Permit To Carry A Gun No Longer Required

Aunt Marg said:
As a gun owner myself, I see nothing wrong with guns per se, but my vision of gun-ownership is one that encompasses traditional values, where guns had a place, and that place was at home, not in a person's pocket, strapped to ones belt, or slung over ones shoulder while out and about in the general public, and in addition to, my vision of guns differs from the mentality I see in the people of the USofA.

I was raised with the understanding that guns were for sport, not killing people.

That's where the Canadian way of thinking differs from that of the folks in the USofA related to guns.

When you wake up in the morning and strap your sidearm on before leaving the house, that isn't sport, that's looking for trouble... that's looking for someone to shoot IMO.

At any rate, packing a gun around with you everywhere doesn't reflect a well-adjusted country/society, nor does it reflect well-adjusted people.

IMO there's something seriously lacking in people who feel the need to pack a gun on them 24/7. I see a major disconnect.
Click to expand...
Ever study the origination of gun laws in the US? Fact was that carrying "in the open" was the norm. Only "outlaws" would carry concealed. Then I guess Americans got all scared and decided they should pass a law to conceal carry and shame people who openly carried.

Putting on a gun does NOT mean someone is "looking for someone to shoot." Do you think that's what cops are doing when they go to work? Putting on a gun means that if I am attacked I MAY be able to defend myself. Or perhaps protect someone I love. Or even protect you from the nut job psychopath who decided to shoot up the local grocery store!

Police have no obligation to protect you. Who will protect you? If not you, who?
 

fuzzybuddy said:
I believe Texas politicians are extremely pro-gun. I think they want to have so many guns in so many hands that the evil federal government won't be able to take them away. But the constant mass gun killings is eating away at gun ownership, and gun lovers. In most states, hunting licenses are way down. It won't happen in my life time, but in 10-20 years, when gun violence becomes a central issue, and there will be strict gun laws. Maybe in another 10 years, the Second Amendment will be modified to address the rampant carnage of way too many guns in way too many irresponsible hands.
Aunt Meg said guns are not for killing people. She may not use her guns to kill people, but millions of other do.
Click to expand...
"mass gun killings is eating away at gun ownership" - not really. every year there are more and more NICS checks for gun sales (that's the federal background check done EVERY TIME someone buys a gun from a federally licensed gun dealer).

In the 1980s and 1990s gun deaths were much higher. But they were on the decline even then and in 1994 the "Assault Weapons Ban" went into affect. A DOJ report later released stated the "ban" had NO EFFECT on overall gun related deaths. The DOJ also estimates that in excess of 1 MILLION crimes per year are prevented by regular citizens who are carrying a firearm for their own protection - rapes, robberies, homicides, etc.

"but millions of other do" - false. undeniably false. unless you want to talk about dictatorial governments that is. In the US the "average" is less than 32k per year with about half of those being suicides. Less than that number are homicides. And if you break down homicides by demographics you will find that most of those homicides are "other crime related" such as gangs and crimes being committed by those 25 years and younger.

The really sad part are the IDIOTS who leave their firearms in their cars or unsecured in their home and a child ends up getting hold of the gun and a kid dies. We have had 2 of those cases in the last week here in TX that I am aware of. I don't know how any parent who allows that to happen can keep living their life. Personally, I would have taken my own life if I had been that irresponsible to cause a child lose their life through my carelessness.
 
OneHalf said:
Ever study the origination of gun laws in the US? Fact was that carrying "in the open" was the norm. Only "outlaws" would carry concealed. Then I guess Americans got all scared and decided they should pass a law to conceal carry and shame people who openly carried.

Putting on a gun does NOT mean someone is "looking for someone to shoot." Do you think that's what cops are doing when they go to work? Putting on a gun means that if I am attacked I MAY be able to defend myself. Or perhaps protect someone I love. Or even protect you from the nut job psychopath who decided to shoot up the local grocery store!

Police have no obligation to protect you. Who will protect you? If not you, who?
Click to expand...
I watched a talk show with Sarah Brady as a guest. She went on & on about the evils of guns. But she had trouble answering a question from an intelligent person in the audience who asked her:
"Mrs. Brady, I notice that everywhere you go, you are surrounded by armed security - you are protected by no less than 7 guns 24/7. How would you propose the rest of us "normal" people protect ourselves?"
She tried her best to reply: "Uh....well.....y...you know......but.....you don't hunt with an assault rifle...."

That's how lots of people react when confronted with intelligence.
 

OneHalf said:
Do you support requiring people to be licensed to publish their opinion or express their view in public? How about the right to practice their religion? Should that be licensed? (more killings have been committed "in the name of religion" than for any other reason) How about needing to pass a competency test and a history exam in order to vote? What other rights should we make people take a test and apply for a license in order to exercise?
Click to expand...
No AM is absolute in nature. Other AM's have restrictions also.
 
chic said:
What if we tackled this a different way? What about getting rid of the reasons why people hate and want to kill each other in the first place? I see so much division and hatred here everyday, I've thought of leaving because of it.

That's why people with guns kill each other. Division. Take that away and there'd be less killing I believe.
Click to expand...
I agree about getting rid of reasons why people hate and want to kill but how does one go about finding those people and stopping them and changing their minds? Its easier said than done, unfortunately. Some kind of intense anti-hate/anti-kill education for those people would be good once we find out who they are.
 
OneHalf said:
AM?

Yes, my right to life IS absolute. I have the ABSOLUTE right to defend it. And as it states, "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."
Click to expand...

"Infringed,"as an inclusion, has it's Judicial interpretations too. Your definition may not meet another mans or Courts.
 
