The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 17, 2013, 11:08 AM   #276
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
My previous post described the barriers to the single mom getting a gun in the first place. Now, let us look at carry.

She is not ex-mil or ex-LE, and she is in Florida, so now she has to complete a training course. This costs $150, and takes a full evening, so she needs to pay a sitter.

She also has to go to the Sheriff's office to get fingerprinted, and pay for that, plus her permit application fee to the Dept of Agriculture. At this point, she is out about $400 on top of the cost of the gun, plus around 8 hours of time.

Once again, gun control is about preventing the poor from keeping and bearing.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:10 AM   #277
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
In public...
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:13 AM   #278
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
Very few rights are free. While we can all sympathize with this quasi-hypothetical woman. I realize she's based on someone you know, but we're discussing a woman LIKE her, not her- so any statements made are generalizations, and not opinions of a woman I don't know or know of. In other words, no insult to her is intended.

I am by no means well off. I also realize while I have a right to travel, that does not mean I have a right to own my own 747. Or to skip any registration fees on my automobiles.

If I can not afford an attorney one will be provided for me. That does not mean if I can afford one, one will be provided for me. Or that if I cannot afford an automobile, I can sign up for a free one at the next police auction.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:14 AM   #279
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
In public, sure.

In AK, VT, WY for examples, she would only be out the $275, and those states do NOT have higher violent crime rates, so what is your point?

One of my points would be that several decades of gun control have conditioned many Americans to think Constitutional carry to be crazy and dangerous, yet facts don't bear them out.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:15 AM   #280
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
JimDandy, you have no Constitutionally guaranteed right to own an automobile or airplane. You do have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:16 AM   #281
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
But not concealed.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:18 AM   #282
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Florida does not allow open carry in most cases, and therefor is required to allow concealed.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:20 AM   #283
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
True enough. At which point the costs involved come down to whether it establishes an undue burden on the right.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:22 AM   #284
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
In the example discussed, the fees involved increase her cost by around 130%.

Edit: They now also create a 5 day wait for the gun (dealer transfer) and a 3-6 week wait for the permit.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:28 AM   #285
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
To be fair, the 3-6 week wait for the permit is not in any way altered by a private sale background check. Nor is the cost of the permit. Those would be the same with no background check, or a FFL vendor purchase. We're starting to make her situation more dire from things not related to the issue being discussed.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:29 AM   #286
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
So, do you want free, immediate concealed carry?
What is a reasonable burden for this?
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:32 AM   #287
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
Quote:
Was is a reasonable burden for this?
We don't HAVE to have a reasonable burden for a right or a privilege, we have to have a reasonable burden when INFRINGING a right.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:33 AM   #288
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
I meant, what is acceptable?
How much $$ and how much time from the petitioner?
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:36 AM   #289
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,810
Jim Dandy, the problem is that she can't afford the gun and ammunition, the problem is she can't afford the fees and taxes related to the purchase, or at least that they represent an undue burden. As pointed out the "taxes" are going to double or triple her cost.
I don't see how anyone could think that is not a burden.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:37 AM   #290
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by kochman
I meant, what is acceptable?
How much $$ and how much time from the petitioner?
The minimum amount that serves the compelling government interest.

Since "permitless", unregulated, untrained, carry/acquisition of firearms can not be shown to increase crime or danger and since the compelling government interest (in this case) can be no other than reducing crime/danger, there is no compelling interest to be accomplished. Therefore, no such permit system or training or delay is acceptable.

This is ASSUMING that there's an ENUMERATED POWER that grants the national government the power in the first place, which there isn't.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:49 AM   #291
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
Specifically enumerated restrictions, rights, etc doesn't limit the gov to only those... especially since the world changes over the centuries, new inventions, etc.
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:49 AM   #292
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
Quote:
Jim Dandy, the problem isn't that she can't afford the gun and ammunition, the problem is she can't afford the fees and taxes related to the purchase, or at least that they represent an undue burden. As pointed out the "taxes" are going to double or triple her cost.
I don't see how anyone could think that is not a burden.
Fixed your quote in what I believe you meant-if I got it wrong let me know, but I fixed it so you'd know the thought process I was assuming you meant and thus replying to-

Most of the fees and taxes MLeake has brought up are related to getting the carry permit. Which as I've said is in no way related to whether the background check applies to a second hand sale or not. Those taxes and fees would still be there if there were not a check, or if she bought new, and at retail.

Extending the check to second hand increased her costs by approximately $50 according to Mr. Leake. Not knowing Florida's economy I can't comment on the accuracy, or continued availability of that price- so I'll take it on faith, as a result of Mr. Leake's generally upstanding behavior on the forum.

