PDA

View Full Version : Illegal Immigrants want CCW?


chico.cm
01-06-2011, 4:05 PM
I didn't see this duped anywhere...enjoy the read:


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/06/new-aclu-lawsuit-expand-south-dakota-gun-rights/

Sam .223
01-06-2011, 4:12 PM
the article says he is a LEGAL immigrant, for whatever thats worth, at least hes not an illegal, but the question is does our constitution apply to non citizens? this should be an interesting case, not sure i'm behind this one though.

rromeo
01-06-2011, 4:13 PM
Wasn't the ccw permit originally to stop immigrants from carrying?

dantodd
01-06-2011, 4:15 PM
Of course non-citizens enjoy the same protections as citizens. They have all the protections of the 1st, 4th, 5th amendments etc.... Including the second.

gobler
01-06-2011, 4:22 PM
In this circumstance the 14th does apply and he should get a CCW. He has been a legal resident for 30 years. The constitution applies to all who are here and fall under the jurisdiction thereof. Where does the 2nd read "unless you weren't born here" I could see if one was an illegal immigrant then no, no gun no CCW since you do not fall under the 14th.

HowardW56
01-06-2011, 4:26 PM
I have known two long term resident aliens (one Canadian and the other British) Neither wanted to give up their citizenship, (dual citizenship wasn't allowed at all back then).

They both owned guns, it wasn't a big deal. As far as CCW is concerned, I don't know if that was, or is now, and Issue in the California statute.

707electrician
01-06-2011, 4:28 PM
I didn't see this duped anywhere...enjoy the read:


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/06/new-aclu-lawsuit-expand-south-dakota-gun-rights/

Looks like you were a day late:D : http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=380531

Although it is a different article

CCWFacts
01-06-2011, 4:45 PM
Illegal immigrants don't have any gun rights in the US. They are prohibited persons, just like felons or fugitives. They might be able to get a CCW permit (some states might have forgotten to put "must be here legally" in their CCW statutes), but the CCW wouldn't do them any good because they would still be a prohibited person.

Legal immigrants have all the same rights as any US citizen, except for a very small set of rights which are for citizens only. AFAIK, the only rights US citizens have, that legal immigrants do not have, are the right to vote, to hold certain elected offices, to serve on a jury, and certain government jobs. If some state is trying to deny legal immigrants access to CCWs solely on the basis of their lack of citizenship, that state is going to get spanked in court, and rightfully so.

Headly Jones
01-06-2011, 4:58 PM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship.

resident-shooter
01-06-2011, 5:07 PM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship.

Really? Do u know how many Americans live abroad for years? Let's just say a lot. If u think that US is by far the best place to live in every way and everyone outside can't wait o move in, then u r plain wrong. People can reside wherever they want if there is no Visa of any kind involved.

Stonewalker
01-06-2011, 5:08 PM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship.

Puuuuleeease. Get a thinking head on your shoulders before you make comments like that. What animosity do you have toward Legal Permanent Residents and why? Just because they have decided to make America their home, pay taxes and enjoy the benefits of living here without being a citizen? Sounds like a strange thing to be angry about to me.

taperxz
01-06-2011, 5:40 PM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship.

Absurd!! Our nation was founded on legal immigrants. Many of these people worked here, brought their education here and helped make this country. If i had to move out of the country for fear of persecution or work or whatever i would still remain an American. Why wouldn't they?

Gray Peterson
01-06-2011, 5:45 PM
Headly Jones is another example of someone who is a constitutional illiterate....

HowardW56
01-06-2011, 5:52 PM
Headly Jones is another example of someone who is a constitutional illiterate....


:iagree:

tacticalcity
01-06-2011, 5:56 PM
"Originally Posted by Headly Jones
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship."


The idea that someone "should" bother to come an American citizen is a relatively new concept. Today it is a very smart idea, legally speaking, but it was not long ago that people would have looked at you like you were crazy for suggesting that they needed to renounce their native country and swear allegence to ours in order to live here.

