ChristCrusader
Regular Member
I'd like jurisdictions (including local jurisdictions, if they have any specific addidtions or deviations) to be compelled by law to make available on paper and online a comprehensive presentation of firearms laws/regulations/restrictions in their jurisdictions, from local to national, and include their policies and procedures for LEO interations with lawfully armed civilians.
It's not like it's a mystery to them, because they'll be ready to charge and try you on all the laws at their disposal.
It's not like it'd be unfair to hold them to the legal advisement the presentation would offer... because even without it, they hold us to the rules, sight unseen.
This would serve to educate both LEO and civilians, get them on the same page, and promote peaceful coexistence, mutual adherence, and early pre-emptive pre-event discussion opportunities if something is amiss (I mean other than the obvious infringements being perpetrated).
The scattershot placement of the mines of punishable infractions throughout code and regulations are not only onerous, but are hard to assemble and piece together. It takes herculean effort (like the great assemblages in the stickys regarding carrying in forests and parks etc, and the spreadsheets of ordinances) and we're all amazed and appreciative when someone who can proficiently do that actually does it and shares it with us. I think the onus ought to be upon the govt. to assemble and present such rules. They have the experts who made the rules, enforce the rules, and prosecute us for breaking the rules. We pay them to do all that. They need to tap an expert or two and assemble them into a presentable package.
Despite the existence of all this information already somewhere in the ethos, we often still have to ask questions of each other, enforcers, lawyers, respresentatives, LIS, google, etc. to probe the ground ahead of us for any mines that have been laid; and sometimes we get different answers/interpretations from each source from the same question.
If we were going by the simple shall not be infringed, it'd be easy, the way it should be.
If the laws weren't arbitrary, but had logic in their purpose and construct, that would help.
If a crime had to involve a victim, we could inherently sense the prohibition.
But instead, they are scattered, require no malice, go directly against, "shall not be infringed", defy logic, and work against public safety.
Officials need to step up to the plate and take ownership for the unConstitutional morass they've created. Bring all the infringements out into the sunshine, sweep all the dust bunny gotchas out of the corners, and set them before civilian and enforcer alike so that we can clearly see them and adhere to them or refute them.
And take responsibility for the veracity of their presentation and description, no BS disclaimer, "this is only for information purposes", because this is our a$$ on the line.
Online, it should be a living presentation with a growing FAQ list of interpretations and explanations.
Here's an example of an attempt by a jurisdiction -> North Carolina Firearms Laws
It's not like it's a mystery to them, because they'll be ready to charge and try you on all the laws at their disposal.
It's not like it'd be unfair to hold them to the legal advisement the presentation would offer... because even without it, they hold us to the rules, sight unseen.
This would serve to educate both LEO and civilians, get them on the same page, and promote peaceful coexistence, mutual adherence, and early pre-emptive pre-event discussion opportunities if something is amiss (I mean other than the obvious infringements being perpetrated).
The scattershot placement of the mines of punishable infractions throughout code and regulations are not only onerous, but are hard to assemble and piece together. It takes herculean effort (like the great assemblages in the stickys regarding carrying in forests and parks etc, and the spreadsheets of ordinances) and we're all amazed and appreciative when someone who can proficiently do that actually does it and shares it with us. I think the onus ought to be upon the govt. to assemble and present such rules. They have the experts who made the rules, enforce the rules, and prosecute us for breaking the rules. We pay them to do all that. They need to tap an expert or two and assemble them into a presentable package.
Despite the existence of all this information already somewhere in the ethos, we often still have to ask questions of each other, enforcers, lawyers, respresentatives, LIS, google, etc. to probe the ground ahead of us for any mines that have been laid; and sometimes we get different answers/interpretations from each source from the same question.
If we were going by the simple shall not be infringed, it'd be easy, the way it should be.
If the laws weren't arbitrary, but had logic in their purpose and construct, that would help.
If a crime had to involve a victim, we could inherently sense the prohibition.
But instead, they are scattered, require no malice, go directly against, "shall not be infringed", defy logic, and work against public safety.
Officials need to step up to the plate and take ownership for the unConstitutional morass they've created. Bring all the infringements out into the sunshine, sweep all the dust bunny gotchas out of the corners, and set them before civilian and enforcer alike so that we can clearly see them and adhere to them or refute them.
And take responsibility for the veracity of their presentation and description, no BS disclaimer, "this is only for information purposes", because this is our a$$ on the line.
Online, it should be a living presentation with a growing FAQ list of interpretations and explanations.
Here's an example of an attempt by a jurisdiction -> North Carolina Firearms Laws
Last edited: