Why not? It would be useful in heavy traffic...

Out here heavy traffic is when more than one pickup goes by the place in one day

Well....I didn't know it was loaded officer....Sorry about yer trunk...That was a squad car? Oh...I am truly sorry. Really I am...

All games have rules. We can already own a full auto and other types of weapons. But like was said above. We don't need an aircraft carrier in the driveway...Restrictions/limitations will be needed, but we do need to remove a lot of the stupid laws that don't do a thing but help the liberals feel good...And make the criminal element happy or don't obey anyway...

Right on the head Bushmaster

On my Minnesota card it is called a Carry Permit, which means that if I choose, I can openly carry my pistol. I can't believe that even the DFL people voted for this, but I'm not complaining.

Eric

Mine says CCW (Carrying Concealed Weapon)

I just pulled mine out of my wallet and read what it says on the face of the permit.

"Concealed Handgun Permit"

There you have it.

I'm not too concerned about what people own/use/carry as long as they use it legally, without endangering innocents nearby. Its not up to ME to determine what YOU "need".

Alas I live in Wisconsin where we don't have CCW permits....
If we got it, I probably wouldn't carry in town. It's a small town and I'm prone to believe there's not much happening, police response time is 3-11 minutes (depending on time of day), and everyone else I know will be carrying. (why carry the extra weight?)

At home in the country where police response time is 8-12 minutes average I will most definitely. I have a tendency to be a good Samaritan and help out folks who broke down on the highway and such. That's where I "would." There's something about walking out into the dark with strangers and turning your back to them while trying to see if you can fix their problem. Also too many farmers have been robbed while working on their tractors in the field. It's only a matter of time before they start getting hit around here for a certain chemicals.

Church, I would carry, not for feeling unsafe, but for the protection of my fellow congregates. As far as these states where you are not allowed to carry in a church, what are they afraid of? A large group of people getting together with guns? Are they scared it's a conspiracy? I am absolutely outraged at the thought of it :. I think it should be left to the congregation at whole or the individual congregate. Most congregations of the Christian sects I have spoken with agree, that we have to protect ourselves as to follow the rules of taking care of our blessings. (Ourselves) But "He who kills by the sword will to die by the sword" meaning don't be aggressive, but responsibly and intelligently reactive.

I also don't believe that dressing in my Sundays finest should but a bull’s eye on my back to be robbed or harmed in some way. Based on the fact I'm coming from church.

I think the 2nd amendment protects a someones right to own a 90mm Recoiless Rifle or a tank.

Remember a militia is meant to be able to fight a war, so if your not as well armed and trained as the enemy whats the point?

Dimitri

Bushmaster wrote:

All games have rules. We can already own a full auto and other types of weapons. Restrictions/limitations will be needed, but we do need to remove a lot of the stupid laws that don't do a thing but help the liberals feel good...And make the criminal element happy or don't obey anyway...

I wasn't going to wade into this one because I don't live in the USA or fully understand your Constitution and Laws. However, Bushy makes a good point.

The only thing I will add is that it is not necessarily the LAW ABIDING, LEGAL OWNER OF FIREARMS that need to be regulated out of extistence... it is the criminal that needs to be regulated. Yeah, I know, I can hear it now..."But they don't take any notice of the law"... thats easy to fix!! Legislate HEAVILY against illegal use of firearms. If a criminal uses a firearm for any nefarious reason he should be dealt with in an extreme manner BY THE COURTS...the Judicial System. These laws will apply equally to a "law abiding" citizen if he does the wrong thing.

When these laws are being rehashed, it needs to be done by a "group" of ordinary citizens...not Politicians, and especially not by the Judges or Law Associations. I understand that it wouldn't be easy to select exactly who would constitute this group, but it is the primary stakeholders...the everyday citizens of the country...who should carry out this task. Also, there should be NO veto by Government, or anybody else or organisation for that matter.

The first thing that needs to happen though is a shake up of the Legal System...the Lawyers, Attorneys, Solicitors, Barristers etc...THE BOTTOM FEEDERS! Get rid of the ridiculous laws that allow a scumbag lawyer to get a criminal off a charge due to some ludicrous reasoning.

Next, get rid of the laws that negate the use of THE FACTS. Who cares how the facts were obtained!!!! The facts are the facts, and if they prove that Willy Grub committed a crime, then Willy Grub takes ownership/responsibility for his actions...END OF STORY. I'm sick of hearing that "this fact is not permissible because it was obtained by doing something that was not in the best interests of the criminal". Who gives a damn how it was obtained...so long as the criminal isn't "harmed" in the collection of said fact.

At the end of the day if an individual knows and understands that he will be dealt with EXTREMELY firmly for using a firearm in the commission of a crime then he/she may very well reconsider their use of the firearm. Of course there will always be those that don't give a rat's rectum, but they will be dealt with in any case, and hopefully they will never be able to do it again.

Bottom line....don't penalise the law abiding citizen for the actions of someone who has no respect for the laws of society. Penalise the law breaker...regardless of who he/she is. Don't end up in the position that we are in over here in Australia. The Governments idea of "we'll just make guns illegal to own, then nobody will have one for any reason! That will fix the firearm crime issue" is ridiculousand short sighted. The criminals laugh at this idea...it makes their life much easier.

What is the old saying..."Outlaw Guns and only Outlaws will have Guns !!!"



Soapbox dismantled and packed away for future use when required.


