[etjossem]

> They can carry legally with no permit, because the 2nd Amendment is the permit.

No, residents of those states can carry legally without a permit because their state legislature said they could. "Constitutional Carry" is a cute nickname, but Vermont is still granting its residents the privilege of carrying guns in public. There is no nationwide right to concealed carry.

I'd advise you to read up on United States v. Miller (1939), in which the Supreme Court considered the argument you describe. The defendant was carrying a sawed-off shotgun without the proper permit, and his counsel argued that the 2nd Amendment absolved him of any wrongdoing. It was the Court's ruling that many of the firearms we purchase and possess today have nothing to do with the maintenance of a well-regulated militia, and as such, the states may regulate them as they please.

The Founding Fathers may have given you the inalienable right to a musket and a hunting rifle in the days before we had a standing army - but today, even in Texas, you're going to need a permit to conceal that semi-auto on your person.

[krapp]

Unless i'm mistaken, and it's entirely possible that I am, the only enumerated 'inalienable' rights are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" (albeit prefaced with the weasel-words "among others".) The Second Amendment is part of a framework of law which allows for its own legal repeal, so it's not inalienable.

[greenisland]

Well, thankfully, it takes 2/3 repeal, so that likelihood, at least in our lifetimes, is not realistic.

I'm already disappointed that most of the Republicans in the House and Senate are actually RINOs. Just goes to show you that there is a difference between a Republican and a Conservative. No true Conservative will ever vote against gun ownership. We need an entire House and Senate full of guys like Jeff Sessions in order to undo the damage by liberals in this country.

[etjossem]

Well, thankfully for moderates everywhere, a Congress stacked with guys like Jeff Sessions is even less likely.

[greenisland]

As I said, I do not carry my handgun on my person while in public. I do have one in my car because I travel some distance on a regular basis that is purely in the sticks for 60 or 70 miles. I'd hate to have a breakdown and have no way to defend myself, but it's never on my person out and about.

Well-regulated has yet to be defined, as it were, and it needs to remain somewhat amorphous. I'm opposed to firearms registration because it becomes a de facto list of gun owners to demonize down the road. A certain presidential candidate has already said they intend to pursue more heavy restrictions, especially registration. They have been heard to mention that handguns should be for the military and police only. These politicians all seem to be in love with Australian-style firearms registration. No, thank you.

[etjossem]

When your handgun turns up in connection with a felony, I - a voter concerned with public safety - want the police to be able to look up the serial number, knock on your door, and take your statement about the guy who broke into your car last week.

The public has a strong and completely defensible interest in stopping violent crime. That's a shared goal on both sides of the aisle.