Once again bashing the left; if you think people should be qualified, tested, and documented to carry a concealed weapon shouldn't the same be true for voting? Shouldn't we have to prove (within reason) that we are who we say we are?
Also I notice that constantly harken back to the laws as they are and that you wish no more laws. So you are okay with people carrying concealed weapons along as they do so within the law of the 45 states (I think it is actually 47 in some shape or form) but what about a municipality or police department that sets such stringent qualifications that next to no one can qualify. It is a defacto ban while maintaining the illusion of a right to self defense. But tell me this, what if the Supreme Court finally takes up the question and rules that any law may not supercede federal law and federal law is clear; you may not prevent people from being armed which would make all gun laws moot. Would you sit still for that?
On a slight side note, here in Kansas they passed a law that says the federal government is regulating weapons because of the interstate commerce clause. This law says that any weapon manufactured in Kansas for sale in Kansas only for use in Kansas is not any business of the federal government. The Brady Institute is not happy with that and is filing a lawsuit. So tell you where you stand on that. Does a federal, out of state organization have any standing in Kansas and a Kansas only law.
|