While that is a dramatic "mark-up" of the firearm in the example, there are also other external factors involved. The state of Florida used FDLE which adds extra costs to that check for example. I do not believe the FFL's should be making money off of these checks, but they shouldn't have to pay for the check either. The guy on the phone for your check isn't waiting on other customers.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 11:53 AM   #293
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by kochman
Specifically enumerated restrictions, rights, etc doesn't limit the gov to only those...

Um... yes... they do. Otherwise, what's the point? That's why the powers are enumerated. If the power don't have to be enumerated, they are limitless. The only limit is enumeration.

The power belongs to the people. The government borrows that power. It has only that power that is ceded to it by the people. It has no other power.

The very concept, enumeration, MEANS a COMPLETE list.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:03 PM   #294
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
Quote:
The very concept, enumeration, MEANS a COMPLETE list.
The ninth amendment not-withstanding? Which pretty much says the rights enumerated in the Constitution is not a complete list?

The same theory applied to the commerce clause, and the "dormant" commerce clause legal principle could be applied here.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:03 PM   #295
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
BF, you're not being realistic here.
Then we have to get rid of public schools, etc...
Let's work within the reasonable/likely or even potential.

There are enumerated powers and implied powers.
If we limit it only to enumerated powers, then the COTUS actually rather sucks.
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:08 PM   #296
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
Quote:
Then we have to get rid of public schools, etc...
Why is that exactly? Public Schools are organizations of the several States. There may be a federal Department of Education that may be heavily involved in the Public School system, but they are not "in charge" any more than the Department of Transportation is "in charge" of State Highways.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:17 PM   #297
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by kochman
BF, you're not being realistic here.
Then we have to get rid of public schools, etc...
Let's work within the reasonable/likely or even potential.

There are enumerated powers and implied powers.
If we limit it only to enumerated powers, then the COTUS actually rather sucks.
I'm sorry, sir, but you either don't understand or accept the purpose and limits of the COTUS.

The national government is supposed to be specifically and completely limited by the powers enumerated in the Constitution.

It is not supposed to be the limitless, monstrosity that it has become today. The average person going about the average day should have little or no interaction with the national level government.

It exists for the purpose of defending/protecting the nation as a whole, not the man on the street individually, the nation as a whole and negotiating on behalf of the nation as a whole, in other words, treaties and international commerce and regulating direct commerce between the states.

That's it.

The national government is not here to protect you on the streets of your home town or to stop you from buying milk from the farmer up the street or to keep you from cutting down trees in your back yard, or any of the other things that aren't ENUMERATED in the COTUS.

We have OTHER governments for those purposes. State, county, town, village governments. They ALSO have enumerated powers. Their jobs are not to negotiate international treaties. Their jobs are state and local.

The national government is not for state and local concerns. It's job is to protect the states so that THEY can be concerned with state and local things.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:23 PM   #298
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,428
You missed a couple.

They also protect us from the States, and itself.
JimDandy is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:24 PM   #299
Kochman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
Listen, BF, I understand the strictest wording would have you believe that...
However, it's 2013, and that's nowhere near reality.
It doesn't really help to argue about it, as it is so deeply ingrained in our culture, society... the way you are reading it only amendments would make law changes possible... but you're reading it too strictly, or else the US Marshals Service, etc wouldn't exist... because not specifically called for...

Again, the implied stuff often comes from the wording of the Preamble, which some people don't want to accept because it is so vague... but that's the reality of the document. The preamble is the basis for the entire, incomplete document.

Anyhow, you're using "enumeration"... it wasn't used in the sense you are using it in the COTUS or BoR from what I can find.
In fact, it says, the enumeration within the COTUS will not be used limit people... it doesn't say it is limiting government.

It's a moot point, but if I am wrong on this last part I'd like to know, to be honest.
I just feel like, at this point, it's getting upset about something we have no control over... and that's a seriously frustrating feeling. You're trying to argue for us to go back in time and reset everything... including the Civil War.
Kochman is offline  
Old April 17, 2013, 12:30 PM   #300
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Kochman, there was no Federal Department of Education until the 1970s. To read what you write, one would think we would have no education system without the feds. Ironically, school performance has declined, generally, since the feds got into the education racket.

One of the reasons the framers wanted to limit federal power was their belief that most things are handled more efficiently at a more local level, where it is easier for citizens to communicate directly with government. A strong federal system negates much of that citizen ability.

I think you will find that most instances where the feds dictate to the states, with the exceptions of cases where the feds had to enforce civil rights, lead to inefficiencies and drops in performance.

JimDandy, the $50 fee I quoted was what I used to have to pay in the Gainesville - Ocala area, where my theoretical person (she's actually a relative) lives.

Around here, I pay $30. If you look at places like DC and NYC, though, where there is a captive market, FFL fees start out at $100 and go up from there, assuming you can find an FFL - for a while, the only FFL in DC had suspended operations, just check out Emily Miller's series of articles on her hurdles in obtaining a gun in DC post-Heller.
MLeake is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14183 seconds with 7 queries