OC makes me nervous

imported post

Ruark wrote:

But when it's an object that endangers other people, then some regulation needs to be present, to protect the public. "Public education campaign"? Oh, please. Yeah, public education has eliminated drug abuse, AIDS, crime, etc. hasn't it?

Click to expand...

It hasn't eliminated those things, but it is working. Crime, drug abuse, AIDS, abortion, have been on the decline since the mid-90s. Crime has been going down steadily since video game consoles started becoming popular with the mainstream and as they gain in popularity we're seeing crime rates drop with them. That's with "violent immoral evil killing simulators" like Grand Theft Auto running around, which some believe could be credited to educating children and adults alike on the consequences of a life of crime. Some, especially in the gun community, believe it's because of the recent surge of support the 2A has been getting for the past decade.

HIV/AIDS contraction has been dropping steadily since the early 90s in the gay community which correlates with the safe sex campaigns in those communities. Where they're seeingthe largestrise in HIV/AIDS contraction in white suburbia which was impacted the most by the Bush era abstinence program which taught teens nothing and created more misconceptions among them. In other words, you had cases where kids thought they weren't having sex because they were having anal sex instead of vaginal sex and thought they were safe from STDs because of it.

Drug abuse and smoking are also down and continue to drop since the health educationcampaigns against them started in force during the 90s with less people smoking pot now than they did a decade ago.

Your statement is hilariously false and spoken as someone who has no interest in the personal responsibility of defending himself, but rather simply take their guns out once or twice a year to hunt. Oh yeah, and just because you have a CC doesn't mean you're competent with a firearm, it just means you were competent enough for that five hour class you needed to get it.

imported post

Ruark wrote:

In my opinion, we should keep the current CCW permit system, and just expand it to include open as well as concealed carry. Just my opinion.

Ruark

Click to expand...

+1

imported post

MichaelWDean wrote:

I don't think no one else is. But I can think of a lot of people I've met in my life who, while they may not be felons and therefore banned from having a gun, would be jackasses with a gun.

Click to expand...

Being a jackass is not limited to any particular segment of our society. The point here is that one group is being singled out as being as more egregious than the rest, citing those less worthy as representative of the whole group.

The fallacy is that not measuring up to a higher standard will put all of society at a greater risk - it just ain't so.

Fault, censor, shun, ban or prosecute those that do not accept personal responsibility for their actions and its effect on the whole. Do NOT saddle me and mine with the burden of shouldering this load.

Until we trust the people, we have no starting point for a free society.

Yata hey

imported post

I'm not saying there should be any system in place to keep non-violent jackasses from having guns, just noting that they will have them and open carry them.

MWD

imported post

Ruark wrote:

-snip-

In my opinion, we should keep the current CCW permit system, and just expand it to include open as well as concealed carry. Just my opinion.

Ruark

Click to expand...

So are you advocating that folks must have a carry "permit" (permission) to carry openly or concealed? In other words a "permit" (permission) must be given in order to carry in any manner?

Or a concealed "permit" (permission) would also include the permission to carry openly? But without the permit a person could not carry either concealed or openly?

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

Ruark wrote:

-snip-

In my opinion, we should keep the current CCW permit system, and just expand it to include open as well as concealed carry. Just my opinion.

Ruark

Click to expand...

So are you advocating that folks must have a carry "permit" (permission) to carry openly or concealed? In other words a "permit" (permission) must be given in order to carry in any manner?

Or a concealed "permit" (permission) would also include the permission to carry openly? But without the permit a person could not carry either concealed or openly?

Click to expand...

What Ruark said makes me nervous. It is dangerous.

He ought to be trained in the use of rhetoric. Then, after his background is thoroughly checked, his county sheriff "may issue" him a permit to express his opinions in public.

