# House passes Gun Bill **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 7, 2017, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826 "2017-12-07T20:06:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/261 "2017-12-28T16:22:41Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > But if it was discovered that another state had done away with any testing requirement to obtain a drivers license and they were just giving them out to anyone with the $25 processing fee, wouldn’t you want Ohio to be able to bar people from that state from driving within Ohio? Wouldn’t you want Ohio to be able to determine what is safe and acceptable within their borders? If everyone had some way for most people to get a driver’s license, then sure, no one would ever step in and force Ohio to accept anyone else’s driver’s licenses. But lets say that Ohio said that you had to prove you “needed” to drive a car and the only way to prove need was to be really rich or important. Would you really be surprised if the federal government said “fuck it, everyone has to accept everyone else’s driver’s licenses” I don’t think there is any proof that permit holders are more dangerous than non-permit holders. I don’t think there is any proof that the “may issue” and “no issue” states are any less dangerous than shall issue states. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/262 "2017-12-28T16:31:44Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > No, and that is why DL’s are universally accepted in the all the states. > > If CCW’s all had a level of requirements that were acceptable to most or all states, then they would have reciprocity too. > > That there are states that have 0 requirements to get a CCW is why states should have the right to reject reciprocity. The same as if there were states that required 0 training to operate a motor vehicle, states would reject reciprocity from that state too. There are no states that have zero requirements to get a CCW. Some states do not impose any ADDITIONAL requirements to CARRY a gun than they impose to OWN a gun but EVERY state has requirements. No felons, no drug abusers, no wifebeaters, no dishonorably discharged, etc. > [@](#): > > Yeah, that’s not how it played out at all. > > I pointed out that dismissing someone’s argument because they misuse a word or phrase is not a useful debate tactic. If you are trying to claim that people are deliberately missing terminology as a “tactic” then I don’t know that that’s really a thing, and it is certainly not something that has been used or defended in this thread. I did not know it was a tactic to be deplored. Can you give me an example of it in use, so I can see what it is you are talking about? Manufacturing the term assault weapon (which wasn’t a real thing) because you want people to think they are like assault rifles (which are a real thing). That’s why there are so many gun controllers who think that assault weapons are machine guns. And when it turns out they were wrong about that they rationalize their mistake by saying that they still allow high rates of fire. When you point out that they have the same rate of fire as a revolver, they get dangerously close to saying we should just ban guns. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/263 "2017-12-28T16:37:18Z")
> [@BlueMerle](#): > > I think you need better information. I live in TX, have a valid LTC and I can assure you there is a training requirement. > > [TX DPS FAQ](https://www.dps.texas.gov/RSD/LTC/faqs/index.htm) > > see training requirements. The funny thing is that the gun controllers could have imposed hat standard nationwide a long time ago. I mean seriously if the gun controllers said they were in favor of national CCW with Texas standards and pre-empting the field in the area, they could have had it. Now thy complain that they have to deal with Vermont standards. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/264 "2017-12-28T16:46:09Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Yeah, I conveniently clipped the bullshit part of your post that had nothing to do with the questions _I_ had asked of _you_. > > Guns are about force. I find it amusing that you feel you need to resort to force to preserve your right to have force. If it’s so freaking compelling a thing, I would have thought it would be easier to _convince_ people. But that apparently isn’t working, so now you’ll try and get your way thru sheer force, so you can have that force at hand in case someone tries to force _you_ to do something. > > Yeah, I find that ironic and amusing and sad and pathetic and I made a point to indicate it. > > You have a nice day too. We had to “force” states to recognize all sorts of rights, from the right to abortion to the right to sit at the lunch counter to letting gay people get married. We had to force states to do these things because they would not do them on their own. If the right to an abortion I so frikking compelling, I would have thought it would be easier to convince people. But you couldn’t convince people so we forced them to accept abortion, minority rights, gay rights. And now gun rights. I can literally take every fucking rebuttal from the state’s rights threads and use them here. I find it ironic and amusing and sad and pathetic that so many who are against state’s rights and in favor of federal supremacy seem to abandon that principle when the rights at issue are 2nd amendment constitutional rights. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/265 "2017-12-28T16:59:24Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Two things. > > The gun controllers have had every opportunity to pass a national concealed carry permit but they didn’t want to give up the fight in the handful of states that were still limiting the right to concealed carry and they actually like the fact that the mish mosh of state laws is so fucking confusing and unworkable. > > The laws they can enforce are things like “don’t carry concealed while you are drinking” “don’t carry concealed while in near a school” “don’t carry concealed while in a bank” etc. not “don’t carry concealed period end of story or go directly to jail” That’s a lot of words that don’t actually answer the questions you quoted. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/266 "2017-12-28T17:10:00Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > If everyone had some way for most people to get a driver’s license, then sure, no one would ever step in and force Ohio to accept anyone else’s driver’s licenses. But lets say that Ohio said that you had to prove you “needed” to drive a car and the only way to prove need was to be really rich or important. Would you really be surprised if the federal government said “fuck it, everyone has to accept everyone else’s driver’s licenses” But the federal government didn’t do that, did it? > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I don’t think there is any proof that permit holders are more dangerous than non-permit holders. I don’t think there is any proof that the “may issue” and “no issue” states are any less dangerous than shall issue states. Your opinion is noted, but not given any weight because it seems to be seriously misinformed and misleading: [there is proof](http://lawcenter.giffords.org/dangers-of-permissive-carrying-concealed-weapons-ccw-laws-statistics/). > [@](#): > > An analysis of the effects of Texas’ CCW law, (a law adopted in 1995 that overturned the state’s 125-year ban on concealed weapons), found that between January 1, 1996 and August 31, 2001, CCW license holders were arrested for 5,314 crimes, including murder, rape, kidnapping and theft.4 Texas CCW holders were arrested for weapons-related crimes at a rate 81% higher than that of the state’s general population age 21 and older.5 > [@](#): > > In fact, the best available evidence suggests that permissive CCW laws may correlate with statistically meaningful increases in violent crime.2 An extensive statistical analysis by Stanford researcher John Donohue found that permissive shall issue CCW laws were linked to significant increases in rates of aggravated assault.3 I’m reasonably sure that you’ll have some reason(s) that those aren’t valid studies, or don’t show that a place is more “dangerous” or some such, but the fact that you don’t _think_ there is proof is immaterial: there is proof. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/267 "2017-12-28T17:13:32Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Yes. At least, the version under all that obvious hyperbole. Obviously someone who just happened to cross without meaning to should get off. I’m not for opportunistic arrests. But it’s not as if police sit there and search everyone who crosses the border. > > It is a good thing that different states can have different laws, so we can see which laws are actually better for our society. It is also good when we find what that is and make a federal law. What is never good is letting the lowest common denominator decide. > > The reason for this law is to try and undermine CCW restrictions. It’s just some states trying to control the others on an issue that the actual population is divided about. It’s an end run around democracy. > > If drivers’ license laws varied enough from state to state, I’d have a problem with them, too. Fortunately, they largely don’t. They all realize that cars are dangerous and have tests to make sure you know how to use them properly. > > This isn’t some law that cuts through some legal tape, like the licensing laws. It is an attempt to reduce the CCW requirements in other states. The red states care about states rights until it means they might be able to control the blue states. There is broad consensus on the issue and there are a few holdouts. 43 states have shall issue permits, that about as close to consensus as you can get. So they are trying to make a federal law about it. I didn’t see a one single amendment proposed that tried to create a national CCW with some higher standard than reciprocity (which significantly higher than common denominator). ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/268 "2017-12-28T17:15:32Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Concealed carry is enumerated in the Constitution? The right to carry is specifically enumerated. Now show me where anything close to abortion is specifically enumerated. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/269 "2017-12-28T17:20:42Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > That’s a lot of words that don’t actually answer the questions you quoted. "then how can they make someone obey Ohio laws with respect to CCR? " That is the question I answered. “Why shouldn’t Ohio be able to insist on it’s state standards for everyone in the state, regardless of residency?” For the same reason that Kansas shouldn’t be allowed to insist on its standards for obtaining an abortion. For the same reason that Alabama shouldn’t be able to enforce their standards for where you sit on a bus. For the same reason that Arizona shouldn’t be able to enforce their standards for how to extract confessions from a suspect. For the same reason that Colorado shouldn’t be able to enforce their standard for which marriages to honor, the list goes on and on and on. By the time you get over 40 states agreeing on a thing, I say fuck states rights. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/270 "2017-12-28T17:21:34Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The right to carry is specifically enumerated Thanks for answering a question I didn’t ask. Is concealed carry specifically enumerated in the Constitution? