[QUOTE=Birdman101;51860155]Its just a term to describe being able to conceal carry without a license.
Just another thing that sd has that dirty north dakota doesnt
[editline]22nd February 2017[/editline]
Wait shit, nd is passing the same law.
Still dirty peasants though[/QUOTE]
North is still better. Less Rezs
I donno about you guys, but permitless CC is fucking stupid.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51860578]I donno about you guys, but permitless CC is fucking stupid.[/QUOTE]
Agree and would take open carry with banned CC over blanket CC with banned open carry any day
My county issues neither (Well, supposedly issues but rejects 99% of applications without a reason), which is unacceptable and illegal
Concealed Carry exists in theory in Canada, but to get an ATC-3 for purpose of protection of life where police protection is insufficient is nearly impossible. Supposedly there's been less than 100 such permits issued nationally, and those that were were mostly issued to former undercover cops.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51860578]North is still better. Less Rezs
I donno about you guys, but permitless CC is fucking stupid.[/QUOTE]
Wholeheartedly agree
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51860578]North is still better. Less Rezs
I donno about you guys, but permitless CC is fucking stupid.[/QUOTE]
Yea, its not very pracical, but any pro-gun law passed is better than an anti-gun one
I'd like permitless CC, but it'll never happen in VA. Virginia Tech shootings. and etc., along with most of NoVA being more or less a small blue wasteland with DC and Maryland spillovers lording over the rest of us. It's not too bad though. Like a $20 course online and you can get a permit. Could be much worse :v:
I wouls urge anyone who is going to CC to seek out classes on their own volition before carrying in public and would think they're being dumb if they don't , but I don't like the idea of the gov't putting a right behind a paywall and their own spastic regulations that can be changed later on to more or less de facto ban it to something like our friend from Canuckistan posted earlier.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51860588]Agree and would take open carry with banned CC over blanket CC with banned open carry any day
My county issues neither (Well, supposedly issues but rejects 99% of applications without a reason), which is unacceptable and illegal[/QUOTE]
Open carry is insanely fucking stupid. Youre basically openly presenting yourself as a target and letting people know youre armed. Its retarded beyond belief.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51860846]I'd like permitless CC, but it'll never happen in VA. Virginia Tech shootings. and etc., along with most of NoVA being more or less a small blue wasteland with DC and Maryland spillovers lording over the rest of us. It's not too bad though. Like a $20 course online and you can get a permit. Could be much worse :v:
I wouls urge anyone who is going to CC to seek out classes on their own volition before carrying in public and would think they're being dumb if they don't , but I don't like the idea of the gov't putting a right behind a paywall and their own spastic regulations that can be changed later on to more or less de facto ban it to something like our friend from Canuckistan posted earlier.[/QUOTE]
Concealed carrying is not a right. If someone is going to carry a firearm with the intent to use it in self defense, then they need to prove theyre proficient with that firearm, and also know the laws.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51861677]Open carry is insanely fucking stupid. Youre basically openly presenting yourself as a target and letting people know youre armed. Its retarded beyond belief. [/QUOTE]
How else am I going to haul around my 20-pound gold-plated deagle brand deagle? Sure as shit can't fit it in my tight-ass jorts.
Really tho, unless you live in the middle of bum-fuck nowhere or function as something like a cowhand there really isn't a good personal explanation other than terrorizing uninitiated man-bun having vintage bicycle fetishists at your local coffee chain. Which if anything just makes you look like an ass for inviting that kind of bullshit.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51861677]Open carry is insanely fucking stupid. Youre basically openly presenting yourself as a target and letting people know youre armed. Its retarded beyond belief.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
Concealed carrying is not a right. If someone is going to carry a firearm with the intent to use it in self defense, then they need to prove theyre proficient with that firearm, and also know the laws.[/QUOTE]
So OC is dumb and CC isn't a right...riiiiiight...
As much as I'd prefer training before permitting be mandatory, a right delayed is a right denied.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51861677]Open carry is insanely fucking stupid. Youre basically openly presenting yourself as a target and letting people know youre armed. Its retarded beyond belief.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
Concealed carrying is not a right. If someone is going to carry a firearm with the intent to use it in self defense, then they need to prove theyre proficient with that firearm, and also know the laws.[/QUOTE]
I agree that OC is generally monumentally stupid "Hey shoot me first!!" however I do believe it is a right and not a privilege if you want to open carry a goddamn punt gun more power to you and I will fight tooth and nail for your right to do so
[QUOTE=PandaJuggernaut;51862630]I agree that OC is generally monumentally stupid "Hey shoot me first!!" however I do believe it is a right and not a privilege if you want to open carry a goddamn punt gun more power to you and I will fight tooth and nail for your right to do so[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'd say it's one of those things where I'd rather let people exercise their best judgement. Look at your individual situation before making any decision. If you're in the middle of a major city, you're probably going to want to go for CC, assuming that option is legal. Small town in rural Arkansas, where everyone and their grandmother has probably been shooting since they could walk? I'd say OC all you want, again assuming there aren't any laws against it. If you're in bear/cougar country, OC is a bit of a given.
