Quote:
Apples and Oranges Jim.
You may travel by any means you can pay for, as opposed to traveling in your own vehicle.
As for your open v. concealed carry? It didn't come first. The vehicle thing was first.
And ... You have just proved my point.
|
How did I prove your point with apples and oranges?
Not that comparing apples and oranges is necessarily bad. Many cases do it over and over. Citing free speech cases in religion cases, and so on.
You had to pay for your own vehicle. You can do that. Or you can pay for a taxi to convey you. Neither infringes the right of travel. When someone loses their "right" to drive via numerous and repeated DUI convictions, they still retain their right to travel.
And I was under the impression, at least according to the Kachalsky case I was reading in another post, that bans on concealed carry were far older than the horseless carriage.