Make it legal to carry without permit: yes or no?

[RobertNashville]

Lol yes it was taught by Bob Campanovo. My point here is not everyone should be able to carry a gun.

So in your opinion, some people do not have the right to defend themselves, which means you don't believe the right to defend one's own life is actually a right at all, correct?

I do believe that there are some people who should not carry a firearm but they should be ABLE to carry one if they so chose (unless by their own actions they've proven themselves unable to handle a firearm safely/put other people in jeopardy and/or they fall into one of the classes of people that society has decided don't have that right such as convicted felons, stalkers, etc.).

You see, in my humble opinion, this issue is less about the right to carry a firearm and much more about a person's very basic right to be able to defend their life and the lives of their family/other innocents without the need to have permission from somebody. And, if, indeed the right to defend one's life IS a RIGHT, then permission in the form of a HCP should not be required because RIGHTS don't require permission.

[Guest 270win]

driver licensing, marriage licensing, pistol licensing, etc is nothing but a form of revenue making for the states. Have you ever thought that the driver licensing exam really makes people better drivers? I was tested on crap like how many feet it takes a car to stop going 60 miles per hour and that someone in has to use a turn signal 100 feet before making 90 degree turns for my written learner's permit test when I was 14. What made me a safer driver was practicing over and over even when I could drive alone after getting my DL. Making people stand in front of a target and popping off a few shells does not make them safer just one time just like driving around the block, and a state trooper passing me on the driving test made a bona fide safe driver. People have to take the initiative on their own to go out and shoot and practice. People have to read and learn through life. DL testing and administration is a joke just like pistol licensing range time, police qualification for firearms, and armed guards.

[strickj]

Lol yes it was taught by Bob Campanovo. My point here is not everyone should be able to carry a gun. Yes she can shoot it and yes she could defend herself. However she is very smart women, has accomplished a lot in life but she is stubborn and she can not keep her finger off the trigger. One day she will learn the hard way.

As for my skin being tough. It's very tough, but when you throw menin with the anti debate I get pissed. As for the rest this conversation is going no where....I don't want to get banned by a moderator because we don't see eye to eye. So I agree with you and I am wrong. =p

If you read my posts and all of them not just the one you want to belittle me over you would see I don't agree with paying for anything. And report you? To who you?? Lol I don't report people for anything. Now that this thread has been hijacked enough I'm done with this argument.

lol. You're not gonna get banned for disagreeing with someone. The internet would be a pretty small place if everyone got banned because of a disagreement. Like stated, my mod status has absolutely nothing to do with this debate.

I very much respect your opinion because I can see where you're coming from.

I am not belittling you in any way that I can see. If I have, then just point it out to me and I will gladly apologize.

Like I said earlier, I simply made a comparison with two fears. If that upsets you, report my post. TGO David and the rest of the mods will see it and will roll my ass into the path of a bus if I intentionally offended you in some way.

[Guest kirkosaurus]

*My fears of being shot in a bathroom because the moron next to me dropped his weapon are not the same as the liberal dipsticks who would rather you get eaten by a brown bear as opposed to being able to defend yourself.

I would encourage anyone who makes a statement like this to think with logic and not emotion. Fearing something that isn't actual a problem is the same thing the anti-gun people like the Brady Campaign use to further their agenda.

[Guest kirkosaurus]

Not sure if this was mentioned or not, but one thing to remember is that Constitutional Carry does not automatically put a gun in everyone's hand. I would say most people will choose not to carry even if it's legal. I know many people with HCP's that don't even carry because it's just not comfortable or convenient.

[Jonnin]

I doubt it is tracked that closely; so you can’t show statistics.

I’m all for allowing people to carry without training. But you can’t seriously be implying that if everyone is allowed to strap on a gun (training or not) there won’t be an increase in both intentional and accidental shootings?

There is nothing wrong with using logic and common sense; for most people it’s probably more accurate than an internet link.

If you mean raw numbers, thats 100% going to happen: the more people with cars, the more car accidents, the more people with guns, the more gun accidents etc. The percentages may or may not change much -- it depends really. If folks read the NRA rules that are packaged with every gun that is sold NIB, on the internet, very easy to find and follow, the % of accidents will be about the same. If folks just buy them with zero education, there will be accidents. But the HCP class won't help with this much; unless it has changed. When I went it was 85% legal stuff and a very basic shooting test & written test. I do not even remember them going over the safety rules, though they may have, it was years ago. Safety was NOT the goal of the class, if it was presented it was a side-note.

