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.
Take a look at just how stupid the average driver is and how many people die every year from that stupidity. Now, tell me with a straight face allowing such people to carry a gun everywhere is a great idea.
The theoretical "sacredness" of the 2nd Amendment often has little application in reality when idiots can so easily deny other of their right to live while expressing their right to bear arms.
Ok...so I am a huge supporter of the right to keep and bear arms......I think anyone who is of proper age and does not have a criminal record or has been judged mentally deficient in some way should in no way ever be denied the ability to obtain a weapon. CARRYING it is another matter......there has to be some kind of restriction or you'd have every hoople, wanna be gangster, nervous nellie, etc walking around with a gun and tragedies just waiting to happen everywhere. That's why those babbling about how the gov't should butt out and everyone has a God given (well...actually ..Constitutionally given) right to carry wherever and whenever they want and the gov't should have no say are off base and idiotic.
Are those of you saying the gov't (fed or state) can't maintain you show proficiency, qualify, demonstrate handling/safety, etc. of a weapon??? So, then what??....anyone because of the 2nd Amendment should just be able to strap a gun on and walk down Broadway in NYC or anywhere else with no certification or proof of passing a set firearms course or background checks??....If not, why not??....after all the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention anything about having proper training, certification, background checks, etc. or licensing requirements. It's not in there so how can the gov't mandate such things? Should you be able to carry a machine gun?....a RPG, hand grenade??....why not?...they're "arms" (definition of arms: "weapons, armaments")....(definition of armaments: "military weapons and equipment")
Also, what is never mentioned or brought up in these arguments is the 2nd Amendment was written and adopted when our forefathers and the powers that be only had single shot muskets and rifles and flintlock muzzle loading pistols. They could not know or envision a time when 30, 40 round mags (or even 100 round drums) could be used in a rapid fire semi-auto rifle and there would be semi auto shotguns and semi auto handguns that can hold up to 18 rounds, all of which could be fired in the blink of an eye. Think about it.....their sphere of knowledge was weapons that took 30 secs to a minute to load and fire ONE ROUND!!!....They were never exposed to semi auto or full auto technology (or even SIX SHOT REVOLVERS which weren't out until the 1830s) and could not imagine the ability to be able to fire hundreds of round in a very short time. Therefore, it is impossible to know how they would have considered it or how they may have curtailed the right or put limits on it if they had the benefit of such foresight.....they didn't.....their idea of that "right" was for a person or group of persons to be able to have their own slow loading single shot rifle, musket or flintlock pistol for protection & safety. I'm sure it was a very common sight back then to see everyone walking around with a rifle slung over their shoulder or with a flintlock pistol in their belt. Difference is, if one of those people decided to start indiscriminately shooting or was firing in anger they'd get one shot off and be able to be stopped before going any further.....today, as we've seen, one raging or deficient human being or mentally disturbed nut can do A LOT of damage and killing in short time before being stopped.
And don't take this to mean I'm against concealed carry....I'm not.....but it has to be controlled and regulated by proper training, licensing, background checks and the ability to show proficiency as well as knowing the rules of deadly force....just naively and petulantly maintaining "the 2nd Amendment says so, so you can't stop us" will never work in today's world of massively more firepower, the increased number of people alive in the world and, sadly, the multiplying number of sociopaths & nutjobs who use such firepower to kill such people quickly due to having the ability today (but not in the late 1700's when the golden rule was written) to do so.
This is a very foolish bill, some states have absolutely no restrictions on concealed carry. I guess this was a reaction to the Las Vegas shooting, makes no sense. This morning I heard a survivor of the shooting indicating this was a good idea, crazy.
This has been promoted by the NRA and it appears they have their backers in the house. Who says congress doesn't do anything about mass killings, now we have their answer, more guns.
I am glad they are looking into this. Recently the law changed where we are located at and my husbands concealed to carry license in our home state was no longer valid. Which means he had to go through everything just to purchase a gun not too long ago. It would be nice to know the money he spent on the class, the test and for the license itself is not going to waste.