One of my great grandfathers immagrated here as a boy legally, but never got around to applying for his citizenship. It just was not a common thing for people to do back then. He loved America, thought of himself as American, and there didn't seem to be much reason to go through the process of becoming an American citizen. To him, and the community he lived in, it seemed like a lot of time and money to invest in a peice of paper nobody cared about. It didn't affect his ability to own property, or own a gun, or anything along those lines. They only impact it had on his life was he could not vote. Coming from a country were you voted for who you were forced to, it wasn't a priority for him.

He had become a very successful businessman. He married another legal immigrant, they had children, and he started a successful vineyard/farm in California. They owned hundreds of achers of land.

Then, not having become an American citizen bit him in the ***. WWII came along...and he and his wife were Italian citizens. All that land they owned, bordered the Pacific Rail Road...so they were classified a security risk, removed from their land, and placed into an internment camp. Unable to pay the mortgage on their land...Christian Brothers swooped in and bought it all for pennies on the dollar. None of which went to my family.

The irony is, back then it would have been ZERO trouble to get their citizenship. They lost everything, because people didn't think it was a big deal to get your citizenship. I will give him this...he never complained about it. Not once. That was simply the way life worked and he made the best of it. After the war he started again, though he was too old to regain his fortune by then he did pretty well for himself. He died an Italian citizen.

Now, as for things like voting I agree you should need to be a citizen. However, the 2nd Amendment should be all the CCW we need. The idea that you need to be licensed to excercise your 2nd Amendment Right is completely unamerican. I have no problem with non-citizens owning firearms either, provided they are not criminals or mentally ill. Being here illegally, however, by definition does make them a criminal. So I have a problem with that.

The part about the OP's story I find ironic, is the ACLU could give a damn about gun rights. They are only doing this because they want Republicans on record opposing guns in some fashion. If your or my gun rights are violated they are no where to be seen. But if it involves illegals, they all over it. They have been noticably silent on the airport scanners and molestation patdowns. If ever there was a cause for the ACLU to take up, that would be it. They would be serving every single American, and prove their importance to mainstream America. But they have stayed curiously silent. Why? Because there is a member of the ACLU in the white house running the show. They don't want to make their guy look bad even when he is clearly wrong. If it were still George Bush in there, they would be all over it. So they don't care about civil liberties, they care about gaining votes for the Democratic Party and making Repulicans look bad.

The ACLU thinks it is opposite day 365 days a year! They used to serve a purpose, but they sold out long ago.

HowardW56
01-06-2011, 5:59 PM
One of my great grandfathers immagrated here as a boy legally, but never got around to applying for his citizenship. It just was not a common thing for people to do back then. He loved America, thought of himself as American, and there didn't seem to be much reason to go through the process of becoming an American citizen. To him, and the community he lived in, it seemed like a lot of time and money to invest in a peice of paper nobody cared about at the time.

He had become a very successful land owner. He married another legal immigrant, they had children, and he started a successful vineyard/farm in Central California. They owned hundreds of achers of land.

Then, not having become an American citizen bit him in the ***. WWII came along...and he and his wife were Italian citizens. All that land they owned, bordered the Pacific Rail Road...so they were classified a security risk, removed from their land, and placed into an internment camp. Unable to pay the mortgage on their land...Christian Brothers swooped in and bought it all for pennies on the dollar. None of which went to my family.

The irony is, back then it would have been ZERO trouble to get their citizenship. They lost everything, because people didn't think it was a big deal.


The sad part is that citizenship may not have mattered. There were many
Japanese American Citizens who were in the internment camps...

They too lost everything.......

Don29palms
01-06-2011, 6:03 PM
We can't pick and choose whicn amendments apply and which ones don't. If one applies they all apply.

Stonewalker
01-06-2011, 6:04 PM
"Originally Posted by Headly Jones
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship."


The idea that someone "should" bother to come an American citizen is a relatively new concept. Today it is a very smart idea, legally speaking, but it was not long ago that people would have looked at you like you were crazy for suggesting that they needed to renounce their native country and swear allegence to ours in order to live here.

