THERE IS A PROPOSAL, currently pending in the arkansas state legislature, to permit the unconcealed carrying of firearms. what is called "open carry", rather than the current law, which permits only the carrying of concealed weapons.
The purpose behind concealed firearms is presumably to allow people to defend themselves without openly posing a threat to anyone else, even by making someone uncomfortable at the sight of a weapon. But the question is: should bearers be limited to concealment only?
If open carry is passed, and in a southern, conservative, rural state like arkansas a bill like this always has a chance, it might remain legal to conceal and carry; the bearer of the arm might have a choice between concealing or exposing, or, the law might end up requiring openly carrying, and prohibiting conceal and carry, although that would seem a little bit strange. Strange, because, even if you start letting people carry openly, why suddenly prohibit them from carrying hiddenly?
Its debatable which way is better. Conceal, display, or both or either. You would think that the NRA gun lovers would be making a bigger fuss about requiring guns to be carried concealed, since the constitution does not mention concealment. Maybe they feel fortunate to have any kind of carry at all. They would probably prefer both.
You would almost feel a sense of relief knowing that if anyone near you ha a weapon, you at least have a chance to see it, intead of never knowing whether everyone near you might be carrying.
The second amendment is a perfect example of the insanity of trying to figure out what the framers of the constitution meant by their words. Two hundred years ago they had no concept of assault weapons, all weapons were muzzle lading muskets.
If we want guns in our society, we should write very definite laws about them, beginning with the constitution itself, and make those laws applicable to our situation in today's world.
No comments:
Post a Comment