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

[Guest Jamie]

Cars go so much slower than bullets and all.

Then again, a car is like a bigger, slower .45, eh?

- OS

Actually, a car can hit more people at one time than a .45 bullet can... but that wasn't the point.

I find it funny that people go on about not drinking and driving... or carrying, but then turn around and drive themselves, their cars, and their guns home, with a belly full of the alcohol carrier of their choice. Like it's somehow that bad things only happen while they're consuming but not afterwards, when they are usually very much "under the influence".

They'll even say "Oh, I'm fine. I know when I've had too much", when the fact is, if they haven't blown into the little machine, or had blood drawn, they have no idea whether they're actually "fine" or not.

It's just a strange kind of "responsible", in my opinion. Either that, or the worst form of hypocrisy....

[Oh Shoot]

Actually, a car can hit more people at one time than a .45 bullet can... but that wasn't the point.

...

Oh, I got your point perfectly...

Mention having a couple of beers and shooting at your (even personal) range (as I have), and everybody goes nuts about how there is 0 tolerance for guns and booze.

But it's okay to have a couple or three and drive.

- OS

[Spook]

+1

[strickj]

Not going to argue with someone who has an answer for everything and is always right. I thought you had to have it in plain view or in a box out of view. Not just under the seat or down in the door pouch. But I could be wrong. Kinda reminds me of democrats. Heh. You win! everything you say is true and my OPINION means squa or is just flat out wrong. Ever applied for Wifeswap?

Georgia Carry : An information clearinghouse for Georgia Firearms License issues and news » Frequently Asked Questions

Any person who is not prohibited by law from possessing a handgun or long gun may have or carry on his or her person a weapon or long gun on his or her property or inside his or her home, motor vehicle, or place of business without a valid weapons carry license. In addition, such person may carry a long gun, which must be carried openly if loaded. Moreover, such person may carry in his or her own motor vehicle. Finally, if such person is eligible for a Georgia Weapons License, he or she may carry in any private passenger motor vehicle.

Ironically enough, I just learned you can carry a rifle too

Under the law, a Georgia Weapons License holder may carry a weapon or longgun openly or concealed in any location that is not off limits. However, should you choose to openly carry a handgun, please be aware of the image you present to the public while doing so. They vote.

Now, FWIW, I'm not against permits in general. I am against any fees or classes for obtaining a permit.

[Guest Jamie]

Oh, I got your point perfectly...

I figured you did, I just wanted to be sure some of these other slow-pokes got the drift.

Mention having a couple of beers and shooting at your (even personal) range (as I have), and everybody goes nuts about how there is 0 tolerance for guns and booze.

But it's okay to have a couple or three and drive.

- OS

Yep, and then there's the folk who never even think about the fact that some of the over-the-counter meds, much less the prescriptions stuff that they take, could get 'em hung up by their toenails if they have either an auto accident, or get involved in a shooting. "Under the influence" doesn't just mean alcohol, after all.

[Krull]

Georgia Carry : An information clearinghouse for Georgia Firearms License issues and news » Frequently Asked Questions

Ironically enough, I just learned you can carry a rifle too

Now, FWIW, I'm not against permits in general. I am against any fees or classes for obtaining a permit.

I agree with some of what you say.....however I can read the Internet as well and for your analysis of what I say your wrong mr super moderator. Your comparison using GA is a poor one at best. So what if you can carry a damn bazooka in your CAR it has nothing to do with what the op is talking about. The fact that you stated earlier that I am like one of the people who are against park carry, well that just is wrong and ticks me off. Maybe you should moderate yourself on that one.

I think to answer the op as stated above you should have to have some kind of formal training to carry a firearm. As you stated and I agree the hcp class is bogus and however useless you or I think it is my mother learned a lot about handguns. And yes I think it helped her and thousands of people like her who being around firearms isn't second nature.

Now to get another point. The hunters safety course however dumb you may think it is is a good thing. It introduces young kids into the world of firearms and some safety. However useless we think it is, if it answers one firearm safety or hunting safety question that's one more educated question that may save someones life.

Dumb or not .... Any firearm education is good for those who may not be a fluent in gun safety. It can't hurt.

[Guest Jamie]

Although I think firearms training is a good thing, legislating it, or legislating the kind/type or location where that training is received is most certainly NOT.

For instance, Krull.... why didn't YOU teach your mother? I taught mine. And also 3 wives, one of the first wife's cousins, and a few more people besides.

It didn't cost any of those people a dime, didn't require any law to get it done, and - and I'm not trying to brag here - it was probably a better learning experience, and far more informative, than any class the state is ever apt to require.

