Geeez, what a redneck state! Wait, don’t we have the same amendment, here in Virginia? I guess I had better walk back those words real fast. Ok Ok, just kidding! We wouldn’t want to impugn our own Old Dominion.
N.C. defined marriage as being between one man and one woman. According to News-press.com:
Both sides spent a combined $3 million on their campaigns.
North Carolina law already bans gay marriage, like nine other states, but an amendment would effectively slam the door shut on same-sex marriages. The amendment also goes beyond state law by voiding other types of domestic unions from carrying legal status, which opponents warn could disrupt protection orders for unmarried couples.
Six states – all in the Northeast except Iowa – and the District of Columbia allow same sex marriages.
The North Carolina amendment was placed on the ballot after Republicans took over control of the state Legislature after the 2010 elections, a role the GOP hadn’t enjoyed for 140 years.
Joe Easterling, who described himself as a devout Christian, voted for the amendment at a polling place in Wake Forest.
“I know that some people may argue that the Bible may not necessarily be applicable, or it should not be applicable, on such policy matters. But even looking at nature itself, procreation is impossible without a man and a woman. And because of those things, I think it is important that the state of North Carolina’s laws are compatible with the laws of nature but, more importantly, with the laws of God.”
Regardless of one’s personal feelings about same sex marriage, at what point do we decide that all Americans have equal protection under the law? We shouldn’t have one set of rules for one set of people and another set of laws for a different group. The courts will eventually decide this issue as they have all other cases of inequality.
How do I feel personally? I think it is a civil rights matter. On the othre hand, I can’t think of a single reason to not codify same sex marriage. It sure doesn’t hurt me one way or the other. Now if something hurt me or cost me money, I might be willing to vote against it. If it hurt my kids, same. How is it hurting anyone if people who love each other want to marry?
I would probably, as I have said before, stick with civil unions for all contracts with the state and let marriage live in the church world. That way marriage can be what various religions want it to be. I believe the churches would feel less threatened.
The question now becomes, how long will it take the laws in these 30 states to be overturned?
Slow: you said “the right to self defense is one of the many differences between Virginia and MD.” Your words. My question is: how so? it can’t be off topic if you said it, can it? I,ll bet you a nickel (my largest wager in current conditions) that the common law of self-defense, as brought over from the Mother Country, is very much the same in Maryland as in Virginia. You say “you cannot defend yourself in Maryland”. Why not? I think you’re just making this stuff up.
If you can’t carry, if you have a problem getting a concealed carry license, the state is prohibiting you from carrying tools of self defense.
Md is a MAY issue state, though a recent ruling has called their law unconstitutional. Their laws are in transition. But, as of now, Md is a restrictive state.
So, no. Maryland does not completely respect the right of self defense.
There are ways to defend yourself that don’t involve carrying a cannon around in your pocket. The ‘right to bear arms’ really doesn’t say what kind of arms. Obviously I don’t want to sit next to your uzi in Starbux.
“Every person presenting himself for registration shall be able to read and write any section of the Constitution in the English language.”
If only.. If only we could have an educated populace that could see how corrupt govt has gotten and put a stop to it. Instead we have Julia.
For what it’s worth this is the ruling in MD regarding may/shall issue and guns outside of the home.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-06/news/bs-md-gun-law-appeal-20120306_1_gun-ruling-gun-rights-state-police
@Scout
OK, you’re trying to get me with “death by 1000 cuts”. I get it. You can think I’m making it all up. You can tell yourself that there is zero difference between MD and VA. You can even try to convince others that there is no difference between the two states. You might run across people dumb enough to believe you! There are lots of liberals around.
Two quick things, one, you continuously mix up what happens before a tragic incident and what happens after a tragic incident….and yes, it can be off topic if I’m following you off topic.
QUOTE OF THE DAY: “It is good to see that after intense political pressure that President Obama has finally come around to the Dick Cheney position on marriage equality.”
– GOProud’s Chris Barron
Just sayin…..
[moonhower runs her finger down her throat.]
Hey – I didn’t start this – you did, man. You were the one who defined the topic. You said we Virginians can enjoy “basic freedoms” that cannot be enjoyed at the same level in Maryland. You say you can’t defend yourself in Maryland. I’m new to the issue. I didn’t know that. I ask you to explain. You come back with some jive about carrying a weapon. That’s not the same as not being able to defend yourself. You must know something that you’re holding back on us or you wouldn’t have said what you said in the first instance. Unless you just say things without knowing what you’re talking about. Again, until you show me to the contrary, I suspect that the law of self defense is very much the same in Maryland as it is in Virginia.