[JayC]

I doubt it is tracked that closely; so you can’t show statistics.

I’m all for allowing people to carry without training. But you can’t seriously be implying that if everyone is allowed to strap on a gun (training or not) there won’t be an increase in both intentional and accidental shootings?

There is nothing wrong with using logic and common sense; for most people it’s probably more accurate than an internet link.

You're probably right on the increased ND's... I doubt you'd see a sharp increase in innocent persons being killed by law abiding citizens though.

[G27]

But you can’t seriously be implying that if everyone is allowed to strap on a gun (training or not) there won’t be an increase in both intentional and accidental shootings?

Show me the increase in shootings in VT, AZ and AK since constitutional carry was introduced. Surely the police track shootings there, right?

[Jonnin]

Show me the increase in shootings in VT, AZ and AK since constitutional carry was introduced. Surely the police track shootings there, right?

The AZ law is too new to find any stats on it yet. The stats I found show that 2004 was the worst year so far for accidental gun deaths. Yes, its tracked, but it takes time, the law goes into effect, people slowly buy guns and excercise the new rights, then accidents start to happen (or not). The 2010, 2011, and 2012 numbers for accidental discharges should be good info, once we get them.

I could not find a quick reference to the AK accidental discharges.

It does not really matter. So long as cars are legal and car accidents are killing more people, the discussion of accidental gun deaths is really just a tool used by the gun control freaks. Accidental gun deaths are something like 2% of all gun deaths, which are not a large number of the total deaths in the country. Its a small % of a small % that folks are worried about here, again its biggest impact is that these stats are a tool for the enemy.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Jonnin

[Guest FroggyOne2]

Show me the increase in shootings in VT, AZ and AK since constitutional carry was introduced. Surely the police track shootings there, right?

The police don't track shootings.. Police Depts report their stats to the FBI.. whom in turn report incident percentages.. but only about 50% of the dept's in this nation even bother to report anything to the FBI..

[Guest Archminister01]

Why do I find this funny? Could be 'cause you've still gotta drive home after those few beers? With the gun, I presume?

I guess that depends on if your assuming that by having a few beers means getting legally drunk. I dont know what your mindset about drinking and I wont assume to know what it is, but me having a few beers means just that...and that is usually over a long enough period of time that my blood alcohol content would not be over the legal limit when I drove. Based on my size and body type, I can consume one beer per hour and not be over the legal limit. I only know this because I was certified in applying "Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus" testing for DUI task force stopping points. I could also testifiy in court as an expert witness to said testing after passing the required training. Of course everything is funny when the scenerio is being played out in your head and you assume that he persons involved are not acting responsibly. Of course it is human nature to put the people you are assuming about into your standard operating mode when making an assumption.

And the last part confused me but I guess I should ask...do you leave your gun at a bar or destination that you visited or do you take it home? Why would you ask if I was taking my gun with me? That is funny.

Think first speak second.

[Guest Archminister01]

Not sure if this was mentioned or not, but one thing to remember is that Constitutional Carry does not automatically put a gun in everyone's hand. I would say most people will choose not to carry even if it's legal. I know many people with HCP's that don't even carry because it's just not comfortable or convenient.

Show me the increase in shootings in VT, AZ and AK since constitutional carry was introduced. Surely the police track shootings there, right?

There hasnt been an increase. kirkasaurus hit it on the nail head. Just because people can carry does not mean they will. All constitutional carry will do is eliminate a bunch or hassle and payout of hard earned income in order to be able to carry a firearm.

With a little research I am willing to bet that in areas where consitutional carry exists, you would see an actual lowering of random crime activity. That would be due to the criminals having to wonder who is armed and who isnt. How many criminals are stupid enough to commit a crime at a gun show? More then likely they wont,,they usually are stupid but not that stupid.

[Jonnin]

Gun shows do not allow loaded guns, actually. A crook could very well mug someone there safely, assuming all the folks that attend the show are following the rules. This has not historically been an issue, but if I were wanting to steal a gun, this would be a good place to do it, wait for someone leaving with a little plastic case to get to the parking lot then bam...

