Concealed Carrier holds driver at gunpoint after he hits 7 year old

[MikeK]

Should some level of training and certification be mandated before one can practice a religion as well?

That is a truly nonsensical comparison.

Tell us how in your thinking a firearm compares with a spiritual belief.

 

[2aguy]

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?

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.

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.

You gave two states....New York and New Jersey...you cannot get a concealed carry permit there if you aren't rich......and you want to give the national gun grabbers that kind of power....you want them to have the power to deny permits for the whole country....

And again......I post stories all the time of untrained, armed civillians stopping criminals.......they aren't SEALs and they aren't Delta and yet they manage........you want to impose government control over this Right.

 

[2aguy]

Should some level of training and certification be mandated before one can practice a religion as well?

That is a truly nonsensical comparison.

Tell us how in your thinking a firearm compares with a spiritual belief.

Both are Rights...and we know from the democrats that they used Poll Taxes...and Literacy tests to keep blacks from exercising their Right to vote....

 

[Eloy]

Cannabis is less deadly than cigarettes or alcohol.
Members of the national guards have the right and the police but not any psycho citizen.

And all opiate drugs are more deadly than alcohol or tobacco. What's your point?

Where in the Constitution does it say police and national guards?

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

 

[Vastator]

Should some level of training and certification be mandated before one can practice a religion as well?

That is a truly nonsensical comparison.

Tell us how in your thinking a firearm compares with a spiritual belief.

Both are constitutional rights.

 

[Vastator]

Cannabis is less deadly than cigarettes or alcohol.
Members of the national guards have the right and the police but not any psycho citizen.

And all opiate drugs are more deadly than alcohol or tobacco. What's your point?

Where in the Constitution does it say police and national guards?

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

Wrong.

 

[MikeK]

You gave two states....New York and New Jersey...you cannot get a concealed carry permit there if you aren't rich......and you want to give the national gun grabbers that kind of power....you want them to have the power to deny permits for the whole country....

Again you are seeing things that aren't there.

Again I ask you to show me, or provide a link, to something I've proposed that even vaguely empowers "national gun-grabbers." I have proposed nothing more than a federal law that prohibits states from imposing unnecessary restraints on citizens who wish to carry concealed firearms. The only requirements I've proposed are a clean background, minimal training and a competency test. Nothing more demanding or unreasonable than obtaining a driver license.

And again......I post stories all the time of untrained, armed civillians stopping criminals.......they aren't SEALs and they aren't Delta and yet they manage........you want to impose government control over this Right.

Yes. A pathetically tiny sampling of the 15 million CCWs issued. I think that sampling would amount to.000.000.1% How can you be so presumptuously confident that the remaining 15,000,000-1 would perform with equal competence?

PS: You don't post these examples "all the time." You post them now and then. And their insignificant number is too small to affirm anything.

 

[Eloy]

Cannabis is less deadly than cigarettes or alcohol.
Members of the national guards have the right and the police but not any psycho citizen.

And all opiate drugs are more deadly than alcohol or tobacco. What's your point?

Where in the Constitution does it say police and national guards?

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

Wrong.

I'm right.

 

[MikeK]

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

The National Guard is a standing army under the direct and exclusive control of government, as its deployment in Iraq plainly demonstrated. The militia is the body of armed citizens who stand ready to defend their homeland.

Keep in mind it is called The National Guard -- not the State Guard.

 

[MikeK]

Both are constitutional rights.

So what?

What has that to do with the focus of this discussion?

 

[Eloy]

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

The National Guard is a standing army under the direct and exclusive control of government, as its deployment in Iraq plainly demonstrated. The militia is the body of armed citizens who stand ready to defend their homeland.

Keep in mind it is called The National Guard -- not the State Guard.

Since the civil War, the State Guard is not nationalized except in a national emergency. For example, the Alabama Guard was nationalized by President Kennedy when Governor Wallace was defending segregation in 1963. Perhaps "National" Guard is a misnomer.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

Wrong, it's never been an issue because all citizens are constitutionally protected to own firearms including police.

The National Guard is just that, NATIONAL.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

PS: You don't post these examples "all the time." You post them now and then. And their insignificant number is too small to affirm anything.

Well they do happen all the time, except unlike a cop shooting a black suspect, the MSM never gets involved. They are mostly local stories and stay that way.

 

[Eloy]

A well regulated militia is the state national guard. Police do not have a constitutional right to be armed but legislation fixed that.

Wrong, it's never been an issue because all citizens are constitutionally protected to own firearms including police.

The National Guard is just that, NATIONAL.

