|
|
Post by Hood on Feb 12, 2013 7:52:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Feb 12, 2013 13:57:46 GMT -5
We discussed a similar measure last session, I believe.
I find myself joining the Brady people on this issue, although for the exact opposite reasons.
I am a 47-year Life member of the NRA and what many would call an extremist in the defense of the Right To Keep and Bear Arms. I agree with the NRA on the vast majority of their positions....but I can think of some others that have been less than smart, and I think this one will prove to be one of those.
I am also old enough to have observed the benign introduction of the federal government into a number of issues as a helpful player with pure intentions....and the resulting growth of federal influence, and the eventual loss of state and individual rights in the areas involved.
Take a look at federal "help" in the areas of education, transportation, and environmental protection as examples. And there are others if you care to look for them.
What is extremely difficult to find is an example of federal involvement in an issue that REMAINS benign and unobtrusive over time.
This measure would provide only a federal guarantee (for whatever that may be worth) of the rights we already have established through the voluntary cooperation agreements of the states. It gains us NOTHING in our ability to actually carry in any other state, and risks our carry anywhere in the country at a future time when the agreement has grown into a branch of Homeland Security and the people of New York, Illinois, and California will be in position to influence the decisions handed down by the regulatory czar-in-chief.
The voluntary agreements to recognize one another's state reciprocal carry rights are the better answer and are still growing in number. We don't need to risk the "possible" (I'd say "certain") future abuse of such an agreement at the federal level.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 12, 2013 16:28:43 GMT -5
We discussed a similar measure last session, I believe. I find myself joining the Brady people on this issue, although for the exact opposite reasons. I am a 47-year Life member of the NRA and what many would call an extremist in the defense of the Right To Keep and Bear Arms. I agree with the NRA on the vast majority of their positions....but I can think of some others that have been less than smart, and I think this one will prove to be one of those. I am also old enough to have observed the benign introduction of the federal government into a number of issues as a helpful player with pure intentions....and the resulting growth of federal influence, and the eventual loss of state and individual rights in the areas involved. Take a look at federal "help" in the areas of education, transportation, and environmental protection as examples. And there are others if you care to look for them. What is extremely difficult to find is an example of federal involvement in an issue that REMAINS benign and unobtrusive over time. This measure would provide only a federal guarantee (for whatever that may be worth) of the rights we already have established through the voluntary cooperation agreements of the states. It gains us NOTHING in our ability to actually carry in any other state, and risks our carry anywhere in the country at a future time when the agreement has grown into a branch of Homeland Security and the people of New York, Illinois, and California will be in position to influence the decisions handed down by the regulatory czar-in-chief. The voluntary agreements to recognize one another's state reciprocal carry rights are the better answer and are still growing in number. We don't need to risk the "possible" (I'd say "certain") future abuse of such an agreement at the federal level. I've got mixed emotions on this one too, Russ.. Same reasons.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2013 17:48:57 GMT -5
I disagree. You can carry your handgun in any state except Illinois openly. This change opens Illinois and allows CC in those statesif you are premitted hy your state. Hard to find any negatives there from where Im sitting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 12, 2013 18:13:54 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2013 18:59:52 GMT -5
Woody when people talk carry, there are several kinds of carry. The highest degree is always "concealed" either in your vehicle or on your person. Most states allow open carry as allowed by Federal law known as the 2nd Admendment. CC cary permits are State issued until this bill goes forward. As it doesn't change the 2nd Admendment or it's meaning, there is no negative to passing this law that I can see?
|
|
|
|
Post by BOBinIN on Feb 13, 2013 8:35:43 GMT -5
Woody, am I reading it right that we CANNOT carry in Ohio? |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Feb 13, 2013 10:09:36 GMT -5
More than 10% of states currently outlaw any type of "open carry".
Indiana does not have any type of "conceal carry" permit. We have a "license to carry handgun" and can carry openly or concealed once we have the permit. Without the permit there is no way to legally carry on your person.
Curious as to which states allow open carry with no paperwork at all?
Mixed feelings on the feds getting involved at all .... IMO no paperwork should be required. We should be able to carry any way at any time at any place with no reason or paperwork needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Feb 13, 2013 11:43:09 GMT -5
I agree completely, swilk. As with most other gun laws, the ONLY people being restricted are the ones who OBEY THE LAW.
How stupid is it to think that such a restriction will help reduce the criminal use of weapons?
Meanwhile, the "reasonable" legislators are seeking some agreement on which people to restrict from legally obtaining firearms. If they are successful, a certain percentage of citizens will be deprived of their right to keep and bear arms for the defense of themselves and their families because of some long-ago bout with depression or arrest for a youthful mistake. Some of those people will subsequently be killed due to their lack of defensive capability, and others will become lawbreakers by obtaining the needed weapons the way 80% of criminals do...by illegal street purchases, theft, or straw purchases.
But the liberals will feel better and be able to boast that they "did something", and will have "proof" that we need to go still further down that road to insanity.
I think we need to be doing something more than preaching to each other and agreeing heartily with one another. Not sure what. We already support the politicians who promise respect for the 2A. We belong to organizations that support it. Many of us actively speak up whenever the chance provides us an opportunity with friends or family.
It's an uphill battle though, when the other side has pictures of dead kids, and we don't have pictures of live kids that would have been dead had their parent or teacher have been unarmed and helpless.
Kleck's 1993 study puts the defensive use of guns at about 2.5 million times a year. DOJ study had it at 1.5 million. If we assume some bias on each side and take the average, that's still 2 million times a year that someone uses a firearm (not necessarily shoots it, just presenting it is "use") to stop or prevent a crime by someone else.
Impossible to say how many of those crimes that didn't happen or didn't get completed to the intent of the criminal, would have resulted in an innocent death. But that shouldn't mean that they should be disregarded as irrelevant.
The libs would have us leave a good portion of the innocent public defenseless and then see how many end up dead as a result after the fact. I find that approach unacceptable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2013 13:57:12 GMT -5
More than 10% of states currently outlaw any type of "open carry". Curious as to which states allow open carry with no paperwork at all? A few of these have some restrictions, on where you can open carry. There ate others that allow open carry with a hunting licenses, such as Indiana does for NR who aren't required to have a carry permit. Kentucky just removed ALL restriction on where you can carry. Now it's any public building state or local as well. Alaska Montana Idaho Wyoming Nevada Arizona New Mexico South Dakota Vermont Kentucky Virginia Utah North Dakota Minnesota Iowa Tennessee Mississippi Georgia Maryland New Jersey Rhode Island Connecticut Massachusetts |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Feb 13, 2013 14:09:33 GMT -5
|
|