[Guest Archminister01]

Not sure if this was mentioned or not, but one thing to remember is that Constitutional Carry does not automatically put a gun in everyone's hand. I would say most people will choose not to carry even if it's legal. I know many people with HCP's that don't even carry because it's just not comfortable or convenient.

Gun shows do not allow loaded guns, actually. A crook could very well mug someone there safely, assuming all the folks that attend the show are following the rules. This has not historically been an issue, but if I were wanting to steal a gun, this would be a good place to do it, wait for someone leaving with a little plastic case to get to the parking lot then bam...

Inside the show boundaries you are correct. Parking lot is a different story. The crossroads show in AZ is huge and most everyone there has a loaded weapon in there vehicle. Im not sure about here. Only went to one show so far and that was in GA. It was in total about half of one single building would house at a crossroads show. The crossroads show is in five separate building usually at the fairgrounds.

[RobertNashville]

Gun shows do not allow loaded guns, actually. A crook could very well mug someone there safely, assuming all the folks that attend the show are following the rules. This has not historically been an issue, but if I were wanting to steal a gun, this would be a good place to do it, wait for someone leaving with a little plastic case to get to the parking lot then bam...

I think that varies from gun show to gun show and while patrons may be "unloaded" I'm not sure that rule applies to vendors...that also assumes that everyone who goes to a gun show follows the rules about being unloaded. And of course as already stated, such rules don't apply to the parking lot in any case...I'd hope that if someone mugged me when getting read to leave that there would be any number of others who are armed and would step in to help.

No...were I a criminal and looking for an easy place to steel a gun I don't think a gun show would be an optimal choice.

[Jonnin]

Many of the ones here are small, and folks leave one by one after the initial opening crowd thins. It would be a possibility at some of these smaller shows, if done carefully. There is always a cop on duty, checking for loaded weapons at the door, so it would have to be done quickly & low profile, but its a definate *could happen*. A dumb move? well anytime someone is stealing its a dumb move, risk of jail usually for less than a week's paycheck worth of takings, but there are those who would try it.

[Guest President Fernatt]

I didn't know Gun Shows didn't allow loaded guns...I've never been to one. That's pretty interesting! A gun show banning loaded guns would be like cracker barrel banning biscuits. One of you more experienced folks should explain it to me

[DaveTN]

I didn't know Gun Shows didn't allow loaded guns...I've never been to one. That's pretty interesting! A gun show banning loaded guns would be like cracker barrel banning biscuits. One of you more experienced folks should explain it to me

They do it because of ND’s.

Most gun shops I have seen don’t allow loaded guns that you plan on handling or are bringing in for Sale/Trade/Work.

Cracker Barrel doesn’t let you bring in your own biscuits.

[Guest Jamie]

Think first speak second.

Good advice. Now I'll offer you some: Think it all the way through, THEN speak.

Your statements imply that there's nothing wrong with drinking, then driving or carrying a gun, so long as you don't do either WHILE drinking.

And this flies most soundly in the face of "Guns, Driving, and Alcohol don't mix".

And though you may be a real wonderboy at gauging you own level of impairment, most people are not. Also, I have to question how well the "expert testimony" of anyone would stand up if it were pointed out that they too had been imbibing at the time they administered the test.

Not very well, in any court I've been in.

Remember, you may be certified to administer the test on someone else while YOU are sober/not drinking, but your ability to test yourself while drinking is seriously questionable.

And just for the record, I either do my drinking at home, or have somebody else drive. And that's even in light of the fact that I'm one of those people that functions quite well with a blood alcohol level that's WAAAY over the legal limit. ( I do know people who can pass any field sobriety test that either you or I can give them, with flying colors, with a BAC of .10 or better. )

Oh, and like OhShoot, I've been known to have a beer or two while shooting on my own "private" range. Won't catch me doing any such thing in "public" though.

One last piece of advice: Do try to keep in mind that you're not the only cop or ex-cop here.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Jamie

[shortround]

Genius! Why didn't I think of this? Make basic firearms training mandatory in high school. Then there would be no need for a permit, because everyone would have the training. It would be a heckuva lot more useful than a lot of the stuff they teach in HS, too. BTW, my school had the hunter safety course in 6th grade. Everyone took the course. I guess if your parents had some kind of objection, they could have held you out.

