Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 03-17-2012, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,418,303 times
Reputation: 4190

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Hmmmm. I thought it was Obama who was coming get your guns.


SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard vetoed a bill Friday that would have allowed any South Dakota resident 18 and older with a valid state driver's license to carry a concealed handgun without having to obtain a permit…..

….Daugaard said the state's permitting laws are already "fair and reasonable."….

S.D. governor vetoes concealed handgun bill

Further proof that Republicans are smart. He didn't limit anything other than wack jobs getting carrying a concealed weapon. Gun owners are generally responsible.

"The current process we have for issuing concealed carry permits is very easy and helps us to identify people who, because of mental health issues or criminal convictions, shouldn't be carrying a concealed weapon or issued a concealed carry permit," Milstead said. "The bill as it was written was going to eliminate that process and have people more or less self regulate whether or not they were qualified to carry."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2012, 05:29 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt View Post
I disagree with you and agree with SamTM. Let me proceed by letting you know, I am a gun owner. I am "X" military and am extremely accurate with my weapons. If I have to react to a situation with lethal force, I can and will, to someone else's detriment.

Federal law doesn't mean squat. Federal law prohibits marijuana, but small amounts are legal in California. So what do you do, flood California with federal agents and arrest everyone with a joint and send em to the federal lockup?

I feel that a license to carry concealed is the way to go. Yes, it's a hassle, but allows the state to ensure that the people carrying concealed are informed as to the state laws concerning handgun use, and that they are updated when changes are made to state laws.

It also allows the state to ensure that those with a CCP are legally carrying, and not some ex-felon who will use it illegally and get every responsible person criticized for the felon's misdeeds.

guess what, the felon already does not follow the law, hence that is why he is a felon. also what i said is true, you have to be 21 to buy a psitol or the ammo for it, but not to own one.

all ccw permits do, is take firearms out of the hands of the already law abiding citizen.

if you read up on the true intent of the 2nd Amendment, using the same language our founding fathers did, you would realize that regulate in our founding fathers days did not mean for the state to make laws against.

it meant being able to hit a target at a set distance with a set charge and bullet.

ask a gunsmith to regulate your firearm, and he should ask you what distance, charge and bullet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 05:32 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miborn View Post
NO IT IS NOT GUN CONTROL!

It is responsible concealed carry!!!!!!!

it is victim disarmanent. take more firearms out of the hands of the law abiding and let the criminal keep breaking those laws.

goverment truly never has wanted to keep criminals from having firearms. after all if criminals were actually prosecuted and imprisoned for the crimes they did, sooner or later there would be no criminals and law enforcement would be out of a job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 05:33 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
Further proof that Republicans are smart. He didn't limit anything other than wack jobs getting carrying a concealed weapon. Gun owners are generally responsible.

"The current process we have for issuing concealed carry permits is very easy and helps us to identify people who, because of mental health issues or criminal convictions, shouldn't be carrying a concealed weapon or issued a concealed carry permit," Milstead said. "The bill as it was written was going to eliminate that process and have people more or less self regulate whether or not they were qualified to carry."
criminal convictions? the criminal already does not follow the law, and will disregard the law anyways when it comes to ccw. if a criminal wants to carry concealed, they will do so no matter what the law says about ccw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,530,289 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
Further proof that Republicans are smart. He didn't limit anything other than wack jobs getting carrying a concealed weapon. Gun owners are generally responsible.

"The current process we have for issuing concealed carry permits is very easy and helps us to identify people who, because of mental health issues or criminal convictions, shouldn't be carrying a concealed weapon or issued a concealed carry permit," Milstead said. "The bill as it was written was going to eliminate that process and have people more or less self regulate whether or not they were qualified to carry."

So, you're comfortable with a level of gun control which keeps firearms out of the hands of "undesirables?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 06:55 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,048,770 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterboy7375 View Post
Bill was flawed. Federal law prohibits anyone younger then 21 from owning a handgun.
Wrong. Under Federal law the age is "less" than 18 years of age unless that conflicts with state law, i.e., a state that requires someone being 21 or older.

http://www.atf.gov/publications/down...f-p-5300-4.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 06:59 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,418,303 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
So, you're comfortable with a level of gun control which keeps firearms out of the hands of "undesirables?"
As long as the definition of "undesirable" is explicitly clear, yes.

Convicted, violent felons and diagnosed schizophrenics for example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 07:15 PM
 
46,289 posts, read 27,099,738 times
Reputation: 11127
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Wrong. Under Federal law the age is "less" than 18 years of age unless that conflicts with state law, i.e., a state that requires someone being 21 or older.

http://www.atf.gov/publications/down...f-p-5300-4.pdf
So, you posted a 200+ page document from 2005?

Lets have a page....not gonna read the entire thing....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 07:19 PM
 
46,289 posts, read 27,099,738 times
Reputation: 11127
What pisses the left off......is that this GOP GOV, actually looked at the bill, read the bill and decided it was not worth signing......

Well now, that is certainly different than what the left would do or say...because EVERYONE knows the left has to pass a bill to KNOW WHAT IN IT.......

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaa
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 07:21 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,495,840 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee View Post
What pisses the left off......is that this GOP GOV, actually looked at the bill, read the bill and decided it was not worth signing......

Well now, that is certainly different than what the left would do or say...because EVERYONE knows the left has to pass a bill to KNOW WHAT IN IT.......

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaa
Only anti-freedom statists are defending this idiot governor.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:56 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top