OneHalf said:
Do you support requiring people to be licensed to publish their opinion or express their view in public? How about the right to practice their religion? Should that be licensed? (more killings have been committed "in the name of religion" than for any other reason) How about needing to pass a competency test and a history exam in order to vote? What other rights should we make people take a test and apply for a license in order to exercise?
Click to expand...
Now that is just being silly. It is the gun that is registered and the owner who needs a licence to buy one.
The assumption is that unless there are reasons for that individual not to have access to firearms the licence will be granted.

Extrapolating this concept to religious faith is irrelevant to these considerations but a history of criminality or violence, including DV, would not be.
 
Warrigal said:
Now that is just being silly. It is the gun that is registered and the owner who needs a licence to buy one.
The assumption is that unless there are reasons for that individual not to have access to firearms the licence will be granted.

Extrapolating this concept to religious faith is irrelevant to these considerations but a history of criminality or violence, including DV, would not be.
Click to expand...
Those are already exclusions to legal ownership.
 
OneHalf said:
"mass gun killings is eating away at gun ownership" - not really.
Click to expand...
OneHalf said:
The DOJ also estimates that in excess of 1 MILLION crimes per year are prevented by regular citizens who are carrying a firearm for their own protection -
Click to expand...
Please OneHalf..... Dont confuse people with true facts....
Just after the Sandy Hook shooting, a few of us at work dug into statistics from FBI and CDC and came to a very surprising conclusion.
using the past 4 years data......
You were 4 times more likely to be killed by falling debris, Tree limbs and such, than a random mass shooter....
 
Police officers in Texas must be very worried by this new law. Who would willingly sign up for such a dangerous job?
 
old medic said:
Please OneHalf..... Dont confuse people with true facts....
Just after the Sandy Hook shooting, a few of us at work dug into statistics from FBI and CDC and came to a very surprising conclusion.
using the past 4 years data......
You were 4 times more likely to be killed by falling debris, Tree limbs and such, than a random mass shooter....
Click to expand...
Over 38,000 people died by firearms in 2019 in USA.

Is that not problem enough to contemplate action to reduce that number of people dying unnecessary deaths?

Note - 36,120 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes in the same year.
 
Warrigal said:
Over 38,000 people died by firearms in 2019 in USA.

Is that not problem enough to contemplate action to reduce that number of people dying unnecessary deaths?

Note - 36,120 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes in the same year.
Click to expand...
There are people trying very hard to take action to reduce the unnecessary deaths--the problem is a Political one I'm sorry to say so I don't believe I can go much further to explain. All I can say is The people trying to take action are constantly met with those who believe we are trying to take away their second amendment rights. I'm hoping this new administration in the White House will be able remedy this with the new senators now. I'm anxiously awaiting what they will do next--the ones who want to help solve the problem. So, you see we are on it and have been for a long time. Unfortunately all the red tape is keeping us in limbo. So you don't have to worry about us!
 
Warrigal said:
Over 38,000 people died by firearms in 2019 in USA.

Is that not problem enough to contemplate action to reduce that number of people dying unnecessary deaths?

Note - 36,120 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes in the same year.
Click to expand...
About 24,000 of those were suicides. Total suicides was about 48,000, over 6,000 were by poisoning.

Of the remaining 14,000 gun deaths (homicides), most are tied to gang/drug activity (can't find the actual number right now). There were another 5,000 homicides that did not involve firearms. 39,000 folks died from falling. 66,000 died from unintentional poisoning.

These numbers are from CDC website. Thanks for playing.
 
Warrigal said:
I know that but it is mandatory to register each gun owned?
Click to expand...
Not in New Mexico. We don't have mandatory gun registration. It's also legal here to open carry, but I've never seen anybody (besides police) do it except while hunting or out in the wilderness areas. Back in the day when we would go out in the mountains to hike or fish or whatever, we always had a weapon with us. If I were to do it now (unlikely), I'd still take a weapon.
 
OneHalf said:
Ever study the origination of gun laws in the US? Fact was that carrying "in the open" was the norm. Only "outlaws" would carry concealed. Then I guess Americans got all scared and decided they should pass a law to conceal carry and shame people who openly carried.

Putting on a gun does NOT mean someone is "looking for someone to shoot." Do you think that's what cops are doing when they go to work? Putting on a gun means that if I am attacked I MAY be able to defend myself. Or perhaps protect someone I love. Or even protect you from the nut job psychopath who decided to shoot up the local grocery store!

Police have no obligation to protect you. Who will protect you? If not you, who?
Click to expand...
Cops have a job to do.

As for the other highlighted content, LOL!

Here in Canada I don't need protection, because every street I drive on, walk on, and every store I visit, I don't encounter nut-jobs packing heat.
 
mellowyellow said:
Police officers in Texas must be very worried by this new law. Who would willingly sign up for such a dangerous job?
Click to expand...
Excellent point and the Blue People paid to protect us are leaving in record numbers and new recruits are probably seeing different avenues in terms of careers. The sad fact is it is not the government that is pounding on our police but the media. Don't get me wrong no one hates dirty cops more than me. I grew up the Chicago Mayor Daily days and I hated the Chicago cops for reasons that were justified. However, when you send cops into a crowd of out of control people the rule book is thrown out. Take a person high on PCP for example there is no one man that can contain him or her so to me the officer had every right to kill that person in order to prevent himself from being killed. The young woman that was shot was attacking. I said 'attacking" with a knife so the cop did the right thing. Ask yourself this, what kind of parent "raise" a child to believe stabbing another human being is OK to resolve a dispute? I think you all know the answer. One of the clowns on the morning show referred that dead woman as a "child". Really? A child? I was her age and I was not a child then and never considered ramming a large knife in to another human being. But then that's just me.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top