Let’s try it this way: If I am under attack in Maryland, and I have a reasonable fear for my survival, or even physical safety, and I did not provoke the attack, and I break the assailant’s neck with my bare hands (something that I might have been able to pull off in my salad days, perhaps not now unless someone from the geriatric ward takes me on), and he dies, my guess is that I walk. Same in Virginia. What’s the difference? And what do guns have to do with the right of self defense?
@Scout
OK, tough guy….now it’s 5 MS-13 members with knives and machetes……good luck with your bare hands. They’ll cut ’em off and cram ’em up yer butt. Or is there no such thing as a street gang where you come from?
If I may interject.. Is Maryland a Stand Your Ground state or a Criminal-Can-Shoot-Me-In-The-Back-Because-The-Requires-The-Good-Guys-Without-Badges-To-Run-Away-And-Not-Hurt-The-Criminal State?
Regardless of the means of self defense – I choose the pistol because I’m slow, fat, and have no muscle mass due to my superior awesomeness – you have a duty to die in Maryland.
I can meet force with force in Virginia.
Why can you not meet force with force in Maryland? What is the source in law of the “duty to die” in Maryland? I do not believe such a thing exists, but you guys are certainly persistent.
Whether I defend myself with my bare hands, a pistol, or a spatula, how would the outcome be different on the same facts in Maryland than in Virginia?
@Scout, I hope you can wrestle it out of them. They are very persistent on this subject. It just isn’t something I think alot about.
Did I tell you all about this neighbor I had a number of years ago who used to beat cops with her frying pan when they came to lock her up? The minute we saw them pulling up in front of her town house, all the neighbors ran out toget a ring side seat. It happened fairly frequently. Does that mean old Gerry would have had to go frying-panless in Maryland?
@Scout
OK, so you obviously missed the fact that you cannot meet force with force in Maryland, because you are not legally allowed to posses the equalizer in a disparity of force situation. I am talking about what happens before the deadly confrontation, where you are not allowed to carry a weapon that might overcome a severe disparity of force. And you can’t get past what happens AFTER the deadly confrontation where the courts come into play. ANYTHING can happen after the confrontation depending upon the local DA, the jury, the knowledge of the lawyer, etc. But like a typical liberal, you have to blend two different concepts (before and after) in order to maintain your misguided belief. We’ve gone back and forth over this enough that I am convinced you are not capable of understanding. I rest on page 2, number 6. My advice to you is declare victory and keep thinking there is no difference between Maryland and Virginia. Tell all your friends there is no difference! As I said, you may run into some that will believe you!
Here, Scout, maybe this helps.
We are both right, but we are not making the same point. AFTER the incident, you are correct, there is no duty to retreat in Maryland if it is not feasible to do so. You have the right to defend yourself.
BUT, I’m right in that if you are in any way outmatched going into the confrontation, you are NOT allowed to have a weapon outside your home. If you find yourself in a disparity of force situation, and you cannot legally posses the equalizer, then the fact you have the right to defend yourself is irrelevant, isn’t it?
Now that you’re focussing in, Slo, it’s clear that you’re not talking about the right of self-defense. You’re back to talking about comparing how easy it is for someone to walk around carrying heat in each jurisdiction and equating that with “Basic freedoms”.
You now say that one is not allowed to have gun outside one’s home in Maryland. How is that different than what the Court struck down in the District of Columbia? Is that really the standard in Maryland – no guns outside your residence? Anyone have accurate factual information on that? I frankly doubt it. My guess is that you’re saying that Maryland doesn’t give a pass to open carry the way Virginia does and may be more stringent about its standards for awarding concealed permits.
When I hear people talk this way, I get the impression that there is a class of people who frequently find themselves, as they go about their daily routine, confronting malefactors wielding deadly force and that it is a constant concern that they have death dealing weaponry on their persons to confront these situations. I, for their sakes, hope this is not the case, but wonder about the inside of the heads of people who assume daily life is likely to bring life-or-death confrontations at every turn. It is a world view that, if based on empirical data, indicates that our society has gone hugely backwards since the mythical frontier days of the Hollywood/Dodge City type. If it is not based on fact, then it shows how terribly disturbed our inner worlds have become. None of this is a good thing.
First paragraph: whatever helps you get to the end you want to get to.
Second paragraph: ditto, whatever you want to think!
Third paragraph: you obviously haven’t been reading what I’ve said. Thank God we’re talking about an extremely rare occurrence. I see you are desperately winding yourself around the concept of “basic freedoms”. Perhaps you think what I am talking about is not a basic freedom. That’s fine. I think it is. You are playing little liberal games, splitting hairs…lyes you can have a gun outside your home if you are hunting during season. You think MD’s concealed carry requirements are just a bit more stringent? Uh-huh. I’m telling ya, you need to declare victory and move on. Trust me when I say that EVERYONE will believe you.
