Are 'Concealed Carry' permits Redundant?

[Picaro]

I think it's more than obvious it makes no sense to require a separate permit just to carry it concealed. If you're allowed to possess one, it makes no difference whether its concealed or not in the case of honest citizens.

I'm splitting this particular topic off from the 70 pages of 'I TOUCHED YOU LAST!!!!!! NYAH NYAH!!!!' thread, since it is a more specific topic. The premise if you're allowed to possess them at all, it doesn't matter if they're 'concealed' or not. I know the 'concealed' permit is merely proof of having taken a safety course and some training, but that should be the case anyway.

 

[Ikari]

I've argued before that I don't like CCW's. Because of the fact that to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right, I don't think I need the government's permission to exercise that right. I view open and concealed carry as the standard and don't think you need to get a permit to carry in these manners. Of course, private property owners can forbid carrying on their property, but in general I don't like the idea of needing a permit for carrying a gun.

 

[Picaro]

Yes, it is rather a silly concept.

 

[Juliet Bravo]

I've argued before that I don't like CCW's. Because of the fact that to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right, I don't think I need the government's permission to exercise that right. I view open and concealed carry as the standard and don't think you need to get a permit to carry in these manners. Of course, private property owners can forbid carrying on their property, but in general I don't like the idea of needing a permit for carrying a gun.

I agree with that.

Bearing arms is specifically protected; whether it's concealed or in plain sight, you have the right to carry.