thirty-ought-six
member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2015
- Messages
- 185
Let me ask you this, Sam. Would you feel the least bit safe driving in downtown Chicago during rush hour if Chicago decided 10 years ago, no one needs a license to drive?
Help Me Understand So I Don't Be A Fudd
- Thread starter berettaprofessor
- Start date
- Status
W.E.G.
Member
So, attending a class for a few hours "qualifies" somebody to handle a deadly weapon, and make life/death decisions in a split-second.
No.
I don't think so.
No.
I don't think so.
CoRoMo
Member
None of those are inherent human rights. Argument fail.
Please read this thread before you post anything else on this site: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=689728
How Sam1911 might or might not 'feel' given any particular situation doesn't change the fact the human rights are not to be questioned or infringed upon. And again, the car/driver license analogy is a non-sequitur in a gun control discussion. Learn this.
thirty-ought-six
member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2015
- Messages
- 185
Also, I want to clarify on what I said earlier, I'm not 100% set on a license, my main concern is more about education that anything.
The more education gun owners become, the less fuel it is for the antis. A anti might say "well he died because he didn't know how to properly use a gun". If that person was indeed educated, it's one less talking point for them.
The more education gun owners become, the less fuel it is for the antis. A anti might say "well he died because he didn't know how to properly use a gun". If that person was indeed educated, it's one less talking point for them.
right to drive which amendment is that?
oneounceload
member
They are probably similar in population. racial/ethnic/religious make-up - basically a homogeneous society with mostly small towns and villages - an ideal climate for cooperation and low crime compared to massive urban areas with a huge diversity of folks from around the world. Sad, but reality is what it is in THAT regard.
OP - I agree with you in most, if not all of your concerns. There's a thread about someone who followed someone into a Walmart and tried to disarm him because he spied a gun in the parking lot - would those incidents go up? Would cops be able to determine who is legal or not? I do not know so - PERSONALLY - I would err on the side of caution at this time until all issues are ironed out.
it just makes things harder for those who get the permit for a concealed handgun.
the estra burden involved with paying for the permit and the mandatory trainining.
it merely means that susie carjacker, who couldnt get a legal permit to carry a handgun due to criminal history, can do so without a permit.
the estra burden involved with paying for the permit and the mandatory trainining.
it merely means that susie carjacker, who couldnt get a legal permit to carry a handgun due to criminal history, can do so without a permit.
When Arizona went to "constitutional carry" meaning no permits or educational standards specified or required) I felt a lot like you do.
However time and experience has shown that my concerns were unwarranted. Yes, we do have crime, accidental shootings, etc. But the fact is that when Arizona dropped the mandated training requirements, crime and accidental shooting statistics didn't go up in any meaningful way that could be attributed to relaxing permit training and other things including education.
HorseSoldier
Member
Alaska is the same way. You can take the state DPS required course to get an Alaska CHP if you want one for reciprocity's sake. No real other reason to get one, which generates the main downside -- due to limited demand, you'll probably pay a couple hundred bucks plus your own weapon and own ammo to take the required course from the various certified instructors out there.
BSA1
member
"What would it hurt?"
Not what but who.
The poor, the elderly and single parents mostly women which as the groups most likely to be victims of crime. These groups may lack the money for application fees, cost of taking the class, lack of or cost of transportation to and from the class and child care.
It takes a cold, hard heart to tell someone they don't have the right to self-defense because they don't measure up to your standards.
Not what but who.
The poor, the elderly and single parents mostly women which as the groups most likely to be victims of crime. These groups may lack the money for application fees, cost of taking the class, lack of or cost of transportation to and from the class and child care.
It takes a cold, hard heart to tell someone they don't have the right to self-defense because they don't measure up to your standards.
Thermactor
member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 992
As a pure social experiment, I would personally love to see what constitutional, unfettered carry would do to decrease the violent crime rates of Camden, Chicago, and Detroit.
The good outweighs the bad.
The good outweighs the bad.
Jason75979
Member
And here I was thinking the bill of rights was intended to secure my individual right OVER "the greater good".
Silly me.
