Wednesday, April 05, 2017

CONSTIUTIONAL CARRY IN TEXAS

The Texas legislature is considering a supposed 'constitutional carry' change to current gun laws.  Currently one must obtain a license, which includes a training component requirement.  This license permits both open and concealed carry.  The new proposal would allow anyone who is not in the prohibited classes (e.g. convicted felons) to carry without any license or any firearms training. 
How many  people who don't want to spend the time or money to get a license, or fear they may be denied a license are going to take advantage of this.  How many of them will be able to find and read the statute specifying who is not eligible?  How many people who shouldn't be carrying for a variety of reasons, will start carrying?  This may work, but I think it deserves more study, a thorough unbiased review of the research and carefully thinking out all the details.  The Texas legislature generally does not have a good reputation in this regard.  The problems and complexity for both law enforcement and carriers have not bee adequately analyzed.
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article141353158.html

If you have followed this blog you know I am a very strong advocate of gun owner/carrier rights.  I am a strong advocate for all constitutional rights and generally expanding freedom of choice in most areas of life.  I am a gun owner and have a carry permit.  I think the current system is working very well.  Let's think about this new proposal a little longer.   I am familiar with the research on carrying, etc. and there are still too many unanswered questions.v Remember, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. .  Pushing gun rights radically beyond constitutional requirements without a good understanding of the dynamics and a few high publicity incidents could turn the public against gun rights.

What the constitutional carry folks seem to be missing  is the fact that no constitutional right is absolute.  They need to study the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Heller and McDonald re the scope of Second Amendment rights.

This problem is analogous to the Left's push to legalize marijuana.  It is moving too fast and there is not enough good research yet on the possible negative effects of such legalization.  Further, there is no fundamental constitutional right to grow, possess or use marijuana. 

Freedom is a good thing, but we need to remember that there needs to be limits to protect the public, esp. children, and that no rights are absolute.  Anarchy is not the solution.

3 comments:

  1. Seems to have worked okay in Vermont for the last couple of hundred years. Works okay, seems like, in other CC states. Alaska, Wyoming, Arizona.

    But we all know that Texans are crazy-irresponsible, right?

    Me, I'm fed up with booger-hunting against the citizens.

    Art

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not all the states you mention have adopted constitutional carry. Sorry, but Vermont is a lot different than Texas.

    ReplyDelete
  3. IMHO, the 2A does not grant but recognizes people's natural right to keep and bear arms. That said, the country's founders also saw a need to keep firearms out of the hands of convicted criminals or anyone who posed a real public danger. Texas meets the recognition standard being a shall issue state. Of course, the argument can be made, much like with voter ID requirements, that people are denied their right to carry because they don't have a state issued handgun license.

    ReplyDelete