Ok...so I am a huge supporter of the right to keep and bear arms......I think anyone who is of proper age and does not have a criminal record or has been judged mentally deficient in some way should in no way ever be denied the ability to obtain a weapon. CARRYING it is another matter......there has to be some kind of restriction or you'd have every hoople, wanna be gangster, nervous nellie, etc walking around with a gun and tragedies just waiting to happen everywhere. That's why those babbling about how the gov't should butt out and everyone has a God given (well...actually ..Constitutionally given) right to carry wherever and whenever they want and the gov't should have no say are off base and idiotic.
Are those of you saying the gov't (fed or state) can't maintain you show proficiency, qualify, demonstrate handling/safety, etc. of a weapon??? So, then what??....anyone because of the 2nd Amendment should just be able to strap a gun on and walk down Broadway in NYC or anywhere else with no certification or proof of passing a set firearms course or background checks??....If not, why not??....after all the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention anything about having proper training, certification, background checks, etc. or licensing requirements. It's not in there so how can the gov't mandate such things? Should you be able to carry a machine gun?....a RPG, hand grenade??....why not?...they're "arms" (definition of arms: "weapons, armaments")....(definition of armaments: "military weapons and equipment")
Also, what is never mentioned or brought up in these arguments is the 2nd Amendment was written and adopted when our forefathers and the powers that be only had single shot muskets and rifles and flintlock muzzle loading pistols. They could not know or envision a time when 30, 40 round mags (or even 100 round drums) could be used in a rapid fire semi-auto rifle and there would be semi auto shotguns and semi auto handguns that can hold up to 18 rounds, all of which could be fired in the blink of an eye. Think about it.....their sphere of knowledge was weapons that took 30 secs to a minute to load and fire ONE ROUND!!!....They were never exposed to semi auto or full auto technology (or even SIX SHOT REVOLVERS which weren't out until the 1830s) and could not imagine the ability to be able to fire hundreds of round in a very short time. Therefore, it is impossible to know how they would have considered it or how they may have curtailed the right or put limits on it if they had the benefit of such foresight.....they didn't.....their idea of that "right" was for a person or group of persons to be able to have their own slow loading single shot rifle, musket or flintlock pistol for protection & safety. I'm sure it was a very common sight back then to see everyone walking around with a rifle slung over their shoulder or with a flintlock pistol in their belt. Difference is, if one of those people decided to start indiscriminately shooting or was firing in anger they'd get one shot off and be able to be stopped before going any further.....today, as we've seen, one raging or deficient human being or mentally disturbed nut can do A LOT of damage and killing in short time before being stopped.
And don't take this to mean I'm against concealed carry....I'm not.....but it has to be controlled and regulated by proper training, licensing, background checks and the ability to show proficiency as well as knowing the rules of deadly force....just naively and petulantly maintaining "the 2nd Amendment says so, so you can't stop us" will never work in today's world of massively more firepower, the increased number of people alive in the world and, sadly, the multiplying number of sociopaths & nutjobs who use such firepower to kill such people quickly due to having the ability today (but not in the late 1700's when the golden rule was written) to do so.
"CARRYING it is another matter......there has to be some kind of restriction"
"The RIGHT to keep and BEAR arms shall NOT be INFRINGED"
What do you think "infringed" means?
Have you ever read the quotes from our Founding Fathers about the "right" to own and carry guns?
Others been suggested that we apply EVERY SINGLE gun law (thousands) to the FIRST Amendment that is in effect regauarding the Second Amercement.
How do you feel about that?
"Also, what is never mentioned or brought up in these arguments is the 2nd Amendment was written and adopted when our forefathers and the powers that be only had single shot muskets and rifles and flintlock muzzle loading pistols."
NOT TRUE.
The semi-automatic rifle was invented BEFORE our Constitution was written.
Thomas Jefferson even gave a couple to Lewis and Clark for their expedition.
"Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, was the first person to bring an “assault rifle” to the shores of the country in 1780. Jefferson purchased two Girardoni air rifles, which had a 22-shot capacity, were magazine-fed, and nearly silent--in other words a textbook "assault rifle" by many gun-control enthusiasts. The .46 caliber-repeating rifle was adopted by the Austrian Army in 1780."
