no carry at southland mall

[charlie12]

if i could'nt legally get a permit then how do i no get arrested for carrying?they ran my id.

I THINK you're asking if you were to apply for a CHP and had something that would keep the State from issuing you one all that would have shown up when they ran you at the mall, I THINK that's what you're asking.

Well you just proved one point people have been posting on here. You don't know anything (or not enough) about our Louisiana gun laws.
If you took a class like Quate_shooter offered to give you for FREE he would explain some of that in his class.

First we have a few things that would get you denied a Louisiana CHP but wouldn't keep you from OC. Example a DWI within so many years, some other types of arrest too, some medical and so on.

But you would still be able to OC without a permit as long as it was legal for you to own a gun, so that's why they didn't arrest you. Probably when the LEO ran your DL and check for warrants or felony conviction and ran you gun to see if it was stolen it all came back ok. So they didn't do you anything since you were legal to carry your gun. They problem was the Mall is PRIVATE property and if they don't want you there with a gun then you have to take the gun off or leave. And it you don't then you can go to jail.

If you go to the LSP website CHP section and just read our CHP rules it might help you understand some of this. And it's FREE.

 

[Hitman]

For the life of me I don't see a single violation of any Constitutional right being violated by charging a fee for a concealed permit or the 8 hour class you have to attend. You have not lost a single right, NOT ONE!

Allow me

The right lost, is the right to carry concealed (WITHOUT a permit). This used to be legal and now it is not = Lost Right
Constitution Carry States like, VT, AZ, AK and WY allow for the carrying of firearms, Open or Concealed in proper holsters without a permit to do so.

Would you vote for Louisiana to be a Constitution Carry State?

 

[rob52]

Carrying concealed without a permit is not a right lost. I say this because, as evidenced by many posts on this site, can a person carrying a gun actually do it legally? How could one know without some sort of background check? A permit does not violate any right it actually enforces it.
There is no Constitutional mandate that allows uncontested carry. But please understand that in a perfect world I would have no problem with any one carrying open or concealed, We don't live in such a world.
My wife and I have been avid gun owners and users for over 40 years and only recently decided to carry. We did so because of the violent crime and numerous shootings around New Orleans by the very people who carry guns (concealed or not) that have absoulutely no legal right to do so.
The second Amendment states in part "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Now by getting the permit (or not) what infringment has been violated? Is it the cost of the permit? Is it the inconvienience of the 8 hour class? Is it the finger printing or the "hold harmless" papers that need to be notorized?
Now, if permitting legal citizens to carry concealed violates a constitutional write than I can assure you I will do every thing I can to challenge it.
I understand the cost of the permit may be excessive and you may feel like you are being violated somehow, but the information you provide to the state police is available through public records anyway and the information you will learn in the course may just save your life. And in order to carry concealed on your person, it is the law.
My suggestion is, since Louisiana is an open carry state, don't get the damned permit, open carry and be prepared to be questioned. If you have nothing to hide, great. Or if you think you should be allowed to carry concealed without a permit, do that and be prepared to defend yourself in court, or mount a grass roots effort to change the law.

 

[Hitman]

Carrying concealed without a permit is not a right lost.

And if you had to pay for Freedom of Speech? it would not be a right lost?

Since when do you have to PAY for a Right? When you pay it becomes a privilege, not a Right. Are you seriously suggesting otherwise?

There is no Constitutional mandate that allows uncontested carry.

Your are correct there is no mandate. Only the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution which says the right to bear firearms may not be infringed.

But please understand that in a perfect world I would have no problem with any one carrying open or concealed, We don't live in such a world.

There are 4 states that allow Constitution Carry. I asked you already if you'd vote for LA to do the same. You didn't answer.

The second Amendment states in part "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Now by getting the permit (or not) what infringment has been violated? Is it the cost of the permit? Is it the inconvienience of the 8 hour class? Is it the finger printing or the "hold harmless" papers that need to be notorized?
.

Explained above already.

As soon as paying with money is involved how can anyone consider it a FREELY EXPRESSED RIGHT?

Let’s go basic here.

What if we had to pay the State in order to worship God.

Would you then still consider the 1st Amendment a Free and Unalienable Right? You CANNOT b/c it is no longer FREE to do.

You must $PAY$ in order to do it.

Since for so long our rights have been under attack people are less and less resistant when it comes to the restriction of those supposed FREE RIGHTS. The people are fooled by the government into thinking that it's ok for us to pass restrictions because it's going to make you safer. And over and over the game is played. PATRIOT ACT Ring a bell? Don't worry it's for your safety We'll protect you.

It's what led this man to say this;
“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
Benjamin Franklin

It's simply how the government has worked and works today. Little by little they chop away at the foundational Freedoms until they're gone.

