Thursday, July 15, 2010

Gun Laws

Alright, to start off, gun laws are something I'm still learning about and that are being given new freedoms and restrictions quite frequently. The most recent being the case of McDonald v. Chicago, Illinois, where it was being argued that,


"Primarily, they argue that the right to keep and bear arms is protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that the Slaughter-House Cases’ narrow interpretation of the Clause should now be rejected. As a secondary argument, they contend that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause incorporates the Second Amendment right" (2). 


And, for those who don't know much about the Fourteenth amendment or what it is, sadly enough, you'd be surprised how many Americans don't know it;


"The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted after the Civil War as one of the Reconstruction Amendments on July 9, 1868.
The Fourteenth Amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the decision in Dred Scott v Sandford (1857), which held that blacks could not be citizens of the United States.
Its Due Process Clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. This clause has also been used to recognize substantive due process rights, such as parental and marriage rights, and procedural due process rights. Certain steps are required before depriving people (individual and corporate) of life, liberty, or property.
The amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions. This clause later became the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision which precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation in the United States." (Wikipedia - 14th Ammendment)
"The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendmentto the United States Constititutions incorporated by teh Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and appliest to the states" (Wikidpedia - McDonald v. Chicago).

After reading up on all of that, sadly enough, Wikipedia and the Supreme Court's site are the only places I could find unbiased and accurate information. I think the ruling is a good thing in general. A person's rights should be honored and respected. If we are to honor the first amendment which allows peaceful gathering to protest, I live in Western Washington, so protests happen quite often, then we should also honor all the other amendments of the Bill of Rights. Whether you are a personal fan of the First Amendment - Freedom of Speech, Second Amendment - The Right To Bear Arms, or even the Fifth Amendment - Which allows you to avoid self incrimination... OJ, that means when Johnny got you off with the argument, "If it don't fit, you must acquit" (Cochran)... turning around and writing a book about how you would've done it if you did commit the crime... probably wasn't a good move, you should be able to respect others rights.
Now, here's where I'll make even more enemies I'm sure... oh well ^_^, I do think that there should be a bit more restriction as far as who owns guns. Now give me a second to explain myself before you start calling me ignorant, anti-patriotic, or any 4 to 6 letter word of your choosing. I think we should adopt something that Switzerland does as far as gun policies go. That's right, Switzerland, that small country over in Europe. 
"Conditions for getting a Carrying Permit
There are three conditions:
  • fulfilling the conditions for a buying permit (see section below)
  • stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger
  • passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon
The carrying permit remains valid for a term of five years (unless otherwise surrendered or revoked), and applies only to the type of firearm for which the permit was issued. Additional constraints may be invoked to modify any specific permit."
Now, here's where I'm lacking information, so please, feel free to critique me and enlighten me, this is my understanding as far as getting a concealed permit within the state of Washington,


Step 1 - Verify that you meet the requirements for applying for a concealed carry permit. You must be 21 years old, not convicted of a felony or found not guilty of a felony by reason of insanity and do not have any outstanding warrants.


Step 2 - Pick up an application for concealed carry permit at your local sheriff's department or chief of police. You will have to submit this application in person. When you go to pick up your application, it may save you time if you are prepared to fill it out on the spot.


Step 3 - Pay a $60 application fee when you turn in your application. You will also need your driver's license or state-issued ID and you must be fingerprinted. Usually, you will be fingerprinted at the same time you turn in your application. (Warning, the stuff they use to remove the ink from the finger printing... wow that stuff smells bad, at least to me it did.)


Step 4 - Laminate your permit to carry a concealed gun or pay an additional fee to have it laminated.


Step 5 - Renew your concealed carry permit after five years.


Step 6 - Remember that you cannot carry a concealed gun with or without a permit at schools, courthouses, jails, mental facilities, any areas where people are younger than 21 years are not allowed (liquor stores, bars, etc), and music festivals
  1. Now, I haven't seen the application first hand before, but I'm curious if on the application, does it cover stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger and does it require passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon? (To be completely honest, doing research for something I plan on doing in the future)

I'm curious what others have to say about the Supreme Court's Decision? Do you agree with their decision? Do you disagree? Willing to honor the 1st amendment and the 5th amendment, what makes honoring the 2nd one so controversial? (Saying that guns kill people, not the greatest defense or argument out there) My opinion, like it, hate it, couldn't care less about it? 

Sources for my information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

A Little Info On The Writer

I thought out of courtesy and respect, given what I could end up writing on here, that I would give a little background info on my views.


Politically;
     I side with Republicans and Conservatives on most things, some exceptions being: Gay Marriage, if you can find happiness in this world, who am I to get in your way; I do believe that abortion is justifiable in certain cases, rape victims, victims of any type of sexual assault, if the child would be born into a bad environment

     Wasn't an overly huge fan of George W. Bush Jr., but to be honest, the situation he had to deal with and how he handled it, a lot of people may not agree with, but I can and do respect the actions he took as far as things go in the Middle East.

     Barack Hussein Obama II, I'll be bluntly honest, his Marxist political views could lead to a socialist country, I don't see eye to eye with him on pretty much any of his policies or how he is handling things. However, he is the president of our nation, like him or hate him, I do respect the man for the difficulties him and every president before him has had to deal with.


Religiously;
     Here's the one that will probably confuse people like no other, my religious views are a hybrid of Catholicism, Christianity, Druidism, Celtic mythology. The easiest way I can think to explain my views is that, I view religion as something to believe in and put your faith in, but that it's not simply restricted by a mere title placed upon it. If anyone would ever like me to explain how that mix of faiths goes together, you are more than welcomed to ask, I may even post something up here sometime about it.


Life In General;
     Simply put, I like living my life, it's not to complicated, it's not warped and distorted by drama, people show me mutual respect and I do the same to them out of common courtesy, I'll listen to anyone's views and be respectful about it... but yelling your opinion or getting in my face telling me I'm wrong without any justification, not a good route to go. ^_^ So simply put, if I'm wrong about something, believe me when I say, 'Call me on it', I'd rather be wrong and corrected than look like a pure fool. Just be sure to show me information that shows me that I was wrong, that's all I ask.