U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
 [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 04-22-2015, 09:12 PM
 
Location: New Braunfels, TX
5,934 posts, read 8,496,020 times
Reputation: 5739

Advertisements

As soon as they make the same requirement to exercise free speech or any other CONSTITUTIONALLY guaranteed RIGHT, I'll agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-23-2015, 01:58 AM
 
Location: Spots Wyoming
18,696 posts, read 35,410,165 times
Reputation: 2147483647
So you are saying that although you proclaim TTY out are pro 2A, you want to reword it to say, The right to keep and narebarma, and be able to pass a test of proficiency, shall not be infringed..
__________________
[B][COLOR="Red"]"No Copyrighted Material."[/COLOR][/B]
[URL="http://www.city-data.com/"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]CD Home page[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html"][COLOR="seagreen"]TOS (Terms of Service)[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/107997-search-function-using-search-function.html"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]How to Search,[/COLOR][/URL] [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]FAQ's[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/70589-guide-guide-city-data-posting.html"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]Guide[/COLOR][/URL]
[URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/wyoming/"]Wyoming[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/montana/"]Montana[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/north-dakota/"]North Dakota[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/south-dakota/"]South Dakota[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/guns-hunting/"]Guns and Hunting[/URL]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2015, 05:11 AM
 
Location: New-Dentist Colony
5,724 posts, read 8,600,976 times
Reputation: 3831
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
I'm pro 2A and a fan of D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. That means I'm a firm believer in the right of every citizen to own firearms as long as they follow the rules of our society (i.e., if you break the law no guns for you).

I'm also a firm believer in the principle that, before you are allowed to operate equipment in public that is a danger to the general public, you must be trained in how to operate it safely. Drive all the cars, tractors, even 18-wheelers you want on on private property. But before you are allowed to pilot a multi-ton projectile down crowded public roadways the State has every right to make you prove proficiency first. This means a test and a license.

Same for a gun. Own all the guns you want; the right for individuals to own firearms is guaranteed until the court cases above are overturned. Shoot them all you want on your own property, or on the property of someone else who gives you permission to shoot there (gun range, friend's field, etc.). But before you are allowed to carry a loaded firearm in public, you should be required to prove you have at least a rudimentary understanding of self defense law and firearm safety. This means a license.

Open carry vs. concealed carry is irrelevant.
Completely agree. Which is why I'm absolutely certain that at least 50% of the people driving should never have been given a license without additional training/testing (or should have had it revoked long ago).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2015, 07:02 AM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
2,773 posts, read 3,676,401 times
Reputation: 4236
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElkHunter View Post
So you are saying that although you proclaim TTY out are pro 2A, you want to reword it to say, The right to keep and narebarma, and be able to pass a test of proficiency, shall not be infringed..
No, the wording is fine as is, and the recent interpretation by the courts is fine as is.

Any person who agrees to follow the rules of our society gets to enjoy the benefits of our society. Which means as long as you don't break the law you may own all the guns you can afford.

There are restrictions on all rights guaranteed by the constitution. You have the right to free speech... except you can't slander or lie in court. You have the right to any religion... except you can't perform human sacrifices, even if your religion requires it. You have to right to be free from illegal search and seizure... unless there are exigent circumstances like someone inside a house screaming for help. In all these cases, your rights stop where they start interfering with the rights of others.

Carrying a loaded projectile weapon in public creates a danger to the public.

We can come up with all sorts of ways where unrestricted access by anyone to any type of weapon is a bad idea (convicted wife beater buying a machine gun before going to his ex's house to get revenge on the lying b**ch; drunk accidentally pulling the pin on a live grenade in a crowded bar, etc.). I'm hoping you aren't going to try to argue the "shall not be infringed" part literally, so let's agree that laws controlling firearms are necessary.

That said, I grew up in a highly rural area. Everyone had a gun of some form in their vehicle, and they were loaded. Maybe a hunting rifle in a rack, maybe a pistol in the glove box, maybe a shotgun behind the seat. I routinely had a hunting rifle in my car parked in the school parking lot. When out walking around the possibility of running into a water moccasin, wild boar, or wild dog wasn't just possible, it was likely. Also, you could draw and fire in almost any direction and the only thing you'd hit is a tree or the ground. I understand you live in such an area, so I can see your position. Low risk of danger to the public. Why shouldn't you be able to carry a handgun without a permit? Especially if getting a permit requires driving halfway across a huge state to the nearest testing facility. If a state is mostly rural, then I can see where "no-permit carry" would work.

But unfortunately, the majority of people live in cities or towns. The snakes and hogs have been eliminated from the area. If you draw and fire in a random direction there is a very good chance you will hit a person or do property damage. High risk of danger to the public.

Back on topic, while Texas is a highly rural state, a very large percentage of the population lives in crowded cities (Austin, Dallas, Houston, etc.). Requiring a minimum of training and a background check before allowing someone to carry a firearm down a crowded street is a no-brainer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 12:14 AM
 
Location: Spots Wyoming
18,696 posts, read 35,410,165 times
Reputation: 2147483647
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
No, the wording is fine as is, and the recent interpretation by the courts is fine as is.

Any person who agrees to follow the rules of our society gets to enjoy the benefits of our society. Which means as long as you don't break the law you may own all the guns you can afford.

There are restrictions on all rights guaranteed by the constitution. You have the right to free speech... except you can't slander or lie in court. You have the right to any religion... except you can't perform human sacrifices, even if your religion requires it. You have to right to be free from illegal search and seizure... unless there are exigent circumstances like someone inside a house screaming for help. In all these cases, your rights stop where they start interfering with the rights of others.

Carrying a loaded projectile weapon in public creates a danger to the public.

We can come up with all sorts of ways where unrestricted access by anyone to any type of weapon is a bad idea (convicted wife beater buying a machine gun before going to his ex's house to get revenge on the lying b**ch; drunk accidentally pulling the pin on a live grenade in a crowded bar, etc.). I'm hoping you aren't going to try to argue the "shall not be infringed" part literally, so let's agree that laws controlling firearms are necessary.

That said, I grew up in a highly rural area. Everyone had a gun of some form in their vehicle, and they were loaded. Maybe a hunting rifle in a rack, maybe a pistol in the glove box, maybe a shotgun behind the seat. I routinely had a hunting rifle in my car parked in the school parking lot. When out walking around the possibility of running into a water moccasin, wild boar, or wild dog wasn't just possible, it was likely. Also, you could draw and fire in almost any direction and the only thing you'd hit is a tree or the ground. I understand you live in such an area, so I can see your position. Low risk of danger to the public. Why shouldn't you be able to carry a handgun without a permit? Especially if getting a permit requires driving halfway across a huge state to the nearest testing facility. If a state is mostly rural, then I can see where "no-permit carry" would work.

But unfortunately, the majority of people live in cities or towns. The snakes and hogs have been eliminated from the area. If you draw and fire in a random direction there is a very good chance you will hit a person or do property damage. High risk of danger to the public.

Back on topic, while Texas is a highly rural state, a very large percentage of the population lives in crowded cities (Austin, Dallas, Houston, etc.). Requiring a minimum of training and a background check before allowing someone to carry a firearm down a crowded street is a no-brainer.
Maybe, just maybe, if the constitution, in particular, the "Bill of rights" were followed and adhered to, it would be natural, the norm. People would be responsible. Where I live, we passed Constitutional Carry and since then have had ZERO incidences of wrong doing. As it was written, with no amendments of "you must pass this class or you have to have this training, or ????? When you pick up a firearm, there are certain things you must adhere to. Safety and the willingness to use the firearm in a responseble manner. You don't willy nilly pick it up and play with it. You are taught, and believe me, my 7 kids were taught safe handling and proper handling by the age of 5. Every one of my kids could safe a gun by age 5. You could lay a loaded shotgun on the coffee table and they would empty the shotgun and lay it back down, safe. The training you talk about is done at home, at a young age. I don't need, nor do mg kids need, government intervention or testing on firearms. They already have it. Believe me, if you find a city dude that wants to carry, he will either have the k owlets, or seek the training, he doesn't need Government intervention to make sure he/she doesn't look down the barrel while pulling the trigger. If he does, well, there's another idiot that doesn't need to share my oxygen.

Texas, like most states, has not drafted a new law. They have simply taken an existing law and with a little whiteout and a sharp pencil, taken an existing law and modified it. You will have the right to open carry, with a permit. Meaning that they took these concealed carry law and added or changed a few words. It also means that you will have to adhear to the law in that you will have to pass their stupid class. I know what kind of joke their class is, iv taken it. Matter of fact, I've taken the class in 8 different states. Every time the Gov sends me on a new project, I enroll in their class. Not because I have to, because they see mg permit and wave the requirement, but because I can learn local law.

The Bill of rights is not the Bill of conditions. It is your right. You mention that the first amendment doesn't allow me to yell fire in a crowded theater. Yes I can. I can lie in court too. That is my right. I'll get in trouble, but I can do it. Just like I can carry a gun. Might get I. Trouble in your state, but I can do it. Its my responsibility to adhear to the laws. There is a reason I retired in Wyoming, and that is because of the laws, or lack of laws. I can carry openly, or concealed, with no permit required.
__________________
[B][COLOR="Red"]"No Copyrighted Material."[/COLOR][/B]
[URL="http://www.city-data.com/"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]CD Home page[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html"][COLOR="seagreen"]TOS (Terms of Service)[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/107997-search-function-using-search-function.html"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]How to Search,[/COLOR][/URL] [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]FAQ's[/COLOR][/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/faq/70589-guide-guide-city-data-posting.html"][COLOR="SeaGreen"]Guide[/COLOR][/URL]
[URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/wyoming/"]Wyoming[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/montana/"]Montana[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/north-dakota/"]North Dakota[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/south-dakota/"]South Dakota[/URL], [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/guns-hunting/"]Guns and Hunting[/URL]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 05:47 AM
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
2,773 posts, read 3,676,401 times
Reputation: 4236
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElkHunter View Post
The Bill of rights is not the Bill of conditions. It is your right. You mention that the first amendment doesn't allow me to yell fire in a crowded theater. Yes I can. I can lie in court too. That is my right. I'll get in trouble, but I can do it. Just like I can carry a gun. Might get I. Trouble in your state, but I can do it. Its my responsibility to adhear to the laws. There is a reason I retired in Wyoming, and that is because of the laws, or lack of laws. I can carry openly, or concealed, with no permit required.
This backs up one of my arguments about "rights". You have no rights that are guaranteed by God, or by birth, or by Thomas Jefferson. The only rights you have are 1) the rights that society agrees to let you have (our constitution and laws, and more importantly, how both are interpreted by the courts), and/or 2) the rights you claim and can defend for yourself.

I said earlier that a felon has lost the right to own a firearm. What I meant was that the society no longer gives him that right. Plenty of felons simply take the approach in number 2. Ignore society and do it themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 06:06 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,776 posts, read 14,134,753 times
Reputation: 11850
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
I'm pro 2A and a fan of D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. That means I'm a firm believer in the right of every citizen to own firearms as long as they follow the rules of our society (i.e., if you break the law no guns for you).

I'm also a firm believer in the principle that, before you are allowed to operate equipment in public that is a danger to the general public, you must be trained in how to operate it safely. Drive all the cars, tractors, even 18-wheelers you want on on private property. But before you are allowed to pilot a multi-ton projectile down crowded public roadways the State has every right to make you prove proficiency first. This means a test and a license.

Same for a gun. Own all the guns you want; the right for individuals to own firearms is guaranteed until the court cases above are overturned. Shoot them all you want on your own property, or on the property of someone else who gives you permission to shoot there (gun range, friend's field, etc.). But before you are allowed to carry a loaded firearm in public, you should be required to prove you have at least a rudimentary understanding of self defense law and firearm safety. This means a license.

Open carry vs. concealed carry is irrelevant.
^^^^^Agree with this. We certainly need some laws that allow "law abiding citizen" to own and carry. But we have to keep them out of the hands of nut jobs, criminals and most important the chronically stupid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
7,824 posts, read 7,813,981 times
Reputation: 6230
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwkilgore View Post
This backs up one of my arguments about "rights". You have no rights that are guaranteed by God, or by birth, or by Thomas Jefferson. The only rights you have are 1) the rights that society agrees to let you have (our constitution and laws, and more importantly, how both are interpreted by the courts), and/or 2) the rights you claim and can defend for yourself.

I said earlier that a felon has lost the right to own a firearm. What I meant was that the society no longer gives him that right. Plenty of felons simply take the approach in number 2. Ignore society and do it themselves.
Excuse me, but with all due respect, you are completely wrong.

The BoR defines restrictions on the federal government, not the citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,951 posts, read 10,310,168 times
Reputation: 7232
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
^^^^^Agree with this. We certainly need some laws that allow "law abiding citizen" to own and carry. But we have to keep them out of the hands of nut jobs, criminals and most important the chronically stupid.
Yeah except your laws aren't going to stop a criminal from carrying a gun.

No criminal was like "cool, now I can carry a gun" when their state passed CC laws, because they had already been doing it for a long time. If anything, they were probably like "Oh, crap!.... Now we don't have the advantage anymore"

Just say'n.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2015, 03:10 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,951 posts, read 10,310,168 times
Reputation: 7232
There is no question that we have a right to keep and bear arms....

The real question here is, does the state have enough of an interest in public safety to justify infringing on your Rights by requiring that you undergo a safety course before carrying a firearm?

I'll let each of you answer that for yourselves. No doubt you'll all have different opinions.
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 > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
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