As for idiots who don't know how to handle guns, why are we worried about their competence when they start carrying firearms in public, rather than when they first get their hands on them? I've said this before, I'll say it a thousand times: people should know what the fuck they're doing before they pick up a firearm. Leave competent, law-abiding people alone. Punish the morons.
[QUOTE=MAC21500;51862452]So OC is dumb and CC isn't a right...riiiiiight...
As much as I'd prefer training before permitting be mandatory, a right delayed is a right denied.[/QUOTE]
Open carrying is dumb, because like I just said, you're openly presenting yourself as a target if something does happen, and all you're really doing is scaring soccer moms. It goes without saying that if you're hiking or are a farm hand or something, theres no reason not too as its way more comfy than CC.
CC isn't a right because it isn't protected in our bill of rights, CC is a privilege.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51862681]Yeah, I'd say it's one of those things where I'd rather let people exercise their best judgement. Look at your individual situation before making any decision. If you're in the middle of a major city, you're probably going to want to go for CC, assuming that option is legal. Small town in rural Arkansas, where everyone and their grandmother has probably been shooting since they could walk? I'd say OC all you want, again assuming there aren't any laws against it. If you're in bear/cougar country, OC is a bit of a given.
As for idiots who don't know how to handle guns, why are we worried about their competence when they start carrying firearms in public, rather than when they first get their hands on them? I've said this before, I'll say it a thousand times: people should know what the fuck they're doing before they pick up a firearm. Leave competent, law-abiding people alone. Punish the morons.[/QUOTE]
I'm worried about the morons carrying in public because they're not trained, they don't know the laws, and I go out in public pretty damned often.
Look guys, I'm not saying that we should start a permit process to be able to buy firearms, register firearms, ban, confiscate, whatever. I don't understand why this is hard to relate to, but I don't want unqualified people carrying firearms in public places where they intend to use them for defense, despite being unqualified and not read on the laws.
I'm going to go with a solid no on CC not being a right; I don't like OC either, but saying things like that about both methods of carry isn't helping advance our rights.
[QUOTE=MAC21500;51863726]I'm going to go with a solid no on CC not being a right; I don't like OC either, but saying things like that about both methods of carry isn't helping advance our rights.[/QUOTE]
The firearm community will always get less than what we believe we deserve or are entitled to. We will be forced to make terrible compromises to sate an uninformed and unsympathetic public. This is why you have to fight tooth and nail for every right possible, even when they don't seem to matter too much, so that later when compromises are made you are happy with what you get. If you shoot (haha pun) for any legal gains, you will only get half of what you want., so shoot for the stars.
[QUOTE=MAC21500;51863726]I'm going to go with a solid no on CC not being a right; I don't like OC either, but saying things like that about both methods of carry isn't helping advance our rights.[/QUOTE]
Can you justify CC being a right instead of just saying it is?
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zombinie;51863866]The firearm community will always get less than what we believe we deserve or are entitled to. We will be forced to make terrible compromises to sate an uninformed and unsympathetic public. This is why you have to fight tooth and nail for every right possible, even when they don't seem to matter too much, so that later when compromises are made you are happy with what you get. If you shoot (haha pun) for any legal gains, you will only get half of what you want., so shoot for the stars.[/QUOTE]
shoot for the stars [i]within reason[/i]. Asking for people to be able to carry guns in public without training, and justifying it as a right, does not get people on your side.
Well, that's more or less why I'm glad Europe is way over there
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51863988]Well, that's more or less why I'm glad Europe is way over there[/QUOTE]
Can you honestly say you're A-OK with every single American being able to carry a firearm in public without training in any way? Even after meeting some Americans and being around people at the gunrange? Do you honestly think that its a good idea?
Most states require you to take a hunting course before you can carry a rifle into a depopulated area and shoot a deer. You think its a good idea to let people carry them in public without training?
No such thing as sensible gun legislation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NRA4ever
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51864054]Can you honestly say you're A-OK with every single American being able to carry a firearm in public without training in any way? Even after meeting some Americans and being around people at the gunrange? Do you honestly think that its a good idea?