Look at it this way, scout. My wife drives a car that is capable of 4 wheel drive. Am I afraid that it is going to snow and ice up every other day? No, not even close. But there was one time two winters ago where she had to come home in the middle of a snow storm with my two boys in the back seat. Am I glad she had it? Your damn right I’m glad. So there is such a thing as something being important to someone even if they don’t think they’ll need it all the time. The whole point of concealed carry revolves around knowing you’ll probably never need it, praying you never need it. Heck, if you’ve any brains at all, you’d be real hesitant to use it even when the law says you are justified!
Wouldn’t you be just as comfortable with open carry? Why is the “concealed” part attractive? I would think carrying openly would have a better deterrent effect.
I am not. I hate looking at people’s uzi’s while drinking my morning coffee. I don;’t like the armed camp mentality.
I am just as happy with the gun folks hiding their love away.
@Scout
Open carry can also make you a target. Some people think that carrying openly is a “shoot me first” sign. Also, if you open carry, you should train retention techniques, because now an opponent knows exactly where your weapon is located.
But you are right. Open carry can be a good deterrent. There are many anecdotes about such events. My favorite is of a man who open carried into a bank. It was his bank and they were used to him. He was quietly filling out paperwork when, suddenly, the manager came up and thanked him for wearing his gun. It seems, unbeknownst to him, that a man in a mask had come in, walked 3 feet, saw the gun, turned and ran.
So there are advantages and disadvantages to both.
I like that open carry is allowed in Virginia because if you carry concealed, and you reveal your weapon by accident, such as a coat opening or shirt riding up, you don’t get in trouble. In some states, you can get in trouble if the pistol on “prints” on the clothes.
Look at it this way, Moon. if everyone carrying had to carry openly, a lot of people who carry for really marginal reasons would reconsider and those of us who blithely slide through life unaware of the deadly threats that surround us could make intelligent decisions about which spaces we put ourselves in. I know a lot of people who have concealed permits with whom I would not choose to occupy a small space if they had the capacity to kill me in an instant. I also fancy that I ought to be able to make a subjective decision that I just don’t feel like being in a space with a lot of guns. This in no way impinges on other citizens’ rights to keep-‘n-bear. They can bear all they want. Also, as CS notes, if there is a crime-deterrent effect to gobs of people ready to wield deadly force being out and about, open carry is the way to go.
The additional advantage of mandatory open carry is that all citizens get to evaluate politically how they like the brave new world of widely armed citizenry. If people like you aren’t real keen on sitting next to a deadly weapon at Starbucks, after a while that message will start manifesting itself in political circles.
CS raises the concern that open carry might make one a target. Well, if that’s a concern, either don’t carry or, as he suggests, get appropriate training on weapon protection and retention. Cops have open carried for decades.
@Scout, i had never thought of it that way.
I am just one of those weirdos who is uneasy being around anyone I don’t know who is carrying a small arsenal. I was raised around guns my entire life. I can never think of a time there wasn’t at least a shot gun and a rifle in the house where I grew up. Its the “I don’t know if you are a nut or not” that gets me efvery time. Now that is not to say equally nutty people can’t do me more harm with other weapons or with weapons I can’t see. That is another issue.
PS – I should add that I had a couple of government gigs in the distant past where I open carried and I currently am a gun owner. When I open carried, I never much worried about being targetted because of it, although it was overseas in a pretty undeveloped setting. I would utterly hate to open carry now here in the NoVA burbs, for fear that people would (with some justification) think I’m absolutely, and perhaps dangerously, barmy. But of course, I would be just as likely to be considered barmy if I concealed carried if people knew I was doing it.
Of course, open carry was mandatory, until recently, in any restaurant that served alcohol. And there was very little running and screaming, except from Delegate Saslaw.
Some of us just quietly left. I am not eating in a place with someone packing heat who I don’t know. I don’t believe it was legal until like last year to bring any gun into a bar. You can’t now if the owner doesn’t want guns there.
The problem is, Moon, you (or I, or anyone else) can’t make an informed judgement to leave a space if there are bunch of people in there carrying concealed. And you know as little about them (generally) as you do about the guy carrying openly. Under my modest proposal, everyone who needs to carry can – no abridgement of rights there – and the rest of us can just move on based on an intelligent assessment of the situation.
@Moon-howler
It was legal. One had to open carry in a place that served alcohol. Now, concealed carry is allowed. In any case, any private enterprise that wishes can post a no firearms allowed sign.