LEO here.
i think every man has the right to carry, till he forfeits it with a crime.
I was with you all the way until I read this last statement. I have to respectfully disagree for the following reasons:
1) Criminals by definition, do NOT obey laws. Just a wild guess, but would bet that none of the people in your profession would approach a known convicted violent criminal and
ASSUME he/they are unarmed because there is a law that says so...so what good the law?
2) I have read and heard numerous times that any person in the U.S. can get up in the morning, eat breakfast and walk out to their car and have committed several "crimes" in the process. With the number of "feel good reasonable sounding" laws on the books in this country, I don't doubt that's true. Also there a several
non violent felony laws that would have nothing to do with a convicted individuals of those type of laws,
propensity to commit violent crimes but would interfere with their background check.
3) On occasion there have to be some convicted felony criminals that
learn and change and become good and honest people. Should they be denied
the God given right to self defense of themself and possibly their family against the violence of those still
on the other side so to speak?
4) Too often those "
FEEL GOOD REASONABLE SOUNDING" laws are DANGEROUS!
In my mind, it's the biggest reason today that this country is essentially bankrupt.
The main goal of 99.99% of politicians and lawmakers is to
GET ELECTED OR RE ELECTED. They know and realize that if they come out with simple truth as their platform, they will go home a loser. The old "Vote for me and I'll take from them and give to you" is as sound today as it has been for the last several thousand years in politics I'm afraid.
SO...in my humble opinion, the second amendment should be left alone as it is ...simple and clear. Yes, liberty and free society can be dangerous too but I would choose it over the alternative.
JMHO and THANKS for your service.