Most states require you to take a hunting course before you can carry a rifle into a depopulated area and shoot a deer. You think its a good idea to let people carry them in public without training?[/QUOTE]
While I much, MUCH prefer them seeking out training on their own before or right after they buy the gun (because I DO believe walking around with one and being 100% uneducated is fairly unsafe), I do think it is their right to do so, and laws to do so should either remain or be changed to respect that. Because, I think the alternative leads down a path I'd rather not see one of my rights go.
I just got into a similar discussion about this a week ago in SH, I'd rather not go through that all again with the posters in this thread, who I actually like.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;51864063]but bro it's my god given right through the second amendment and in that way you cannot legislate or regulate it because then you infringe and it [B] S H A L L N O T B E I N F R I N G E D !!!!!!!!!![/B]
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
TL;DR "i should be able to carry my makarov loaded with +p+ fmj into church for service and if you disagree you are a godless commie without respect for the us constitution"[/QUOTE]
yeah nvm basically this
(all of the churches I attended had a fairly armed congregation and I have not yet been shot so maybe I'm biased)
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51864084]No such thing as sensible gun legislation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NRA4ever[/QUOTE]
this too
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864091]While I much, MUCH prefer them seeking out training on their own before or right after they buy the gun (because I DO believe walking around with one and being 100% uneducated is fairly unsafe), I do think it is their right to do so, and laws to do so should either remain or be changed to respect that. Because, I think the alternative leads down a path I'd rather not see one of my rights go.
I just got into a similar discussion about this a week ago in SH, I'd rather not go through that all again with the posters in this thread, who I actually like.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
yeah nvm basically this
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
this too[/QUOTE]
You live in a fantasy land dood. If people don't have to go through training for it, then they're not going too.
Given the option, would you completely deregulate firearms and weaponry in general?
If you're [i]agreeing[/i] with my and Prusse's sarcasm, then theres something blatantly wrong with your ideals.
When it comes to CC I really think the applicant needs to attend some classes first. Just to make them aware of the serious responsibility they're undertaking.
Perhaps shake them a little with the reality that they own every bullet that gets fired and the [i]consequences[/i] that come with it.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51864106]You live in a fantasy land dood. If people don't have to go through training for it, then they're not going too.
Given the option, would you completely deregulate firearms and weaponry in general?
If you're [i]agreeing[/i] with my and Prusse's sarcasm, then theres something blatantly wrong with your ideals.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure that the part on training is 100% accurate. I'd be surprised if classes on the legal issues you may face and general proficiency things weren't offered at quite a few shops in the states that already have constitutional carry.
I know in VA, the process doesn't really require a large set of tests/classes like some places do, an online course or hunters safety will suffice here as far as I am aware. However, both of my local shop's classes are booked up pretty fat for months in advance. Stress to people that when they buy a gun that it's absolutely critical to be well-educated, but it's not something the government should have control over, on the grounds that they're imperfect and constantly changing, and regulations could be increased to something ridiculous like 40 hrs. of practice a week to retain CCW permit or etc. by a more eager anti-gun administration.
On Deregulation:
Yeah, more or less. Suppressors, SBRs, Full Auto, CC mostly anywhere without gov't interference (I don't mind private property like businesses and etc. naming themselves no gun zones, and them being able to kick me out or call the police on me for trespassing if I don't leave). I'd like to keep the parts relating to relevant mental issues, felonies, and violent misdemeanors barring people from (legal, anyway) firearms, because I'm all in for taking away the rights of people who willfully deny others theirs, or are unable to stop themselves from doing so to others or themselves, as long as there is a rights restoration/appeals process for the respective issues (which there is.) I'm sure there are a few other areas I agree with some of the laws on the books that I'm forgetting.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864174]I'm not sure that the part on training is 100% accurate. I'd be surprised if classes on the legal issues you may face and general proficiency things weren't offered at quite a few shops in the states that already have constitutional carry.[/quote]
I didn't say shops wouldn't offer it, I said most people wouldn't go to it. And how many people are currently carrying because they haven't been to one of these overbooked classes? Nobody knows because you can't track a permitless system.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864174]
I know in VA, the process doesn't really require a large set of tests/classes like some places do, an online course or hunters safety will suffice here as far as I am aware. However, both of my local shop's classes are booked up pretty fat for months in advance. Stress to people that when they buy a gun that it's absolutely critical to be well-educated, but it's not something the government should have control over, on the grounds that they're imperfect and constantly changing, and regulations could be increased to something ridiculous like 40 hrs. of practice a week to retain CCW permit or etc. by a more eager anti-gun administration. [/quote]
No they couldn't. We haven't seen any sort of vigorous gun legislation on a federal level since the 90's. The NRA holds immense power over the law making process. Has any shall-issue blue state done this?