One of my great grandfathers immagrated here as a boy legally, but never got around to applying for his citizenship. It just was not a common thing for people to do back then. He loved America, thought of himself as American, and there didn't seem to be much reason to go through the process of becoming an American citizen. To him, and the community he lived in, it seemed like a lot of time and money to invest in a peice of paper nobody cared about at the time.

He had become a very successful land owner. He married another legal immigrant, they had children, and he started a successful vineyard/farm in Central California. They owned hundreds of achers of land.

Then, not having become an American citizen bit him in the ***. WWII came along...and he and his wife were Italian citizens. All that land they owned, bordered the Pacific Rail Road...so they were classified a security risk, removed from their land, and placed into an internment camp. Unable to pay the mortgage on their land...Christian Brothers swooped in and bought it all for pennies on the dollar. None of which went to my family.

The irony is, back then it would have been ZERO trouble to get their citizenship. They lost everything, because people didn't think it was a big deal.

Wow. Injustice I tell you.

rojocorsa
01-06-2011, 6:18 PM
I saw this on another gun board, so I'll just put the same response here. (I was actually about to start a thread on this).

First off, I want to start out by saying that the title for this specific thread, in my opinion, is misleading. This specific has nothing to do whatsoever with illegals, and it irks me that they were brought into the fold.

I don't know if this is just the Faux News doing their thing (with MSM bias I mean)

But the man in question is a legal permanent resident. That fact is clearly spelled out in the beginning of the article, so why the f___ do they keep talking about illegal aliens? Clearly, this isn't about illegal aliens, or like they said, they wouldn't bring forth this case. Besides, illegal aliens aren't even supposed to be here. Sigh. I would just appreciate it if they left out illegal aliens out of the discussion since they're technically irrelevant to this discussion. C'est la Media, I guess.

The mantra about self defense being a human right includes nothing about nationality or citizenship. From the sounds of it, I approve of this case and I am glad that the ACLU is doing the right thing in this case. Sure people say, "Oh, but he's been here for 30 years, why doesn't he just become a citizen?" My answer to that "argument" is that his motive for legal status are non of my business. However, we've established that it is OK for him be in the country, and so as long as he isn't a criminal (like a [member of the other forum] said), there is nothing wrong with him legally carrying a gun. Otherwise, I'd argue that his human rights are being pissed on.

This is what someone else had said and what I just alluded to.
If I were the South Carolina legislature, I'd amend the law to include anyone legally able to purchase or possess a weapon. That would remove the plaintiff's standing, while still excluding illegal aliens (who would have a harder court fight due to existing laws concerning their ability to purchase a weapon, plus their whole lack of legal residency issue).


Remember that the 2A doesn't grant us the right to bear Arms*. It just clearly spells it out that RKBA is not to be INFRINGED.

*Something about the unalienable rights of men endowed from their Creator, am I right?

Self Defense is a Natural, Human right.

Let's leave illegals out of this, for Christ's sake.

WokMaster1
01-06-2011, 6:24 PM
"Originally Posted by Headly Jones
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship."


The idea that someone "should" bother to come an American citizen is a relatively new concept. Today it is a very smart idea, legally speaking, but it was not long ago that people would have looked at you like you were crazy for suggesting that they needed to renounce their native country and swear allegence to ours in order to live here.

One of my great grandfathers immagrated here as a boy legally, but never got around to applying for his citizenship. It just was not a common thing for people to do back then. He loved America, thought of himself as American, and there didn't seem to be much reason to go through the process of becoming an American citizen. To him, and the community he lived in, it seemed like a lot of time and money to invest in a peice of paper nobody cared about. It didn't affect his ability to own property, or own a gun, or anything along those lines. They only impact it had on his life was he could not vote. Coming from a country were you voted for who you were forced to, it wasn't a priority for him.

He had become a very successful businessman. He married another legal immigrant, they had children, and he started a successful vineyard/farm in California. They owned hundreds of achers of land.

Then, not having become an American citizen bit him in the ***. WWII came along...and he and his wife were Italian citizens. All that land they owned, bordered the Pacific Rail Road...so they were classified a security risk, removed from their land, and placed into an internment camp. Unable to pay the mortgage on their land...Christian Brothers swooped in and bought it all for pennies on the dollar. None of which went to my family.

The irony is, back then it would have been ZERO trouble to get their citizenship. They lost everything, because people didn't think it was a big deal to get your citizenship. I will give him this...he never complained about it. Not once. That was simply the way life worked and he made the best of it. After the war he started again, though he was too old to regain his fortune by then he did pretty well for himself. He died an Italian citizen.

Now, as for things like voting I agree you should need to be a citizen. However, the 2nd Amendment should be all the CCW we need. The idea that you need to be licensed to excercise your 2nd Amendment Right is completely unamerican. I have no problem with non-citizens owning firearms either, provided they are not criminals or mentally ill. Being here illegally, however, by definition does make them a criminal. So I have a problem with that.

The part about this story I find ironic, is the ACLU could give a damn about gun rights. They are only doing this because they want Republicans on record opposing guns in some fashion. If your or my gun rights are violated they are no where to be seen. But if it involves illegals, they all over it.

The ACLU thinks it is opposite day 365 days a year!


If you raised enough ruckus, Obama might apologize. But hurry cos 2012 is right round the corner.:D

All kidding aside, you should really pursue this just for the sake of justice.

maddoggie13
01-06-2011, 6:41 PM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

He cant apply for his CCW again after he applies for citizenship.

+1...Coming a US citizen was one of my parents' top goal in life beside having a well rasied family.

rysmithjr
01-07-2011, 12:48 PM
Of course non-citizens enjoy the same protections as citizens. They have all the protections of the 1st, 4th, 5th amendments etc.... Including the second.

of course, if they truly are God Given Rights, then why should they be limited to just citizens?

The Constitution is only an effort to guarantee those rights as much as the government is able to. It gives us no right to remove those God Given Rights from other people.

Stonewalker
01-07-2011, 2:01 PM
Wow.. that article is just so damned biased.

chico.cm
01-07-2011, 4:49 PM
The ACLU scumbad used the word 'citizen' more than once.
This jackhole is NOT a citizen, and as such, many of the "rights" (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f3f43a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=f3f43a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD) people refer to, don't apply! He doesn't have the right to vote (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=fb853a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fb853a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD), does he? The 15th, 19th, 24th, & 26th says that citizens do!

Many jobs are only available to US Citizens, and travel restrictions are usually stipulated at issuance of a 'green card'.

And for the record, the clown is illegal in my eyes. He doesn't appear to be in any hurry to embrace citizenship, like most all of our forebears did.
He reminds me of my wifes idiot canadian friends who badmouth everything about the US, but have green cards and better paying jobs than they could ever hope to have in canada.

Stonewalker
01-07-2011, 4:59 PM
I guess all those a-hole Americans who live abroad for work/family/whatever but choose to retain their US citizenship should just pack up and head up home huh. Scumbags, how dare they encroach on those other countries :rolleyes:

CCWFacts
01-07-2011, 5:22 PM
The ACLU scumbad used the word 'citizen' more than once.
This jackhole is NOT a citizen, and as such, many of the "rights" people refer to, don't apply! He doesn't have the right to vote, does he? The 15th, 19th, 24th, & 26th says that citizens do!

A legal alien has all the rights of a citizen, minus voting, certain elected offices, being on a jury, and certain government jobs. That includes the right to own guns.

An illegal alien has basically all the rights of a legal alien, minus the right to own a gun! Think of it: they can't say, "illegal aliens who go to church will be arrested", or, "we can torture illegal aliens", or "illegal aliens have no right to have an attorney". They have all the same rights as legal aliens, except no guns.

Many jobs are only available to US Citizens,

Certain government jobs and elected positions, yes.

and travel restrictions are usually stipulated at issuance of a 'green card'.

No, illegal aliens have no travel restrictions, other than that they can be deported if they are caught and the INS decides to deport them, and the INS won't let them into the country without valid status. But there could not be a law that says, "illegal aliens are not allowed to walk down the sidewalk while legal aliens and citizens are."

And for the record, the clown is illegal in my eyes.

