re: LA Constitutional Carry Bill is Back (HB68)

quote:

---

But both involve "keeping and bearing arms."

---

One is killing a managed species of animals. Tools used to do this DO include firearms but also include spears, arrows, knives, traps, etc. It is reguulated by a state authority and requires a licsense. It is not a constitutioanally proteected activity.

The other is a constituitionally protactud righte to possessesesses something.

I can't not wrap my head arund how someone cannot re-cognize how the requorements to obtane a license to kill animals draws any parallel with someone needing to fulfill requirements to xercise a right. One is a RIGHT...the other is a prevldge.

Where do I sign up for the rest of the Bill of Rights classes?

sic

quote:

---

If someone has a logical, objective reason for Hunter safety requirements being OK (along with hunter orange, hunting licenses, etc.) while CCW requirements aren't, I'd be interested in reading it.

---

Because hunting is a recreational firearm activity in which you go out in the world, in a shared wildlife space, and if all goes well, you will discharge the firearm (often multiple times) from a stealthy, concealed position, often to the surprise of folks not hunting with you.

CCW is an extension of self-defense. Yes, you're in a shared space (public), but if all goes well, you WON'T discharge the firearm. And, if the situation deteriorates to the point where the weapon IS discharged in this situation, then folks in the immediate area are highly likely to be alerted to the fact that shite's going down.


That's my humble, logical justification for hunter safety rules/hunter orange/hunter education and no requirement for CCW.


ETA: Just FTR, I think education is good and everyone intending to carry a weapon for defense should be proficient (or better) with the weapon, as well as be well aware of the rules and regulations involved in lethal force in self-defense situations. However, the libertarian in me has a hard time saying it should be mandatory - because at that point, who decides what should be taught, who should teach it, how much it should cost always ends up with the government and it becomes a licensed privilege, not a true right.