We need National right to carry a concealed weapon Law

sear said:
G #19
You have my sympathy sir or m'am.
Consult your physician.
There may be useful treatment available to you.

#18
"Precision & clarity in the use of language leads to precision & clarity of thought." G. Gordon Liddy

The obvious interpretation of your sub-literate post is that my posted point/s flew far over the heads of most posters here.
If that is not your intended meaning, than the communication problem is not my capacity to interpret, but in your ability to specify.
Click to expand...

It took you almost a month to think of a comeback, that's impressive Cappy.

No, your interpretation is the problem.

Yep, Asperger's.
 
SJJRSJJS said:
An armed society is a polite society, like Arizona for instance. Awhile back, I gave my son a .380 Walther PP and found out that the great State of AZ does not require a CCW permit to carry a handgun either open or concealed. If you have a "clean" record, you can carry a handgun. What does this all prove... don't mess around in AZ if you don't want to get your ass shot off. A National CCW law would mean that the good guys would be able to defend theirselves and their families against potential terrorists anywhere in the USA. The bad guys carry guns anyway because they are by definition "bad" guys, so we need to counter their ability to create chaos like in Orlando Florida and San Bernardino CA, etc. with our own weapons.
Click to expand...
Why? What are you so afraid of? Is it difficult living your life in fear? Why not open carry or do you not want members of the public knowing you are scared?
 
Right said:
Agreed. We should have different environmental laws in every state. For example small crowded states like Massachusetts should have much more stringent vehicle emission laws since the car or truck next to you sitting in traffic is so close. But wide-open states like Montana should have far less stringent laws.
Click to expand...

We have tough vehicle emission laws. Traffic?? Mostly in Boston. You know the home of the way over budget big dig. That did not do a friggin thing for traffic. How about instead of more laws, just politicians with better brains??
 
Just remember, contrary to what you see on the media and what your racist grandpappy taught you, most Blacks and Latinos will also be legally able to carry a weapon and they see a lot of white guys as the bad guys.

Be careful of who you confront and judge. Because a armed society will leave a lot of dead bodies.
 
TTQ64 said:
Just remember, contrary to what you see on the media and what your racist grandpappy taught you, most Blacks and Latinos will also be legally able to carry a weapon and they see a lot of white guys as the bad guys.

Be careful of who you confront and judge. Because a armed society will leave a lot of dead bodies.
Click to expand...

Yawn. Seriously. Just fucking yawn.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Why? What are you so afraid of? Is it difficult living your life in fear? Why not open carry or do you not want members of the public knowing you are scared?
Click to expand...

His type has a guilty conscious. When you go your entire life treating people like dog shit........you tend to have to always look over your shoulder.
 
TTQ64 said:
Yawn all you want......just speaking the truth.
Click to expand...

Actions speak louder than words TT. Put your money your mouth is. Go get a gun, start shooting people. Tell me how it works out for you. Other wise do not bother with threatening to do it. Just do it.
 
sear said:
"Every state is different so a national policy is inappropriate." R #12

At first I didn't understand the apparent intended meaning of this comment.
My initial reaction was to reply that it's BECAUSE every State is different that one national policy is appropriate.

But I now deduce what you mean is, the standards for rural Wyoming might not be optimal for a metropolis like New York City, or vice versa.
If that's your intended meaning, I'm inclined to agree.

BUT !!

That's no rational reason to deny State to State reciprocity for concealed carry licenses already issued.
And that could be handled at:
- county level, or
- State level, or
- federal level.
Click to expand...

There are indeed rational reasons.
Massachusetts has among the strictest gun laws s in the country. My son just got his concealed carry and high capacity long gun permit.
He took many courses, some at police stations, some at rod and gun clubs.

He is well qualified and very well vetted by the government.
How vetted and qualified are those from Arizona or Texas?

I don't know, that's why I am asking.
 
Last edited:
Sailor said:
Actions speak louder than words TT. Put your money your mouth is. Go get a gun, start shooting people. Tell me how it works out for you. Other wise do not bother with threatening to do it. Just do it.
Click to expand...

I've made no threats.

I'm speaking nothing but truth. You people think you are the good guy and Blacks and Latino's are the bad guys and can't legally own firearms.