Unless you're a judge, what's illegal or not in your eyes makes no difference. You may not like it, but if he has a residence visa, then he's here legally.

He doesn't appear to be in any hurry to embrace citizenship, like most all of our forebears did.

I don't know if our forebearers embraced citizenship or not. I don't know if there even was a clearly defined citizenship process until pretty recently. It's only fairly recent that passports have been used. In fact passports weren't even linked to citizenship initially. How, at a practical level, did they decide who was allowed to vote, say, 200 years ago? What documents (if any) were required? I'm wondering, because I have no idea how that worked, but my guess is that citizenship was not as rigidly defined then as it is now.

I know plenty of permanent residents here who have no intention of ever seeking citizenship, for various reasons.

What about those of us who are dual citizens? Are we also "jackholes" and "clowns" for not renouncing our 2nd citizenship?

HowardW56
01-07-2011, 5:46 PM
The ACLU scumbad used the word 'citizen' more than once.
This jackhole is NOT a citizen, and as such, many of the "rights" (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f3f43a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=f3f43a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD) people refer to, don't apply! He doesn't have the right to vote (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=fb853a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fb853a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60a RCRD), does he? The 15th, 19th, 24th, & 26th says that citizens do!

Many jobs are only available to US Citizens, and travel restrictions are usually stipulated at issuance of a 'green card'.

And for the record, the clown is illegal in my eyes. He doesn't appear to be in any hurry to embrace citizenship, like most all of our forebears did.
He reminds me of my wifes idiot canadian friends who badmouth everything about the US, but have green cards and better paying jobs than they could ever hope to have in canada.

WOW, I'm glad most people on this forum are better informed, capable of forming an complete sentence, and generally more intelligent that you appear to be.

uyoga
01-08-2011, 9:24 AM
In order to become a "legal, permanent resident" of the US, a foreign national has to apply to the US Embassy in the country he/she is living in.

They have to undergo health checks (blood, X-ray, etc.).

They have to have "good moral character" as determined by the US Embassy.

They, generally, have to have a promise of employment in the US.

They have to have a "sponsor", a US Citizen, who will agree to financially ensure they do not become a "public charge" once they get to the US.

- - -Then, and only then, do they get a "Green Card" that allows them to legally permanently reside in the US and enjoy all the privileges of US Citizens - - - Except the right to vote and, in most instances, hold elective office.

Once they have been "legal permanent residents" for a period of five years, then, they can apply for US Citizenship.

At least that was the way it was 56 years ago.

CCWFacts
01-08-2011, 10:52 AM
Any who lives here for over 20 years and never becomes a citizen should be kicked out immediately.

And for the record, the clown is illegal in my eyes. He doesn't appear to be in any hurry to embrace citizenship, like most all of our forebears did.
He reminds me of my wifes idiot canadian friends who badmouth everything about the US, but have green cards and better paying jobs than they could ever hope to have in canada.

Yeah, I totally agree.

I'm still pi$$ed off at that clown Thomas Jefferson who was so in love with France. Why didn't he just move there (actually he did move there) and get French citizenship if he wants to be French.

Jefferson was notorious for his love of France and French culture. Even during the excesses of the Reign of Terror, Jefferson refused to disavow the revolution because he was "convinced that the fates of the two republics were indissolubly linked. To back away from France would be to undermine the cause of republicanism in America."

The "staunchly Francophile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francophile)" Jefferson, and by extension his adherents or "Jeffersonians", were characterized by his political enemies, the Federalists, as "decadent, ungodly and immoral Francophiles"

Jefferson would often sign his letters "Affectionately adieu"

I'm sure the French were saying, "if he wants to be equal to us why doesn't he get his French citizenship! Zut alors!" Pass me another Freedom Fry!

nicki
01-08-2011, 7:13 PM
People have no control over where they were born or who their parents are, that is God's choice.

We are a country that is founded on the principle that our rights come to us from God, not the government.

The government gets it's authority only by our "Consent" and that "Consent is contingent on their good behavior".

The government certainly can enact gun laws provided that they can show a compelling need and any law they do pass needs to be done in such a way that it is the least intrusive so that infringements on rights are limited.

