concealed carry in san diego (exemptions, safety, rich)

[Mack Knife]

Originally Posted by sfosyd

This is just not true in many states. In some states, restoration is automatic for non-violent offenders. Even for violent offenders, in some states, there is a relatively low bar set with NO waiting period. I think the point of this thread is that the laws ARE working in San Diego and some folks are happy with them.

In what state are violent offenders (convicted of a felony) allowed to legally purchase a firearm or obtain a CCW?

Can you provide any proof of that?

If the point of this thread is that laws (CCW I take it) are working in San Diego, why would protection against wild animals be a point in your reply to me? I don't see the connection between wild animals and the point of this thread as you described. I know I didn't bring that up.

[sfosyd]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us...anted=all&_r=0

I respectfully agree to disagree you with you and I do apologize for the gun nut comment. The protection against wild animals was mentioned earlier in the thread.

[Huckleberry3911948]

does not matter god help you if you ever use that weapon. go hang out at the court and see what happens to people even cops when they have to use that weapon for ANY reason. in SD self defense is a crime. pineapple upside down cake justice.

[Mack Knife]

Originally Posted by sfosyd

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us...anted=all&_r=0

I respectfully agree to disagree you with you and I do apologize for the gun nut comment. The protection against wild animals was mentioned earlier in the thread.

Ok and thanks.

Then can we discuss the animal point just for a moment?

If (a big IF) San Diego was located in an area with many wild animals around that posed a threat to humans would the issue of allowing a person to carry a concealed or non-concealed firearm be considered a problem of great magnitude?

To clarify, when I say wild animals, consider the kind that can reasonably be disabled or killed with firearms such as leopards, hyenas, lions (most big cats are not difficult to disable or kill with a gun) and so on. Not bears as few firearms are really effective against bears intent on feasting upon you.

In that scenario, would carrying firearms outside the home be acceptable? If not, why not? Lets leave animal control out of the scenario because like the police, they can't be everywhere all the time and there aren't very many of them.

[aedubber]

Liberals live in a land of fear , communism, and disrespect to freedom and liberties.

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by aedubber

Liberals live in a land of fear , communism, and disrespect to freedom and liberties.

Exactly and how odd the term liberal can be quite different depending on which state you are from. I find that liberal in CA = stepping on the rights of others to promote your freedom limiting agenda. Does not sound very liberal to me. More like totalitarian.

[sfosyd]

Originally Posted by Mack Knife

In that scenario, would carrying firearms outside the home be acceptable? If not, why not? Lets leave animal control out of the scenario because like the police, they can't be everywhere all the time and there aren't very many of them.

Absolutely in that scenario carrying firearms would be acceptable assuming that the person carrying had a background check and the proper training. Also, animals won't care if the weapon is concealed or not so no reason to conceal it in that scenario.

[aedubber]

Originally Posted by sfosyd

Absolutely in that scenario carrying firearms would be acceptable assuming that the person carrying had a background check and the proper training. Also, animals won't care if the weapon is concealed or not so no reason to conceal it in that scenario.

Well for starters in order to obtain a firearms ID you undergo a background check already, so thats done and out the way. What type of training are you seeking to carry a weapon?

[SoCalbound12]

Originally Posted by Think4Yourself

That's all fine and dandy expect 1) we're talking about this locality not other localities and I believe each location should be able to design their own laws with in the confines of the constitution and 2) You're just wrong, dead wrong, as there is no absolute right in the constitution, not one, the Supreme Court has ruled so, everything has limits, and concealed carry is one of those. Yes, you can own a gun, yes, you can keep in it your home, no, you can't carry it 24/7 concealed on your person without a permit. FACT!

To go back to an earlier post where some bonehead claimed I was "a fake" because I am a gun owner who dared to disagree with him... Far to many gun nuts, and many of them truly are nuts, I'm not taking about regular people here, are ideological purists who denounce anyone who dares to disagree with them plus they can't even demonstrate the slightest amount of knowledge about what gun laws actually are. No, I don't want anyone to concealed carry without showing both a demonstrable need and knowledge of local gun laws. It's that simple and it is in within the confines of the constitution even if you don't like it. The truth is our local laws work great and I want to see a compelling reason to change them before I agree to any changes; the people of this locality voted for the existing laws so their will shouldn't be ignored without good reason especially since the SCotUS has already said they have a right to do so and the only question is exactly how they can regulate concealed carry permits (the REQUIREMENT that regulations be placed on fire arms in the constitution is something gun nuts constantly ignore or try to explain away via mythology). That doesn't change the words written though.

I love how you blatantly ignore what I clearly wrote, "I'm not taking a side in the issue" and ignore the fact that I was explaining OTHER POSTERS logic and rationale. You ignore the clear intent of my post so you can go on some long winded rant full of arrogance and faux intellectual superiority.

For someone who talks about "raving drooling extremists" the only poster who comes off as one in this whole thread is you. The only unreasonable sounding person set in his ways who won't listen to logic or the other side is you. While I don't really give a damn one way or another about the gun issue as a whole it's people like you who make me want to join the NRA. I'd rather be locked in a NRA convention for a whole day than be stuck with a group of anti-gun/CCW people. At least in the NRA there are less wannabe intellectual know-it-alls.

[Think4Yourself]

Originally Posted by sfosyd

This is just not true in many states. In some states, restoration is automatic for non-violent offenders. Even for violent offenders, in some states, there is a relatively low bar set with NO waiting period. I think the point of this thread is that the laws ARE working in San Diego and some folks are happy with them.

Amen. Also, as you pointed out to Mack, being anti-concealed carry is not being anti-gun and you will notice the first thing the no regulations on guns folks always do is claim anyone who doesn't agree with their extremist agenda is anti-gun even when that's not even remotely the case. We saw this on page one of this very thread.