imported post
AaronS wrote:
Hello Krista, and welcome to our forum. You sound like the kind of person we need in state government.
You say that you "do believe there should be some licensing and training necessary (to carry)", and I hope you don't take to much flack over that. You must understand, self protection is a right, and needs no training, or licensing. If you do not need a permit to exercise your other rights, why would you need one to protect your family? This would be a hoop we would have to jump through, and one most on this forum would not support this.
Thanks for joining the forum. I am sure you will earn a bunch of votes. Best of luck.
Aaron
Agreed Aaron , Welcome to the site Krista, though I and my wife don't appreciate your views, hopefully you will be able to take something from this site. However, Krista, you would not get my vote nor my wife's vote, taking a stance against the second amendment which is what you are doing ("do believe there should be some licensing and training necessary (to carry)". As soon as you infringe my right to carry, you are out. Anybody fooled by any of this bearucratic double speak deserves whatever they get. We don't need more laws. Just look at Vermont, Alsaska, and Arizona's non-existent carry laws. They are Constitutional carry states. Laws binding law abiding citizens are for control, nothing more. PERIOD.
The bull pucky spewed by the liberal media is just that. Warnings that lawlessness and the old west gun battles will erupt never came true. Wow! Instead, an armed society became a polite society.
My wife and I are adamantly opposed to any kind of licensing, permit, or training schemes. This is an affront to the 2nd amendment. Owning a gun is not like driving a car. At this point, one does not need to drive a car to protect oneself or family.
Self-defense is not a license-able right. It is an inherent right. One we are born with. The 2nd amendment is my license and my permit. Same with my wife. [We just want to make sure you don't hurt yourself. We want to teach you.] So beware of the silver tongue. We're from the government and we're here to help are bad words.
Setting up an onerous, government bureaucracy to oversee any such licensing program would be expensive and intrusive and dangerous. Besides infringing on my 2nd amendment rights. Criminals will not take classes nor will they target shoot to qualify for the stolen gun they have tucked in their pants. All a licensing/training/permit scheme will do is put physical and financial road blocks up in front of decent, law-abiding folk who want to defend themselves and their families.
The worst of it is this, a woman gets a restraining order against her ex husband or boyfriend and she waves the piece of paper at him as he beats her to death or shoots her in the head and then kills the kids too. That little piece of paper did no good. She was just three weeks away from being approved to purchase a handgun. Because she needed to be licensed and trained. The bad guy did not need to be trained nor licensed. So sad.
200 women march down the street at midnight carrying candles and signs that shout out, "We will take back the night!" Later that night, as she gets to her car, the organizer of the march puts the key in the door and as she turns it, a hand reaches around her and pulls her away and then pushes her to the ground where she is beaten and raped. Her sign, now covered with mud and blood, a sad reminder of her former life. She doesn't believe in guns.
Every time my wife hear's of a take back the night rally, she remarks, "what in the heck are they going to do with a candle? I don't get it." My wife has been attacked and she won, she wasn't holding a candle.
My recommendation, get a Kahr 9mm or a snub nosed .357, learn how to use it and you will have taken back the night.
A .357 beats a candle in the wind every time. Hot wax never impressed a criminal.
