U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-12-2009, 07:38 AM
 
Location: Central, IL
3,408 posts, read 3,459,947 times
Reputation: 1371

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would like to see Concealed Carry Permits effective in all jurisdictions just like drivers licenses. I do not see why a CCP issued in Londondery, New Hampshire should not be valid in Boston, New York or Wash DC.

I also beleive that convicted felons lose the right to carry firearms along with the right to vote. That is part of paying their "debt to society".
Not all felons lose their right to vote, and some only lose them, until their sentence is over with. It depends on the state. In Illinois, the day the get out of prison, the regain every right, except the right to own a firearm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-12-2009, 09:05 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,902,291 times
Reputation: 12289
Yes, people should have the right to carry a concealed firearm. Now, a blanket type of thing , where there are no requirements to demonstrate proficiency? I'm iffy on that, however, I do not believe that demonstrating said proficiency, should be used as a way to require registration of firearms owned and carried. A person has a clean history, demonstrates proficiency, and is certified as such, recording specific weapons in a data base, I have issue with. If a person is not a criminal and has shown they can handle a weapon in proper fashion, it's none of the feds business what they own or carry from there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 09:37 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by aveojohn View Post
I was talking about anyone who commits a heinous crime , mass murderer was just an example. I doubt very much you would want a murderer living next door to your family.
I have talked to several veteran police officers about this, in fact. Convicted murderers, provided that was the only major item on their criminal record, are seen as model citizens, and often volunteer to work with the police investigative units to help unravel the mentality of perpetrators of homicides. Typically, a person who commits a single murder in his lifetime carries a high degree of contrition and remorse, and committed the crime only because of an escalation of circumstances in a life that would have otherwise been exemplary. As such, the convicted murderer is inclined to compensate for his deeds by being the best possible "neighbor".

Any convicted murderer that does nor fall into the above description is very unlikely to be in the general population where he can move into the house next to mine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Houston/Heights
2,637 posts, read 3,879,832 times
Reputation: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
Yes, people should have the right to carry a concealed firearm. Now, a blanket type of thing , where there are no requirements to demonstrate proficiency? I'm iffy on that, however, I do not believe that demonstrating said proficiency, should be used as a way to require registration of firearms owned and carried. A person has a clean history, demonstrates proficiency, and is certified as such, recording specific weapons in a data base, I have issue with. If a person is not a criminal and has shown they can handle a weapon in proper fashion, it's none of the feds business what they own or carry from there.
I agree with most of what you propose. Yet, just because a person may not be a proficiat shot, should not limit their rights to at least have a fighting chance to defend themselves. At five to seven foot range most attackers are shot at, they may do just fine. No need to shoot some one many feet away anyhow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 01:13 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,902,291 times
Reputation: 12289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thaskateguy View Post
I agree with most of what you propose. Yet, just because a person may not be a proficiat shot, should not limit their rights to at least have a fighting chance to defend themselves. At five to seven foot range most attackers are shot at, they may do just fine. No need to shoot some one many feet away anyhow.
"Proficiency" does not mean that a person has to be Jerry Miculeck, no. More that they can demonstrate they have the knowledge to handle a weapon safely, are responsible, understand the ramifications of lethal force, and understand when it is, and is not, called for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Houston/Heights
2,637 posts, read 3,879,832 times
Reputation: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
"Proficiency" does not mean that a person has to be Jerry Miculeck, no. More that they can demonstrate they have the knowledge to handle a weapon safely, are responsible, understand the ramifications of lethal force, and understand when it is, and is not, called for.
Sounds reasonable to me---but does one have to pay for a permit, to have those qualities is the question. I know folks that have been around guns all their lives. they hunt, and have them for protection. a fee for a permit, will not improve their handling skills. Any more than having a drivers license, automatically makes one a better driver. I'm all for training, and gun safety, just not for giving money to the gubment for their approval. they have plenty on their plate now, they are having problems with. Marijuana is just fine now days, as long as the gubment gets there tax money. Money and skill have nothing to do with each other. I ramble, --must need coffee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 02:31 PM
 
Location: New Kensington (Parnassus) ,Pa
2,424 posts, read 1,812,832 times
Reputation: 603
I live in Pa and have had a cwp for about 15 yrs. No training is required, but a fee of about 20 bucs and a background check is necessary. You cannot be a convicted felon, a habitual drunkard and must be free of mental illness, such as having been institutionalized.The permit is good for 5 yrs and is legal all over the state with the exception of Philadelphia and I am not sure why.I am getting older now and feel much safer carrying a pistol than without. I am a level headed person and would never shoot someone out of anger, only self defense. Also, I will not be dictated to by a bunch of bleeding hearts who want to take my gun away. If guns are ever outlawed, I will carry one anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Houston/Heights
2,637 posts, read 3,879,832 times
Reputation: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by aveojohn View Post
I live in Pa and have had a cwp for about 15 yrs. No training is required, but a fee of about 20 bucs and a background check is necessary. You cannot be a convicted felon, a habitual drunkard and must be free of mental illness, such as having been institutionalized.The permit is good for 5 yrs and is legal all over the state with the exception of Philadelphia and I am not sure why.I am getting older now and feel much safer carrying a pistol than without. I am a level headed person and would never shoot someone out of anger, only self defense. Also, I will not be dictated to by a bunch of bleeding hearts who want to take my gun away. If guns are ever outlawed, I will carry one anyway.
You sound like my kind of People.---I know some that are concerned about getting on "the list" of firearms owners. and also feel their right to self defense should NOT have a fee for the gubment. but is an inalienable right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 03:36 PM
 
10,869 posts, read 41,150,426 times
Reputation: 14009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
(snip)

Ironically, most people that carry a concealed wheapon are unlicensed to even have a gun let alone concealed carry...and are generally engaged in criminal activity.
Really? That's news to the people around here that legally carry and aren't involved in criminal activity.

Just what study are you citing that asserts so many people carry and are all "generally engaged in criminal activity?" From the depths of your inquisitive mind, perhaps? From your dreams? From you obviously ignorant imagination? From some anti-gun lobby that's simply fabricating a "fact" for your satisfaction to make you feel good about regulating others?

The legitimate studies I've seen assert that a licensed concealed carry weapon permit holder is 5 times less likely to commit an act of violence than the general population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2009, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,062,995 times
Reputation: 3717
I actually insisted and persisted and acquired a CCW in Southern California, Orange County some years ago. I was a registered gunsmith, and I showed the PD some of the custom rifles I carried to gun shows, engraved rifles worth about half a year's salary to a detective, and that I might well, and often did, stay in motels all by my lonesome.

So OK then. But... in addition to the usual NCIS and other background checks (IRS apparently), they told me to show up at the OC Shooting Center where a very gruff Sargeant had me demo loading and unloading the Smith J-Frame I brought along, and then had me shoot two cylinders worth (10 rounds) into a target on the rack system about 10 yards away, all within 90 seconds. You had to place all but one round into the 10" black. I did.

Then, he watched me holster it safely and handed me an OK to be handed in to the desk sarge on my way out.

My only beef now is that the states don't want to Federalize a CCW, as I believe most all states now allow it. There's some reciprocity, but not, for instance, Oregon and Washington, where I now live. And if I take a handgun down to California, even if it's safely locked in my automotive vault, unloaded, it has to be a "CA-approved"type", which my hi-cap Springfield Armories XD(M) is NOT.
So, I'm a felon if they find that particular gun, but not if they find my old J-Frame.

Makes sense, huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top