Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: I just don't understand this thinking...

  1. #1
    Regular Member sawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437

    I just don't understand this thinking...

    From the VCDL newsletter:
    Virginia law requires a permit for concealed carry, but a measure proposed by State Del. Mark Cole, (R-Spotsylvania), would eliminate the permit requirement, making it legal for all gun owners to carry a concealed weapon

    Del. Jennifer McClellan, (D-Richmond), vows to vote against Cole's proposal. She said the permit process is a major benefit to public safety within the state.

    "If a police officer stops a car, they can run the license plate and they will know if that person has a concealed-weapons permit," McClellan said. "That gives them some information we probably want them to have about whether or not that individual is armed, and that would go away."
    You will NEVER know if a Bad Guy has a gun in the car. Yet this dimwit is concerned that cops know about permit holders. Cops need to approach EVERY car stop as though the driver has a firearm, and if the driver is obeying and being calm, process the ticket and leave. I DEFY her to prove how the permit process is a benefit to public safety. Only law-abiding folks BOTHER to get a permit and there are a LOT of people illegally carrying that they will NEVER know about.

    Why isn't she concerned about people driving 2-ton cars intoxicated and with suspended licenses? The difference in danger between bad drivers and permit holder is just not on the same level; not even close.
    A firearm is a tool of convenience, not effectiveness - Clint Smith, Thunder Ranch

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Some things cannot be explained. It is the same old "blood in the streets" argument. If we get rid of permits there will be more shooting and thousand of innocent children will die. Yes, people actually believe that despite all of the evidence to the contrary.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    The short answer is that despite their very loud protestations to the contrary, most serious anti-gunners think that all private citizen gun owners are criminals.

    They see the permit as a good thing because at least that way, the LEOs will know about some of the "criminals" who have guns, even if not all of them. Some is better than none.

    TFred

  4. #4
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    R4p

    Sort of a back door gun registration, isn't it?

    R4P = Registration for Permittees
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Playing with people who think backwards should be a sport.

    Anti-gunners strive their best to make it as hard or inconvenient or embarrassing (newspaper printing) as possible to get a CHP... but if you think about it logically, they should want all gun owners to have CHPs, because that is the only legal way to put them on record for owning a normal gun in Virginia. They should therefore push legislation to make the process as quick, easy and cheap as possible, so that every gun owner says, "why not go ahead and get one?"

    I still think it would be a hoot to engage an anti-gunner in a serious conversation one day and pose them this question:

    "If Joe Citizen has decided that the time has come for him to buy his first handgun,
    would you rather he did, or did not go through the process of obtaining a CHP?"

    I can only imagine the conflict of desired outcomes that would be spinning in their heads... it would probably render them unable to speak coherently for several minutes.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Regular Member sparkman2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Hampton Roads, Virginia
    Posts
    132
    This is unbelievable. Never understand why the 2A is such a hard pill for some folks to swallow.
    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." Thomas Jefferson (quoting Cesare Beccaria)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    The short answer is that despite their very loud protestations to the contrary, most serious anti-gunners think that all private citizen gun owners are criminals.

    They see the permit as a good thing because at least that way, the LEOs will know about some of the "criminals" who have guns, even if not all of them. Some is better than none.

    TFred
    Ever wonder why when you are pulled over and you are run for wants/warrants the officer is alerted that you have a CHP?




    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Playing with people who think backwards should be a sport.

    Anti-gunners strive their best to make it as hard or inconvenient or embarrassing (newspaper printing) as possible to get a CHP... but if you think about it logically, they should want all gun owners to have CHPs, because that is the only legal way to put them on record for owning a normal gun in Virginia. They should therefore push legislation to make the process as quick, easy and cheap as possible, so that every gun owner says, "why not go ahead and get one?"

    I still think it would be a hoot to engage an anti-gunner in a serious conversation one day and pose them this question:

    "If Joe Citizen has decided that the time has come for him to buy his first handgun,
    would you rather he did, or did not go through the process of obtaining a CHP?"

    I can only imagine the conflict of desired outcomes that would be spinning in their heads... it would probably render them unable to speak coherently for several minutes.

    TFred

    Gun owners in general would never stand for national gun registration but they are lining up for national gun owner registration.
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkman2 View Post
    This is unbelievable. Never understand why the 2A is such a hard pill for some folks to swallow.
    You really should be scared. Much of what the other side is afraid of is their projection of what THEY would do with a gun.

    That is why they are so terrified of guns. They see themselves shooting someone in traffic or in an argument. Or themselves either by accident or on purpose.

    For some of these people it is the only diagnosis that makes sense.

    I think there is also a large population that has just never been exposed to guns and knows nothing about them. These are the people we need to ID and take shooting one day. Imagine if each of us took 5 people a year shooting?