We have immigration laws and this guy played by them

Who knows, this could be the CCW case that hits the SCOTUS.

Nicki

alcmaeon
01-09-2011, 11:44 AM
Yeah, I totally agree.

I'm still pi$$ed off at that clown Thomas Jefferson who was so in love with France. Why didn't he just move there (actually he did move there) and get French citizenship if he wants to be French.



I'm sure the French were saying, "if he wants to be equal to us why doesn't he get his French citizenship! Zut alors!" Pass me another Freedom Fry!

You forgot to add that Jefferson lived here 33 years before becoming a US citizen. What was he waiting for?
His fellow "clown" George Washington lived here for 44 years before becoming a citizen.

chico.cm
01-09-2011, 3:15 PM
I apologize for offending the delicate sensibilities of anyone on the forum, for my blatant ignorance and inability to write a cogent sentence. :rolleyes:

It is obvious that some of you didn't read the articles I cited.
The illegal alien reference is absolutely appropriate.
My citation of travel restrictions being stipulated on green cards comes from the USCIS, which I linked. If you disagree, call them out--not me!

"If the guy wants to enjoy the full benefit of residing in the United States become a citizen. He’s been here for 30 years what’s he waiting for?," Pratt told FoxNews.com.

Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

"They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else...every little bit chipping away," he said."

Furthermore, it's a HUGE freaking leap to go back to Colonial times to make the citizenship argument. There have been immigration rules in place in the US since the late 1700's.

I honestly find it hard to believe that anyone on this forum would advocate the gun rights of a resident alien when the rights of U. S. Citizens are so often maligned--particularly in California!

Why don't you bleeding hearts go to a foreign country and gain resident alien status. Then demand the rights of native born citizens. Better yet, demand to own firearms and carry them concealed!


This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States) might help a few...

Uriah02
01-09-2011, 3:20 PM
Way to stir the pile with the thread title OP. The guy is a LEGAL immigrant, it is just speculations that the ACLU will want to use this to possibly get illegal immigrants CCW.

wildhawker
01-09-2011, 3:36 PM
"Larry Pratt of the organization Gun Rights for Whites, a member of the GOP's far right-wing shill and fundraising coalition, says that this litigation is an 'abomination, just an abomination'..."

If you'd care to actually understand how our Constitution works, you might find it doesn't mean what you wish it did.

-Brandon

I apologize for offending the delicate sensibilities of anyone on the forum, for my blatant ignorance and inability to write a cogent sentence. :rolleyes:

It is obvious that some of you didn't read the articles I cited.
The illegal alien reference is absolutely appropriate.
My citation of travel restrictions being stipulated on green cards comes from the USCIS, which I linked. If you disagree, call them out--not me!

"If the guy wants to enjoy the full benefit of residing in the United States become a citizen. He’s been here for 30 years what’s he waiting for?," Pratt told FoxNews.com.

Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

"They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else...every little bit chipping away," he said."

Furthermore, it's a HUGE freaking leap to go back to Colonial times to make the citizenship argument. There have been immigration rules in place in the US since the late 1700's.

I honestly find it hard to believe that anyone on this forum would advocate the gun rights of a resident alien when the rights of U. S. Citizens are so often maligned--particularly in California!

Why don't you bleeding hearts go to a foreign country and gain resident alien status. Then demand the rights of native born citizens. Better yet, demand to own firearms and carry them concealed!


This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States) might help a few...

CCWFacts
01-09-2011, 4:45 PM
Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

Pratt is an idiot. Yes, I agree, the ACLU membership probably are the types who support some of the various amnesty proposals which would make illegal aliens into legal residents. But giving legal residents CCW rights is irrelevant to that.

"They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else...every little bit chipping away," he said." [/I]

Illegal aliens already have all the same rights as legal resident aliens, minus the right to own firearms. There's nothing to chip away at. And illegal aliens will never get the right to own guns, just like violent felons will never have the right to own guns.

I honestly find it hard to believe that anyone on this forum would advocate the gun rights of a resident alien when the rights of U. S. Citizens are so often maligned--particularly in California!