I'm just giving you people a fair warning.
 
TTQ64 said:
I've made no threats.

I'm speaking nothing but truth. You people think you are the good guy and Blacks and Latino's are the bad guys and can't legally own firearms.

I'm just giving you people a fair warning.
Click to expand...

Who said anyone thinks Blacks and Latinos are the bad guys??
 
Sailor said:
We have tough vehicle emission laws. Traffic?? Mostly in Boston. You know the home of the way over budget big dig. That did not do a friggin thing for traffic. How about instead of more laws, just politicians with better brains??
Click to expand...

You want to cure metro Boston's pain in your ass? Do as I did. Get all your bills paid off, close your bank accounts, quit your job, get in your car and drive until you get to someplace that isn't so fucked up.
 
SJJRSJJS said:
An armed society is a polite society, like Arizona for instance. Awhile back, I gave my son a .380 Walther PP and found out that the great State of AZ does not require a CCW permit to carry a handgun either open or concealed. If you have a "clean" record, you can carry a handgun. What does this all prove... don't mess around in AZ if you don't want to get your ass shot off. A National CCW law would mean that the good guys would be able to defend theirselves and their families against potential terrorists anywhere in the USA. The bad guys carry guns anyway because they are by definition "bad" guys, so we need to counter their ability to create chaos like in Orlando Florida and San Bernardino CA, etc. with our own weapons.
Click to expand...

It's good in principle.

But living in NYC I can say for certain there would be a bloodbath on day #1 that would make Chicago look like Mayberry.

There are two distinct gun cultures in this country. Let the states who carry responsibly do so, and let those that can not continue to outlaw it.
 
I don't think of myself as a strict constructionist.
But I consider what you've described here infringements or usurpations of our 2nd Amendment right.

When the law requires us to have a license to speak, I'll reconsider my perspective.
UNTIL the law requires us to have a license to speak, then requiring a license to exercise any other right enumerated in our Bill of Rights seems out of line.

And if it is a "right" then why apply?

An application can be turned down, rejected.

BUT !!

The wording in 2A is: "shall not be infringed".

"Massachusetts has among the strictest gun laws s in the country. My son just got his concealed carry and high capacity long gun permit.
He took many courses, some at police stations, some at rod and gun clubs.

He is well qualified and very well vetted by the government.
How vetted and qualified are those from Arizona or Texas?

I don't know, that's why I am asking." R #31

Lookit:
I'm a pragmatist.
If it is absolutely necessary for all this course taking & vetting then fine. All they need then do is amend the Constitution to list the exceptions for infringing our right to keep and bear arms.

But this LOOK THE OTHER WAY-ISM of pretending we're pure: "... shall not be infringed", and then we infringe the $#@! out of it; that's bad form. Our law enforcers are supposed to enforce the law, not lead the charge in breaking the law; as they do now with these 2A infringements.
 
The people of New York and other states have had these laws for years and the people seem to like it because they've elected politicians to do it for ages.

I understand your point and agree with it completely, but can you coerce a right upon people?
 
"The people of New York and other states have had these laws for years and the people seem to like it" T2 #39

New York State is a puzzle to some that don't live here.
In presidential votes for example, NY tends to blue. Trump is a native New Yorker, but NY vote usually goes Democrat. I assume it did in 2016.

Many non-New Yorkers assume it's because the State is crammed full of Democrats. NYC may be.

BUT:
geographically, most of NY is Republican; where I live for example.

"because they've elected politicians to do it for ages." T2 #39

Their liking it would explain it. But I suspect there's a more accurate explanation.

I suspect there are other voter priorities. And even if no single other priority trumps that one, perhaps 3 other priorities together may subordinate some gun rights issues.

The "Safe Act" for example limits magazine capacity. I gather the limit in NY is now 7 rounds; except for government guns, which remains unlimited.
To my knowledge there's no grandfathering on this.

"can you coerce a right upon people?"

When coerced, it's a requirement, not a right.
A legal right means it's the citizen's choice. The right to free speech is not a requirement to talk. And in fact, the 5th Amendment allows citizens to not testify against themselves.

"No right is absolute. Conversely, no government authority is absolute." lawyer, law Professor and former ACLU head Nadine Strossen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top