Explain the thinking behind concealed carry permit

[rice paddy daddy]

Originally Posted by Lurch

While I agree with your post, I believe that the OP's intention was to ask what the reasoning was to have the need for a concealed carry permit in the first place. Not to discuss the legality of the issue. After all, just because there is a law, does not mean that it is right.

That argument went by-the-by 150 years ago. Or more.
Even in the days of the Old West there were places and even towns where guns could not be worn at all.
I understand Catherine is speaking to the Constitutionality of gun laws, but that went out the window long, long ago.
As did most of the rest of the Constitution. Just look at what Lincoln did to it.

[Stinger]

Originally Posted by papa bear

I apologize for shorting your post. Some very intelligent response.

Couple of things I would like to point out: I open carry so you will always know if I am carrying or not; but, basically if I am awake, I am carrying. That being said, it is no government official business if I am carrying or not. I am not guilty of.anything until I do it.

Another point I would like to make is carrying a gun is a right, thus not subject to licensing. But hiding a gun is a privilege,just like driving is a privilege, so hence the licensing.

Thank you for your courtesy. I, also, happen to agree with you; however, I specifically called this information out because - Although we are, indeed, talking about presumably, 'self-evident rights' - the net effect of many of today's regulatory firearms laws is to severely modify, and even quash what would, otherwise, be genuinely unalienable citizens' rights; i.e.: In numerous instances the overall effect of modern firearm legislation is not equal to the original specified intent!

Unless, of course, the original specified legal intent were to, in effect, create a next-to-impossible social situation where either the use and/or the mere possess of a firearm - not by a few, but ultimately by everybody - could be judicially construed as being wholly illegal! One of the great intellectual paradoxes of my own life is that I will never understand how so many states can have 100% antithetical AND fully enforceable firearms laws on their books? (It's either constitutional and subject to the undeniable force of American law; or it is not - Correct?)

Furthermore, how can so many elected politicians continue to act so deceitfully against America's FORMERLY INVIOLABLE Second Amendment Rights? As British Statesman William Pitt (the Younger) has observed, 'Necessity is the plea for every infringement on human rights.' 'It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.' THIS I'm able to understand; however, what I just don't get is, 'Why' there's no longer any sort of stoppage to the many ongoing legislative attempts to eviscerate one (if not more) of the American Republic's most fundamental legal principles?

The only sense I can make out of this highly unconstitutional (and unethical) behavior is that the Holy Bible teaches, 'This is the devil's world.' I look around; I see the very wrong things that politicians do; and I think to myself that the Bible must be right; it's the world - or, more specifically, humanity-at-large - that is inevitably and repeatedly wrong!' (As a whole, men can't be trusted to equitably and magnanimously govern themselves. Not even once in the entire past 5,000 + years of recorded history. Not even once!)

The hidden reality of mankind existing under some sort of evil overlordship - an overlordship that is able to permeate and strongly influence the hearts and minds of men - isn't readily discernible; and I believe this is what you and I, each in his own respective way, are alluding to. May God help us both because the worldwide political situation isn't getting any better; in fact it's getting worse.