|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
IN: Officials Consider Ridding of Handgun Carry Licenses
Submitted by:
Davd Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Police officials in Indiana say a proposal to eliminate the state’s handgun carry license requirement for civilians could result in a loss of revenue. The Joint Committee on Judiciary and Public Policy heard presentations on the proposal Thursday, The Tribune-Star reported . It seeks to repeal the law requiring a person to obtain a license in order to carry a handgun in the state.
|
| Comment by:
xqqme
(9/12/2017)
|
| OK... so the State of Indiana makes a PROFIT on the issuance of handgun licenses? The fees cover more than the costs? So they are, essentially, taxing a Constitutional Right? And I thought SCOTUS ruled that poll taxes and the like were UNCONSTITUTIONAL. |
| Comment by:
dasing
(9/12/2017)
|
| Have a bake sale!!!!! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
