Illinois Only State Without Concealed Carry Rights

[Vegas]

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/06/27/illinois_only_state_without_concealed_carry_rights

The Wisconsin legislature recently passed a law that allows individuals to obtain a concealed carry permit, making it the 49th state to give its people full Second Amendent Rights. Not surprisingly, the 50th and only state left supressing Second Amendment rights is Illinois.

"It's embarrassing. We're the last ones," said state Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg. "Every other state tends to believe this is a right, not a privilege, and they have let their law-abiding citizens do it, and I don't know why we should be any different.

"We're not going to go away. We're going to keep pushing it."

But Phelps faces stiff opposition from Chicago and suburban lawmakers and Gov. Pat Quinn, who said last week he is proud Illinois is the last state not to allow concealed carry and that he would veto any bill allowing it.

[ryr8828]

I saw Brandon at a golf tournament Friday. He's one of the democrats I'm going to have to force myself to vote for only because of this concealed carry issue.

I'm not sure if he's in my district any more or not though since they re-drew the map.

[Vegas]

I saw Brandon at a golf tournament Friday. He's one of the democrats I'm going to have to force myself to vote for only because of this concealed carry issue.

I'm not sure if he's in my district any more or not though since they re-drew the map.

You can always move to another state.

[ryr8828]

You can always move to another state.

Should have done that 25 years ago, I've been driving to Missouri that long.

Probably too late now. I don't think I can afford to move somewhere else and still have a combination rifle and pistol range/golf practice area/ deer camp in my back yard.
Plus I can walk or drive my atv down to the office. Then there's all the grandkids.

[Roy Munson]

The Wisconsin legislature recently passed a law that allows individuals to obtain a concealed carry permit, making it the 49th state to give its people full Second Amendent Rights.

Nowhere in the 2nd amendment does it say people can conceal the arms they are allowed to keep and bear.

Meaning of "keep and bear arms"

While a number of authors, lawyers and historians have advocated the view that the term "to bear arms" implies only the military use of arms, the courts have disregarded this viewpoint by pointing out that the term to bear arms also has a private component. In District of Columbia v. Heller the majority pointed out that:

Before addressing the verbs “keep” and “bear,” we interpret their object: “Arms.” The term was applied, then as now, to weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity. Thus, the most natural reading of “keep Arms” in the Second Amendment is to “have weapons.” At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry.” In numerous instances, “bear arms” was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia. Nine state constitutional provisions written in the 18th century or the first two decades of the 19th, which enshrined a right of citizens “bear arms in defense of themselves and the state” again, in the most analogous linguistic context—that “bear arms” was not limited to the carrying of arms in a militia. The phrase “bear Arms” also had at the time of the founding an idiomatic meaning that was significantly different from its natural meaning: “to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight” or “to wage war.” But it unequivocally bore that idiomatic meaning only when followed by the preposition “against,”. Every example given by petitioners’ amici for the idiomatic meaning of “bear arms” from the founding period either includes the preposition “against” or is not clearly idiomatic. In any event, the meaning of “bear arms” that petitioners and Justice Stevens propose is not even the (sometimes) idiomatic meaning. Rather, they manufacture a hybrid definition, whereby “bear arms” connotes the actual carrying of arms (and therefore is not really an idiom) but only in the service of an organized militia. No dictionary has ever adopted that definition, and we have been apprised of no source that indicates that it carried that meaning at the time of the founding. Worse still, the phrase “keep and bear Arms” would be incoherent. The word “Arms” would have two different meanings at once: “weapons” (as the object of “keep”) and (as the object of “bear”) one-half of an idiom. It would be rather like saying “He filled and kicked the bucket” to mean “He filled the bucket and died.”[106]

In a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer, Justice John Paul Stevens said:

The Amendment’s text does justify a different limitation: the “right to keep and bear arms” protects only a right to possess and use firearms in connection with service in a state-organized militia. Had the Framers wished to expand the meaning of the phrase “bear arms” to encompass civilian possession and use, they could have done so by the addition of phrases such as “for the defense of themselves”.[107]

[ryr8828]

Nowhere in the 2nd amendment does it say people can conceal the arms they are allowed to keep and bear.

We really don't care what Justice Stevens said in his minority opinion. He lost. His opinion is not valid. His and his liberal comrades attempt to legislate from the bench failed.

[Jiddy78]

We really don't care what Justice Stevens said in his minority opinion. He lost. His opinion is not valid. His and his liberal comrades attempt to legislate from the bench failed.


http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/auto/r/350x0/8/f/8f872_ORIG-wh_you_mad.jpg

[ryr8828]

http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/auto/r/350x0/8/f/8f872_ORIG-wh_you_mad.jpg

Because I live in a state that allows the opinions of one county to trample upon my constitutional rights.

[Roy Munson]

Because I live in a state that allows the opinions of one county to trample upon my constitutional rights.
I still haven't seen anywhere in the amendment that allows you to hide your arm in your pants.