Think about it, in the past 50 years has our Liberty as Free Men with Free Rights been upheld? or have they been slowly but surely eroding away under the guise of SAFETY!!!

The game is old my friend, yet so many people refuse to NOT allow history to repeat itself.

 

[rob52]

I guess I must be wrong. However, I don't consider the cost of a permit to conceal carry a payment to keep and bear arms. What I consider it to be is merely a fee for the LA. State Police to investigate a criminal background and issue a permit to carry.
Of course, any program could and probably will be abused but I personaly feel like great strides in La. have been made as far as gun ownership is involved. When I bought my first handgun in Louisiana I recall having to register it and get fingerprinted.
I don't think my view is contradictory to the quote you post from Benjamin Franklin either. Why? Because as I stated earlier, I have not lost a single right.
Now to answer your question about supporting a La. law for Constitutional carry I will answer this way:
The tenth Amendment states in total "the powers not deligated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The ninth Amendment states in total; "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
My point being, on the surface I would have to read any bill before blindly supporting it especially in light of the fact that the right to keep and bear arms is a national right, not a states right. No one can deny that we have some very liberal left leaning states (California, New York, Vermont, Washington, Nevada...etc) who's rights would be trampled if we made this a state issue.
I am not advocating any more government control but lets not forget that we are a nation of laws, some we like some we don't. I don't agree with the push to legalize Marijuana either (and I would say this law would be one delegated to the states) and I will do what I can to express my displeasure for it however, if it becomes law I will have no other choice but to accept it.
I want to say one more thing about "paying money for an expressed right. I pay a lot of taxes (as do we all) and I object to much of that. When I paid for the permit, I got what I paid for. When I pay taxes others get the benefit of my money. Some in the form of food stamps, disability payments, rental assistance, educational grants, grants to foreign nations, excessive regulations and on and on. I pay millage taxes in part to support schools of which I no longer have children attending. The list goes on seemingly forever and pays for programs started duting the great depression. This is what I consider paying for rights. This is what I would consider abuse.
I chose to pay the fee, I did not have to register a gun, I did not have to claim I was a gun owner and I knew up front the conditions. Since this is the only way I can carry concealed in most places legally, this was the only path available. I will support any National right to carry as long as there is a way to monitor those who cannont legally possess a gun. Keep in mind, any law passed will require funding either in tax dollars or fees.

 

[Tate]

Hitman nailed it. We have for far too long allowed the government, both national and at the state level, encroach upon our natural rights. Having a government body "permit" you to exercise your rights is an infringement.

 

[Abh3vol.firemen]

thank you hitman and tate.somebody finaly gets my point.also if you are driving in your car and there is nothing wrong leo cant pull you over just because your driving.so how is it that some is walking on a side walk not breaking any laws and an leo can stop you just because you have a gun? i thought there has to be probale cause to search your vehicle and run your id so should the same apply to carry?i undestand if its private property to tell me to leave but if no law is broken then were is the probale cause to run my id and the gun? disarm me, fine safety first but not the rest.i know not all you tube videos are a great example but there are a few where some are carrying on a sidewalk and this happens.leo"l see your carrying a gun,any reason why?"person"for protection.leo"ok thats fine and it is legal can i see some i.d.?"as he disarms and runs id.person"why do you have to have my i.d.?"leo "because your carrying a gun all right sir heres your i.d. and gun have a nice day".what if this same thing happend but it was "well because your driving a car and want to see if you have lic." no other reason?how many of you would be upset?

 

[charlie12]

thank you hitman and tate.somebody finaly gets my point.also if you are driving in your car and there is nothing wrong leo cant pull you over just because your driving.so how is it that some is walking on a side walk not breaking any laws and an leo can stop you just because you have a gun? i thought there has to be probale cause to search your vehicle and run your id so should the same apply to carry?i undestand if its private property to tell me to leave but if no law is broken then were is the probale cause to run my id and the gun? disarm me, fine safety first but not the rest.i know not all you tube videos are a great example but there are a few where some are carrying on a sidewalk and this happens.leo"l see your carrying a gun,any reason why?"person"for protection.leo"ok thats fine and it is legal can i see some i.d.?"as he disarms and runs id.person"why do you have to have my i.d.?"leo "because your carrying a gun all right sir heres your i.d. and gun have a nice day".what if this same thing happend but it was "well because your driving a car and want to see if you have lic." no other reason?how many of you would be upset?

Don't ever use Title 32 like that, most people driving on our roads are breaking some Title 32 RS. If you don't believe me read this. http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?folder=106

 

[geauxshootin]

There are several classes available and approved by the legislature for the purpose of filling the CHP requirement. The most advanced of those is personal protection outside the home. With the advance range portion, it is a two day class. We teach this class along with the other two approved training formats for the CHP.

 

[03protege]

Nevermind.