Do You Support Nation Wide Constitutional Carry? - Page 14

View Poll Results: Do you support nation wide permitless carry?

Voters
204. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    162 79.41%
  • No

    42 20.59%
Page 14 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 251

Thread: Do You Support Nation Wide Constitutional Carry?

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,668
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    What you are doing is called Reducto ad absurdum it's a logical fallacy in which you take and argument to an absurd end and try to say that's where we'll all end up.

    Not a single state that has constitutional carry has done away w/ federally mandated background checks on retail sales of firearms. In all three states it is still illegal for a convicted felon to be in possession of a firearm and it's still illegal to use a firearm in the commission of a crime.

    Reducto ad absurdum would be saying that carrying a concealed weapon while jay walking would be using a firearm in the commission of a crime
    So by your very admission, you admit that the three states do not have Constitutional Carry. Carrying under the Constitution would not include a background check. Which is a restriction.

  2.   
  3. #132
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,900
    Quote Originally Posted by jg1967 View Post
    What exactly is a FUDD anyway?

    Fudd: Slang term for a "casual" gun owner; eg; a person who typically only owns guns for hunting or shotgun sports and does not truly believe in the true premise of the second amendment. These people also generally treat owners/users of so called "non sporting" firearms like handguns or semiautomatic rifles with unwarranted scorn or contempt.

    Urban Dictionary: fudd
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  4. Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    So by your very admission, you admit that the three states do not have Constitutional Carry. Carrying under the Constitution would not include a background check. Which is a restriction.
    Vermont, Arizona and Alaska do NOT require background checks to CARRY a firearm.

    Also, in Vermont, Arizona and Alaska (and most states) it is lawful to purchase/sell or be given a gun with no background check.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  5. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,900
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Vermont, Arizona and Alaska do NOT require background checks to CARRY a firearm.

    Also, in Vermont, Arizona and Alaska (and most states) it is lawful to purchase/sell or be given a gun with no background check.
    To clarify this only applies to private sales.
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  6. #135
    I would agree to having only one (1) ccw permit per person nationwide, but with serious statutes.

  7. #136
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Butner, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    So the first amendment only goes one way?
    You did take an Oath before joining the Navy, did you not? That Oath is not something to be turned on/off to suit you fancy "NavyLT", and it doesn't retire when you retire. Get with the program and stop trolling the threads on this forum looking for an arguement, kapish?
    MSgt, USAF (ret), Life Member - NRA, Life Member - NAHC,
    Life Member - NCOA, Member - USCCA, Member - NCGR,
    Member - Oathkeepers

  8. #137
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,668
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    Vermont, Arizona and Alaska do NOT require background checks to CARRY a firearm.

    Also, in Vermont, Arizona and Alaska (and most states) it is lawful to purchase/sell or be given a gun with no background check.
    To get a CCW permit in AZ they do. Without the permit and a background check, the Feds could go after the carriers in a GFSZ. And I wouldn't put it past this admin to not do it either with the way they feel about AZ. The VT page here is incorrect as it doesn't say that Fed law says handguns require a higher age than listed in that section. And unfortunately Fed laws win. Even when they violate the Constitution. Until they get challanged in court. AK also does a background check for the CCW permit so it is the same as AZ in that aspect.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Ed Hamberger View Post
    You did take an Oath before joining the Navy, did you not? That Oath is not something to be turned on/off to suit you fancy "NavyLT", and it doesn't retire when you retire. Get with the program and stop trolling the threads on this forum looking for an arguement, kapish?
    No, quite frankly I don't kapish. I am sorry if you feel as if expressing a differing opinion is "looking for an argument." I don't understand why you feel your opinion is any more important than mine or has any more validity than mine. Just like my signature line now says.... get in line for your tissue

    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by TheSaint View Post
    I know its not popular but I prefer laws like we have here in Florida. Right-To-Carry yes
    Can I ask this question, please, without getting shot in the face....

    How is it a Right-To-Carry when a person must pay a fee in order to obtain the state's permission to do so? Isn't that a Privilege-To-Carry granted only to those who pay for such privilege?
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    To get a CCW permit in AZ they do. Without the permit and a background check, the Feds could go after the carriers in a GFSZ. And I wouldn't put it past this admin to not do it either with the way they feel about AZ. The VT page here is incorrect as it doesn't say that Fed law says handguns require a higher age than listed in that section. And unfortunately Fed laws win. Even when they violate the Constitution. Until they get challanged in court. AK also does a background check for the CCW permit so it is the same as AZ in that aspect.
    However, no permit is required in AZ, VT, or AK in order to carry a gun openly or concealed. A citizen can lawfully carry a firearm in those three states, either concealed or openly without a background check, because the permit is not required.

    Yes, you are correct about the Federal GFSZ law, which is interesting since I'll bet there are a bunch of people in Vermont violating that one every day since Vermont does not even offer an optional permit.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

Page 14 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast