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.
Difference being, in South Carolina, it is unlawful to have a handgun in church in the absence of “express permission by the appropriate church official,”.
Not that Dylann Roof cared about his lack of permission.
As a responsible, law-abiding gun owner, the solution is to request permission from the pastor. After this horrific tragedy, I would bet that more than a few will be finding a new-found willingness to allow their trusted parishioners to conceal-carry. But if the pastor refuses, then you must choose between going to church unarmed or finding another church. (Under no circumstances would I carry in opposition to the pastor's denial of permission, because by so doing you would be engaging in a lie and in disobedience to the God-ordained authority of that church, neither of which would be pleasing to the One you are there to worship.)
This is all 100% made-up nonsense, probably from some NRA talking point. Most killings are done by legally bought weaponry. Thousands of people are dead every year because of legally purchased firearms.
Heck, the gun used in the Charleston massacre was legally purchased.
That's the stats published by the FBI, by law people with criminal record are prohibited from owning guns so they do it illegally.
No government agency keeps stats on the number of times legally owned guns were used by law abiding people to prevent or stop a crime.
Selling guns to criminals is not a "loophole" but an already illegal transaction, there's no "loophole" to close here. What you are in essence saying is let's stop selling guns to the law abiding citizens so that some of these guns wouldn't get in the hands of criminals. But all this would do is disarm the innocent and create an even more lucrative black market for illegal guns.
And yes every now and then a person who owns guns legally commits a crime. Which is a drop in an ocean of crimes committed by illegally owned guns. Also people with legally owned guns stop crimes. Nobody is tracking that statistics so there is never an honest comprehensive picture.
They are both issues. It's not an either/or situation.
What rational person would not want gun control and stricter gun laws? It doesn't mean guns will be abolished.
1) Because it's a direct violation of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
2) Because it will likley make it more difficult, if not impossible, for citizens to lawfully obtain now-legal weapons which will never be used to harm anyone. I have several of that type purchased both for sport shooting and as investment purposes. None of them have ever been used in a way to harm anyone. I have my eye on a few new purchases, including military-caliber weapons of the type likely to be banned/tightly-controlled under any measures put for by the anti-gun zealots now occupying the White House.
None of my weapons have ever harmed anyone. I hope none of them do. Some have been purchased through dealers, and some from individuals met at gun shows.
The problem in society is that of mental health.
Have you ever had to deal with it? I have as someone very close to me was involved in very self-destructive acts. Even when she was hospitalized, I begged and pleaded with doctors to keep her confined until she could get the proper treatment. I appealed to mental health professionals, to judges and magistates, to anyone I could find who might be of help. They all were unwilling - not unable but unwilling - to get involved and turned a deaf ear. That ended very badly.
1) Because it's a direct violation of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
2) Because it will likley make it more difficult, if not impossible, for citizens to lawfully obtain now-legal weapons which will never be used to harm anyone. I have several of that type purchased both for sport shooting and as investment purposes. None of them have ever been used in a way to harm anyone. I have my eye on a few new purchases, including military-caliber weapons of the type likely to be banned/tightly-controlled under any measures put for by the anti-gun zealots now occupying the White House.
None of my weapons have ever harmed anyone. I hope none of them do. Some have been purchased through dealers, and some from individuals met at gun shows.
The problem in society is that of mental health.
Have you ever had to deal with it? I have as someone very close to me was involved in very self-destructive acts. Even when she was hospitalized, I begged and pleaded with doctors to keep her confined until she could get the proper treatment. I appealed to mental health professionals, to judges and magistates, to anyone I could find who might be of help. They all were unwilling - not unable but unwilling - to get involved and turned a deaf ear. That ended very badly.
Thanks for posting this. I have posted similar remarks, and gotten called names for it.
There is NO HELP for the mentally ill. The entire "profession" of mental-health helpers is a joke, except, interestingly, at the lower levels. The psych nurses, the LCDCs, the psych techs. They are in the trenches, but it's too much for them.
The weapons in these incidents are only half of the factor. Majority of these individuals have some type of mental health issue that needs to be addressed, but goes unnoticed. Last I can recall my state has the highest pay out of $120 per resident in mental health treatment. However, I say our state is lacking and most states when it comes to mental health care. We shut down five state run mental health facilities and cut funding to hospitals affecting possibly mental health care.
In addition to, our schools need money in terms of behavioral analysis/applied behavior therapist and identify students in high risk situations to work on the before they escalate. Better family involvement less government mandates requiring less kid's out of foster care and group homes reintegration back with their original parent's, sometimes that doesn't work.
I do pray for the family and for those involved in the shooting. Pray for the shooter as well. Pray for forgiveness and peace.
