|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 11:50:47 GMT -5
Go for it. Maybe one day ill work your protective detail when you make it to the big time hahaha
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Uriel Bates on May 19, 2016 12:09:50 GMT -5
I'm already going to have Smith & Wesson, Sam Colt, and Carl Walther backing me up, but maybe. We'll see, lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 13:36:43 GMT -5
I'm already going to have Smith & Wesson, Sam Colt, and Carl Walther backing me up, but maybe. We'll see, lol. Ha. Not in my city you wont |
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Uriel Bates on May 19, 2016 18:01:48 GMT -5
I'm already going to have Smith & Wesson, Sam Colt, and Carl Walther backing me up, but maybe. We'll see, lol. Ha. Not in my city you wont You live in one of those ultra liberal "gun free" cities? I am very interested to see how their "laws" hold up on the books since District of Columbia v Heller and McDonald v Chicago. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2016 18:23:54 GMT -5
Ha. Not in my city you wont You live in one of those ultra liberal "gun free" cities? I am very interested to see how their "laws" hold up on the books since District of Columbia v Heller and McDonald v Chicago. Didn't we just have another of these cases rule that the city couldn't have a ban on gun sales within so many miles from the city? I'm pretty sure I saw a story in my news feed but I forget which it was. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 18:30:00 GMT -5
Ha. Not in my city you wont You live in one of those ultra liberal "gun free" cities? I am very interested to see how their "laws" hold up on the books since District of Columbia v Heller and McDonald v Chicago. Not live, work. You can have a gun. You can not have a concealed carry permit. They are starting to relax that law now to allow a few CCW but it is still EXTREMELY difficult to obtain one. My city is definitely not gun free. Most of them aren't legal but they're definitely here hahaha |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 18:37:21 GMT -5
Also, not that I disagree with your feelings on the matter but neither of those cases would have a bearing on whether or not you can buy a gun inside a city.
The city can't restrict you from buying or owning a gun, but they can have a local ordinance that prohibits firearms from being sold within the city limits and they can certainly prohibit you from carrying it loaded on your person
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Uriel Bates on May 19, 2016 18:39:21 GMT -5
Where do you live, and where do you work then? I wouldn't be surprised if that "law" gets overturned soon. The only issue is the current makeup of the Supreme Court, and who they might install to replace Justice Scalia.
A law in D.C. was struck down again. They don't seem to listen too well to what the Court had to say. Individuals have a Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and each State must abide by the 2nd Amendment as well. (D.C. isn't a State, therefore even if the 2nd Amendment wasn't incorporated to the States, it would apply to D.C.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 18:48:51 GMT -5
I'm a Fed. I'll let you guess where I work.
Individuals can certainly keep firearms here. They just can't carry them on their person outside their homes. They must be transported in a certain manner.
I'd love to see CCW permits issued more frequently. I'm a big believer in more good guys with guns is a good thing (I don't think studies support that but it seems like common sense to me). I do think that background checks are a good thing and I feel that there should be legitimate training that comes along with the issuance of a CCW.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Uriel Bates on May 19, 2016 18:56:07 GMT -5
I do believe that McDonald v Chicago opens the door to challenge such law, first as it dealt specifically with a city ordinance, and second due to the wording of the 2nd Amendment. The only drawback is in D.C. v Heller in which they reaffirmed the individual rights, but also claimed the Right was not absolute (contrary to the wording of the amendment). Another challenge I believe is the status of the District of Columbia, which is a Federal District and not a State, but the Amendment should still apply even if the ruling of Barron v Baltimore was still in place.
Would be very interesting to see what happens.
That being said, we do need to pull back a bit on the political discussions here. Friend me on Facebook and we can continue if you'd like.
I'll be locking this thread later on tonight, after I post my RP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Spearman on May 19, 2016 19:32:54 GMT -5
Yea I'm not much for political debate. Especially since I actually agree with you. I'm just stating factually what it is where I work.
I think the caveat is that the fed can restrict possession of a firearm on federal grounds. Technically all of DC is federal grounds.
I don't have a Facebook. You can PM me if you want.
I'm a libertarian so I'm definitely with you on the gun thing
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarah Twilight on May 19, 2016 19:37:24 GMT -5
I voted yes. For the most part, my political beliefs are about the same as yours and I'm a Constitutional Conservative. I'll leave it at that. But absolutely you should run. Gotta make a difference somehow, and doing it from the inside seems like a great start.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 8:43:15 GMT -5
The whole gun discussion ends at Switzerland/Honduras  |
|
Buzzsaw Bundy
Rookie
I ain't jacked my lumber baby... Since my chain saw you...
Posts: 276
|
Post by Buzzsaw Bundy on May 20, 2016 9:39:21 GMT -5
Switzerland would be nice to visit, but I don't want to go to Honduras just to stop the convo...
|
|
|
|
Post by AdamYoung on May 21, 2016 7:12:22 GMT -5
|
|