You're willing to let people who are untrained, unqualified, and not fully aware of the laws, carry a firearm in public just because of irrational paranoia.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864174]
On Deregulation:
Yeah, more or less. Suppressors, SBRs, Full Auto, CC mostly anywhere without gov't interference (I don't mind private property like businesses and etc. naming themselves no gun zones, and them being able to kick me out or call the police on me for trespassing if I don't leave). I'd like to keep the parts relating to relevant mental issues, felonies, and violent misdemeanors barring people from (legal, anyway) firearms, because I'm all in for taking away the rights of people who willfully deny others theirs, or are unable to stop themselves from doing so to others or themselves, as long as there is a rights restoration/appeals process for the respective issues (which there is.) I'm sure there are a few other areas I agree with some of the laws on the books that I'm forgetting.[/QUOTE]
The thing you just described is not deregulation, it's actually whats called [i]gun control[/i].
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
I understand most people don't want to have to get a permit to buy a gun, I don't either. The process thats in place right now works perfectly. But allowing people to carry firearms in public to defend themselves when they're not aware of the laws and when they're not trained or experienced enough to use a firearm in self defense, is just blatantly reckless.
I don't want my firearms regulated [i]unreasonably[/i]. Wanting anyone and everyone to be able to carry is not a reasonable request and it certainly is not a right. "Constitutional" carry is not something that a Clinton or Sanders is trying to take away, this is something people are proposing just because we got a orange faced lunatic in office who will sign any pro-gun bill that lands on his desk.
If we fuck shit up now by getting the wrong things done, then its only going to get worse for us with Trump is kicked out of office in 4 years.
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
When I took my concealed carry course, there were about 15 of us in there. 5 or 6 of them thought that you could shoot a guy that was stealing your TV, even if he was unarmed. 1 guy even thought that the thing a guy was stealing had to be worth enough to be considered felony theft for you to kill them.
Everyone in the class passed the shooting course, but about half had to try again for a second time and 1 gal had to take it a third time.
These are the types of people that would be in my town carrying without a permit if CC didn't require a permit. Not only could they unnecessarily kill somebody, but they themselves could end up in prison for murder because they weren't aware of the laws.
If you want to go hunting in pretty much any state, you have to take a hunters safety course. Why is that reasonable but taking a course so you understand the consequences of killing a person is different?
[QUOTE]No they couldn't. We haven't seen any sort of vigorous gun legislation on a federal level since the 90's. The NRA holds immense power over the law making process. Has any shall-issue blue state done this?
You're willing to let people who are untrained, unqualified, and not fully aware of the laws, carry a firearm in public just because of irrational paranoia.[/QUOTE]
Okay. I'd like to keep it that way, and then some in the way of them removing a large chunk of gun laws. I've never subscribed to the thought of "It's unlikely now, so it can NEVER happen."
Second bit, Yeah, I am. I don't think it's unacceptably dangerous. As far as I'm aware, the states that have adopted Constitutional Carry™ aren't engulfed in some bullet-filled hellhole of people accidentally shooting each other reaching for the $1 bill in their pocket to buy a Pepsi at Wawa. For the most part, I trust most people who are going to go out and buy a gun to inform themselves and carry it safely, despite some of the stupidity I have seen at the public range. Accidents will probably still happen, granted. However, I don't think it will be on a scale that warrants denying everyone else of their right.
Hate to use a cliche quote, but if you're going to give me the choice between freedom and safety, I'll probably choose freedom in most cases.
[QUOTE]The thing you just described is not deregulation, it's actually whats called gun control.[/QUOTE]
How is the removal of most regulations, not deregulation? :v:
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864344]Okay. I'd like to keep it that way, and then some in the way of them removing a large chunk of gun laws. I've never subscribed to the thought of "It's unlikely now, so it can NEVER happen."
Second bit, Yeah, I am. I don't think it's unacceptably dangerous. As far as I'm aware, the states that have adopted Constitutional Carry™ aren't engulfed in some bullet-filled hellhole of people accidentally shooting each other reaching for the $1 bill in their pocket to buy a Pepsi at Wawa. For the most part, I trust most people who are going to go out and buy a gun to inform themselves and carry it safely, despite some of the stupidity I have seen at the public range. Accidents will probably still happen, granted. However, I don't think it will be on a scale that warrants denying everyone else of their right.
