Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
States have liberalized gun laws, meaning making them more lax. NJ is in a bubble as are a few other states but most are not hostile to ccw, some are shall issue, some are may issue.You are seeing things that aren't there. Please show me, or link me to, anything I've ever said that implies the kind of laws you've outlined above.And yet when we point out New Jersey and New York and other states that use the very laws you want to deny the right to carry a gun....you want them imposed at a federal level, thinking that federal gun grabbers will be more reasonable than state gun grabbers?
The only gun law I would like imposed at the federal level is a law that will enable any citizen with a clean background who has received training and passed a competence test to be issued a CCW permit.
Without even considering the issue, and the influence of the NRA, GOA, and other pro-gun citizen organizations, you have assumed that government will make the competence test so difficult that only the rich and powerful will qualify. Again I remind you, if government had that kind of ability it would by now have stripped you and me of our guns.
Right now, with few exceptions, the individual states have imposed such repressive requirements that the average law-abiding citizen cannot obtain a carry permit -- in spite of the fact that needing to carry a gun has become more and more necessary. My proposed federal law will eliminate all this arbitrary state-level bullshit and result in many millions of competently armed, decent, law-abiding citizens.
And you may rest assured this Nation is soon going to need them to deal with the kind of menace which is coming across our borders in massive numbers.
Not quite.This is a shall issue/open carry state. We are not experiencing the problems you fear. You are in a no carry state and base your opinions on that.
Like I said before, you are in a noncarry state, for all practical purposes, telling me in a shall issue/open carry state about your concerns that are not realized here. I can't understand it for you.Not quite.This is a shall issue/open carry state. We are not experiencing the problems you fear. You are in a no carry state and base your opinions on that.
My concern is not only the ability to carry, but to carry concealed and to be trained in efficient and proper use and handling of the weapon one carries.
If your concern were a likely contingency you may rest assured that by now none of us would have our guns.[...]
But once control goes to central government, power has been given (or taken) and then the clock starts ticking on when, not if, they start seriously restricting gun rights. We don't have to guess, we have examples from all over the world.
What about my proposal would limit the Keep and Bear element of the Second Amendment? You are seeing what you want to see. My proposal addresses one issue. Concealed Carry.Yes...you want to give the government complete control over a Right by allowing them to set the standards on how you access that right...and New Jersey, and New York...which you brought up, would become the standard....and then only the favored people would be allowed to pass those tests.....
Federal control is too dangerous. The feds don't give up power. Change your state. I don't know what you mean by America's ignorance. We probably have more knowledgeable people here than anywhere.If your concern were a likely contingency you may rest assured that by now none of us would have our guns.[...]
But once control goes to central government, power has been given (or taken) and then the clock starts ticking on when, not if, they start seriously restricting gun rights. We don't have to guess, we have examples from all over the world.
The bottom line is this issue is and always will be in the hands of the Congress. The problem with existing gun laws is public ignorance. But in view of what we see happening in Europe the American public's ignorance of and pessimism about guns is changing. It it time for the public to tell the Congress it's time for change in the gun laws. We need more armed citizens on our streets.
Not only armed but competently armed.
What about my proposal would limit the Keep and Bear element of the Second Amendment? You are seeing what you want to see. My proposal addresses one issue. Concealed Carry.Yes...you want to give the government complete control over a Right by allowing them to set the standards on how you access that right...and New Jersey, and New York...which you brought up, would become the standard....and then only the favored people would be allowed to pass those tests.....
I want to see more solid citizens armed -- and every one of them competently[/i] armed.
Federal control is too dangerous. The feds don't give up power. Change your state. I don't know what you mean by America's ignorance. We probably have more knowledgeable people here than anywhere.[/QUOTE]Not only armed but competently armed.
Of those 15 million only a tiny percentage have been tried in terms of their ability to function competently. This is analogous to issuing swimming pool passes to anyone and everyone who asks for one, including those who have never been in the water. Just because they have the pool pass doesn't mean they can swim -- and a lot of them can't.[...]
And guy...it aint that hard or complicated..........357 million people....15 million carrying guns concealed....and you can't show that we have a problem.....
Should some level of training and certification be mandated before one can practice a religion as well?You are seeing things that aren't there. Please show me, or link me to, anything I've ever said that implies the kind of laws you've outlined above.And yet when we point out New Jersey and New York and other states that use the very laws you want to deny the right to carry a gun....you want them imposed at a federal level, thinking that federal gun grabbers will be more reasonable than state gun grabbers?
The only gun law I would like imposed at the federal level is a law that will enable any citizen with a clean background who has received training and passed a competence test to be issued a CCW permit.
Without even considering the issue, and the influence of the NRA, GOA, and other pro-gun citizen organizations, you have assumed that government will make the competence test so difficult that only the rich and powerful will qualify. Again I remind you, if government had that kind of ability it would by now have stripped you and me of our guns.
Right now, with few exceptions, the individual states have imposed such repressive requirements that the average law-abiding citizen cannot obtain a carry permit -- in spite of the fact that needing to carry a gun has become more and more necessary. My proposed federal law will eliminate all this arbitrary state-level bullshit and result in many millions of competently armed, decent, law-abiding citizens.
And you may rest assured this Nation is soon going to need them to deal with the kind of menace which is coming across our borders in massive numbers.
Of those 15 million only a tiny percentage have been tried in terms of their ability to function competently. This is analogous to issuing swimming pool passes to anyone and everyone who asks for one, including those who have never been in the water. Just because they have the pool pass doesn't mean they can swim -- and a lot of them can't.[...]
And guy...it aint that hard or complicated..........357 million people....15 million carrying guns concealed....and you can't show that we have a problem.....
The only gun law I would like imposed at the federal level is a law that will enable any citizen with a clean background who has received training and passed a competence test to be issued a CCW permit.
There is no constitutional right for dysfunctional families to own an arsenal.
There cannot be proper gun control if it is left to individual states when firearms can bleed from one place to the next. What is needed is federal gun control.
Yes; well regulated militias, not lunatics, are guaranteed the right to bear arms.There is no constitutional right for dysfunctional families to own an arsenal.
There isn't? Can you tell me where the exclusions to gun rights are written in the Constitution please?
Yes; well regulated militias, not lunatics, are guaranteed the right to bear arms.
Cannabis is less deadly than cigarettes or alcohol.There cannot be proper gun control if it is left to individual states when firearms can bleed from one place to the next. What is needed is federal gun control.
That's what we have with recreational narcotics. How's that working out for us?
And just what kind of gun control do you speak of?
Then the Supreme Court is wrong, and not for the first time.Yes; well regulated militias, not lunatics, are guaranteed the right to bear arms.
Nice try, but the Supreme Court disagrees with you as most people do.
Cannabis is less deadly than cigarettes or alcohol.
Members of the national guards have the right and the police but not any psycho citizen.
