• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Question... For everyone here

eastmeyers

eastmeyers

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
1,363
Location
Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
imported post

HYPOTHETICAL

Okay I am going to list two possible choices, you must choose one.

Number one:

Michigan CPL, becomes a CCW. Which means that you may carry open or concealed, if you are a CCW holder, and it would be excepted by all. This means that OC would be just as common as CC, and police officers and media would easily accept this fact, and it would be life as normal. You would have tobe 18 (not 21) to get the CCW, and it would have the same back round checks as our CPL. Like Arizona for example, but you need the CCW.

Number two:

Things are just as they are right now, some police have a problem with OC, 90% of the population assumes its illegal. But you do not need a CCW/CPL.

Now the reason I pose this question is, would you rather have your rights violated by needing a license to carry a firearm. Or have the peace-of-mind of not being hassled, also that many others would be open-carriers! Just hypothetical ya'll, have fun, and let loose!
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

Typical liberal response would be that we need a law.

I don't need any law to do what is lawful.

If da po po gots a problem with it, then it's just that... their problem.

If the gen public thinks it's illegal, then that's their problem.

In either case, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

I don't think we even need a CPL! Works in other states.

I don't think we need to register pistols either.

But the pansy liberal minded will say there is a need for regulation of some sort.

Why?
 
J

joshuaeberly

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
165
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

I will settle for NO licensing for OC or CC, as well as NO victim disarmament zones and NO registration of any firearms, along with NO restrictions on type or quantity of firearms, ammunition, or anything else that can be considered "arms".

when I have that, I'll be happy.
until then, I'd rather have a cop with a problem, than have to have a license to OC.
(and btw, I have CPL and think it's ridiculous that I need a permission slip if I want to hide my gun)
 
eastmeyers

eastmeyers

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
1,363
Location
Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
imported post

Sorry I asked the question. If I knew how to delete my thread I would. So far no one that has responded has actually answered my HYPOTHETICAL question. I understand that most people here, myself included, believe that it is ridicules that you need permission to do anything guaranteed to us in the constitution of the USA. A CPL/CCW is ridicules, and it is also ridicules that the public as a whole does not know their rights.

And while we are on the topic of things sucking, I wish Santa Claus was real!
 
eastmeyers

eastmeyers

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
1,363
Location
Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
imported post

Fishous wrote:
eastmeyers wrote:
... Michigan CPL, becomes a CCW. Which means that you may carry open or concealed,
Click to expand...
What? This makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...


CPL stands for Concealed Pistol Licence

CCW stands for Concent to Carry a Weapon

Meaning CPL, you can carry a concealed (registered) pistol. With a "CCW" you can carry a pistol (or other weapon within reason, so not a tank, or bazooka, but a knife) concealed or openly.


Hope this clears things up.
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

I guess that my response was not explicit enough for you. So, I'll restate it in a simpler manner.

I would prefer things the way they are now. But we do not need a CCW/CLP.

Isn't that kinda what I wrote previously?

eastmeyers wrote:
Number two:

Things are just as they are right now, some police have a problem with OC, 90% of the population assumes its illegal. But you do not need a CCW/CPL.
Click to expand...

eastmeyers wrote:
Just hypothetical ya'll, have fun, and let loose!
Click to expand...
Isn't that what we were doing?

eastmeyers wrote:
Sorry I asked the question. If I knew how to delete my thread I would. So far no one that has responded has actually answered my HYPOTHETICAL question.
Click to expand...
Maybe if your question was expressed, formulated, and presented with clarity you may have received responses more to your liking.

eastmeyers wrote:
And while we are on the topic of things sucking, I wish Santa Claus was real!
Click to expand...
He's not?!?
 
C

CoonDog

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
532
Location
Farmington Hills, Michigan, USA
imported post

Your option number 1 is more restrictive than what we have now, so I don't think you'll get any takers. I mean, if I don't need a license to OC now, why would I want to create a scenario where one is needed? You then say you would prefer no license/fewer restrictions...I guess I'm not sure where you're coming from.

Also, I think you are making some wild assumptions by asserting that OC would become more common if people carry a license for it. I think most would still find OC stressful and prefer the anonymity of CC.
 
M

mikestilly

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
1,869
Location
Macomb County, Michigan, USA
imported post

Who in their right mind would volunteer to pay taxes (permit) and give up their personal information on a freedom we already have? IE something that is 100% legal such as open carry.

The scenarios are silly because they show a lack of understanding of the constitution. Should we next have a permit to practice our religion? What about a permit to have free speech? I believe in the constitution not turning America in to Europe or the middle east.

Mike
 
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
imported post

eastmeyers wrote:
Number two:

Things are just as they are right now, some police have a problem with OC, 90% of the population assumes its illegal. But you do not need a CCW/CPL.
Click to expand...
Your number two is better than your number one.Less regulation ofperfectly ethical behavioris ALWAYS trump. Number two, with work on getting further deregulation where necessary, like abolishingCriminal Empowerment Zonesand the illegality of carry of a holstered handgun in a vehicle without a CPL. Then, abolishment of the CPL itself in going to Vermont-style laws (no permit requiredforopen or concealed carry, it is onlyillegal to carrywith unlawful intent).
 
C

CoonDog

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
532
Location
Farmington Hills, Michigan, USA
imported post

The truth is, EM, that you have provided a false dichotomy in your OP. These aren't the only two scenarios possible, so to suggest as much can be construed as deceiving.

My hunch is that you wished to gauge the MOC reaction to your scenario #1. If you were to solely suggest this scenario first, this format would have been more straightforward and less confrontational. Iit's extremely, however, likely that the received responses would have been just as repugnant to the idea as those already given.

Please continue to post thought-provoking topics, but bear in mind that it's not the MOC is close-minded to your initial idea, rather, it's that most MOC'ers have already made up their mind on this particular topic.
 
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
imported post

CoonDog wrote:
The truth is, EM, that you have provided a false dichotomy in your OP. These aren't the only two scenarios possible, so to suggest as much can be construed as deceiving.
Click to expand...
A false dichotomy is a representation of there being only two alternativespossible ina real situation. EM was clear, in the first post, this situation is HYPOTHETICAL. While he does indeedpresent adichotomy, it is a hypothetical dichotomy for mere discussion of merits, not a false dichotomy presented as a matter of fact. The former is quite legitimate as a device for discussion, the latter is a logical fallacy. Know the difference, because I think your conclusions arewrong aboutEM's post.
 
eastmeyers

eastmeyers

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
1,363
Location
Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
imported post

DanM wrote:
CoonDog wrote:
The truth is, EM, that you have provided a false dichotomy in your OP. These aren't the only two scenarios possible, so to suggest as much can be construed as deceiving.
Click to expand...
A false dichotomy is a representation of there being only two alternativespossible ina real situation. EM was clear, in the first post, this situation is HYPOTHETICAL. While he does indeedpresent adichotomy, it is a hypothetical dichotomy for mere discussion of merits, not a false dichotomy presented as a matter of fact. The former is quite legitimate as a device for discussion, the latter is a logical fallacy. Know the difference, because I think your conclusions arewrong aboutEM's post.
Click to expand...

Someone gets me! :celebrate

Thank you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top