How many here carries a concealed weapon?

Originally Posted by Rilder

I don't see how being a soldier for your chosen nation state change anything, this is a civilized society of people trying live their lives, not a warzone where the enemy is around every corner.

For me, I don't want a society where problems are solved with a gun, I want the underlying reasons behind criminal behavior to be found and treated. A person does not commit violent acts for no reason and we should find the cultural, social, and psychological reasons behind the acts and eliminate them. A normal person doesn't commit acts of violence, just as someone who doesn't want for anything won't commit theft.

We need education, welfare, and healthcare, not guns and death. I don't care if that means paying a little bit extra taxes, its better then people dying.

I wish more people would have your sense of reason. Some lines written down in this thread are... somewhat agitating.

When I see 'Murricans talk about "chains of oppression" only because a well-going, civilized foreign country has strict gun laws - and nearly no deaths a year related to guns - I really start to lose faith in humani... America.

But the same kind of 'Murricans would probably tell me, again, to keep out of Murrica's business... on an open internet forum

[Oberon]

myeah...I think this thread is starting to run its course and head back into rather familiar territory.

Ducimus, August, been good talking to you, but I think I'll bail out of this thread early, you both know my stance on gun control anyway. I'm neither for or against guns, I can see both sides point of view, so I will bow out here before even more people get infracted.

[Sailor Steve]

Oberon has a point. It started off well, but now it's turning into just another gun control argument. No reason now not to merge it with all the others.

How odd a thread goes wild here in GT.

[MH]

Originally Posted by TheDarkWraith

That is your opinion and not fact. Take your gun hating views somewhere else.

I dont hate guns.
Actually have no feeling toward them but all i can say is that i know how to use some.
Maybe the issue with some people is about them having feelings toward the guns and not the second amendment ?
That would explain a lot...
My opinion about carry - should be always concealed.
Don't understand this stupid laws you have .... you can leave your guns in the car or whatever ...its legal and dumb, on another hand the state tell you how to carry your guns.

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by MH

I dont hate guns.
Actually have no feeling toward them but all i can say is that i know how to use some.
Maybe the issue with some people is about them having feelings toward the guns and not the second amendment ?
That would explain a lot...
My opinion about carry - should be always concealed.
Don't understand this stupid laws you have .... you can leave your guns in the car or whatever ...its legal and dumb, on another hand the state tell you how to carry your guns.

Even states that allow guns, they're numerous places you can't carry your gun, govt. gun free zones and numerous private businesses have signs you can't bring your gun in, so people leave them in their car. Many states it's very hard to get a CCW, but allow open carry, so I agree the laws should be changed.

Sadly, they're many stories of shootings, some mass, where private businesses don't allow guns and people couldn't fight back because they had to leave their gun in their cars.

History has proven over and over, people that give up their guns to the govt often face tyranny and mad dictators..

[Platapus]

Unfortunately, in the US, the gun genies are out of many bottles.

The baddies already have guns and a continued source of guns. There is little the law can do to stop this.

I am not sure how it works in other countries, but in the US, criminals tend not to follow laws... that's what makes them criminals.

Until there is some sort of plan that would be effective in drastically cutting the number of criminals with guns and drastically cut off the continued supply of guns, gun limiting legislation will only affect the law-abiding gun owner.

What we really want is a program that will get the guns away from the criminals first and then perhaps start restricting gun ownership by law-abiding citizens. But in any case, go after the criminals first.

Unfortunately, what gun legislation does is affect the law-abiding citizen first in hopes that somehow, sometime, somewhere down the road eventually criminals will not be able to gain access to guns. That is the wrong order.

Criminals love gun legislation for this very reason... because it cuts down on the law-abiding citizen's access to guns while having very little impact on law-breaking citizen's access to guns.

As long as criminals have access to guns, law-abiding citizens will not want to lose their ability to defend themselves.

The inconvenient truth is that criminals already have illegal ways of obtaining guns. That is just a result of our history.

Any regulation that affects the legal ways of obtaining guns is not going to be effective in regulating the illegal ways of obtaining guns.

One suggestion that I am fully aware of is the idea that if someone uses a gun in the commission of a crime that there will be an automatic 10 year sentence which is separate from, but must be served consecutively to any other sentence; is ineligible for parole during that 10 year sentence; and can't be plea-bargained away. No exceptions... No exceptions!

That type of "red-hot stove" type of action-punishment schema, I feel will be a good first step.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Oberon

The problem I think that America will find in the 21st century is that whilst the American people have political power in their guns, the government that they keep those guns to defend from has much bigger guns and much more power if it chooses to use it. Of course, if the entire populace rose up, then that would be something different, but we all know that nothing is ever unanimous.

Well, i did say that keeping and bearing of arms by the citizenry is highly symbolic.

I know that you are non-partisan Ducimus, and I respect you for that, but I still wonder how vocal the current crowds who fear the loss of their freedoms will be under a differently aligned President. Still, time will tell.

I find my "political identity" is something in flux. For awhile I was thinking Libertarian, however many libertarian philosophies i disagree with. Right along with many Democrat and Republican philosophies. At this point, about the only thing I can agree with is the US constitution. I really care for little else. So perhaps, a "Constitutionalist" is the label that best fits me.

As for how vocal people will be about their fear of loss of freedoms under a differently aligned president, I don't think, or at least I hope, alignment is no longer the issue.

In my view it's not what they say, or by what party they align with, but by what they DO. Since 911 our government has been given a blank check to do what they like in the name of public safety; and professional politicians have taken FULL advantage of it. We are at a point where our government has legislated itself to be too big, too overbearing, and too intrusive, regardless of party affiliation; with no signs of it letting up. I believe we are well on our way to becoming a police state, some would argue we already are.

Originally Posted by Oberon

Why? Is the First Amendment outlawed in favour of the Second?

Each and every amendment listed in the Bill of Rights is important. Each having equal weight, and the sum of the whole is an interwoven tapestry. That said, some would argue that without the second, none of the others would be possible.

[gimpy117]

I'm just not in the position to drop a couple hundred on a license. I plan too. Have a sweet little Bersa .380 thunder