taxation I doubt you would have a problem with them having guns. That shows that the heart of the problem comes from government theft ( taxation ) and not from needy people.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,717 Posts
1. if we make the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right to bear arms subject to identity checks, why not do the same for voter registration?

That is something I could support ... but that would take away a large voting group away from all career politicians


2. if is unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to purchase a firearm, why not apply same rules to welfare recipients?

Just because you are poor doesn't mean you should have your rights taken away ... however I would strongly oppose welfare recipients the right to use their welfare money on any non essential items ... beer, cigs, cars and yes even guns

3. if state-issued driving and same gender marriage licenses are nationally recognized, why not same for state-issued ccw permits?

If I buy a gun in Ohio where I live and there is a FFL background check done (which is federal) why can't I go to any other state and buy a gun if they are using the same federal background check ...


im just asking what i hope are reasonable questions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
2. if is unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to purchase a firearm, why not apply same rules to welfare recipients?

Just because you are poor doesn't mean you should have your rights taken away ... however I would strongly oppose welfare recipients the right to use their welfare money on any non essential items ... beer, cigs, cars and yes even guns
I think what jstert was trying to say, if I follow his logic, is that if it is unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to purchase a firearm, why is it not also unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to receive welfare?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
gravel bay is correct, my bad, this is what happens when you stay up too late and write a post. i would never say that folks with a bonafide need for public assistance should be deprived of our god-given rights. i do believe that if you have a real need for my/our hard earned tax dollars you should live as clean a life as we do--he who pays sets the rules, eh.

while in principle i am against any permit to practice a right, in our complex age where fewer folks grow up with firearms a permit with training should be necessary to carry in public, open or concealed. on the other hand i support no permit, no restriction, no registration needed to buy and carry on one's private property.

if it were up to me i would have every high school kid learn about firearms by passing a life sklls/emergency course: driving, swimming, firearms, fire fighting, first aid, cooking, clothes mending, gardening, simple car & household repair... these once commonly acquired skills seem to be in short supply in our sophisticated age, sad to say. i might even agree with our obscene $1.15 trillion federal budget if it paid for such a program. and who knows, kids might even enjoy it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
The constitution doesn't give you the right to keep and bear arms. The constitution just forbids the govt. from violating that natural right which existed before the bill of rights was written. Last time I checked the 2nd amendment doesn't say the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed once an identity check and background check is done. There's no need to do that if we keep violent criminals locked up. If someone " serves their time " or " pays their debt to society " and is deemed to be safe to be released back into public they should get all their rights back. Releasing people back into society that are deemed unsafe to own a gun doesn't make sense because those same people could still use a million other weapons that aren't guns to hurt people. Keep them locked up or release them and give them all their rights back and stop throwing people into cages for non-violent crimes where there is no actual victim. People own their own bodies and they should have the right to do whatever they want to it as long as they don't harm anyone else. If they want to do foolish things to their own body they should have every right to do so. Just as much of a right as you have to drink alcohol and smoke tobacco.
As far as a national CCW permit I would support that even though a permit shouldn't be needed in the first place.

Well said.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,940 Posts
Voting without an ID is not the heart of the problem just like welfare recipients with guns isn't the heart of the problem. The heart of the problem is the immoral idea that 51% of the people can " force " their will onto 49% of the people. If the decisions made by voting couldn't be forced onto anyone without direct consent you wouldn't care who was voting without an ID at all.

If something is morally wrong for you as an individual to force onto your neighbor by yourself that also means outsourcing that same action to a 3rd party would still be immoral even if that 3rd party was a politician because they shouldn't be exempt from that same common morality everyone shares with their neighbors and because pulling a lever in a voting booth doesn't alter reality and make the immoral act good.

Politicians cease being " representatives " and become rulers when they are given exemptions from that common morality or any special rights the average person doesn't have. History shows giving those special rights to a ruling class is what always leads to abuses and corruption. Having a ruling class with extra rights is what creates the incentive for people and special interest groups to lobby govt. for an unfair advantage over everyone else. It govt. agents didn't have those extra rights to begin with there wouldn't be any incentive or ability for anyone to game the system. In a true free society all interactions would be consensual and nobody would have extra rights or any exemptions from shared morality. Especially not a political ruling class.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
1. if we make the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right to bear arms subject to identity checks, why not do the same for voter registration?

2. if is unlawful for convicted felons and drug or spousal abusers to purchase a firearm, why not apply same rules to welfare recipients?

3. if state-issued driving and same gender marriage licenses are nationally recognized, why not same for state-issued ccw permits?



im just asking what i hope are reasonable questions.

1. Because then the Dumbocrats can't vote often in the same election. Better chance of voter fraud which usually benefits the liberals.
2. Targeting Welfare recipients would be targeting the Dumbocrats voting base.
3. Probably because some states are more gun friendly than others.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top