Why are illegal or non-English speaking people allowed to carry a weapon in the United States of America?
478250
Well I'm from the peoples republic of California and we don't enjoy such right to carry laws here...so I have a hard time relating.  I don't understand why a state like Texas tolerates an illegal resident period....I would think a good ole boy state like Texas would be rounding up anyone without a green card and shipping them south....
11853
All of them.  Every state has some kind of law which regulates the possession or purchase of a weapon.  Some states are just more strict than others.
287118
1. Yes , With the proper permit.(CCW)\n2. Yes * A person may not carry or possess a firearm, knife, or deadly weapon of any kind on public school property.(MD Criminal Law § 4-102.)\n3. Yes * See #1\nNOTE: In MD it is almost impossible for a non-resident to get a permit. For that matter most MD residents can't either. You can view the law on Permits (Article 27 Crimes and Punishment: Handguns: § 36E. Permits) \nArticle 27 SEC. 36D (b)\n\nNOTE: (Article 27 SEC. 36D (b))In the event that the officer discovers the person to be wearing, carrying or transporting a handgun, he may demand that the person produce evidence that he is entitled to so wear, carry, or transport the handgun pursuant to Sec. 36B (c) of this article.
109699
Because the right to bear arms is part of the bill of rights. Lawn darts aren't, and they don't have the NRA or some big lobbying group behind them.
607092
Yes, They are a weapon used to inflict injury to another person, they are not considered a toy or a collectible therefore the only reason to have them is to hurt someone.\nYou can't get a permit for them like you can a gun. Its the same as walking around with a big knife in your pocket. But if your going to beat someone up you are probably going to go to jail anyways so whats the big deal right?\nWrong, if you used your fist, it would be assault and battery, which is a misdemeanor offense, if you an object such as brass knuckles it is considered a felonious assault, which means you could go to prison . Felonies are hardly ever given probation for and usually carry stiff fines. And convicted felons are never aloud to vote again or join the military, live in federal or public assisted housing (HUD) or own a handgun.And in the state of new york not aloud to be a garbage collector (lol, strange law!!) \n.. Usually misdemeanors if convicted means probation and or fines or serve time in the local jail. Therefore it is wise not to ever uses a object to fight with. Big house,verses, little house....
356217
bear arms. i think that people get too perinoid about there safety and end up hurting someone they care about. people shouldnt be able to carry guns you never know who might get there hands on one and who canbe trusted. So what do you think? well bye have a great day
676027
YOu answered your own question.\n\nNo one has the right to break our laws and to do something illegal.\n\nWithout control, any terrorist can learn Spanish and come over through Mexico. This is not a racial issue but a country taking a hard stance to enforce good laws.\n\nNoone can blame the poor Mexicans for trying to better their lives but it cannot go unchecked without damage to our country and the rest of us.
706679
Anyone who looks Hispanic and does not speak English in public is subject to being an illegal.  As far as I am concerned, they have to prove their innocence.  They are rude to not speak English in public.  We live in America.
878503
I would say it depends on your states laws on it. As some states its legal to carry mace (with being certified as a concelaed weapon or device )while others very illegal. I know in New Mexico, where I am it is currently legal to own one however if your ever stopped it is illegal to conceal any weapon. It must be out in the open and in any crossing with a officer you must notify them immediatly you are armed. I know though the state is currently working on a law for it and it has been talked either banning it from the public to carry or make persons take a class at there expense to carry one. Check with your district attorney or ask a peace officer in your area. The city Im in just recently banned the public (civilian) from carrying tasers in public, its kind of conflicting right now since its only a local ordinance made and some say it could conflict with the states statue soon to come out. I do know it is totally illegal to carry mace, weapons or tasers into military installations or have them on your person/car on a base.\n\nI do have experience and carry one on duty. I would say it is a good device however I think any joe shouldnt be able to carry one as it can also be deadly to some. To carry mine me and fellow officers had to take written tests, courses on proper uses, and proper situations to deploy it and then were tasered with  x-22 tasers to feel the effect as same we have to be maced once a year to carry it for certification. I know the classes we took here from a trained instruction person it took us all a month in training on its proper use and testing to ensure everyone was widely aware of its capabilities and effect, and again said what situations to properly use it in. We hardly use it unless the situation really needs it. The cops tv show you just see all the good situations they require it to be used where as I have only used it twice in a year, being the other guy had a gun or large knife. So I wouldnt just deploy it just because billy joe is fisting up.\n\nIm guessing you want one for self defense. I know most manufacturers, specially like Galls, GT, etc.  will NOT sell any x-22 type guns used by law enforcement to the public or any similiar. I know some companies sell to the public but ones sold to the public are not as good as a x-22 and very less effective, as I dont blame them for doing this. I wouldnt want the 17 year old Im about to confront with one either.\n\nBut call your district attorneys office or local pd and inquire it.
