In Michigan:
What is it with liberals and gun rights? Liberals simply cannot find an individual right to carry in the U.S. Constitution, even though it is explicitly cited in amendments that specifically address only individual rights, but can find a right to abortion which is somehow invisibly inserted somewhere in the same document.
It’s partly because they’re not really liberals.
I have friends who think the whole peculiar panic by progressives over the 2nd amendment is a specific attempt to keep people unarmed so the government can take over.
I rather think it’s just another reflection of their attitude that people cannot be trusted to be responsible for themselves, and therefore the state is necessary to make sure we have health insurance, wear our seatbelts, wear our helmets on our motorcycles and don’t play with guns.
Interesting though that the 2nd is the amendment that is so willingly compromised, even by claimed supporters. The 10th circuit just ruled that your 2nd amendment rights are not applicable if you are found guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence. Many 2A supporters will say this is just fine.
While I know this is now going to portray me as some thug who supports domestic violence, what other constitutional right is null and void if you commit any misdemeanor?
Do you lose your first amendment rights if you commit misdemeanor assault? (verbal threat)
Do you lose your fourth amendment rights if you are busted for misdemeanor possession of marijuana?
I SO enjoy living in Texas.
I don’t know the specifics of the case, Bob C., but it sounds as though what the court ruled was that Congress has the power to exclude persons convicted of misdemeanors from the right to keep and bear arms.
Personally, in a political climate where convicted felons are increasingly granted the right to vote after their sentences are up, I don’t like Congress building more walls around the Second Amendment either — but even if Congress were to stick to the notion that felons and only felons may be disqualified from certain fundamental rights, there doesn’t really seem to be any overriding constitutional principle I can think of that would keep them from redefining these domestic-violence misdemeanors as felonies.
Anyway, if the ruling were appealed to SCOTUS one would hope it would be overturned — there being only competent constitutional jurists on that Court, right? No? Well, that’s one of the reasons presidential elections matter.
And the power of Congress to make laws, including bad ones, is one of the reasons congressional elections matter. If we get to thinking we can leave it all up to the courts we get … what we have.
I almost bought my first self defense pistol the other day. I’m a student in a somewhat sketchy neighborhood in SW Michigan on a limited budget, so when I found a good deal on a Taurus 9mm at the local gun shop, I was ready to jump on it. That is until I found out it was going to cost around $250 to get my concealed weapon’s permit. So I could afford either the gun or the CCW permit. Neither are particularly helpful for self defense individually. I find it very frustrating that I must pay that much money to be ‘allowed’ to defend myself.
@ Aaron Williams: You can get a CCW permit? You’re ahead of me in California.
I’d suggest be patient. Get one now, and the other when you can afford it. As for which one, I don’t know, it would depend on your circumstances.
If you have access to a range, maybe start with the Taurus and practice with it while you save for the CCW?
Don’t know how it is in California, but in Michigan you have to be 21+, take a required course($125-175), do 4 hours of supervised range time and pay a $105 dollar application fee.
I’ve got access to pistols and my own .22 rifles for shooting and I keep my .22s loaded in my room for home defense, the point of the Taurus and CCW permit is to avoid getting wasted walking to my car in the middle of the night. Not much point in getting one now since one or the other won’t help with that. I’ll just hope for the best until graduate next year
I was actually about to get the gun on layaway, pay for it in 6 months and get my CCW permit now, then I got my tuition bill…
Aaron, California is a ‘may issue’ state, as in the cops may issue you a CCW permit if they feel like it. The state CCW law requires showing ‘good cause’ for a permit and leaves the determination of good cause totally in the hands of local law enforcement.
So if a person is lucky enough to live in a county whose chief law enforcement officer has set a reasonable policy regarding ‘good cause’, that person can get a permit. If however you live in say Los Angeles, the second largest city in the U.S., it doesn’t matter what your good cause is, you can’t get a permit.
Once upon a time, most other states were like California when it came to CCW permits. It was the history of horrible abuse of the discretionary power why most states today now have ‘must issue’ CCW laws which stripped the power of discretion away from the police.
Funny how the things the modern left hates the most — like personal firearms, personal automobiles, home schooling, commerce, free trade, etc — all reduce the individuals dependence on the state?
I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.
Brad, yeah I vaguely remember some discussion years ago about passing some sort of ‘just cause’ legislation for CCW permits in Michigan. Fortunately it was turned down. Paying a couple hundred dollars is certainly better than asking for a government favor, but its still ridiculous.
How bout having to apply for your Free Speech Permit requiring just cause to exercise your First Amendment rights in public. Wouldn’t put it past them
Well, I am happy to report I spent this weekend and approx 1400 rounds practicing the only proven and effective form of gun control this past weekend:
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=31306
I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.
Totally. It certainly doesn’t speak to their core beliefs one iota. The emperor’s new clothes look fabulous.
Yes, they are not liberals and it’s better not to refer to them as liberals. They are leftists, or authoritarians, or muddled thinkers who wish to use state power to enforce their aesthetic distaste for private weapons, or all of the above.
I always wondered how those who espoused the slogan “Power to the People” as young adults would enact their vision of utopia by denying the very insturments of that power from the people.
There is simply no right more eglaitarian than the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
It’s because “the people” are something radicals use to secure power. Once the radical are installed, it’s time to cut-off the power.
As for the proletariat, well, there’s a lot of cognitive dissonance there, or should I say, “False consciousness?”