GOA's John Velleco Speaks Out for Constitutional Carry in Texas

Published on March 3, 2017
Duration: 1:26

John Velleco of Gun Owners of America argues for Constitutional Carry, emphasizing that the Second Amendment protects an individual right akin to the First Amendment. He highlights that law-abiding citizens shouldn't need government permission or permits to exercise their right to carry, citing the statistically insignificant crime rate among concealed carry permit holders.

Quick Summary

John Velleco of Gun Owners of America argues for Constitutional Carry, asserting that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, similar to the First Amendment. He highlights that law-abiding citizens should not need government permission or permits to carry firearms, citing the statistically insignificant crime rate among permit holders.

Chapters

  1. 00:06Introduction: John Velleco of GOA
  2. 00:13The Case for Constitutional Carry
  3. 00:25Crime Rates and Permit Holders
  4. 00:49Criminals vs. Law-Abiding Citizens
  5. 00:55Second Amendment as an Individual Right
  6. 01:02Supreme Court Reaffirmation
  7. 01:08No Permit Needed for Free Speech
  8. 01:14Conclusion: No Permit for 2nd Amendment Rights

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Constitutional Carry?

Constitutional Carry, also known as permitless carry, is a legal framework that allows individuals to carry firearms, both openly and concealed, without needing a government-issued permit. Proponents argue it upholds the Second Amendment as an individual right.

Why does GOA advocate for Constitutional Carry?

Gun Owners of America (GOA) advocates for Constitutional Carry because they believe the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms without requiring government permission. They cite low crime rates among permit holders as evidence that permits are not a deterrent to crime.

What is the argument regarding crime rates and concealed carry permits?

The argument is that the crime rate among individuals who hold concealed carry permits is statistically insignificant. This suggests that law-abiding citizens with permits are not a significant source of crime, and therefore, the permit requirement is an unnecessary burden.

How is the Second Amendment compared to the First Amendment in this context?

The speaker compares the Second Amendment to the First Amendment by stating that just as one doesn't need a permit to exercise their right to free speech, they shouldn't need a permit to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Gun Owners of America

View all →