Oh, I'm sorry. That is wrong. He has a right to speak his mind. It is an important right. Without it, we could lose all of our other liberties.

imported post

i think it would be a good idea for people to have to take a corse to carry just about every thing you do you have to have a license like drive a car,semi,forklift,plane even the military trains people to use every thing they have doing a class would be good for every body but i dont agree with the line because people will use there guns and miss if they dont do a corse i have been shot at and in that moment its vary hard to think anybody could miss

imported post

got to have guns wrote:

i think it would be a good idea for people to have to take a corse to carry just about every thing you do you have to have a license like drive a car,semi,forklift,plane even the military trains people to use every thing they have doing a class would be good for every body but i dont agree with the line because people will use there guns and miss if they dont do a corse i have been shot at and in that moment its vary hard to think anybody could miss

Click to expand...

There is no right to an automobile or to drive. There is no right to operate planes, trains, semis, or forklifts. There is a right to keep and bear arms.

Licensing is the way government gives permission for an action. We don't need permission to carry arms. The Constitution guarantees that we have a right to do so.

I think everyone should be trained in the proper handling and use of handguns. Municipalities and States should offer such training to everyone. (Montgomery does.) One person here suggested that K-12 schools provide such training. That's a good idea (of course with parental permission).

imported post

got to have guns wrote:

i think it would be a good idea for people to have to take a corse to carry just about every thing you do you have to have a license like drive a car,semi,forklift,plane even the military trains people to use every thing they have doing a class would be good for every body but i dont agree with the line because people will use there guns and miss if they dont do a corse i have been shot at and in that moment its vary hard to think anybody could miss

Click to expand...

No, no, no... it says "....shall not be infringed." no training, no class, no license, nada...the government is to be absent from a citizens right to 'keep' (own) and 'bear' (carry, open or concealed).

Now for one minute let's tear apart this stupid licensing idea.

You take ONE test to drive a car when you are 16 and then NEVER have to prove competency again. The test is simple, multiple choice and teaches you nothing that you can't read on your own. You take ONE driving test and then NEVER have to prove your ability ever again, EVER.

You can therefore be 66 years old and have not taken a test, written or physical in 50 YEARS. The 'you have to have a license to drive' argument doesn't hold water, it is a joke. How many times driving have you said to yourself; 'that old man shouldn't be driving', 'that woman shouldn't be driving', 'that immigrant shouldn't be driving', 'that teenager shouldn't be driving?' We have all said this to ourselves. The argument simply is ridiculous and is now null and void.

And even with licensing, we still have; drunk drivers, negligent drivers,hit and runs,get away (from crime) drivers, stolen cars and more.

YOU SEE THAT LICENSING DRIVERS (AND CARS) DOES NOTHING TO PREVENT CRIME FROM CARS...OR FROM DRIVERS.

We must all simply accept that we choose to live in a free society. In a free society their are inherit risks and there is evil. Part of living in a free society is that we must accept responsibility for our actions. There are things in a free society that people will always not like and will always be opposed to and never agree upon, we must learn to accept that and yet choose to live together in peace and respect.

LIVE FREE OR DIE!

imported post

i guess my example was wrong say you dont have any test at all and some body discharge a gun in a store lets say one of these things happen (here honey take the gun with you to the store all you have to do is point and shoot if you need it ) O no the safty was never set and mommy dont know so mommeyputs the bag on the counter to get money out and KABOOMsomebody is shot because she never checkedit out when you are varry sick where do you go to a doc that has had school and has taken test or when you apply to buy a hand gun you have to be check out toodo you think that should go away somepeople should not have guns let alone carryand driven is a privilage not a wrighti have a cdl too allways being checked out if you dont pass your stuff you dont drivenot all city people no how to work a gun every body whants safty thats why they carry so lets all be safe and learn how they work

imported post

got to have guns wrote:

i guess my example was wrong say you dont have any test at all and some body discharge a gun in a store lets say one of these things happen (here honey take the gun with you to the store all you have to do is point and shoot if you need it ) O no the safty was never set and mommy dont know so mommeyputs the bag on the counter to get money out and KABOOMsomebody is shot because she never checkedit out when you are varry sick where do you go to a doc that has had school and has taken test or when you apply to buy a hand gun you have to be check out toodo you think that should go away somepeople should not have guns let alone carryand driven is a privilage not a wrighti have a cdl too allways being checked out if you dont pass your stuff you dont drivenot all city people no how to work a gun every body whants safty thats why they carry so lets all be safe and learn how they work

Click to expand...