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/271 "2017-12-28T17:22:15Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > We had to “force” states to recognize all sorts of rights, from the right to abortion to the right to sit at the lunch counter to letting gay people get married. We had to force states to do these things because they would not do them on their own. If the right to an abortion I so frikking compelling, I would have thought it would be easier to convince people. But you couldn’t convince people so we forced them to accept abortion, minority rights, gay rights. And now gun rights. > > I can literally take every fucking rebuttal from the state’s rights threads and use them here. I find it ironic and amusing and sad and pathetic that so many who are against state’s rights and in favor of federal supremacy seem to abandon that principle when the rights at issue are 2nd amendment constitutional rights. So like **BlueMerle** , you want to use force to force people to allow you to use force in case someone tries to force you to do something you don’t want to do, right? :rolleyes: It’s a deliciously circular, ironic bit of fuckery that **BlueMerle** brought up, and yeah, I enjoyed pointing it out. I’m also enjoying being able to point it out again now that you brought it up, so thanks for the opportunity, **Damuri**. By the way, that was a terrible attempt to draw equivalence. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/272 "2017-12-28T17:25:33Z")
nm not worth it ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/273 "2017-12-28T17:51:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > But the federal government didn’t do that, did it? What do you think reciprocity means? > [@](#): > > Your opinion is noted, but not given any weight because it seems to be seriously misinformed and misleading: [there is proof](http://lawcenter.giffords.org/dangers-of-permissive-carrying-concealed-weapons-ccw-laws-statistics/).I’m reasonably sure that you’ll have some reason(s) that those aren’t valid studies, or don’t show that a place is more “dangerous” or some such, but the fact that you don’t _think_ there is proof is immaterial: there is proof. Are you fucking kidding me? Giffords Law Center? As in Gabby Giffords? That article is highly misleading. There are no empirical studies that show that concealed carry increases gun violence (it usually doesn’t decrease gun violence much either), its all statistical noise. Texas CCW holders are more law abiding than Texas police officers, who in turn are more law abiding than the general population. This is the fact of the matter. Despite the fact that 5314 CCW holders out of 215,000 CCW holders have been arrested (not convicted or even indicted, arrested) of everything from murder to jaywalking (funny how they only mention things like murder and rape), they are STILL more law abiding than police officers. The footnote is to an article that shot down the relatively unsupported notion that lax CCW rules would have a pronounced deterrent effect on crime. John Donohue never said that lax carry laws = more crime. He said lax carry laws /= less crime. This was somewhat big news a while back, I suspect that not enough people change their carrying habits for it to make a difference. And the Violence Policy Center has been less than honest about guns for years. That statement that “Texas CCW holders were arrested for \*\*\*weapons-related crimes \*\*\*at a rate 81% higher than that of the state’s general population age 21 and older.” is misleading. It makes you think that CCW holders shoot people 81% more often than the general population. When in fact the statistic refers mostly to illegal possession, that means they were ARRESTED (not convicted or even indicted) for carrying and they may or may not have had their license on them at the time or they were carrying too close to a school or church or in a bar, etc. All the “proof” you see is highly stylized to fool people who are either easily fooled or WANT to be fooled. Here is a pretty good article on how the gun controllers have been distorting data in some cases: [http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443981/new-york-times-concealed-handgun-crime-numbers-are-bogus](http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443981/new-york-times-concealed-handgun-crime-numbers-are-bogus) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/274 "2017-12-28T17:55:46Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Thanks for answering a question I didn’t ask. Is concealed carry specifically enumerated in the Constitution? That is a pretty stupid distinction you are trying to make there. It highlights the weakness of your argument. If the law allowed for universal open carry, your response would be that the 2nd amendment don’t have the words “open” carry in it? I suppose that congress could have allowed ALL carry but they restricted themselves to concealed carry. the type of carry type that most states require licenses for. There are a SHITLOAD of states that do not require licenses for open carry. Is THAT what you would have preferred? A law that said that all states have to give reciprocity for BOTH open AND concealed carry? Would THAT have passed you pettifoggery of constitutional interpretation? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/275 "2017-12-28T17:55:53Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > So like **BlueMerle** , you want to use force to force people to allow you to use force in case someone tries to force you to do something you don’t want to do, right? :rolleyes: > > It’s a deliciously circular, ironic bit of fuckery that **BlueMerle** brought up, and yeah, I enjoyed pointing it out. I’m also enjoying being able to point it out again now that you brought it up, so thanks for the opportunity, **Damuri**. > > By the way, that was a terrible attempt to draw equivalence. Bo, you are right on the line and maybe over with your behavior, here. You’ve referred to another’s post as ‘bullshit’. In this one your use of ‘bit of fuckery’ is too much. In addition, in your response to Damuri Ajashi upthread refers to his post as misinformed - which is fine - and misleading - which may or may not be fine, depending. Calm the hell down and dial back the angry rhetoric or suffer the consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/276 "2017-12-28T18:04:03Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > That is a pretty stupid distinction you are trying to make there. It highlights the weakness of your argument. If the law allowed for universal open carry, your response would be that the 2nd amendment don’t have the words “open” carry in it? > > I suppose that congress could have allowed ALL carry but they restricted themselves to concealed carry. the type of carry type that most states require licenses for. There are a SHITLOAD of states that do not require licenses for open carry. Is THAT what you would have preferred? A law that said that all states have to give reciprocity for BOTH open AND concealed carry? Would THAT have passed you pettifoggery of constitutional interpretation? I don’t see an answer to the question of “Is concealed carry enumerated in the Constitution?” It’s funny how a simple question somehow becomes an argument when one doesn’t want to answer. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/277 "2017-12-28T18:05:44Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > So like **BlueMerle** , you want to use force to force people to allow you to use force in case someone tries to force you to do something you don’t want to do, right? :rolleyes: Yes. Its called self defense. I want the federal government to force states to allow me to have access to the means to defend myself. The kind of self defense that Korean store owners used to stop the sacking of Koreatown in LA. The kind of self defense that black rights activists used to protect themselves from the KKK in the South. The kind of self defense that gay militant groups used to protect their community from homophobes. > [@](#): > > It’s a deliciously circular, ironic bit of fuckery that **BlueMerle** brought up, and yeah, I enjoyed pointing it out. I’m also enjoying being able to point it out again now that you brought it up, so thanks for the opportunity, **Damuri**. > > By the way, that was a terrible attempt to draw equivalence. Of course it was, because to you there are good constitutional rights and bad constitutional rights.:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/278 "2017-12-28T18:24:29Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I don’t see an answer to the question of “Is concealed carry enumerated in the Constitution?” > > It’s funny how a simple question somehow becomes an argument when one doesn’t want to answer. The right to carry in an enumerated right. Do you think the right goes away because its concealed carry? What kind of retarded distinction are you trying to make? The universe of carry can be divided into concealed carry and open carry. The laws regarding open are significantly more lax in most states than laws regarding concealed carry. Congress chose to provide reciprocity for more regulated of the two. You want to change that? Try winning some elections. But in order to do that, you would probably have to drop gun control as an issue in most swing states. You lose votes in the entire rust belt from Pennsylvania to Wisconsin, you lose votes in Virginia and North Carolina. I can’t think of a swing state where you don’t lose net votes on the gun issue. You can pretty much blame Trump on Hillary’s moving to the left of Bernie on the gun issue as much as you could blame it on anything else. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/279 "2017-12-28T18:35:06Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > … You want to change that? Try winning some elections. But in order to do that, you would probably have to drop gun control as an issue in most swing states. You lose votes in the entire rust belt from Pennsylvania to Wisconsin, you lose votes in Virginia and North Carolina. **I can’t think of a swing state where you don’t lose net votes on the gun issue**. You can pretty much blame Trump on Hillary’s moving to the left of Bernie on the gun issue as much as you could blame it on anything else. (bolding mine) The only one I can think of that might be the case in is perhaps Minnesota, maybe, on the right day, with the window blowing the right way and all the planets in alignment. ---
**Author:** ![Unpronounceable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9de0a6/32.png) [@Unpronounceable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unpronounceable)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2017, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826/280 "2017-12-28T19:47:04Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The right to carry in an enumerated right. Do you think the right goes away because its concealed carry? What kind of retarded distinction are you trying to make? It’s not complicated, nor even a remotely new idea - see, the constitution doesn’t guarantee the right to carry concealed, so it’s ok to make that illegal. And it doesn’t guarantee the right to open-carry either, so that can be illegal too. So, nobody can have a gun, and it’s perfectly legal (as long as you ignore all the times those laws have been found to be unconstitutional.) But it takes time to challenge those laws, and they usually go through the 9th circuit (motto: only 80%\* of our appealed decisions have been overturned!) first. \*the average across all circuits is something in the 60-70% range, so not _quite_ as bad as it looks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/house-passes-gun-bill/803826.md?page=15)