Has anyone here taken the TWRA hunter safety course it used to be gave at high school. I took mine in 1983 and both of my sons have taken theirs it is a much better course than the handgun safety course the only difference is the legal stuff. That is where it needs to be it could be a 6 week course like it was when I was in school. also it needs to be instructed early on to every child. How many children have we lost because they found a gun maybe at a friends house didn't understand the danger and someone dies? Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it is a verse from the Bible but it also applies here. I have never supported the idea that I should as a law abiding citizen should have to pay any money to do what the United States Constitution already guarantees. I did not learn one thing from the handgun course that I did not already know. I have made up my mind I will always carry no matter what laws are changed in the state and keep a copy of the US Constitution on me. Politicians always talk about reasonable restrictions the founding fathers understood that is why they didn't have any. The second amendment was and is about being able to defend against a tyrannical government not necessarily personal protection. Hope this doesn't ramble too much just some quick thoughts on the subject.

[TNRobocop]

I would prefer that it be the way it is in Alabama.

Fill out a slip of paper, pay $20 (it was $7.50, but cost went up), come back two weeks later after they ran a criminal background check and pick up your permit.

Done.

[Guest Archminister01]

Good advice. Now I'll offer you some: Think it all the way through, THEN speak.

Your statements imply that there's nothing wrong with drinking, then driving or carrying a gun, so long as you don't do either WHILE drinking.

And this flies most soundly in the face of "Guns, Driving, and Alcohol don't mix".

And though you may be a real wonderboy at gauging you own level of impairment, most people are not. Also, I have to question how well the "expert testimony" of anyone would stand up if it were pointed out that they too had been imbibing at the time they administered the test.

Not very well, in any court I've been in.

Remember, you may be certified to administer the test on someone else while YOU are sober/not drinking, but your ability to test yourself while drinking is seriously questionable.

And just for the record, I either do my drinking at home, or have somebody else drive. And that's even in light of the fact that I'm one of those people that functions quite well with a blood alcohol level that's WAAAY over the legal limit. ( I do know people who can pass any field sobriety test that either you or I can give them, with flying colors, with a BAC of .10 or better. )

Oh, and like OhShoot, I've been known to have a beer or two while shooting on my own "private" range. Won't catch me doing any such thing in "public" though.

One last piece of advice: Do try to keep in mind that you're not the only cop or ex-cop here.

My statement was simply that I would never drink while impaired..and if I am correct..there is a limit of impairment for that reason. To have a baseline of acceptable use. I dont ever remember anyone getting a ticket for being under the legal limit unless there was some other infraction going on.

I dont remember writing anything about administering tests while impaired? What are you reading? Being former LE, I will assume that you are, without me specifically typing that I made it a practice of administering tests in a bar while drinking wouldnt you assume that I was speaking of duty related testing? I hope that whatever agency you worked for that this was not common practice and I agree totally that any test administered under such circumstances would be less that desirable in a court of law as evidence.

I was a wonderboy at judging impairment because I had to be so in order to be certfified..lol. And by the way..HGN trying was made for those who could perform the SFST's while impaired. The eyes dont lie. Read up on it..its a wonderful method of verification. Most smart attorneys knew to not to take an HGN case before a judge,

Anyway, seems I got into a dick measuring contest and I am opting out until the level of reading comprehension gets a little higher. I like conversations even debates that deal with what was actually said.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Archminister01

[tnhawk]

I think that varies from gun show to gun show and while patrons may be "unloaded" I'm not sure that rule applies to vendors...that also assumes that everyone who goes to a gun show follows the rules about being unloaded. And of course as already stated, such rules don't apply to the parking lot in any case...I'd hope that if someone mugged me when getting read to leave that there would be any number of others who are armed and would step in to help.

No...were I a criminal and looking for an easy place to steel a gun I don't think a gun show would be an optimal choice.

Recently in Memphis, the purchaser of a firearm was robbed when he walked out the door. There were several people and employees with loaded weapons, yet the criminals were able to rob the victim unnoticed by anyone.

[Guest Jamie]

Anyway, seems I got into a dick measuring contest and I am opting out until the level of reading comprehension gets a little higher.

Oh, you win that contest, 'cause yours is obviously long enough for you to step on it...

If I have a couple of drinks later and think on it some, I may decide to elaborate on how... just for sh*ts and giggles. :D

.... 'Cause no way do I expect you to grasp what more than a few of us are seeing in your posts here.

[Guest Archminister01]

Criminal had balls and situational awareness was definitely at its peak. Does the article say whether or not the victim cried for help?