Ohio Becomes 23rd State To Ban Concealed Carry Permits (arsenal, layman, felons)
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.
For those who have expressed favor for a law allowing anyone to carry a weapon without a license, what is your opinion of the fact that there are still numerous places that NO ONE (except law enforcement) is permitted to carry a weapon on school grounds, in a polling/voting place, in an establishment that is primarily in the business of selling alcohol, etc? Or are you even aware that those laws still exist in most states? Do you think those laws should be nullified too? Perhaps your idea of a good time is to strap on your .45 and go down to the local saloon? Sorry, but that still isn't allowed (to the best of my knowledge). Guess you'll have to get that one changed too.
Also, by allowing ANYONE to carry without a license, you're allowing the robbers, rapists, and thugs to be LEGALLY armed just like the law abiding citizen. The cops can't arrest them for carrying without a license because NO license is required. I realize that many criminals don't obey the laws, but at least they should be subject to arrest and jail time if they disobey the gun laws, but now you're essentially making the carrying of guns by those with criminal intent perfectly legal.
To you first point, any business can make the rules for what goes on their property.
To your second point, there is no qualifier in the 2nd amendment. The world "except" doesn't show up anyplace in the text.
Every time another state stands up for the Constitution, some on the Left boo-hoo about how terrible it will make things and it never does. Most shootings are still in Democratically controlled inner cities and that has not changed. And many if not most of those shootings are done by people who can't legally own a gun.
I don't see the requirement to obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon IN PUBLIC as being bad. We don't automatically grant everyone permission to drive a car just because they turn 16 years of age. They need to apply and demonstrate that they have at least some minimal understanding of the traffic laws and some minimal driving skills before being turned loose with a 4,000 pound deadly weapon. I don't think it's unreasonable to require similar reasonable knowledge and skill before granting a license to carry a handgun in public.
Yes, I'm a handgun carrier (legally) and have done so for about the past 40 years, but that doesn't mean that I think that just ANYONE with no training, no knowledge, and no experience should be automatically allowed to carry a handgun anywhere and anytime that they choose. If they want to carry on their own property, that's fine, but carrying in public is a different matter. Similarly, if a person wants to drive a car on their own property, then no license is required, but if you want to drive in public and potentially endanger other people, then passing some minimal knowledge and proficiency test is perfectly fine.
Now before someone chimes in and says "But what about the Second Amendment," I will respond that ALL of our rights have some degree of limitation. We have the right to free speech, but that doesn't give us the right to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater, nor does it give us the right to slander others. We have the right to peacefully assemble and ask our elected officials to address our grievances, but that doesn't give us the right to form mobs and destroy stuff just because we don't like the way something is done.
ALL rights come with responsibilities, and just because a person has a right to do something at home or on their own property doesn't mean that they automatically have that right to do so in public where they may be infringing on the rights of others. As the old saying goes, "Your right to swing your fist anywhere you want ends where the other person's nose begins." In other words, YOUR rights are not the ONLY rights that must be considered.
I most certainly have the right to yell fire in a crowded theatre, but in doing so I can face legal repercussions. That's an important distinction as I explain further.
I too share your concerns about the above but the reality really breaks down as to whom is following these laws (or not).
For example, most idiots and criminals aren't going to follow any law you make anyway while reasonable people will get the training etc. even if not required.
Just look at car insurance, it's required. Some states have 1/4 of their drivers without insurance. Nationally it's 1 in 8 drivers. So it's important to note that putting laws and requirements on people is nice but the reasonable people would already be doing so and the others won't follow the law anyways.
Lastly, many of these states pass such laws for CC because there have been numerous attempts to circumvent this right. They do this by putting huge fees on the process or understaffing the department so it takes years and years to get a permit and so forth.
Also, by allowing ANYONE to carry without a license, you're allowing the robbers, rapists, and thugs to be LEGALLY armed just like the law abiding citizen. The cops can't arrest them for carrying without a license because NO license is required. I realize that many criminals don't obey the laws, but at least they should be subject to arrest and jail time if they disobey the gun laws, but now you're essentially making the carrying of guns by those with criminal intent perfectly legal.