Cheers, Vince

d_hoffman wrote:

As far as explosive rounds, That would be ridiculous. Any standard round be it factory or handload with convetional bullet types would be reasonable and constitutional, IMNSHO. . . . .

OK, d_hoffman, let me have just a little fun with your statement, but, only to illustrate a point.

The intent of the 2nd Ammendment, from my reading, was to assure that private citizens had access to the same weaponry as the militia. This is self evident, because there was no standing army, only the militia. The militia was any able bodied citizen that was eligible to vote (this immediately precluded women as they did not have the right to vote --- see these guys were really smart!) and had a firearm in his possession.

Time passes and America eventually has a standing army (another thing the Founding Fathers deplored). Weaponry becomes more sophisticated and today includes a vast array of offensive weapons that were unimaginable at the time the country was founded. Yet, the precept is thought valid by many, that we should as citizens has access to the same weaponry as our Army. And why should we? So that the power remains with the People, including the ability to thwart their own government if needed.

So while hunting, competition, recreation shooting, etal, have legions that want the 2nd Ammendment guarded and protected, none is as important as the people having the power to reject their govenment by force if needed. And, that leads to this question -- if Armed Force combatants have explosive rounds, shouldn't we? Why or why not?

Jbird, something to think about... How many times can a guy hit you with a baseball bat in "3-11 minutes"? And that's IF you got a call in to the police first.

That said, I have a concealed carry permit and, so far, rarely carry concealed. If I go out at night to pick up a pizza or to the ATM I carry concealed. When I go out for a walk I carry concealed because its a rural area with a possibility of rabid animals, aggressive dogs, etc and I don't want to scare the liberal neighbors with open carry.

When I go to work, etc. I don't carry on me, although I have a gun in the car. I don't have any stats to prove it but I'm betting that most violent crimes barely last 3 minutes.

As for the militia thing... The US Supreme Court has already ruled that the people/militia are supposed to have the type of weapons in current use by the military. See US vs Miller - " that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

[quote="Vince"]

Bushmaster wrote:

All games have rules. We can already own a full auto and other types of weapons. Restrictions/limitations will be needed, but we do need to remove a lot of the stupid laws that don't do a thing but help the liberals feel good...And make the criminal element happy or don't obey anyway...

I wasn't going to wade into this one because I don't live in the USA or fully understand your Constitution and Laws. However, Bushy makes a good point.


***********************************************************

Vince: I totally agree with Bushy. Don't feel bad you don't understand the U.S. Constitution, or Laws. There are some of us that do not, or will not attempt to understand. I don't understand it a s I feel I should.

Some do have valid reasons for opposing guns.

Like my wife: She, at one time enjoyed shooting, and I enjoyed having her with me. We raised our kids to know about guns, and respect them.

But, unknown to us, our son has a genetic chemical imbalance, which causes depression and, at one time, a suicide attempt.

I never want to go through that again, coming home from work, finding a suicide note and my handgun box on our bed, and being gut wrenching scared to walk down the hall and open the door of his bedroom.

Fortunately, he had gone to complete some "unfinished business" , and we were able to intervene, and with the help of our family doctor, get him into a program which helped.

My guns spent 3 years in my brother-in-law's basement.

He is good now, but still has problems with depression. He is a good dad, and a hard worker. I show he and my grandson my small collection whenever they wish to look at it.

Unfortunately, my wife cannot accept he is o.k. She hides it well, but has a deep fear that some day, it will happen again.
That led to a complete mental breakdown, several years of therapy, and other things which we will not discuss. She now hates guns, which makes for a somewhat strained relationship at times. At one time, she told me that I was to get rid of my guns, to which I said firmly "NO" !

But,...for better or for worse...together... and it is mostly good. She even relented and gave me a beautiful rifle for a retirement present, and encourages me in my shooting... most of the time...

The problems we face are many: The "interpretation" of the Constitution by the Courts, and attorneys.

We have in place "enhancements" of sentence mandated by Federal Law, but that can backfire. Let's take an extreme hypothetical: If a 70 year old woman defends her person with a handgun, depending upon the circumsatnces, and the prosecutor, she could be facing charges ranging from attempted murder, manslaughter, or "murder most foul", AND could face prosecution under the "gun enhancements."

If the "victim" was of a minorty persuasion, again, depending upon what the attorney had for lunch, a "hate crime" charge could be forthcoming. In my career, I have supervised litigation cases where the person being defended was innocent, only to have some assistant attorney general decide that he wished to curry favor with the legal community, and cave in to some of the most bizarre interpretations of the law. (To get along, go along...or don't look for a job, when you think you are ready to earn more money...)

There is some hope, though. The recent Supreme Court decision to hear a case contending the Washington D.C. handgun ban is unconstitutional, as well as the increased number of states that allow Concealed Weapons Permits, and the credence given to many of the studies showing that guns don't commit crimes.

The biggest problem we face is APATHY...those who don't care what is happening...until they are directly affected, then all they do is gripe about the way it used to be.

OR.. those who won't even take the small amount of time it takes to become somewhat familiar with what is happening regarding our Constitutional rights, or pay the~ $35/year to belong to the NRA.

Oh Boy! I didn' t reallly mean for this to become a book. I guess I just needed to get it off my chest. Thanks, guys!

WildHorse wrote:

I just pulled mine out of my wallet and read what it says on the face of the permit. "Concealed Handgun Permit" There you have it.

CPL, Concealed Pistol License, is what Michigan's is..


And, Good Post Sniper