Monday, May 9, 2011

NRA was right about slippery slope governing guns, only in favor of fewer regulations.

Even my conservative friend in Milwaukee is appalled by the idea now pushed by “constitutional carry” gun nuts, that any law requiring a license, background check or training discourages someone from exercising their constitutional rights. To him, people need to learn which gun to buy, for what purpose, safety options etc.
jsonline: A newly floated bill that would allow Wisconsin residents to carry concealed weapons without getting permits, background checks or training would essentially let the state catch up with the latest thinking in gun law, according to backers who call the approach "constitutional carry." 
Others, however, seem stunned at the idea that anyone who could lawfully own a gun could carry it just about anywhere, under a coat or in a purse, without any government oversight. 
The Wisconsin Professional Police Association was neutral on past concealed-carry proposals, said Executive Director Jim Palmer, because of different views among rural and urban officers. "Our group is likely to revisit our stance," he said. Since the no-permit proposal made the news, "We've been overwhelmed with members opposing that. It just seems absurd." 
Constitutional-carry supporters say the cost and bureaucracy of a permit process become a barrier for people who want to carry a gun for protection. They think the training requirement is just symbolism. 

Where in the constitution did it say we couldn't require background checks, a license and training?

1 comment:

Teacher in Cheeseland said...

Yes, no permits, but at least they require someone "not have been ruled mentally incompetent." Yippee...