First, please learn how to put coherent thoughts together. This is just gibberish nonsense.

Second, if someone doesn't want a gun and they don't know how to operate a gun then they don't have to have one. Guns are simple tools. Simple machines. Your hypothetical is based on projection of your own fears not on reality. Anyone who discharges a firearm illegally should be prosecuted.

imported post

Some whitespace, capitalization, and punctuation would be nice too. I didn't bother to try to decode that string of lower-case letters.

imported post

and the people that say keep out goverment has some thing to hide too people has the right to have guns just have a test for safty

imported post

got to have guns wrote:

i guess my example was wrong say you dont have any test at all and some body discharge a gun in a store lets say one of these things happen (here honey take the gun with you to the store all you have to do is point and shoot if you need it ) O no the safty was never set and mommy dont know so mommeyputs the bag on the counter to get money out and KABOOMsomebody is shot because she never checkedit out when you are varry sick where do you go to a doc that has had school and has taken test or when you apply to buy a hand gun you have to be check out toodo you think that should go away somepeople should not have guns let alone carryand driven is a privilage not a wrighti have a cdl too allways being checked out if you dont pass your stuff you dont drivenot all city people no how to work a gun every body whants safty thats why they carry so lets all be safe and learn how they work

Click to expand...

Let's not play the "what if" game.

We've all been there and done that + seen the stats on safety of citizens vs LEOs too.

Suggest if you wish to be taken seriously, earn your credentials + learn to use caps, spell check and punctuation.

I give your submission an F-

Your homework assignment is to read:
http://www.gunfacts.info/index.html

Yata hey

imported post

got to have guns wrote:

and the people that say keep out goverment has some thing to hide too people has the right to have guns just have a test for safty

Click to expand...

Firearms come with a book for safety. You can find out about safety on the internet. You can ask the dealer or previous owner about safety. You can ask you father, uncle, neighbor about safety. You, supposedly (and I am beginning to doubt) went to school, can read past the 8th grade and can work a simple machine. Firearms are not complicated, they just need to be treated with respect. If you are not smart enough, not intelligent enough then YOU should not own a firearm. There is not one gun owner at a range or gun shop who won't spend time with you showing you how to handle a gun safely. And lastly, if you want the government to help you, then join the army infantry.

Firearm safety should be taught at home, by your parents, uncles, aunts, grandparents.

There are over 210,000 injuries from lawnmowers each year. There is no government safety class. There never will be a government safety class for lawnmowers. People choose to not read the manual, the safety features and abuse their 'right to mow!' http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/june08lawnmowersafety.htm

imported post

Some are of the opinion that without a license to carry a gun, bad things will happen. What people forget is that there are already laws regulating the consequences of certain actions making the need for a license unnecessary. If a person accidently shoots someone, whether they have a license or not, that person is going to be criminally and civilly liable for that action. A free society is one where the populace can generally govern themselves without much help from the government. Naturally, there are going to be some risks. Sadly, there are those who are more concerned about being taken care of at all times even if that requires them to give up freedom rather than take responsibility for themselves.