678370
so that the person who figures it out cant use it in america and use their oown weapons against them
831347
As a Brit  I apologise for stepping in here, but would just like to say that the only two members of my American family who possess guns are police officers.  The remainder refuse to own guns on the grounds that too many 'accidents' occur in households where weapons are kept. They have a point - I lived in New York for a while and the number of accidental (fatal) shootings by children of children, in the home, amazed me - as did the arbitrary and senseless shooting of people on the streets.  So I guess the family has a point. \n\nIncidentally, regarding the comment above that the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution gives Americans the constitutional right to own guns, doesn't the relevant sentence say  "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."   Surely, all that means is that in the absence of a standing army (the newly formed United States not yet having a regular army when the Constitution was drafted), the people were allowed to bear arms, as members of a disciplined militia, in order to protect their new nation in case of an attack by outside forces?  Now that the USA has both a National Guard  _and_  an enormous Regular Army, isn't that Amendment now redundant and a couple of centuries out of date?     \n\nI'm only asking... but it's a question that's worth calm, reasoned discussion, surely?
269661
being armed in Iraq is a crime, since the days of saddam Hussien. civilians cannot have weapons at all. but at the end of the previous regiem, the people there armed them selves with the weapons left by the army, some were being ready under the past government to protect Bagdad when the american forces enter. thousands of iraqis are illegally armed.
482010
illegal concealed or not
779860
This is guided by Arms Act in which categories of weapons have been identified requiring licence from govt.Some weapons such as .38, 9mm revolvers/pistols can not be possessed by citizens except members of Armed Force and Police.Air guns(both pistols and guns) do not come under this category.You are free to buy and use it for peaceful purpose.But you cant intimidate others by this.Also hunting by any means is a penal offence.
1024603
If we outlaw all guns, only outlaws will have guns.  Do you REALLY want to give crooks that kind of advantage over us law-abiding citizens?  Many Patriotic Americans proudly own guns...  and that's why no country will even consider invading us!  (except for Mexico, of course)
949936
I am surprised a worldly man such as yourself, working on the fringe of military markets, needs much in the way of an education on laws, weapons and street violence, and I really do not have the time to educate you.  Nevertheless, allow me a cursory response:\n\n1) The US Constitution does not allow people to "play" with guns.  2) The "'right'" conveyed is simply that, and does not require quotation marks to belittle it.  3) You have no way of knowing who considered what before answering your last petty jab at the US and its military delivered in the guise of a question – at the time you conveyed no interest in the relevance of the 2nd Amendment.  \n\nYou say you live a country where guns are not available to civilians and there is very little gun crime.  Have you read Joyce Malcolm, "Guns and Violence: The English Experience"?  An English author, she writes: \n\n"With passage of the Firearms Act of 1997, “it was confidently assumed that the new legislation effectively banning handguns would have the direct effect of reducing certain types of violent crime by reducing access to weapons.” The news media promised that the “world’s toughest laws will help to keep weapons off the streets.”  \n\nYet faster than British gun-owners could surrender their handguns for destruction, guns began flooding into Great Britain from the international black market (especially from eastern Europe and from China), driven by the demands of the country’s rapidly developing criminal gun-culture."  Even The London Times, bastion of the UK, headlined with:  "Killings Rise As 3 Million Illegal Guns Flood Britain" on January 16th, 2000.  I doubt little has changed in the last few years.\n\nAs for your last comment, regarding an armed civilian militia being no match for a modern professional army – ask your “mates” in Basra how things are going – urban warfare fighting against militias with light/captured weaponry is one of the most difficult things imaginable.\n\nUltimately, everything about your comments suggests to me that you are the kind of man who would walk into a bar and start mouthing off, simply to get a good fight started.  I am sure there are many people who would probably oblige you, but for my part I will simply say, if you are a professional, act like one.
724672
Well, you're right about it being a sort of obsolete law. Historically they wanted to allow people to have guns in case we were attacked, as our militia was not as strong as it is today.\n\nBut now, in this "civilized" society, we have police forces in every town, the strongest military in the world, national guard, coast guard, etc. Who are we using guns to protect ourselves from? Each other? I know people like to say "people kill people," but really, the gun was designed for one function. To kill. \n\nHowever, to ban it now would be almost impossible. There are so many guns out there, and a lot of the criminals would be the only ones to have them. There should absolutely be a ban on the semi-automatics, and bullets designed to go through law enforcement vests.\n\nSteve: that's a good idea, we need some bullet control! LOL