Silly me.
savanahsdad
Member
Training should be done in High School , they want to teach sex-ed in grade school and drivers-ed to 15 year old kids , then I say bring back NRA gun safety classes for 16 year olds ,
My father-in-law got his NRA safety card in 1960 or 61 , and that is all he needed to get his CCW, he was also in the army , so that too would have gotten him his CCW card ,
I took the CCW class just because my wife needed it , My Hunter Safety card would have been enough to get a CCW card , plus I have a Hunter Safety Instructor Card ,
So I'm all for little or no training to get a CCW and I'm also for no card at all , but we need to bring back gun safety classes in are schools ,
I know lots of folks that own and carry guns but I know no one that plays football , yet kids have to take gym class , :banghead:
My father-in-law got his NRA safety card in 1960 or 61 , and that is all he needed to get his CCW, he was also in the army , so that too would have gotten him his CCW card ,
I took the CCW class just because my wife needed it , My Hunter Safety card would have been enough to get a CCW card , plus I have a Hunter Safety Instructor Card ,
So I'm all for little or no training to get a CCW and I'm also for no card at all , but we need to bring back gun safety classes in are schools ,
I know lots of folks that own and carry guns but I know no one that plays football , yet kids have to take gym class , :banghead:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
While this is a complete red herring, and probable thread derailment, honestly I wouldn't expect to be in any greater danger than I would be now.
As I said, it's a red herring. But it also brings up another semi-relevant point: DRIVING in rush-hour traffic is not akin to existing among a group of people carrying guns. It is more akin to SHOOTING a gun, repeatedly, among a crowd of other people SHOOTING actively in a confined space, right past each other. Operating a car is like shooting a gun, over and over, in the immediate presence of others, with them shooting right around you, too. Not like carrying a gun around in readiness for a very unlikely emergency.
One carries a gun with the sincere home that they NEVER, once in their lives, have to use it in a moment of crisis. And generally, most people's hope is realized. But if there IS a life or death crisis some moment, they have the tool there at hand and may be able to use it to save their lives. Yes, in that highly unlikely circumstance, they MIGHT present a danger to others, which will depend at least 50% on their acquired skill with that tool, but the need is immediate and cannot be met by any substitute.
As someone else has said, a concealed carry license isn't so much like a drivers' license so much as it is a license to walk around with car keys in your pocket all the time.
jcwit
member
I'll chime in here.
I have a STL who is Bipolar, takes meds daily to control his moods and anger, has been in the mental ward a few times.
Yup, he is a prime example for someone to be able to possess a firearm of any kind with no license or NICS check. But some here continue to think "It is his right!".
Somehow I question that logic.
I have a STL who is Bipolar, takes meds daily to control his moods and anger, has been in the mental ward a few times.
Yup, he is a prime example for someone to be able to possess a firearm of any kind with no license or NICS check. But some here continue to think "It is his right!".
Somehow I question that logic.
savanahsdad
Member
sorry I missed where we aren't doing NICS checks ??
jcwit
member
Surely you jest! If you truly believe this, why have an age to be able to drive, lets let 12 year olds drive.
BTW, while we're at it lets allow 12 year olds carry firearms of any kind, after all they only wish to protect themselves.
jcwit
member
Post #1, item C.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Reductio ad absurdum. Change the goalposts much farther than anyone's discussing and try to claim that --what actually is proved by the experience of many states-- must not be true because if they did some other thing it might not be.
Surely you're better than that.
Shanghai McCoy
Member
It costs about 200 dollars to get a permit in Kansas and about half of that is to the state in "fees". They are not going to pass anything that will cause them to lose revenue...
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
If he can't pass a NICS check, then he can't possess a gun. Ergo, he can't (lawfully) CARRY one because he can't (lawfully) possess it.
(Keeping with the fiction, for the moment, that laws keep people who are willing to break the law, from breaking the law, because...it's the law. <Giggle.>)
Now, I'm of the opinion that if he's out on the streets running around free, then he should have the rights and privileges afforded all free people here in the USA, but seeing as our society doesn't work quite that way, I don't see the point in dragging the argument off into this particular patch of weeds.
CoRoMo
Member
Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Neither can you...
jk
savanahsdad
Member
I think you are reading that wrong , you need a back grown check to get a CCW card, then your CCW bypasses the NICS check, with no card you need a NICS check to get a gun , and it sounds like your STL can't own a gun anyway so it is a mute point
Not seeing the problem here.
You have a state that could potentially let people carry without permission slip, and that's awesome. Are people worried about a lack of training? Or that "criminals" won't be weeded out during the lack of permit process?
You have a state that could potentially let people carry without permission slip, and that's awesome. Are people worried about a lack of training? Or that "criminals" won't be weeded out during the lack of permit process?
Shanghai McCoy
Member
Your CCW Permit in Kansas, and some other states as well, is proof that you have passed a background check on the State and Federal level and is an allowed substitute for the NICS check.
- Status
