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.
The way I see it is that there are already thousands of laws that address both the criminal and negligent misuse of firearms. I have no problem with those.
Hear, hear!
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned the only gun laws that we should have are for the criminal and negligent misuse of firearms only.
I have no issues with the conditions to lawfully possess a firearm that are listed on Federal Form 4473 either.
You start off very well, saying the only gun laws we should have are for criminal and negligent misuse... and even conclude with the word ONLY.
And then in the very next breath you start naming extra laws you want about former felons not being allowed to buy a gun.
So much for "the only laws we should have about guns are for misuse".
Let us know when you find a way to resolve this internal conflict you have. It's a very important one.
Clearly you are OK with the govt having the power to decide who can have a gun and who can't.
including the so-called wild west, where it was illegal to carry guns in towns and communities for example.
Nope. It was only in booming cowtowns or gambling towns where it was required to turn in your guns before entering. The vast majority of Western towns had no problem with their citizens carrying guns. As a matter of fact, it was expected and often appreciated. The James Bros found out the hard way in the Northfield raid.
What if I'm a long haul trucker who may be subject to being hijacked and possibly killed for the cargo that I'm hauling? As you drive from one state/city to another you're legal in one and a felon in another. Even within the same state as many state's allow municipalities to pass laws that are more restrictive than state laws. As far as I'm concerned the only gun laws that we should have are for the criminal and negligent misuse of firearms only. I have no issues with the conditions to lawfully possess a firearm that are listed on Federal Form 4473 either. But other than that people who LAWFULLY carry should be left the hell alone.
You made some great points which I hadn’t thought of...but ironically enough, I am a trucker. I don’t push an agenda because I don’t have one. I am pro-gun, really enjoy guns and shooting, and had I the money there’s north of a dozen guns I’d probably buy yesterday. Being a trucker is exactly why I’m on the fence about it. It’s not just about hijackings and whatnot - the nature of our job often takes us to the unsavory side of town, in an unfamiliar locale to boot. Although I’ve never personally felt threatened, I’ve seen threatening things, and I’m a bit miffed I can’t have some gunpowder-backed recourse, whether I choose to or not. Ideologically I am fairly libertarian in that my basic tenet is maximum individual liberty, minimal government. Think, “I want gay married couples to defend their marijuana fields with assault rifles”, and you’ll catch my drift:
The fact that I doubt my own skill makes me a bit worried about those who don’t. That’s why I’m not instantly in favor of constitutional carry - the moment you produce iron, you raised the stakes to fatal, and without really hardcore training, a la military, or better yet, combat experience, I think it leaves you a bit more vulnerable to death than just taking the mugging and theft. I just haul replaceable things, nothing which some insurance wouldn’t cover. Company policy is another thing - no guns, even for daily local drivers down here in Texas who would have no legal issues carrying a gun within any distance they could cover in a working shift. I’ve often thought about letting CDL-A holders plus anyone else engaged in interstate commerce have a federal carry license which pre-empts the states. But of course, federal pre-emption generally kinda sucks.
So that puts me in a three-way tug of war for responsibility with firearms, retaining as much power as locally as possible, and maybe a slight wish for a federal pre-emption for my industry to be able to go to work strapped - after all, our working hours are incredibly heavily regulated on the federal level.
I think you're confusing two issues here. One is a permit to own a gun. Two is a permit to conceal carry a gun.
May issue for a conceal permit seems good to me. No reason why a person needs to carry a gun concealed to go to the local laundry mat, grocery store, or day care center. If you need a gun to visit common places like that you have bigger issues to worry about.
PS list all the rich and/or famous people who have concealed carry permits in NYC.
wtf are you?
that is for the individual to decide and not anyone else, including you.
You made some great points which I hadn’t thought of...but ironically enough, I am a trucker. I don’t push an agenda because I don’t have one. I am pro-gun, really enjoy guns and shooting, and had I the money there’s north of a dozen guns I’d probably buy yesterday. Being a trucker is exactly why I’m on the fence about it. It’s not just about hijackings and whatnot - the nature of our job often takes us to the unsavory side of town, in an unfamiliar locale to boot. Although I’ve never personally felt threatened, I’ve seen threatening things, and I’m a bit miffed I can’t have some gunpowder-backed recourse, whether I choose to or not. Ideologically I am fairly libertarian in that my basic tenet is maximum individual liberty, minimal government. Think, “I want gay married couples to defend their marijuana fields with assault rifles”, and you’ll catch my drift:
The fact that I doubt my own skill makes me a bit worried about those who don’t. That’s why I’m not instantly in favor of constitutional carry - the moment you produce iron, you raised the stakes to fatal, and without really hardcore training, a la military, or better yet, combat experience, I think it leaves you a bit more vulnerable to death than just taking the mugging and theft. I just haul replaceable things, nothing which some insurance wouldn’t cover. Company policy is another thing - no guns, even for daily local drivers down here in Texas who would have no legal issues carrying a gun within any distance they could cover in a working shift. I’ve often thought about letting CDL-A holders plus anyone else engaged in interstate commerce have a federal carry license which pre-empts the states. But of course, federal pre-emption generally kinda sucks.
So that puts me in a three-way tug of war for responsibility with firearms, retaining as much power as locally as possible, and maybe a slight wish for a federal pre-emption for my industry to be able to go to work strapped - after all, our working hours are incredibly heavily regulated on the federal level.
There is absolutely zero chance of me doing your job without packing 24-7. No one takes a "mugging" right now. Your life is your life. You might want to conserve it.
I think you're confusing two issues here.
One is a permit to own a gun.
That's the "keep" part of the 2nd amendment's "keep and bear arms".
Quote:
Two is a permit to conceal carry a gun.
That's the "bear" part of the "keep and bear arms (so is open carry.)
The 2ndA says that no govt in the U.S. can make any law interfering with the people's right to "keep" and "bear" arms. More precisely, govt has no authority to make any decisions about who can keep and bear arms.
A "permit" is govt's way of saying that you have to convince them it's OK for you to keep and bear arms, or else they won't let you do it. Instead they will violate your 2nd amendment right.
Doesn't matter why. Maybe you're a felon who served his sentence and was let out of jail.
Or maybe somebody thought you were scary and filed a petition with a judge to not let you have a gun.
Or maybe you filled out the "address" part of the application wrong, and the address listed is nonexistent.
Or maybe you tossed the application back at them and told them the 2ndA is all the "permit" you needed. And so they replied that you couldn't get the govt permit they require.
In all cases, the govt is taking the power to decide if you can have (and/or carry) a gun or not.
The very existence of a "permit" system (including the Federal 4473) is a declaration that the govt is taking that power and will exercise it if it thinks it's a good idea. As such, ALL gun "permits" (other than the 2ndA itself) are unconstitutional.
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.