  9. #9
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    4 States w/ Constitutional Carry

    I know Arizona, Alaska, Vermont, and I believe, Wyoming already have constitutional carry. New Hampshire is getting close to it, also. There have been no statistics in those States showing that constitutional carry creates problems, just the opposite. Sawah, you and I and all pro 2nd amendment citizens will NEVER EVER understand the mind of someone like McClellan. But, it is important to post information like this whenever we stumble upon it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Playing with people who think backwards should be a sport.

    Anti-gunners strive their best to make it as hard or inconvenient or embarrassing (newspaper printing) as possible to get a CHP... but if you think about it logically, they should want all gun owners to have CHPs, because that is the only legal way to put them on record for owning a normal gun in Virginia. They should therefore push legislation to make the process as quick, easy and cheap as possible, so that every gun owner says, "why not go ahead and get one?"

    I still think it would be a hoot to engage an anti-gunner in a serious conversation one day and pose them this question:

    "If Joe Citizen has decided that the time has come for him to buy his first handgun,
    would you rather he did, or did not go through the process of obtaining a CHP?"


    I can only imagine the conflict of desired outcomes that would be spinning in their heads... it would probably render them unable to speak coherently for several minutes.

    TFred
    Someone on this board (I forget who) posed a very similar question to the one in bold to an anti. Eventually the anti simply said that they would prefer for the person to simply not have a gun and refused to answer the actual question asked.

  11. #11
    Regular Member JesterP99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Richmond, Va
    Posts
    172
    If Virginia was changed to a state where you didn't need a permit to conceal, would that mean that people 18-20 could conceal a weapon since they are legally able to own a firearm?

  12. #12
    Regular Member ocholsteroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Virginia, Hampton Roads, NC 9 miles away
    Posts
    1,317
    Quote Originally Posted by JesterP99 View Post
    If Virginia was changed to a state where you didn't need a permit to conceal, would that mean that people 18-20 could conceal a weapon since they are legally able to own a firearm?
    pretty sure, just like the other states that allow cc without permits
    How come a DUI you can get your driver licence back, which it is a privilege. But if commiting a felon, even something non violent like stealing, you are denied your constitutional rights for the rest of your life?
    If you don't support the Second Amendment to the Constitution, what other parts of the Constitution do you reject?
    More restrictions on guns? how about restrictions on chainsaws and knives?

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    Someone on this board (I forget who) posed a very similar question to the one in bold to an anti. Eventually the anti simply said that they would prefer for the person to simply not have a gun and refused to answer the actual question asked.
    I've posted that similar question here before, but had not heard of this account. That would be typical for a liberal though, to ignore the premise (the "premise" to a hypothetical question equates to the "facts" of real life scenarios), and choose instead to just stick their head in the sand.

    TFred

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373
    What boggles the mind is the fact that these people assume that the law-abiding socially-responsible people who have bothered to submit to a background check and registered with The System in order to get a CHP are the dangerous gun totin' threat. It's the people who are carrying with felonious intent who have not gotten a CHP, and who couldn't even if they wanted to because of prior felonies, illegal immigration status, insanity, etc., and who don't show up on the computer that the cops should be worried about. If I were a cop approaching a car registered to a CHP holder, I'd worry a lot less than if there were no notation at all on the vehicle owner's information. What would scare me the most is the absence of any information about that at all. Information that the registered owner has passed a recent background check would make me feel a lot better - the real threat in such a situation is drunk drivers who drive off the road toward the flashing blue lights.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    437
    I think the LEOs who are 'frightened' by CHP/CHL holders are faking it (perhaps subconsciously), to lend credence to the idea that only LEOs should be armed, frankly.
    A firearm is a tool of convenience, not effectiveness - Clint Smith, Thunder Ranch

  16. #16
    Regular Member Red Dawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eastern VA, with too many people
    Posts
    404
    A thought or two. When something has been taught to you, almost from birth, good or bad in our eyes, it is very hard for someone to "unlearn it". For a person that is multigenerational living in New York city, never having owned a car, or had a DL, they can't understand a person like me that gets jittery if ONE of my vehicles isn't driviable. Someone raised in the city, never hunted, or had a gun in the house, or even knew someone with a gun. It's hard for them to fathom why I have guns for all kinds of activities. I was asked one time why I keep guns that I only pull out once or twice a year to clean, and that's their life. They have no idea the tradition that is associated with a gun that was my grandfather's, passed down to my father, and passed down to me. And the memories of hunting with all those guys. They never lived in a place where not only was it legal to have a handgun on your side, but part of life with Copperheads in the WV mountains.
    While I may seem like I am ranting worthlessly, sometimes you have to put yourself in their shoes. We need to have some patience to educate those that are ignorant of our life, as we are ignorant of theirs.
    The Second Amendment is in place
    in case the politicians ignore the others

    A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •