Why I carry or Look! Up in the sky... - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Why I carry or Look! Up in the sky...

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by charliej47 View Post
    I see it as no different thatn having to get a license to drive or fly a plane or "slice and dice " as a doctor.
    Not everyone is permitted to pilot an aircraft nor operate a motor vehicle..so why would anyone feel that concealing a deadly weapon on their person should NOT be regulated also?
    Age ,mental capacity ,individual personal history and physical capabilities must all be considered first. Just as flying or driving. I am not for govt. regulation on many regulated issues but firearms is one i'm glad they have tests and restrictions for. Someone has to regulate it. It's not 1777 AD anymore. If govt. don't do it ,then who ? local govt.? Remember ,they make money doaling out permits to. Just as they make money at the dept. motor vehicles. The pioneers had the unrestricted right to bear arms ass hould we now but society's moral degradation requires a different way to go about protecting amendment#2 in 2010. I could make a few very inflamitory statements regarding who and why...but i won't. I would be called a closed minded biggot and pro govt. Just think about almost no mandated regulation on handguns in 2010. Never the less , machined ,fully automatic ,two handed firearms. Wow. The horror ! Unless i'm way off in what this thread is speaking to. Thats been known to happen. If so , i'm sorry.
    I know many people that should'nt have any firearms but have squeezed through cracks in the law, also a higher number of perfectly responsible people that should not have to deal with the red tape of having them but it's the people who should not have them that cause us to be regulated and bogged down with red tape. There are However too many scatter brained liberals who fear everything but islamic gihadists and many other things they should fear and just don't know any better...They'll close Gitmo and open the pentagon to our enemies. They are perfectly willing to appoint islamic sympathizers and" islamic members" to our homeland security positions but insist on trying to undermine the civil rights of good ,red blooded American natives. They will mirandize bin laden but arrest someone for having one to many imported parts on a shotgun. They go too far in limiting the responsible citizens in what and how many we could have and how we carry them. State govt. has much to do with it to. Not just the feds. In a nut shell ,there are too many nut cases out there these days so We need regulation but not this much.
    Having said that , I want a glock 18 for edc and an uzi for my nightstand without having to be personally familiar w ith my local police commisioner. Yeah , in my dreams.
    NEVER FORGET 9*11*01

  2.   
  3. #12
    Of course to get a pilots, or drivers license you have many many hours of training and practice before you are allowed to go out and have at it on your own. Its not always the case with obtaining a CWP. All states have different requirements, but do any of the states require that you get a learners permit first and spend many hours one on one with an instructor before you are allowed to carry on your own.

    I think, to try and go back to one of your original comments, those that do carry, try and hold ourselves to a higher standard, is because (my opinion) we are trying to instill into ourself and into those around us, that we need to set ourselves to a higher level and set the example for others to follow. When the govt looks down at us we want them to recognize that we are not a bunch of gun toating idiots, but that we are responible citizens that have chosen to take upon ourselves the burden of self protection. And we will use our constitutional right to do so, in a responsible manor. And when we are surrounded by the rest of the flock, they can look to us to protect them as well, as is our duty, and our calling.

  4. #13
    wolfhunter Guest
    Flying, driving, or even performing surgery are PRIVILEGES. I don't care what requirements the government expects you to meet before they ALLOW you to carry out those activities.

    Carrying a firearm any way I want to is a RIGHT. EVERY law currently on the books concerning firearms is an affront and an encroachment on my RIGHT. If we allow the government to set restrictions and tell us when or where we can exercise this right, what are we going to do when that government starts delimiting our other RIGHTS? When they start creating taxes and programs that the People don't want? Letting the government make "just one more gun law" "for our protection" or "because it makes sense" is why you can't carry in NYC or DC and why every county in NY has its own little policies and procedures.

  5. #14
    "
    Carrying a firearm any way I want to is a RIGHT. EVERY law currently on the books concerning firearms is an affront and an encroachment on my RIGHT."

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX B N M

    The way I see it, carrying a firearm IS a RIGHT we have. But I don't see EVERY law on the books being an affront to it.
    I personally don't have a problem with "some"/a little regulation. All kinds of things are regulated, less they get completely our of control. If you want to carry a firearm, I think you should be able to...anywhere in this Country. It is a Constitutionally mandated right. I shouldn't have to look at a map when traveling to see which State or locale I can carry in, and which ones don't allow it. I also think I have the right to carry it concealed or open, at my discretion.

    I do, however, think that it isn't an affront to my rights when the NCIC wants to check me out to make sure the permit they are issuing is going to a law-abiding citizen. In fact, I feel a LOT safer with this provision in place. Once you have committed a bad crime, you don't have a RIGHT anymore to carry a gun!

    Look at it this way. If we read in the morning paper about a two time convicted armed robber getting a concealed carry permit, we'd all hit the roof!! Because, after all, they are a citizen of the U.S., so using your logic, THEY have a RIGHT to carry a gun.....IF...it was unregulated.

    Let's face it, we can argue/discuss to the cows come home, but we live in a world where regulation takes place all around us, and always will. I just don't see the big deal about having to apply for a permit...as long as it's treated in a "must issue" way. No State has the authority to pick and choose which law-abiding citizens get a permit. I'm DEFINITELY against that!

    Now, when is South Carolina going to wake up and pass Open Carry? I don't want us to be the last of the seven remaining States that finally do it!

  6. #15
    wolfhunter Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by GOV5 View Post
    "
    Carrying a firearm any way I want to is a RIGHT. EVERY law currently on the books concerning firearms is an affront and an encroachment on my RIGHT."

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX B N M

    The way I see it, carrying a firearm IS a RIGHT we have. But I don't see EVERY law on the books being an affront to it.
    I personally don't have a problem with "some"/a little regulation. All kinds of things are regulated, less they get completely our of control. If you want to carry a firearm, I think you should be able to...anywhere in this Country. It is a Constitutionally mandated right. I shouldn't have to look at a map when traveling to see which State or locale I can carry in, and which ones don't allow it. I also think I have the right to carry it concealed or open, at my discretion.

    I do, however, think that it isn't an affront to my rights when the NCIC wants to check me out to make sure the permit they are issuing is going to a law-abiding citizen. In fact, I feel a LOT safer with this provision in place. Once you have committed a bad crime, you don't have a RIGHT anymore to carry a gun!

    Look at it this way. If we read in the morning paper about a two time convicted armed robber getting a concealed carry permit, we'd all hit the roof!! Because, after all, they are a citizen of the U.S., so using your logic, THEY have a RIGHT to carry a gun.....IF...it was unregulated.

    Let's face it, we can argue/discuss to the cows come home, but we live in a world where regulation takes place all around us, and always will. I just don't see the big deal about having to apply for a permit...as long as it's treated in a "must issue" way. No State has the authority to pick and choose which law-abiding citizens get a permit. I'm DEFINITELY against that!

    Now, when is South Carolina going to wake up and pass Open Carry? I don't want us to be the last of the seven remaining States that finally do it!
    If it's a Right, why do you need to have a permit issued? If YOU (and your predecessors) didn't give your governments the authority to infringe on your Right, you wouldn't be pleading for SC to wake up and "Let" you OC. Every gun law on the books is a violation of my RIGHT, and yours.

  7. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfhunter View Post
    Every gun law on the books is a violation of my RIGHT, and yours.
    What about "equal" rights? Who gets the rights and who doesn't? Should violent felons who've been paroled after serving their time have the right to own and carry firearms? What about people with reduced mental capacity, autism, whatever? Where does the Constitution say some people don't have all the same rights as others?

    Laws, maybe?

  8. #17
    wolfhunter Guest
    Yes, those are some of the laws I meant. I'm against a government deciding what's "best" for responsible adults. I think families should expect to be responsible for members who have diminished mental capacity, autism, or whatever, not expect the government to take on their duties. I think the penal codes need to be revised so that rights are restored upon release, but I think greater punishment (with less parole opportunities) should be awarded to violent criminals.

    In general, I feel that if State and Federal legislators are working as legislators more than 2 weeks a year, they are doing work that should be handled at a more localized level of government, and they should be supporting themselves with full-time private sector jobs the other 50 weeks.

  9. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Иєш Лєяжşєşŧăŋ
    Posts
    1,084
    If I may, I believe the most important aspect of this discussion is that "Keep and Bear Arms" is a Constitutionally guaranteed Right, whereas driving, piloting a plane, even being a surgeon, etc. is a State controlled/licensed privilege.
    NRA Life; GOA Life; CCRKBA Life; Trustee, NJCSD; F&AM: 32° & KT
    The Only Answer to a Bad Guy with a Gun - Is a Good Guy with a Gun!
    When Seconds Count...The Police are only MINUTES Away!

  10. #19
    "I think families should expect to be responsible for members who have diminished mental capacity, autism, or whatever, not expect the government to take on their duties."

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX B N M

    All due respect to you, and I mean that.

    My opinion, from reading this thread, is that the statement above is where you and your opponents on the other side of the debate are at odds, and the statement sums up the entire debate. Many folks think that it is impossible to expect the general population to have the values to expect that kind of responsibility. Therein lies the reason for the necessity of regulation.

    I don't like it anymore than you do, but where you and I differ, is that I don't like the likelihood of the alternatives if regulation isn't allowed. The sad fact is, there are just too many in our society that not only aren't responsible, but they don't even know the meaning of the term. They are the ones from which regulation protects us, and are the sole reason regulation is needed.

  11. #20
    this is just my opinion but for the sake of argument....

    What about the dumb ass people? I'm sure that back when the constitution was written, natural selection played a bigger part in normal everyday life. Now for some reason society, has decided to try and save every degenerent, or drain on society that is ever born. So, although the constitution protects these people and gives them the right to own/carry a firearm. I'm not so sure I want to give that power and right to a person who doesn't have the motor controls to keep from shooting a bystander. Or someone who doesn't have the mental capacity to find their way out of a paper bag with a map and a yardstick.

    Of course if you do qualify to carry, then there should be no limitations on where/when you carry.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Open Carry Argument
    By Mainsail in forum Open Carry Discussion
    Replies: 611
    Last Post: 05-23-2017, 05:42 PM
  2. 10 Commandments of Concealed Carry
    By HK4U in forum Concealed Carry Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-21-2011, 10:51 AM
  3. Why I Carry a Gun
    By HK4U in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-02-2010, 07:41 AM
  4. Why I Carry A Gun, and You Should Too
    By Tea For One in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-02-2010, 04:06 PM
  5. H 3003 In House Judiciary Committee
    By Red Hat in forum South Carolina Discussion and Firearm News
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2009, 04:43 PM

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