So what's really the problem with letting gun owners/carriers find their own education - and as much or as little of it as they care to find? In all likelihood, a person isn't really going to learn anything if they don't want to anyway, and will only go through the motions to satisfy State requirements. So I fail to see where the loss is.

An idiot is going to be an idiot no matter what you try to teach them, after all. And simply passing a test doesn't prove they aren't one.

[Krull]

Deleted. No sense anymore my OPINION is my OPINION and I don't think my way is the only way. Have a nice day

Edited December 28, 2010 by Krull
Deleting

[strickj]

I agree with some of what you say.....however I can read the Internet as well and for your analysis of what I say your wrong mr super moderator. Your comparison using GA is a poor one at best. So what if you can carry a damn bazooka in your CAR it has nothing to do with what the op is talking about.

.

Wow. Easy there, big fella!

First, my Mod status here has nothing to do with this debate.

My "poor comparison" to GA carry laws is in reference to the required training by the state before obtaining a permit. TN is very expensive,has a required 8hr course, and has a very long wait.

Ga has non of that. There hasn't been anything horrible happen in GA because of it either.

The fact that you stated earlier that I am like one of the people who are against park carry, well that just is wrong and ticks me off. Maybe you should moderate yourself on that one.

Umm... not sure what to say here.

I made a comparison on two irrational fears. I thought it is was relevant. If you took offense to that then grow a thicker skin or report my post.

I think to answer the op as stated above you should have to have some kind of formal training to carry a firearm. As you stated and I agree the hcp class is bogus and however useless you or I think it is my mother learned a lot about handguns. And yes I think it helped her and thousands of people like her who being around firearms isn't second nature.

She could have taken a 'safety course' on her own.

There's no need to make 300,000 people pay 200+ dollars just because a small percentage of people do not know how to oil a handgun.

Now to get another point. The hunters safety course however dumb you may think it is is a good thing. It introduces young kids into the world of firearms and some safety. However useless we think it is, if it answers one firearm safety or hunting safety question that's one more educated question that may save someones life.

You have me confused with someone else.

and I still don't want to be within 300 yards of her while she is firing it.

So... she went through the course and you still do not trust her with a gun? Edited December 28, 2010 by strickj

[Guest Jamie]

Deleted. No sense anymore my OPINION is my OPINION and I don't think my way is the only way. Have a nice day

My only problem with your opinion is that you would push it off on everyone else... If it were in regard to you alone, that would be fine, but it's not.

( It's the same reason I have a problem with people like Sarah Brady's opinion, for what it's worth. )

I've always said I don't give a damn who is armed, so long as I am too.

The reason for that, if it's not obvious, is so I'll have the means to correct their "shortcomings" if they happen to put me in danger. Past that, I couldn't care less what they have or how well they know how to use it. In some cases, I'd rather they didn't know much about using it at all.

Anyway, you have a nice day too.

[Guest Jamie]

So... she went through the course and you still do not trust her with a gun?

Must'a been a damned good training course, huh?

[Krull]

Must'a been a damned good training course, huh?

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.

Edited December 28, 2010 by Krull

[Krull]

My only problem with your opinion is that you would push it off on everyone else... If it were in regard to you alone, that would be fine, but it's not.

( It's the same reason I have a problem with people like Sarah Brady's opinion, for what it's worth. )

I've always said I don't give a damn who is armed, so long as I am too.

The reason for that, if it's not obvious, is so I'll have the means to correct their "shortcomings" if they happen to put me in danger. Past that, I couldn't care less what they have or how well they know how to use it. In some cases, I'd rather they didn't know much about using it at all.

Anyway, you have a nice day too.

Wait almost done.....im not pushing my opinion off on anyone dude. I think some of you are doing enough of that to go around by smashing others opinions. Like instated and you quoted...I don't believe my way is the only way.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

I am of the "Which part of Shall not be infringed" do folks not understand group.

Of course we as responsible gun owners all feel that training is a good thing but I think if a state is going to mandate that training that the state should be paying for it. Doing so would save the state money in the long run from not having so many criminal types to take to trial and then to prison.

We also give our criminals the right to not suffer cruel and unusual punishment, correct?..... well our soldiers sleep in tents all the time, do they not?

I say we put those criminals in tents and use the saved money and and empty facilities to give any state mandated basic training to folks and also provide any advanced training courses that some folks may want. All on the saved money from less perks in prison and the lower amount of people in need of a prison after their crimes.

It all works for me, Everyone who is competent gets to carry, everyone gets some training that is affordable (free) If someone flunks the free training the first time they simply schedule another session until they pass and the state saves tons of money over the long haul. Some of which would be also used to raise the salaries of the corrections officers whose jobs would get much harder.

Yet even if they did all that, some will say even the free training is an infringement and they would be correct IMO.