Hate to use a cliche quote, but if you're going to give me the choice between freedom and safety, I'll probably choose freedom in most cases.
How is the removal of most regulations, not deregulation? :v:[/QUOTE]
Can you give me specific gun laws you would like to see repealed? Because so far your whole idea of deregulation is just repealing the NFA. No mention of the GCA of 1968, FFA, Brady laws, ect.
Like I said earlier, deregulation would remove EVERYTHING. Background check process, FFL's, any sort of manufacturing licenses, ect. What you're asking for is not deregulation, some would say even unconstitutional. Shall not be infringed and all that.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51864387]Can you give me specific gun laws you would like to see repealed? Because so far your whole idea of deregulation is just repealing the NFA. No mention of the GCA of 1968, FFA, Brady laws, ect.
Like I said earlier, deregulation would remove EVERYTHING. Background check process, FFL's, any sort of manufacturing licenses, ect. What you're asking for is not deregulation, some would say even unconstitutional. Shall not be infringed and all that.[/QUOTE]
Used the NFA as an example, I assumed you would get the idea from most of my posts.
I don't mind background checks like what is on a 4473 (which I think is about perfect as far as that goes), like I said before, it keeps away people from (legally) getting weapons when they shouldn't have them, IE when they have showed a willingness to deny others of their rights.
Anything involving regulations on Concealed Carry is gone. Things involving FFLS and most other commerce laws could get slashed and I wouldn't really mind, so long as regs. like the FFA has involving barring felons aren't touched. Granted, I don't know a lot of behind-the-counter stuff and the business side of things, so I'd have to read up more on what those entail. Things involving waiting periods and the like are done. The F in ATF is removed because fuck those guys.
Basically, anything that disallows or puts under penalty or otherwise impedes a law abiding and sane citizen, from owning or carrying in any way, covering basically anything they want to would be put in to the shredder. Things like magazine size, features, accessories, etc. would also be completely unregulated as well!
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864519]Used the NFA as an example, I assumed you would get the idea from most of my posts.
I don't mind background checks like what is on a 4473 (which I think is about perfect as far as that goes), like I said before, it keeps away people from [b](legally)[/b] getting weapons when they shouldn't have them, IE when they have showed a willingness to deny others of their rights.
Anything involving regulations on Concealed Carry is gone. Things involving FFLS and most other commerce laws could get slashed and I wouldn't really mind, so long as regs. like the FFA has involving barring felons aren't touched. Granted, I don't know a lot of behind-the-counter stuff and the business side of things, so I'd have to read up more on what those entail. Things involving waiting periods and the like are done. The F in ATF is removed because fuck those guys.
Basically, anything that disallows or puts under penalty or otherwise impedes a law abiding and sane citizen, from owning or carrying in any way, covering basically anything they want to would be put in to the shredder. Things like magazine size, features, accessories, etc. would also be completely unregulated as well![/QUOTE]
That "legally" bit is all because of gun laws that are made long after the 2A was wrote up. You don't think "Shall not be infringed" goes against that regulation, especially since it disallows certain citizens to own guns?
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51864545]That "legally" bit is all because of gun laws that are made long after the 2A was wrote up. You don't think "Shall not be infringed" goes against that regulation, especially since it disallows certain citizens to own guns?[/QUOTE]
Like I said, again, in regards to owning gats, I'm all for barring criminals and the mentally unstable from their rights, so long as their is a process to regain and appealing that decision.
So, legally in my hypothetical world where I deregulated all guns, yeah.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;51864579]Like I said, again, in regards to owning gats, I'm all for barring criminals and the mentally unstable from their rights, so long as their is a process to regain and appealing that decision.
So, legally in my hypothetical world where I deregulated all guns, yeah.[/QUOTE]
But there's a process to gain your rights to conceal carry, how is that much different?
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
I'd be so fucking happy if there was a federal shall issue CC permit that required actual firearms training. I didn't start carrying myself in Mississippi where there was constitutional until I took a pistols course. That is not a common thing to do though.
[QUOTE=Levelog;51864686]But there's a process to gain your rights to conceal carry, how is that much different?
[editline]23rd February 2017[/editline]
I'd be so fucking happy if there was a federal shall issue CC permit that required actual firearms training. I didn't start carrying myself in Mississippi where there was constitutional until I took a pistols course. That is not a common thing to do though.[/QUOTE]
A law-abiding, able citizen shouldn't have to "gain their rights" to do anything recognized by the constitution.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
