Handgun Forum banner
1 - 20 of 36 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
3,915 Posts
I believe that gun control only serves to punish the law abiding. With all of the so called gun control laws, gun crime is exploding.
How about arresting criminals and keeping them in jail? NAH, that would be racist wouldn't it?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
Uh oh another: "I believe in but"

Brandon claimed that he supports the 2nd Amendment too as does Senator Mark Kelly. With friends like that who needs enemies? FJB and FMK

Gun control only controls the law abiding. Every time we compromise we lose until one day there will be nothing left to compromise. NOT ONE MORE INCH.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,915 Posts
Uh oh another: "I believe in but"

Brandon claimed that he supports the 2nd Amendment too as does Senator Mark Kelly. With friends like that who needs enemies? FJB and FMK

Gun control only controls the law abiding. Every time we compromise we lose until one day there will be nothing left to compromise. NOT ONE MORE INCH.
Hey Des, I don't think we tagged up before you leaped off of the top rope!
The antis are trying every trick and failing while flailing and getting ready to lose big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arizona Desertman

· Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
I believe in the second amendment and right to bear arms very strongly but also believe gun control can coexist along with it. Nice to meet you.
Well first, you would need to define gun control; it's level and extent and your interpretation of it. A blanket statement regarding the support of gun control begs this, as it is such a general statement and therefore very open-ended. If, by gun control, you mean doing the best to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, felons, and similar undesirables, then I would wager most people on this site would agree with you.

On the other hand, if you mean banning certain semi-automatic rifles, restricting the number of rounds a magazine could hold, and similar controls, then I would suggest you don't belong here and are not going to ingratiate yourself well with other site contributors.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
Hey Des, I don't think we tagged up before you leaped off of the top rope!
The antis are trying every trick and flailing while flailing and getting ready to lose big.
What infuriates me is when the anti's come out and say they support the 2nd Amendment but "nobody needs" argument. Then they go on to use terminology such as weapons of war, assault weapons, ghost guns, Saturday night specials, high capacity feeding devises etc. etc. Or "nobody hunts with an AR 15" or "Why do you need more than 10 rounds, are you that bad of a shot?" They think that we're all a dumb bunch of hicks that will fall for anything they say. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting and the types of weapons that are protected are those that are in "common use" for any lawful purpose. So called assault weapons and high capacity feeding devises certainly fall into that category as there are 10's of millions of them lawfully owned in the United States.

”Obviously the amendment does not apply to arms that can not be hand carried--It's to keep and 'bear' so it doesn't apply to cannons. But I suppose there are hand held rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes, that will have to be decided."-- "The 2nd Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."--- Antonin Scalia (Heller vs DC) www.law.cornell.edu/suplt

More and more state's are going "Constitutional Carry" where a permit is not required to carry open or concealed. In spite of all the hand wringing and doomsday scenarios they haven't turned into the Wild West. It's still unlawful for those who are deemed a prohibited possessor as described by federal and state laws to possess firearms. The criminal and negligent misuse of firearms laws are still intact. There are thousands of laws already on the books that address that. WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE LAWS PERIOD!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Removing the permit requirement to carry also removes one statue that a criminal can be charged with when he commits a crime while carrying a gun. Most criminals will not fool with a permit and many who do get caught get charged with "carrying without a permit".
Another thing to remember- if your state eliminates the permit.....do you ever travel across state lines with a gun in your possession? Better not- it is illegal! You need a permit for that.
My state just eliminated the need for a permit to carry in state for residents, but I renewed mine- because I go into MS, FL and LA often, and I carry.

Not trying to get political- but I am very conservative and pro gun....but I need my permit.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
Removing the permit requirement to carry also removes one statue that a criminal can be charged with when he commits a crime while carrying a gun. Most criminals will not fool with a permit and many who do get caught get charged with "carrying without a permit".
Another thing to remember- if your state eliminates the permit.....do you ever travel across state lines with a gun in your possession? Better not- it is illegal! You need a permit for that.
My state just eliminated the need for a permit to carry in state for residents, but I renewed mine- because I go into MS, FL and LA often, and I carry.

Not trying to get political- but I am very conservative and pro gun....but I need my permit.
I have an Arizona concealed weapons permit. But it's voluntary for that very same reason. Some state's like Vermont do not issue a permit at all so their residents are shit outta' luck when traveling or visiting some states or within 1000 ft. of a school's property.*

The other reasons for getting a permit at least here in Arizona is that:
(A) You do not have to get a NICS check when buying a firearm.
(B) You can enter establishments that serve alcohol for consumption on their premises providing that you don't consume them. That includes damn near every restaurant.
(C) You're exempt from the provisions of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990.* Without a state issued permit it is illegal to carry a loaded firearm within 1000 ft. of a school's property throughout the entire United States. God only knows how many public streets, highways and thoroughfares fall within that distance? Violation of that law is a federal crime. That's got to be one of the most asinine laws that was ever passed. If you have a home within that area you can have a loaded firearm on your premises but the moment you step foot off of your property the firearm has to be unloaded in a locked case separate from the ammunition. Same if you're just traveling through.

www.usconcealedcarry.com › blog › gun-free-schoolGun-Free School Zones Act of 1990: What Is It? | USCCA
  • What Is The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990?
  • Fighting Gang Violence
  • Opposition to The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990
"The penalty for those convicted of possessing or firing a firearm inside of a school zone carries a maximum fine of $5,000 and five years in prison."
 

· Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
In my answer to this same question-from the same OP on another forum I stated something like:
Some states do make it difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain a permit- but that is not a national issue- it is local, and those affected by such laws need to deal with their local elected leaders.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
In my answer to this same question-from the same OP on another forum I stated something like:
Some states do make it difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain a permit- but that is not a national issue- it is local, and those affected by such laws need to deal with their local elected leaders.
In a case brought by the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) challenging New York's arbitrary and capricious handgun licensing system. That may change come June if the Supreme Court rules in our favor that the 2nd Amendment is applicable outside of one's residence. Which means that they will not be able to deny anyone who is not a prohibited possessor as described by federal from obtaining an unrestricted carry permit. The permit will be good throughout the entire state including New York City and the entire United States as well. By all indications it looks to be in our favor.

This also means that we will be able to travel freely within the United States while armed without the fear of getting arrested for violating individual state or municipal gun laws. Providing that you have met your home state's legal requirements for carrying a handgun. All state's that do not have Constitutional Carry status will become "Shall Issue" state's instead of "May Issue" state's such as New York has now. There's also the possibility that every state may have to become Constitutional Carry and drop the permit requirements altogether. Until the case is decided one way or the other it's hard to predict what will happen. At any rate there will be an awful lot of legal issues and technicalities that will have to be sorted out. There's just too many God damn gun laws that serve absolutely no purpose at all. Other than to entrap otherwise law abiding people that inadvertently break them. The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 is just one of them.

In "May Issue" state's handgun licenses are left up to the discretion of a licensing officer, in New York's case a county judge. As it is now they can turn down an application for any reason whatsoever or impose restrictions on the license as to when, where and how the handgun(s) can be carried lawfully. For civilians carry licenses are typically restricted to target shooting and hunting only and MEANS JUST THAT. Self defense according to those bureaucrats is not a justifiable reason to carry a handgun in public. The only people that can get unrestricted permits are active duty and retired law enforcement personnel, judges, the rich, the famous and politically well connected individuals. Pretty f'ked up huh? This was the basis for the case brought before the Supreme Court by the NYSRPA.

Unfortunately state's such as New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Colorado, Maryland etc. are too far gone. They keep on electing anyone with a (D) after their name regardless of how much they're screwing up their state's and destroying individual civil liberties. This has been going on for decades and it's only getting worse.

www.vox.com › 2021/11/3 › 22761240Supreme Court: The NRA got great news from justices on the ...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,211 Posts
Removing the permit requirement to carry also removes one statue that a criminal can be charged with when he commits a crime while carrying a gun. Most criminals will not fool with a permit and many who do get caught get charged with "carrying without a permit".
Another thing to remember- if your state eliminates the permit.....do you ever travel across state lines with a gun in your possession? Better not- it is illegal! You need a permit for that.
My state just eliminated the need for a permit to carry in state for residents, but I renewed mine- because I go into MS, FL and LA often, and I carry.

Not trying to get political- but I am very conservative and pro gun....but I need my permit.
Me too. Welcome OP.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
Removing the permit requirement to carry also removes one statue that a criminal can be charged with when he commits a crime while carrying a gun. Most criminals will not fool with a permit and many who do get caught get charged with "carrying without a permit".
Another thing to remember- if your state eliminates the permit.....do you ever travel across state lines with a gun in your possession? Better not- it is illegal! You need a permit for that.
My state just eliminated the need for a permit to carry in state for residents, but I renewed mine- because I go into MS, FL and LA often, and I carry.

Not trying to get political- but I am very conservative and pro gun....but I need my permit.
Have to ask... Do you need a permit to talk to someone in one of those "other" states? Or perhaps attending a church over state lines? Or even taking a walk or a drive and crossing a state boundary? None of these activities require obtaining permission from our servants so why should one need to do this when carrying a sidearm?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
Have to ask... Do you need a permit to talk to someone in one of those "other" states? Or perhaps attended a church over state lines? Or even taking a walk or a drive and crossing a state boundary? None of these activities require obtaining permission from our servants so why should one need to do this when carrying a sidearm?
As far as I'm concerned the only laws we need concerning firearms is for the criminal and negligent misuse of them. Oh wait we already have those laws. As long as individuals are not committing any crimes or handling firearms in a reckless manner they should be able to freely carry damn near anywhere with very few exceptions.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
As far as I'm concerned the only laws we need concerning firearms is for the criminal and negligent misuse of them. Oh wait we already have those laws. As long as individuals are not committing any crimes or handling firearms in a reckless manner they should be able to freely carry damn near anywhere with very few exceptions.
Exactly.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,915 Posts
My only concern is letting the damn Feds enter states rights arguments. I want Wisconsin as far away from Pelosi and Schumer as possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arizona Desertman

· Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Have to ask... Do you need a permit to talk to someone in one of those "other" states? Or perhaps attending a church over state lines? Or even taking a walk or a drive and crossing a state boundary? None of these activities require obtaining permission from our servants so why should one need to do this when carrying a sidearm?
Hey man....its America- you go for it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
Before you can enslave a Nation ...the first step is to disarm the people .

Armed men will fight for their freedom ! Can't happen today ... look what is happening in Ukraine right now !

The right to Keep and Bear Arms will help keep you free when nothing else will .

Never give up that right !

Gary
The two things that a despotic regime absolutely must accomplish if it is to gain total power and subjugate the people are...

o Control the dissemination of information.
o Remove from the people their ability to resist.

The first of these universal truths is in place and progressing in our nation. Once in place, the second will follow in earnest.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
What so many people don't seem to understand is that governments are inherently evil. All governments fit this calling. If left unchecked, they will continue to grow until they swallow the governed. It is their natural instinct, it's what they do, just as it is our prerogative to be free and to protect individual liberty.

The Founders knew this and that is why Patrick Henry and George Mason insisted upon a Bill of Rights to be added to the Constitution. They were so adamant in this that they refused to ratify the new federal Constitution until a Bill of Rights became part of this document. And we can thank God for men like this who had the wisdom and the historical acuity to hold fast and do what had to be done to complete this most phenomenal experiment called America.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top