An example is a 1 mile walk to a store. In a free society, you don't need to ask anybody anything to run your errand. You simply leave your house, lock your door, and walk down the street to the store. Are there risks? Of course. A driver may not see you and hit you. Someone could try to mug you. You may see one cop go by but that is about it. You are responsible for making it to the store and back safely for the most part although there are some resources (such as the police) if you require them should a problem arise. The "safety crowd" who wants to be constantly in a "nanny state" would have a very different walk to the store. Before they leave their house, they would need to make sure they have their papers (such as their ID with them) and would have to be dressed properly and look decent. Almost as soon as they leave their house, they would be going through a military-style checkpoint. They would have to explain their intentions to the officers, show them their papers, explain that they are going to the store, why they are going, what they indend to buy, and where they are going next. After they are physically searched and interrogated by officers carrying automatic weapons, they would head on. They would then have to go through about two more of these stops. Once they were done shopping, they would be expected to not delay as the same checkpoints would be watching for them to return to make sure they weren't up to any "funny business." The chances that they would be in danger during their walk to the store by bad drivers, loose animals, or criminals would be very unlikely but they would have zero freedom.

The above examples should tell us precisely which group people subscribe to. Most everyone values safety and security. The real difference is one in which people grow up, act like adults, and take responsibility for their own actions knowing that there are consequences if they don't. The other one is where people are of the understanding that virtually no decision can be made by them without approval by someone else (such as the government) and expect there to always be someone there to help them out, watch over them, or otherwise take care of them. They expect a safety net placed on failure and likely a safety cap to be placed on success because after all they want everyone to be equal so that nobody is offended.

The same people wanting a license to own or carry weapons to provide a safety net for others is thinking along identicallines of wanting a license regulating speech to "safeguard" against someone being offended. In many ways, it is these kinds of people that give us the reason to need guns far more than the criminal element out there because there are plenty of us I'm sure who would hope their states or communities would secede from the Union should this country decide that its citizens are now subjects who are required to withdraw all individuality and conform blindly to the State. Folks, this is basically what liberalism is all about. They pretend they are not socialists but yet that is clearly the end result. If all liberal policies were approved, every aspect of your life would be socialist. Guns tie into it quite well. Since socialism subscribes to the belief in "abolition of private property" (Communist Manifesto) then when someone wants to take away your guns or restrict them this is exactly the political line they are thinking along.

imported post

Folks, "got to have guns" is an example of someone who went through modern-day "liberal education." As you can see, he or she does not write in complete sentences, does not capitalize the proper words, use correct punctuation, and has serious spelling errors. This is what our tax dollars and government schools have produced. Congratulations.

imported post

Don't assume those on this board haven't served, been shot at, been shot. I don't have my government, I don't hate politicians. However, I will stand up and shout against unconstitutional laws, bills, and comments. I am very well educated and understand the issues. What I ask is that you take time to understand the issues as well. Take time to understand both sides and what is right, even when you don't like what is right. I have nothing to hide, the government knows who I am and that is fine. However, I will not let them continue to erode the rights of citizens anymore.

Now, don't forget that any citizen outranks any military officer. You did not earn a special badge to be treated special the rest of your life. You volunteered to serve, you knew the benefits and the negatives.

-- Deleted -- Warning--

Click to expand...

imported post

I think you was trying to say i don't hate my government,not i have my government, I can see your education too!

imported post

I respect those who have honorably served in the armed forces. At the same time, I do not believe that automatically earns them special privileges over everyone else. Additionally, I'm a bit concerned that the U.S. military would employ people such as yourself in the armed forces without requiring that they bring their education up to scratch. You think I'm being insulting but I'm simply telling the truth. Your speech, spelling, and grammar is literally at the level of a street person who has dropped out of school. Nobody is preventing you from taking the time to go to the library or enroll in some remedial classes at a community college and bring your English up to scratch. Unlike liberalism, I don't believe in automatically treating people equally. I believe merit is something that is earned not automatic. If I were to give an important speech in front of a bunch of people, I would comb my hair in a decent fashion, wear a nice suit and tie, and a good pair of dress shoes. If I appeared dressed in rags from a rummage sale, despite how good the content of my speech was, people would not respect me or take me seriously. The same comes to your use of the English language. If you want to discuss these topics on the internet (here or elsewhere) and expect people to take you seriously, it is advisable to educate yourself and bring your spelling and grammar up to scratch before posting. Enough said.