Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: heckler

Shall not be infringed. Shall NOT be infirnged. Shall NOT BE infringed. Shall NOT BE INFRINGED. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Any questions?


7 posted on 02/02/2006 6:43:04 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Jack Hammer
Shall not be infringed. Shall NOT be infirnged. Shall NOT BE infringed. Shall NOT BE INFRINGED. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Any questions?

I don't know that concealed carry was viewed in 1787 the way it is viewed in civilized parts of the U.S. today. I think at least the Founders might have thought there should be no need for an honest gentleman to conceal his armament.

That having been said, if a state or municipality regard the open wearing of armament as a breach of the peace, I would say that they must of necessity then allow people to carry discretely. I suspect given a choice, many municipalities would actually prefer the latter.

10 posted on 02/02/2006 8:53:14 PM PST by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson