heller, 14th amendment and ccw

[outersquare]

given a favorable outcome on heller, again in consideration of equal protection clause, should CCWs be shall issue?

[yellowfin]

Of course! Was that ever in doubt?

[Glock22Fan]

Yes, but it won't be a direct linkage. Take a number of incremental steps (law suits) to get from a favorable Heller to "must issue."

[s2000news]

CCW should be provided to anyone who can prove they handle a gun, know the laws about their use and simply are not out to 'have a gun'.

[bulgron]

CCW should be provided to anyone who can prove they handle a gun, know the laws about their use and simply are not out to 'have a gun'.

What does that mean?

[yellowfin]

Reciprocity should be mandatory under the full faith and credit clause, but for some stupid reason nobody's tried to get that enforced.

[hoffmang]

Reciprocity should be mandatory under the full faith and credit clause, but for some stupid reason nobody's tried to get that enforced.

We've all been missing the prerequisite individual right and privilege.

-Gene

[Bizcuits]

CCW should be provided to anyone who can prove they handle a gun, know the laws about their use and simply are not out to 'have a gun'.

So what are you trying to say?

because to me it sounds like your saying someone who wants to have a gun for self defense shouldn't be allowed to have one.

I'm hoping I misunderstand you.

[WhiteDingo]

So what are you trying to say?

because to me it sounds like your saying someone who wants to have a gun for self defense shouldn't be allowed to have one.

I'm hoping I misunderstand you.


I think what he's trying to say is keep it away from those that want the gun simply to have it to show off how "cool" they are, or be more "gangsta", etc.

I want a CCW "to have a gun", but as a responsible owner and liscensee, would keep it discreet.

I think he wants to keep them away from "show offs"?

[CCWFacts]

Anyone who "shows off" or "flashes" a gun is brandishing and can and should have his permit yanked. If we went shall-issue that wouldn't change.

[KenpoProfessor]

Anyone who "shows off" or "flashes" a gun is brandishing and can and should have his permit yanked. If we went shall-issue that wouldn't change.

Wow, no room for error there huh? I OC all the time, to express my 2nd amendment right in the open. The more others "see" a firearm openly carried, the less fearful they will become of guns in general. It's commonplace here, no one freaks out. A right not expressed will be a right removed, so I don't hide it.

Seems you're taking the Texas attitude of concealed and never seen, but they're trying to overturn that.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[CCWFacts]

Wow, no room for error there huh? I OC all the time, to express my 2nd amendment right in the open.

Confirming once again, it's hard make any statement about firearms without the OC crowd leaping in and accusing me of something, usually being anti-gun-rights or more directly trying to deny them their rights.

OC is not brandishing, obviously. OC is not the same as "flashing" a gun. This is obvious.

Let's say you're CCWing and waiting in line and someone cuts in front of you, and you clear your coat to show the guy who cut in front that you're carrying. That is "flashing" a gun, which is legally brandishing because it's an action which is intended to threaten the guy. Conversely, if you are standing there with a gun in the holster, OCing, and someone cuts in front of you in line, and you don't react, that is not brandishing because you haven't done anything.

Easy enough to understand?

[aileron]

What if I moon someone and accidentally show my gun, is that brandishing????? :43:

You have to admit it, its gonna happen... somewhere, sometime in the future, someones gonna break ranks and forgetting they're carrying, do it. It just has to happen. Its a time honored tradition that has been passed down from generation to generation. Heck the Romans were doing it to their enemies and took a few in the arse for their show of humor. Which happens to be another time honored tradition. "Getting shot in the arse while mooning the enemy." Of course no one volunteers for that one.

I bet Soldier415 has had this thought pass through his mind a few times. :patriot: Mooning the enemy not getting shot in the arse.

I would just like to say I do not condone this activity, its purely theoretical, something someone would want to discuss around the campfire while drinking a brew. Nothing more, nothing less. ;)

[BrianK_73]

Wow, no room for error there huh? I OC all the time, to express my 2nd amendment right in the open. The more others "see" a firearm openly carried, the less fearful they will become of guns in general. It's commonplace here, no one freaks out. A right not expressed will be a right removed, so I don't hide it.


OC'ing has its own form of brandishing. While it is already visible, it is holstered and if you unholster it while involved in a dispute, heated discussion or loud conversation, it could appear that you are brandishing.

Placing your hand on the grip of your firearm while it sits in its holster and having an argument could be considered a form of assault IIRC.

There are penalties for inappropriate behavior for both methods of carry.

BTW, OC'ing to desensitize the public has nothing to do with brandishing.



------

Back on topic: There should be an exception to the law against brandishing that allows for the presentation of your firearm when you feel threatened. The AZCDL is currently trying to get something like this passed in AZ.

[bulgron]

Since we can't seem to get a reasonably issued CCW in the central counties, I think it'll be a cold day in hades before a regular guy can OC around here without old ladies fainting and adult socialist males shrieking like school girls with alarm.

[KenpoProfessor]

Confirming once again, it's hard make any statement about firearms without the OC crowd leaping in and accusing me of something, usually being anti-gun-rights or more directly trying to deny them their rights.

OC is not brandishing, obviously. OC is not the same as "flashing" a gun. This is obvious.

Let's say you're CCWing and waiting in line and someone cuts in front of you, and you clear your coat to show the guy who cut in front that you're carrying. That is "flashing" a gun, which is legally brandishing because it's an action which is intended to threaten the guy. Conversely, if you are standing there with a gun in the holster, OCing, and someone cuts in front of you in line, and you don't react, that is not brandishing because you haven't done anything.

Easy enough to understand?

OK, gotcha, just your last post was unclear.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[GuyW]

"Reciprocity should be mandatory under the full faith and credit clause, but for some stupid reason nobody's tried to get that enforced."

We've all been missing the prerequisite individual right and privilege.

-Gene

Driver's licenses are a Constitutional right? (I think so, but let's not start on THAT...Hoffmang doesn't think so...)

[hoffmang]

Guy,

Most annoyingly drivers licenses aren't something you have a right to, though I agree that we should have a due process right to them. However, whether we like it or not there is a very long line of case law that say that a DL is a privilege. It's about to get weird as ID is now being required to petition the government for redress of grievances and if the EFF hadn't screwed up the right to fly cases we'd have an interesting case. As such, we have to file it somewhere that isn't the 9th circuit.

Reciprocity is a constitutional protected item, but the states could duck it in the past because they had a claim that there was no right to a CCW license - which I think post Heller we'll get clearly defined.

-Gene