That's a misrepresentation of the law. CC laws allow folks legally able to possess a firearm to carry it. So you are correct in that they can't be arrested for carrying, but they can be arrested for illegal possession of a firearm.
Also, by allowing ANYONE to carry without a license, you're allowing the robbers, rapists, and thugs to be LEGALLY armed just like the law abiding citizen. The cops can't arrest them for carrying without a license because NO license is required. I realize that many criminals don't obey the laws, but at least they should be subject to arrest and jail time if they disobey the gun laws, but now you're essentially making the carrying of guns by those with criminal intent perfectly legal.
The bolded don't ask for the government's permission to carry a gun. If they cared about the law, they wouldn't be robbing, raping or thugging in the first place.
The only thing gun control does is put red tape around law-abiding citizens carrying guns because they'll be the only ones asking for the government's permission.
Because someones feeling will get hurt? Like back in the day how seeing an inter racial couple hurts peoples feelings so we should ban that?
Defending yourself and enforcing rights has nothing to do with anyones emotions.
You missed my point. If you choose to carry a gun it should be concealed. There are too many people that are so frightened of guns that they would go out of their way to avoid you while some criminals might actually target you to steal that gun and some Karen's might actually call the cops. Why would anyone want to risk that hassle?
The Karen could tell 911 that you were making threatening remarks and you have a gun. The cops respond and the next thing you know you are face down on the ground, cuffed and having to explain yourself in a he said she said scenario and who they believe is a flip of the coin.
There have been many cases were people have been shot because there was a gun involved. The cops don't know who the "good guy" is when they roll up. They are only responding to the 911 call.
Permits are a good thing because they at least ensure that someone that wants to own a gun has at least taken a safety course. New owners need to know how to handle a gun, how to safely store it and carry it plus they need to know what will happen if they are ever forced to use that gun against someone even if they are well within the law to do so.
Citizens and Legal Immigrants should have no problem owning a gun, thanks to our 2nd amendment but criminals, felons, illegal immigrants should not. Requiring Permits generally separates the law abiding gun owner from the criminals.
I don't know what an inter racial couple has to do with the gun permit debate but if they want to own guns then they should follow the rules.
conceal carry laws should be abolished. It's already illegal for felons to own guns and democrat judges ignore that law in large cities and let thugs off on signature bond all the time.
That's a misrepresentation of the law. CC laws allow folks legally able to possess a firearm to carry it. So you are correct in that they can't be arrested for carrying, but they can be arrested for illegal possession of a firearm.
That's ONLY true if they have previously been CONVICTED OF A FELONY. If they haven't previously been convicted of a felony, then they have just as much legal right to carry a gun as you or me under this new law. .. regardless how many crimes they have actually committed.
Good! It's nice to see the Second Amendment followed, for a change. Concealed Carry Permits are a tax to exercise everyone's Second Amendment right, and, therefore, unconstitutional, in my opinion.
Do criminals make sure they have their Concealed Carry Permits before they carry their guns to commit crimes?... Nope! All it does is hurt the law-abiding gun owners.
From the article: "The other 22 are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming."
I hear Indiana has a similar bill sitting on the Governor's desk. I'm surprised Florida isn't on this list...
This must explain why my license is good in all those States!
Florida has no state income tax, but they have every other tax. The license is good for 7 yrs.
IF there's ever any trouble with the cops, your CCL gives you the benefit of the doubt (Cops know you're not a felon and most likely law-abiding citizen).
To you first point, any business can make the rules for what goes on their property.
To your second point, there is no qualifier in the 2nd amendment. The world "except" doesn't show up anyplace in the text.
You don't want felons to have guns?
Good.
Keep them in jail.
You're WRONG about the bolded part of your statement. These are STATE laws and no bar or liquor establishment can LEGALLY void the law and say that guns are allowed in their establishment. Your claim is like saying that bars could decide to sell alcohol to 14 year olds if they wanted to. That's wrong. They CAN'T decide that because it's against the STATE 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.
That's an important distinction as I explain further.
