First side effect of the gay marriage ruling

As a gun owner I don't see anyway the ruling could be construed to mean that. In fact gun ownership and possession really need to be controlled. There is nothing in the recent ruling that says staes cannot still regulate marriage, only that any regulation must apply equally to all citizens.

Nonsense.States can require medical checks, waiting periods, licensing fees, in fact any rules they feel are in the public interest; but must apply the laws equally regardless of race, creed, beliefs, gender, economic status, education or other factors.Gun ownership or possession can and should also be regulated similarly.

That may be the argument they try to use but it is not what the ruling says. The ruling is based on the 14^th. Amendment which deals with citizenship rights and equal protection under the law.Now if one State licensed only whites to carry guns then this ruling and the 14^th. Amendment might have an effect but I know of no State that only licenses whites or males to carry guns.As long as a State issues licenses to drive or get married or own a gun or carry a gun and treats men and women, white and black, Latino and Asian or straight and gay the same then this ruling would have no effect.Personally I would prefer a National Right to carry firearms but make concealed carry illegal.

I'm sorry but you seem totally clueless (as is most of the modern fascists that claim to be conservatives) what a conservative is. If you would like I will try to educate you.

And so you post yet more falsehoods.I don't love gun control but also understand reality. I am in favor of reasonable regulation.I am a Christian but not a member of the Christian Cult of Ignorance and I do not hate Christians, even the members of the Christian Cult of Ignorance and the bigots. I do pity them and also fear them.I don't claim to be a Conservative; I am a Conservative and have been since Ike's second run for President. I even helped found and was the first Adult leader for a TAR group back when Nixon ran for his second term. Like Senator Goldwater though I lost all respect for the Republican Party when the Christian Right gained influence and when the country elected the joke called Reagan.And as I said, I would be happy to teach you a little about Conservatism and US Conservatives.The point of the topic though is that for the first time in history the US has finally recognized that Gays have basic human rights and that that has nothing to do with guns.Edited by jar, : applin spallinEdited by jar, : more appalin spallin

I would think that the term "keep and bear" would mean carry.It really is that simple.

No where have I ever said " people should be able to open carry everywhere they want" so I guess you need to learn to read.Nor have I ever said that the question is "Black and white" so again, please learn to read what I have said.The folk that wrote the US Constitution though did seem to think that the issue was as far as they were concerned clear and closed.My personal position though is that I would prefer to see a society in the US where Open Carry is legal almost everywhere period and that concealed carry is illegal almost everywhere.I do favor controls on ownership, possession and carry of firearms in the US that is at least as strict and encompassing as the far greater threat from allowing people to drive. I would be in favor of annual proficiency test for both driving and owning/possession/carrying a firearm even though the threat from firearms is so much lower than the threat from other drivers.

Sorry but it seems we have different definitions for what a fundamental right is. I most certainly have never asserted or believe that fundamental rights cannot be regulated, that is your strawman.Sorry charlie, it really is that simple.

Again, please actually learn to read.Once you go back and understand what I actually said then perhaps I will be able to help you.