PRIVATE warships were under contact for the United States.
You need to brush up on gun history.
We CAN'T have an HONEST discussion when 1 side does NOT know the facts and makes statement of facts NOT true.
Last edited by Quick Enough; 12-13-2017 at 05:53 AM..
Ok...so I am a huge supporter of the right to keep and bear arms......I think anyone who is of proper age and does not have a criminal record or has been judged mentally deficient in some way should in no way ever be denied the ability to obtain a weapon. CARRYING it is another matter......there has to be some kind of restriction or you'd have every hoople, wanna be gangster, nervous nellie, etc walking around with a gun and tragedies just waiting to happen everywhere. That's why those babbling about how the gov't should butt out and everyone has a God given (well...actually ..Constitutionally given) right to carry wherever and whenever they want and the gov't should have no say are off base and idiotic.
Are those of you saying the gov't (fed or state) can't maintain you show proficiency, qualify, demonstrate handling/safety, etc. of a weapon??? So, then what??....anyone because of the 2nd Amendment should just be able to strap a gun on and walk down Broadway in NYC or anywhere else with no certification or proof of passing a set firearms course or background checks??....If not, why not??....after all the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention anything about having proper training, certification, background checks, etc. or licensing requirements. It's not in there so how can the gov't mandate such things? Should you be able to carry a machine gun?....a RPG, hand grenade??....why not?...they're "arms" (definition of arms: "weapons, armaments")....(definition of armaments: "military weapons and equipment")
Also, what is never mentioned or brought up in these arguments is the 2nd Amendment was written and adopted when our forefathers and the powers that be only had single shot muskets and rifles and flintlock muzzle loading pistols. They could not know or envision a time when 30, 40 round mags (or even 100 round drums) could be used in a rapid fire semi-auto rifle and there would be semi auto shotguns and semi auto handguns that can hold up to 18 rounds, all of which could be fired in the blink of an eye. Think about it.....their sphere of knowledge was weapons that took 30 secs to a minute to load and fire ONE ROUND!!!....They were never exposed to semi auto or full auto technology (or even SIX SHOT REVOLVERS which weren't out until the 1830s) and could not imagine the ability to be able to fire hundreds of round in a very short time. Therefore, it is impossible to know how they would have considered it or how they may have curtailed the right or put limits on it if they had the benefit of such foresight.....they didn't.....their idea of that "right" was for a person or group of persons to be able to have their own slow loading single shot rifle, musket or flintlock pistol for protection & safety. I'm sure it was a very common sight back then to see everyone walking around with a rifle slung over their shoulder or with a flintlock pistol in their belt. Difference is, if one of those people decided to start indiscriminately shooting or was firing in anger they'd get one shot off and be able to be stopped before going any further.....today, as we've seen, one raging or deficient human being or mentally disturbed nut can do A LOT of damage and killing in short time before being stopped.
And don't take this to mean I'm against concealed carry....I'm not.....but it has to be controlled and regulated by proper training, licensing, background checks and the ability to show proficiency as well as knowing the rules of deadly force....just naively and petulantly maintaining "the 2nd Amendment says so, so you can't stop us" will never work in today's world of massively more firepower, the increased number of people alive in the world and, sadly, the multiplying number of sociopaths & nutjobs who use such firepower to kill such people quickly due to having the ability today (but not in the late 1700's when the golden rule was written) to do so.
Me thinks you know nothing about the Constitution. Semi auto firearms were around and available before it was written. That and making random words capitalized is just drama.
I am glad they are looking into this. Recently the law changed where we are located at and my husbands concealed to carry license in our home state was no longer valid. Which means he had to go through everything just to purchase a gun not too long ago. It would be nice to know the money he spent on the class, the test and for the license itself is not going to waste.
I cannot tell you about today? But 20 years ago my county would not give out CCW permits to the police that moved to our area. They required two local references and the argument was that, unless you lived here for a year, nobody knows you. I do not know if that was a restriction put in place by our local sheriff's office; but I did see one retired policeman refused for that reason. Possibly it was an old policy from before computers and the internet and it was never changed?
