Current administration has been largely silent on gun issues. This may change, now with the Arizona tradgedy. Has been a champion of CRP expansion, and expanded the Walk-in Hunting programs around the country with Pittman-Roberton fund grants for public access. Ag. secretary appearing live at Pheasant Fest second time in a row, presumably with announcements. Besides Cheney shooting his hunting partner on a multi thousand dollar rich man's south Texas quail lease, what did those other guys do for you for a long 8 years? Yeah that's what I thought!
Lawsuit against concealed weapons permit
- Thread starter birdman652001
- Start date
They didn't increase our deficit to multi-trillions of dollars for one. They did not start the housing bubble that has taken this economy to the sewer. That lawyer that walked in on Dick Cheney did not follow field safety rules, so he got shot. Bet he does not do it again. But whatever!!!
BritChaser
Well-known member
They didn't increase our deficit to multi-trillions of dollars for one. They did not start the housing bubble that has taken this economy to the sewer. That lawyer that walked in on Dick Cheney did not follow field safety rules, so he got shot. Bet he does not do it again. But whatever!!!
The law enforcement investigative report of Cheney's shooting the lawyer is on the internet. It is interesting reading. Another good read, also on the internet, is the law enforcement investigative report that led to the conviction of the Idaho senator after he was arrested in an airport men's room in a gay sex sting operation. What a country.
Last edited:
ok, You know or have evey hunted with Dick Cheney? Just wondering????? I don't buy all , I read. It's called critical thinking. You can believe what you want. And I'll do the same.
OK Jmac the Cheney comment was a little humor, maybe very little, but come on the Housing bubble was on Bush's watch, as was the financial meltdown and subsequent initial and agregious bailout of AIG and Goldman. Obama got to hold the bag, just like Hoover in the thirties. Since we as a nation have short term disease, he owns it all now, but let's not fool ourselves as to how it happened, greed gone wild, and the timeline is clear as to who was minding the store or not. From a sportsman's perspective currently it's all been good. I don't agree with everything, far from it, but I don't agree with any of them 100%. Nor do I require you to agree with me as a condition of friendship. In the long run you may be right, I may be wrong. I just look at the facts of the last 10 years, next two may change my mind completely.
Old and new,
Fair enough, Go back another 10 years. Not trying to pull anyones chain. But just trying to let everyone know, you better pay attention. This housing bubble goes back to carter admin, and maybe beyond that. I'll I know is the printing of money Is deflating the dallor. And It's not helping me. My land is paid off, Houses are paid off, Can I keep them? That's my Question. Just saying. Not looking for a fight, and have enjoyed the discussion. That goes for all on this sight.:cheers: It's a great county we all live in, It's all good.:thumbsup:
JMac, I share your worries, I'm 56 with young kids, I'm to old to start over. Been fiscally responsible myself, ( well maybe I have a lot tied up in dogs and guns), but would like to have something left or at least hold on to what I have! I'M with you, go back another 10 years, I couldn't wait to get rid of Clinton-Gore. Really like to have somebody that is by some measure the best to vote for! Question whether we get that from either side of the aisle. We will have to muddle along in spite of them, and hope the blind hogs find an acorn or two!
Just to get back on target, I think all of us agree, that there is really no need for a legal or Illegal NON U.S. citizen to own and conceal carry a handgun, in that bastion of crime South Dakota. Waiting since 2002 to challenge the law, seems to strengthen the likelyhood of denial. I might feel differently if we were talking about a sporting firearm, pistol no, only one reason to carry a concealed pistol and that implies deadly force with a human target,and good or bad probably against a U.S. citizen to boot cause he'd have to travel far and wide to be fortunate enough to shoot another Limey in South Dakota! Take the oath or take a hike is my policy, and I'm going to darned stewed if this clown gets his way.
BritChaser
Well-known member
ok, You know or have evey hunted with Dick Cheney? Just wondering????? I don't buy all , I read. It's called critical thinking. You can believe what you want. And I'll do the same.
I just said the reports are interesting reading. Give it a break.
1pheas4
Moderator
I thought the same thing moellermd.
Anyway, I've had eastern European employees in the past who became citizens within 4-6 years of being in the U.S. They may have been able to become citizens sooner if they wanted to (?)
If this guy wants his gun rights he should just become a citizen and be done with it
--1pheas4
moellermd
Super Moderator
FCSpringer
Moderator
That judge should be disbarred.
birdman652001
New member
Wow, now that guy is a disgrunted guy even though he won the lawsuit. Still, hes not a LEGAL US Citizen. I dont care when you came here. You have to get YOUR citizenship period. Im sure the State will appeal or/and will go to another judges and try to defend's its us citizen's requirements to obtain a firearm.
BritChaser
Well-known member
Restricting Concealed Carry Permits to Citizens
The legal question is whether South Dakota's ban on non-citizens getting concealed carry permits is either 1) rationally related to a legitimate state interest; or 2) subject to a higher form of judicial scutiny considering that the Supreme Court has declared that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to possess arms. This case really isn't about the right to possess arms; it's about state permission to carry concealed. I am guessing that the "rationally related" test applies, or will apply, and ultimatley the court of appeal or U.S. Supreme Court will hold that a state may reasonably restrict concealed carry permits to citizens. But it's always dicey trying to predict what an appellate court will do.
The legal question is whether South Dakota's ban on non-citizens getting concealed carry permits is either 1) rationally related to a legitimate state interest; or 2) subject to a higher form of judicial scutiny considering that the Supreme Court has declared that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to possess arms. This case really isn't about the right to possess arms; it's about state permission to carry concealed. I am guessing that the "rationally related" test applies, or will apply, and ultimatley the court of appeal or U.S. Supreme Court will hold that a state may reasonably restrict concealed carry permits to citizens. But it's always dicey trying to predict what an appellate court will do.
Last edited:
tmrichardson
Banned
deleted deleted
Last edited:
birdman652001
New member
How about flipping it around? What if you married a canadian gal, moved there and were authorized to work and live normally but didn't want to renounce your citizenship in the good old US of A....and ran into a bout of high crime where you live...and wanted to obtain a weapons permit to defend yourself?
Not as simple when you step back and think through all the consequences--in other words, what we ask judges to do.....
Im guessing you'd be smart enough to know if you dont change your citizenship, you wont get a gun. im sure canada wont give you a gun permit if you dont.
I agree though, if you dont do it, you wont get one. But this judge think its a violation of his rights... wait a minute.. if hes not a US citizenship, he doesnt have rights in this country, only of his own country, especially firearm rights in US. Guess what, If he was to get arrested for a crime, he have to be treated like a foreign person or worst, a terrorist if hes not a us citizen.
Yes yes yes. Moe's link is plan and clear. The man is a legal resident. Been here since he was fifteen. He has a permanent residency card. Therefore he qualifies for rights in the United States.
TR, sorry. Your argument does not hold water. You cannot move to a new country (Canada or whereever) and expect to have rights in that country. I do not agree with you, sorry!! It does not work that way.
You may be right this will get overturned in an appellate court. and definitely should not hold up in the supreme court. It is the state's right to make the laws. The federal government should not supercede the states. That is my humble opinion.
The people I've run into that want to live here, work here but not get their citizenship don't want any of the responsibilities that go with it. Mainly the chance they might be called up to serve our country in the military, at least that is what I've been told. And being the soft hearted and generous fellow I am, I tell them that they should leave then and not come back.
birdman652001
New member
ooooh BOY.. here we go.. LEGAL immigrants are now allowed to have concealed pistol permits.