All I know is that here in NYC, I wouldn't be able to buy a gun. I take solace in the fact that no wacko is able to buy a gun with his birthday money here. For it to be that easy to walk into a store and buy a gun, like if you were buying a toy or food, boggles my mind. That's why all those southern states will always be backwater country. Also, because of you southern hick states, we have gun problems here, because all the thugs go down south to Virginia and buy guns, bringing them back here to shoot people. If we outlaw guns everywhere, there would't be any legal or illegal guns. That is the ultimate form of gun control. I can't even imagine, with all the wack jobs here in NYC, eight million people walking around armed. You go into the subway and see two people accidentally shove each other, (which happens thousands of times a day), the two people take out their guns, and start shooting. All of a sudden, hundreds of people on the platform would be in harm's way, and they'll take out their guns and shoot back. Absolute mayhem.
The weapons in these incidents are only half of the factor. Majority of these individuals have some type of mental health issue that needs to be addressed, but goes unnoticed.
I agree about the mental health issues in a lot of cases (Aurora theater shooting), but in the particular interest of this church shooting, I don't think it was a mental illness at all. This guy just truly despised black people and he wanted to start a race war (his words according to the news). Nothing mental about that. In this case, I do wonder about the guy's parents. Are they just as racist? Did they raise him to be like this and this kid just took it to the next level? You can raise a child to hate anything, that doesn't mean they have mental issues.
That's why all those southern states will always be backwater country. Also, because of you southern hick states, we have gun problems here, because all the thugs go down south to Virginia and buy guns, bringing them back here to shoot people. If we outlaw guns everywhere, there would't be any legal or illegal guns. That is the ultimate form of gun control. I can't even imagine, with all the wack jobs here in NYC, eight million people walking around armed. You go into the subway and see two people accidentally shove each other, (which happens thousands of times a day), the two people take out their guns, and start shooting. All of a sudden, hundreds of people on the platform would be in harm's way, and they'll take out their guns and shoot back. Absolute mayhem.
How often do you hear about two people who are legally carrying guns in the "backwater" South getting into a traffic accident and engaging in a gunfight? By your logic, the Castle Doctrine states should be scenes of daily chaos, with blood flowing in the streets. But they're not. Why is that?
I must say, though, that I find your naivete to be rather sweet, when you say that the mere act of outlawing guns will result in the disappearance of all illegal guns. I suppose there wasn't any booze during Prohibition either, right? And there certainly aren't any illegal drugs out there, because after all, they're illegal!
All I know is that here in NYC, I wouldn't be able to buy a gun. I take solace in the fact that no wacko is able to buy a gun with his birthday money here. For it to be that easy to walk into a store and buy a gun, like if you were buying a toy or food, boggles my mind. That's why all those southern states will always be backwater country. Also, because of you southern hick states, we have gun problems here, because all the thugs go down south to Virginia and buy guns, bringing them back here to shoot people. If we outlaw guns everywhere, there would't be any legal or illegal guns. That is the ultimate form of gun control. I can't even imagine, with all the wack jobs here in NYC, eight million people walking around armed. You go into the subway and see two people accidentally shove each other, (which happens thousands of times a day), the two people take out their guns, and start shooting. All of a sudden, hundreds of people on the platform would be in harm's way, and they'll take out their guns and shoot back. Absolute mayhem.
This comment is so full of myths and errors that where does one begin?
"ultimate gun control" is a myth. Even in countries that ban guns completely, gangsters use guns. Even in countries like China and Japan, where guns are tightly restricted, gangsters have guns. France is infamous for its violent gangland shootings despite severe gun control. The Mafia families of Italy don't walk around unarmed, either.
The fact is, most homicides are committed by a tiny fraction of the population -- young male Blacks, about 1% actually -- residing mainly in the ghettos of America's large cities such as Chicago, south LA, Detroit, D.C., and NYC.
If you control for this violent minority of the black male population, the overall gun death rate in the U.S. is in line with Canada and Western Europe and were it not for these gangbangers, there would be no debate about gun control. The anti-gun activists lump the whole population together and take the average, when in reality most segments of the U.S. population are completely non-violent and civilized and have no need of gun control.
This poster imagines that if more people in NYC were armed, there would be random rage shootings all the time. It's possible that there would be more shootings, but there's no evidence. Some of the most horrific gun massacres have occurred in states like Connecticut that have crazy-stupid restrictions on guns. New York has its share of shootings as well, despite the onerous restrictions.
Having just gone through an annoying few weeks to obtain a license to carry for the purposes of recreational shooting and hunting, I'm quite familiar with the restrictions here in Massachusetts and the fact is, no mass murderer wannabe or gangbanger is going to go and apply for a license in an honest way like I did. They're going to take a relative's gun, or steal one, or buy off the street from shady characters.
You can't keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Obama would love to take guns out of the hands of honest citizens, just because he panders to the ultra liberal left who believe guns are evil objects that should be banned.
I once worked in a gun store and when a man came in to buy his wife a gun as a gift, the FFL dealer had both fill out the paper work. While it may be "legal" to buy a gun as a gift for someone (not being an FFL myself, I don't quite know how those rules run), these days, at least in these parts, we get nervous about anything that might be viewed as a strawman purchase.
Thats a bit tricky. Its illegal to buy a gun for another person, this is one of the questions on the application. However its legal to give someone a gun. E.G. You cant really enforce that law.
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.