I can tell you are no constitutional scholar. Never mind.

 

[MikeK]

PS: You don't post these examples "all the time." You post them now and then. And their insignificant number is too small to affirm anything.

Well they do happen all the time, except unlike a cop shooting a black suspect, the MSM never gets involved. They are mostly local stories and stay that way.

How do we know how many positive incidents take place -- and how many negative ones? I personally know of one nitwit (untrained) CCW holder, a New York City Councilman, who fired two shots at an individual he mistakenly believed was breaking into a house. Luckily he missed because the "burglar" was the homeowner who had locked himself out. No media coverage.

Even though cops received top-shelf firearms training they sometimes foul up, such as the trio who fired the infamous 41 shots at an innocent individual. But how many such incidents would there be without the training requirements?

 

[MikeK]

Since the civil War, the State Guard is not nationalized except in a national emergency. For example, the Alabama Guard was nationalized by President Kennedy when Governor Wallace was defending segregation in 1963. Perhaps "National" Guard is a misnomer.

Because the individual states' National Guard forces are subject to compulsory deployment by order of the President it is a standing army. There is no misnomer.

The National Guard is by no means a militia. The U.S. Militia is every able-bodied male between age 17 and 45 who is not a member of the National Guard.

 

[MikeK]

PS: You don't post these examples "all the time." You post them now and then. And their insignificant number is too small to affirm anything.

Well they do happen all the time, except unlike a cop shooting a black suspect, the MSM never gets involved. They are mostly local stories and stay that way.

Most cops have the number of at least one news reporter in their wallets and memo books. The way the media finds out about the vast majority of gun incidents is by a phone call from a cop. If the cops don't feel an incident is newsworthy, or if they do not wish it to be, and if no other means of notification takes place, we never read or hear about it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How do we know how many positive incidents take place -- and how many negative ones? I personally know of one nitwit (untrained) CCW holder, a New York City Councilman, who fired two shots at an individual he mistakenly believed was breaking into a house. Luckily he missed because the "burglar" was the homeowner who had locked himself out. No media coverage.

Even though cops received top-shelf firearms training they sometimes foul up, such as the trio who fired the infamous 41 shots at an innocent individual. But how many such incidents would there be without the training requirements?

When you have millions of people obtaining licenses, some will abuse their privilege. It does happen and all the training in the world won't change that.

Here in Ohio, we had one murder a few years ago by a CCW holder who killed the parking lot attendant over a parking space he wanted. Another killed a police officer in Twinsburg, Ohio, a very quiet and safe suburb of Cleveland. And yes, we do have required training, electronic fingerprinting, and various other hurdles one needs to jump over before you get a license to carry a firearm.

If you Google CCW holders stopping crime or protecting themselves or others, you will be treated to all kinds of hidden local stories. If you would like, I have several in my gun folder I'm perfectly happy to share with you, but I don't know if that's what you're looking for.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Most cops have the number of at least one news reporter in their wallets and memo books. The way the media finds out about the vast majority of gun incidents is by a phone call from a cop. If the cops don't feel an incident is newsworthy, or if they do not wish it to be, and if no other mean of notification takes place, we never read or hear about it.

I know several police officers and this is the first time I've ever heard of such a thing. I think an officer that called the media without permission of their supervisor would be suspended or even fired.

 

[MikeK]

When you have millions of people obtaining licenses, some will abuse their privilege. It does happen and all the training in the world won't change that.

Very true. That is to be expected. The same circumstance exists in the example of permitting the casual, unnecessary use of motor vehicles. The question is whether the positive effect is worth the negative consequence. In my opinion, having seen what happened in Cologne, Germany on New Years Eve, and what is happening in Sweden, there is no question the major good is well worth the minor bad.

I want these sonsabitches coming across our borders to be very aware that they won't get away with that kind of bullshit in America. That to me is worth the risk of a few gun misuse incidents a year. I'll take my chances.

Here in Ohio, we had one murder a few years ago by a CCW holder who killed the parking lot attendant over a parking space he wanted. Another killed a police officer in Twinsburg, Ohio, a very quiet and safe suburb of Cleveland. And yes, we do have required training, electronic fingerprinting, and various other hurdles one needs to jump over before you get a license to carry a firearm.

Background checks and training are necessary and perfectly acceptable requirements. But what are the "other hurdles" you've mentioned?

If you Google CCW holders stopping crime or protecting themselves or others, you will be treated to all kinds of hidden local stories. If you would like, I have several in my gun folder I'm perfectly happy to share with you, but I don't know if that's what you're looking for.

Not necessary, but I do appreciate the offer.