Opening, again, a can of worms . . .

[kshillbillys]

A community cannot ban the Second Amendment. A business is not banning guns just by saying no concealed carry on their property. It's the same as a no trespassing sign or no hunting sign because it's private property.

In District of Columbia v. Heller, No. 07-290, the United States Supreme Court held that Americans have an individual right under the Second Amendment to possess firearms "for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home". It is an appeal from Parker v. District of Columbia, 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007), a decision in which the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit became the first federal appeals court in the United States to rule that a firearm ban unconstitutionally infringes the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the second to expressly interpret the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right to possess firearms for private use. The first federal case that interpreted the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right was United States v. Emerson, 270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2001).[51]

[sixdogsmom]

If a ban on legal CC is not a ban on a gun, then what is it? Nobody said ban the second ammendment.

[kshillbillys]

Five states have a ban on concealed carry. All gun laws vary from state to state. There is NO second amendment right to concealed carry, only a right to keep and bear arms.

[sixdogsmom]

Having a weapon whether or not it is concealed should be covered by the second ammendment shouldn't it?

[srkruzich]

Having a weapon whether or not it is concealed should be covered by the second ammendment shouldn't it?

The private business is just that a private business. The business can set the rules and if they so wish not to allow CC then that is their right.

Lets say i am throwing a party.  IF there is any alchohol served, anyone that has a handgun either gives me their gun to lock in a safe while their there, or they go away.  I dont' allow loaded guns in a environment like that and furthermore if that person is intoxicated i would not release their weapon until they were sober.
Thats my rules and my rules do not violate the 2nd amendment because their on my property.

THe 2nd amendment is the law of the land prohibiting GOVERNMENT from restricting firearms.

[sixdogsmom]

So, if every house in Washington D.C. or Chicago, and every business in Washington D.C. or Chicago banded together and banned firearms, there would be no violation of the constitution? Assuming that citizens were the inhabitants of said houses and were owner/operators/users of said businesses, there would be no violation of the constitution?

[srkruzich]

So, if every house in Washington D.C. or Chicago, and every business in Washington D.C. or Chicago banded together and banned firearms, there would be no violation of the constitution? Assuming that citizens were the inhabitants of said houses and were owner/operators/users of said businesses, there would be no violation of the constitution?

only in thier homes.   Still can carry them in the streets.   
And how do you propose to identify those who carry concealed?  You would never know it if i was carrying until i used it on some lowlife that was trying to kill someone and then i would doubt that anyone would say anything after that rapist or violent SOB is DRT.

[srkruzich]

So, if every house in Washington D.C. or Chicago, and every business in Washington D.C. or Chicago banded together and banned firearms, there would be no violation of the constitution? Assuming that citizens were the inhabitants of said houses and were owner/operators/users of said businesses, there would be no violation of the constitution?

thinking about it you can't ban a firearm.  You can restrict YOUR PROPERTY not mine or anyone elses from allowing firearms into the structure.   IF i walk down the sidewalk, and it crosses your property and i have a firearm you cannot stop me. If i am on a river and you own both sides of that river, you cannot stop me from travelling down the river with a firearm. Thats 2nd amendment protection.

[Varmit]

Mr. Micheal Hart is a freaking idiot.  If he wants to use the argument that guns are unsafe because of the accidental shootings as a reason to ban them, then we should ban bathrooms as well, espcially when you consider that more people die in bathroom related accidents each year than by accidential shootings. in 2003, children 14 and under suffeded 56 fatal gun accidents, 86 drowned in bathtubs. Also, pools should be banned given that in that same year 285 drowned in them.  For kids 10 and under the numbers are even more dramatic. 

Thats just one example, I've got more.  Don't have the time to post them right now.

[Diane Amberg]

I suspect there are a lot of kids, little boys especially, who would love to have bathtubs banned!