|
|
Post by surefire on Sept 7, 2008 20:31:39 GMT -5
A gun is an extension of one's hand. It is so easy to use one's hand to do anything. A LOT of training needs to be assured prior to allowing such. Public & open carrying would bring out ALL the nuts for the first generation. After which Darwin's laws & courtesy would reign. But the mops would be continuously wet for years. No, not in public, at least not in this state. Stupid is as stupid does. Forty states with shall issue, no issue required and / or unlimited open carry all say you are utterly and completely wrong. Florida has had "shall issue" concealed carry since 1987. The hue and cry was that the streets would run red. They haven't. And the streets have not run red in any of the states where owning or using a firearm isn't looked upon by society as some type of social disease as it is here in California. Open carry is the norm in Arizona, among other places. Don't see anything in the news about dime store desperadoes shooting each other down in the streets there, do you? thebigdog is correct. States with shall issue laws do not experience red streets. Some California liberals seem to have hysterical, irrational fears over inanimate objects such as guns. I like the line from the movie 'Shane': "A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that. " |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Sept 7, 2008 20:54:18 GMT -5
TBD posted:
"Open carry is the norm in Arizona, among other places. Don't see anything in the news about dime store desperadoes shooting each other down in the streets there, do you?"
I wonder if CA would be as successful given our demographics/Hispanic population (gang bangers), not to mention road rage and chronic traffic jams...
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 7, 2008 21:47:55 GMT -5
JMO, CA isn't the only place with road rage (very rare even here) and traffic jams. That has been raised in every state that went to must issue and it has never borne out, much to the sorrow of the antis. Their predictions didn't come true so they had no horror stories to spread.
The gangbangers carry anyway, even though I suspect most of them can't fill out a 4473 truthfully and buy a gun. So since the thugs you seem to worry about have guns anyway, why not even the playing field?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Sept 8, 2008 19:28:39 GMT -5
I wonder if CA would be as successful given our demographics/Hispanic population (gang bangers), not to mention road rage and chronic traffic jams...Hence my point up the thread about unless / until there is more done about the gang banger problems in this state. Actual road rage where someone acts out, as opposed to flipping the bird or two, doesn't happen as much as some people think. Besides, the folks we're talking about here are the law abiding ones, who by definition would be far more circumspect in their behavior and far less likely to act out. And to Joe's point... why not level the playing field? |
|
Len
Apprentice Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by Len on Sept 8, 2008 19:49:53 GMT -5
A gun is an extension of one's hand. It is so easy to use one's hand to do anything. A LOT of training needs to be assured prior to allowing such. Public & open carrying would bring out ALL the nuts for the first generation. After which Darwin's laws & courtesy would reign. But the mops would be continuously wet for years. No, not in public, at least not in this state. Stupid is as stupid does. Forty states with shall issue, no issue required and / or unlimited open carry all say you are utterly and completely wrong. Florida has had "shall issue" concealed carry since 1987. The hue and cry was that the streets would run red. They haven't. And the streets have not run red in any of the states where owning or using a firearm isn't looked upon by society as some type of social disease as it is here in California. Open carry is the norm in Arizona, among other places. Don't see anything in the news about dime store desperadoes shooting each other down in the streets there, do you? Well, well, I guess an old dog can learn....simply ask my wife about me being wrong too. Still, it stands to reason that there would be a lot of blood in California's streets. All ready is. We have it one way here, unlike Arizona which has ANOTHER way to work out their salvation. Very different dynamics. I'll bet the lawsuits here are 3x the amount than Arizona, and probably more so in the other 40 states as well, and I mean that is "on the natural" without guns. The screw ups carrying, shooting, hitting the wrong target, property damage and......wait....are you in the judicial business, because the lawyers & courts would have a field day in this state! Make a ton of money. People are sue happy and will sue a dog's butt for poop on the street, but they are going to allow idiots without training carry? You told the truth and posted the thought of "gun" in California makes all to many in our population think "social disease", and you hope to let that spread? I wish it was legal to carry, but there will be a snowball fight in hell before that happens. |
|
Len
Apprentice Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by Len on Sept 8, 2008 20:00:29 GMT -5
I wonder if CA would be as successful given our demographics/Hispanic population (gang bangers), not to mention road rage and chronic traffic jams...Hence my point up the thread about unless / until there is more done about the gang banger problems in this state. Actual road rage where someone acts out, as opposed to flipping the bird or two, doesn't happen as much as some people think. Besides, the folks we're talking about here are the law abiding ones, who by definition would be far more circumspect in their behavior and far less likely to act out. And to Joe's point... why not level the playing field? Bangers already carry. Now their friends as well? And one reason "actual road rage" doesn't happen is because folks DON'T carry. By definition rage is not rational, and as an extension of one's hand, the gun is there for that "stupid son of ....." Bang! Doesn't take training to do that....that's why I would advocate serious training before handing out permits. Or worse, the state not handing out permits, lase fair, and not knowing the ballistics of the weapon a person chooses to carry in public. Politically I am more conservative than The Divine Right of Kings, yet I can see the reason for keeping status quo, though personally I wish it would change. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 8, 2008 21:00:45 GMT -5
Len, you are sounding like a shill for Sarah Brady or Rosie. That tired old agument about guns blazing away when some gets cut off in traffic, or whatever, doesn't hold up to what happens in real life. Or, the times they do, they are caused by the gang bangers and wannabees that are already prohibited from owning firearms.
To paraphrase a bumper sticker, Ted Kennedys car has killed more people than the guns of 80,000,000 gun owners.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Sept 10, 2008 11:53:50 GMT -5
I think my comfort level with gun ownership stops at a concealed weapons permit, and only for those that are SQUEAKY clean. I've encountered a few nut jobs in my life and I would hope they NEVER gain access to a gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Sept 10, 2008 11:57:07 GMT -5
Unless and until...
** The gang issue is dealt with, and harshly at that,
** There is a profound shift in thinking toward the mere appearance of a firearm,
I do not see open carry in an urban setting as a viable alternative. Yes, I now see TBD your previous post, I had missed it. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 10, 2008 21:24:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Sept 11, 2008 18:55:55 GMT -5
We do not need Officers like this in office. It is always appropriate to show and exercise your rights.
I quote:
"I don’t think this was the time or the place to show your rights," Beaver County Sheriff George David said.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 11, 2008 19:34:13 GMT -5
Concur, Bolverk (sic). I found this interesting too: "Beaver County District Attorney Anthony Berosh said the issue isn’t whether Noble was legally carrying a gun. State police said Noble did not violate the state’s open carry law, under which you don’t need a permit to carry a weapon in plain sight.
Instead, Berosh said, it’s a battle between two constitutional rights: The right to bear arms and the right to assemble peaceably and without fear."
My copy of the Bill of Rights must be out of date. I don't remember the part "and without fear" being in it. And I fail to see how he is responsible for the unreasonable and irrational fears and insecurities of others. Of course, many of the followers of Barry are professional victims and fear mongers, so it is no wonder that they were scared of a person who is confident and secure in himself.
|
|