I think that is what many want with new laws - uniformity. We do not want some obscure law to place 'normal', productive, citizens in jail that have followed all the rules - but overlooked something because it is not in bold print. We do not want reasons to feed more lawyers - they are fed well enough!
Ok...so I am a huge supporter of the right to keep and bear arms......I think anyone who is of proper age and does not have a criminal record or has been judged mentally deficient in some way should in no way ever be denied the ability to obtain a weapon. CARRYING it is another matter......there has to be some kind of restriction or you'd have every hoople, wanna be gangster, nervous nellie, etc walking around with a gun and tragedies just waiting to happen everywhere. That's why those babbling about how the gov't should butt out and everyone has a God given (well...actually ..Constitutionally given) right to carry wherever and whenever they want and the gov't should have no say are off base and idiotic.
Are those of you saying the gov't (fed or state) can't maintain you show proficiency, qualify, demonstrate handling/safety, etc. of a weapon??? So, then what??....anyone because of the 2nd Amendment should just be able to strap a gun on and walk down Broadway in NYC or anywhere else with no certification or proof of passing a set firearms course or background checks??....If not, why not??....after all the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention anything about having proper training, certification, background checks, etc. or licensing requirements. It's not in there so how can the gov't mandate such things? Should you be able to carry a machine gun?....a RPG, hand grenade??....why not?...they're "arms" (definition of arms: "weapons, armaments")....(definition of armaments: "military weapons and equipment")
Also, what is never mentioned or brought up in these arguments is the 2nd Amendment was written and adopted when our forefathers and the powers that be only had single shot muskets and rifles and flintlock muzzle loading pistols. They could not know or envision a time when 30, 40 round mags (or even 100 round drums) could be used in a rapid fire semi-auto rifle and there would be semi auto shotguns and semi auto handguns that can hold up to 18 rounds, all of which could be fired in the blink of an eye. Think about it.....their sphere of knowledge was weapons that took 30 secs to a minute to load and fire ONE ROUND!!!....They were never exposed to semi auto or full auto technology (or even SIX SHOT REVOLVERS which weren't out until the 1830s) and could not imagine the ability to be able to fire hundreds of round in a very short time. Therefore, it is impossible to know how they would have considered it or how they may have curtailed the right or put limits on it if they had the benefit of such foresight.....they didn't.....their idea of that "right" was for a person or group of persons to be able to have their own slow loading single shot rifle, musket or flintlock pistol for protection & safety. I'm sure it was a very common sight back then to see everyone walking around with a rifle slung over their shoulder or with a flintlock pistol in their belt. Difference is, if one of those people decided to start indiscriminately shooting or was firing in anger they'd get one shot off and be able to be stopped before going any further.....today, as we've seen, one raging or deficient human being or mentally disturbed nut can do A LOT of damage and killing in short time before being stopped.
And don't take this to mean I'm against concealed carry....I'm not.....but it has to be controlled and regulated by proper training, licensing, background checks and the ability to show proficiency as well as knowing the rules of deadly force....just naively and petulantly maintaining "the 2nd Amendment says so, so you can't stop us" will never work in today's world of massively more firepower, the increased number of people alive in the world and, sadly, the multiplying number of sociopaths & nutjobs who use such firepower to kill such people quickly due to having the ability today (but not in the late 1700's when the golden rule was written) to do so.
CCW holders are the LEAST likely group to commit a crime. Even less likely than police.
The use of firearms in self-defense is prevalent. According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by criminologists from Florida State University, Americans use guns in self-defense an estimated 2.2 to 2.5 million times a year, or every 13 seconds. This same study found that, in general, simply brandishing a gun or firing a warning shot is sufficient to defend against an attacker in most cases of self-defense involving a firearm. Only 24 percent of people surveyed reported firing a gun in self-defense, and just eight percent reported wounding an assailant with a gun.
Last edited by Floorist; 12-13-2017 at 07:38 AM..
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.
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.