There might be quite a few people on this forum who are resident aliens! And think of it this way: defending the RKBA in the broadest possible sense makes it stronger for everyone.

Why don't you bleeding hearts go to a foreign country and gain resident alien status.

I did that.

Then demand the rights of native born citizens.

Yup, I got that.

Better yet, demand to own firearms and carry them concealed!

I also got that!

In fact quite a few countries grant CCW rights to visitors. South Africa used to issue CCWs upon arrival at the airport. That's unusual but not unique by any means. Panama is another example I can think of. CCW for resident aliens (http://www.panamalaw.org/panama_gun_laws.html) is easy there.

If you want to worry about the rights of illegal aliens, don't worry about them getting gun rights, because it's not going to happen. Worry about the long-term liberal agenda of creating "entitlement rights" (or "second generation rights" as they call them) like right to healthcare, right to free education, right to various social services, and then conferring those on illegal immigrants. Gun rights are not on the agenda for illegal aliens. What they want are entitlement "rights" and amnesty. Getting upset about gun rights is just a distraction from the real issues.

If you want to be scared, be scared of the expansion of the concept of "rights". See this article on second generation rights (http://humanrights.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Generation_of_Human_Rights). Worry about that, not about some impossibility like concealed carry for illegal aliens.

dfletcher
01-09-2011, 4:59 PM
"If the guy wants to enjoy the full benefit of residing in the United States become a citizen. He’s been here for 30 years what’s he waiting for?," Pratt told FoxNews.com.

Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

"They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else...every little bit chipping away," he said."



You do realize the state of California views you as a gun owner in the same way you view legal resident aliens as gun owners, correct?

The first part of Mr. Pratt's quote was that South Dakota can do what it wants. If SD can violate the law and deny rights in this respect why can't CA do the same? Is he going to take that approach, that states can do what they want, when CA continues to abridge our rights - will you too?

chico.cm
01-09-2011, 8:18 PM
You do realize the state of California views you as a gun owner in the same way you view legal resident aliens as gun owners, correct?

The first part of Mr. Pratt's quote was that South Dakota can do what it wants. If SD can violate the law and deny rights in this respect why can't CA do the same? Is he going to take that approach, that states can do what they want, when CA continues to abridge our rights - will you too?

I never said that I agreed with Pratt, I just cited him, as did Fox on their OP.
I don't need to be a lawyer to understand the concept that all rights not delegated are reserved (http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-nd-rp.html). CCW is a state issue, not a Federal one.

I don't really care what SD does. I don't live there.
I do care about states rights being undermined by the Fed.

The Fed loves to use the Supremacy Clause and the 14th to usurp states rights every chance they get.

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." (James Madison; Federalist #45 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed45.asp))

todd2968
01-09-2011, 8:25 PM
Make him get a conceal carry permit from the Uk and honor it here if he is a legal resident. Oh that's right they don't have gun right in the Uk!!! All the reason to get US citizenship.

dfletcher
01-09-2011, 9:37 PM
I never said that I agreed with Pratt, I just cited him, as did Fox on their OP.
I don't need to be a lawyer to understand the concept that all rights not delegated are reserved (http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-nd-rp.html). CCW is a state issue, not a Federal one.

I don't really care what SD does. I don't live there.
I do care about states rights being undermined by the Fed.

The Fed loves to use the Supremacy Clause and the 14th to usurp states rights every chance they get.

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." (James Madison; Federalist #45 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed45.asp))

Ah, c'mon now - I would think you cited Pratt because you agree with him or think he has a good point, makes no sense to quote the guy otherwise. Just my guess.

I understand folks in SD or MT, ID and the other "good gun" states not being sensitive to states abridging rights, not to the extent we do in CA. You're correct, the 14th is a two edged sword - but we can't use it for those things we like and not allow it on those things we dislike and states can not, at least for now, abridge someone's rights under the thesis of states rights, to include a state like CA being able to ban guns.

QQQ
01-09-2011, 10:10 PM
States' rights should not deprive individuals of their rights, especially those enumerated in the Federal Constitution, and double especially those rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

As 2A supporters in California we should be well-aware of this.