THE REST OF THE STORY IS FOUND IN . Miranda v ARZ ,384 US 436,491,; 86 S Ct 1602; 16 L Ed 2d 694 (1966),, "WHERE RIGHTS SECURED BY ..... THERE CAN BE NO LEGISLATURE WHICH CAN PASS A LAW THAT WOULD PROHIBIT ANY UNALIENABLE RIGHT [SURVIVAL SIDEARMS IS A RIGHT] " A RIGHT REQUIRES NO PERMISSION" A PERMIT TO CARRY CONCEALED IS IN VIOLATION= FEEdom versus FREEdom . Bliss Vs COMMONWEALTH = CONCEAL CARRY LAW IS A VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTION=FEEdom, there be not "FEELIBERTY" BUT FREE WITHOUT CHARGE OF MONEY=FREEdom YEH!

REMEMBER: THE REST OF THE STORY! . WHERE RIGHTS SECURED BY THE CONSTITUTION ARE INVOLVED THERE CAN BE NO [ MEANS HAVEN'T BEEN ONE MADE YET] THERE CAN BE NO LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD ABRIGE,DENY,ABROGATE,BLOCK,HINDER,KILL OR STOP THEM" NOTE THEM MEANS PLURAL.