But we have reached a point in this country where we are never going to make everyone happy so why dont we start by letting those who commit the crimes to become the most unhappy? Let them foot the bill for any training the state may want the good people to have while creating a greater deterrent to crime along with it.

I dont know though......it probably makes too much sense.

[Guest Jamie]

It's very tough, but when you throw me in with the anti debate I get pissed.

I'm not throwing you in with anybody, only pointing out the similarity of the thinking: "Legislate this stuff for people's own good".

Doesn't make much difference to me if it's firearms safety, seat belts, mandatory car insurance, etc. I see major flaws and trouble with other people deciding what is in EVERYONE'S best interest. I'd much rather the government stay out of it and let those Darwin candidates weed themselves out of the gene pool, while allowing the rest of us to protect ourselves from them with little interference.

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.

I have read all your posts and am not belittling anything... only poking fun at some of the flaws in logic I find there. And if you've read enough of my posts you'll know you aren't special... I'm an equal-opportunity assh0le who pokes at all flawed logic. Even my own, when I catch it.

I'd much rather make you think than piss you off. Pissing you off might be amusing for the short term, but getting folks thinking is much better in the long run.

[Krull]

^^^^good answer

[Guest Jamie]

I dont know though......it probably makes too much sense.

Making sense doesn't work in these days of NONsense. People seem to be way too hung up on trying to prevent someone else from being able to do a thing to begin with - even though there's no possible, practical way to do that - rather than learning or becoming able to defend against that thing they fear, if it actually ever does happen to or near them.

Being pro-active is fine, but it only really works regarding your own actions... you just can't do much with someone else's, especially if you don't know who that someone is apt to be.

[JayC]

Krull, if you get banned it's going to because of the way your disagreeing not because you're disagreeing... Trust me if somebody could get banned for disagreeing around here I would have been gone a long time ago, I can't count how many times I've told David I thought he was completely wrong on a subject I've always done it with respect and without naming calling though...

As far as certain people shouldn't carry a gun... how are we stopping those people today? Clearly the HCP class is not a factor that prevents virtually everybody with $100 and a clean record from completing... And there isn't blood running in the street so clearly the training is both a waste of time and money for the vast majority of people who take the course.

I contend that a simple paper hand out when you buy your firearm would have the same impact as the training class at a cost of $.10 instead of $50-100 for the class.

I'd encourage anybody who is going to carry a handgun on a regular basis you go to a training class, and practice on a regular basis, but that is my opinion on the matter, I'm smart enough to realize I have no business forcing my opinion on others.

There are a number of states which require no test nor range time to receive a permit... show me the numbers where they are having a higher rate of ND's and killing of innocents from permit holders. I'm willing to bet you a beer you can't find such evidence, and surly if such evidence was out there the Brady campaign would be using it for full effect.

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.

[Guest Jamie]

By the way, I'm still trying to figure this one out:

And report you? To who you?? Lol I don't report people for anything.

Who said anything about reporting anybody for anything? Did I type something I have absolutely no memory of typing??? If so... where?

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

By the way, I'm still trying to figure this one out:

Who said anything about reporting anybody for anything? Did I type something I have absolutely no memory of typing??? If so... where?

Memory? It seems I remember something like that but really can not recall.

Krull quoted you and was typing to you in the first paragraph and then the rest of the post was directed at Stickj as best I can tell. You really need to keep up.

[G27]

don't think every Tom dick and Harry should carry a firearm until some training has been done, or some knowledge has been shown. Just my opinion.

Please show statistics of an increase in irresponsible firearms usage from states which allow constitutional carry.

We need more than 'feelings' and 'logic' to impinge upon rights, imo.

Thanks in advance.

[DaveTN]

Please show statistics of an increase in irresponsible firearms usage from states which allow constitutional carry.

We need more than 'feelings' and 'logic' to impinge upon rights, imo.

Thanks in advance.

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.

[Guest Ae-35]

If you can legally buy , then you should be able to carry ! What part of " Shall not be infringed " don't people understand?

[Guest Jamie]

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?

I believe that somewhere back up the thread it's already been pointed out that just because everyone could carry, it wouldn't necessarily mean they would.

I still remember the hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth when Tn became "shall-issue", over the blood-bath, and the general increase in the number of shootings that was expected.

That was way back in 1994 or '95, and to date, none of those things has occurred. Hasn't been an abundance of murders either, as was expected when the home/self defense laws were changed.

Certainly, as the base number of gun carriers increase, the percentage of accidents and such will as well, but generally that won't be out of proportion with the previous base number.

[Guest Jamie]

You really need to keep up.

I like being a little behind you people... It's much safer back here.