English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Assume the following:

* A permit must be applied for (including background check/fingerprint/photo id issued --- people with felony criminal records or violent crimes would NOT be eligible
* A class must be attended and the applicant must pass a written/practical test including demonstrating knowledge of how to care for and use the weapon (i.e. similar class as to what Peace Officers must take and pass) This class would cover the legal use and ramifications for using the weapon (including uses where the weapon is NOT fired)
* If required by existing state law, the owner of said weapon must have child safety locks/a lockable safe place to secure said weapon when not in use.
* Government buildings would be off limits while carrying the weapon, even with a permit.
* Private businesses could post signs that state “no concealed weapons” (I’ve seen this before while visiting Indiana)

Please do not argue the assumptions above, just go with them and answer the question...

2006-07-03 17:56:34 · 42 answers · asked by Schbrownie 2 in Politics & Government Politics

42 answers

Absolutely. The Founders wouldn't agree with the necessity of the concealed permit idea though

2006-07-04 17:50:49 · answer #1 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 3 2

I would agree wholeheartedly with your assumptions as long as there was also the requirement that concealed gun owners state what well regulated militia they belong to. That would satisfy to the very last letter, and would hold up in any state or federal court, the entire second amendment which reads:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 1

"The Supreme Court has given effect to the dependent clause of the Amendment in the only case in which it has tested a congressional enactment against the constitutional prohibition, seeming to affirm individual protection but only in the context of the maintenance of a militia or other such public force." 2

2006-07-17 09:49:20 · answer #2 · answered by navymom 5 · 0 0

One problem is. I know many many people that could follow those guidelines and pass getting approval, but by no stretch of the imagination should carry a concealed weapon.

Background searches dont always show the true, much less the whole story. If things are that bad that we need to all be carrying hand guns, then i think I would be out of here anyhow.

2006-07-16 15:23:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am in total agreement, as 46 states have a similar arrangement, and I don't hear anything (which you of course would) about deaths by concealed weapons. The "wild wild west" comment that liberals like to make just isn't based in fact (except for maybe Washington DC, which, incidentally, has the strictest gun restrictions and no concealed carry allowance... mull that over).

Remember, concealed weapons are often used without being fired - and citizens have far fewer questions to answer about using their weapon than does a police officer, meaning that bad guys fear armed citizens that much more.

2006-07-03 18:10:26 · answer #4 · answered by eagle5953 3 · 0 0

No, this would just complicate things. It would open more avenues for criminals to get a gun. A large percentage of people are shot with their own gun. All criminals at one time were law abiding citizens, so what's to stop some guy who has a license from just taking revenge on somebody or just plain snapping and shooting a bunch of people in public. The only reason you need a concealed weapon is if you face real danger everyday. I know and have met some of these people who have concealed weapon licenses. They are all the same guy, it is a matter of showing off and manhood, and usually they have a drinking problem; that's not a good combo!

2006-07-13 22:55:06 · answer #5 · answered by nukecat25 3 · 0 1

Yes I do and I also have my CWP. Not everyone can get it and you have to have a clean record. Also the training classes are pretty good and they teach you common sence things like dont point the gun at something you dont want to destroy. But you do have to be able shoot. I think in SC you had to shoot 90 out of 100 in the * ring or higher to get the CWP. I had 98 and most people do score very high if they know how to shoot the right way. And they make sure you know all the rules.

2006-07-03 18:02:44 · answer #6 · answered by whitetrashwithmoney 5 · 0 0

i see no reason why u cant carry a concealed weapon. i carry every time i go out. yes i had to go thru the back ground check, i have a child safety lock, when i dont carry my gun its locked up in a safe. i never went to any classes to learn to shot the gun my husband taught me. i would only shoot the gun if my life was in danger. you are not allowed to carry your gun into most goverment buildings no matter if you have a permit or not. but there are some people out there who will never agree with me. i say to that ...to each his own...

2006-07-03 18:04:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yeah. there are such restrictions in one form or another in just about every state. yes, it makes sense to have training in the care, keeping and use of a handgun. felony record? sure, that would work- theoretically. hey, if my neighbor was a felon and used his weapon to save me or mine's life? hell, yeah, i'm on his side! f-----' A! i don't think you'd be complaining if he saved the life of you or your's. hey, i am a felon of (3) dui's. i'm no threat to anyone; even the cops agreed i was driving extremely well. child safety lock? there was a case here, in Texas, that a young girl could not get the key out and the safe opened in time to save her family. what is there to recommend one safely over another? there are many examples of all. i guess it just depends on how you think.

as for me, i believe that mass murderers (mao, stalin, hitler) are right: gun control works. i hope y'all know that the first thing all of them did was take away the people's guns...

politicians love unarmed peasants.

2006-07-12 21:18:11 · answer #8 · answered by rejoice 2 · 0 0

3/4 of the guys in my church carry guns with them. If a terrorist ever came into church to blow us all up, he'd be deader than a doornail. The kids know how to shoot since they've been hunting and target practicing. I happen to be a bullseye with a sniper rifle. Concealed Carry is a good thing, but it would be sad if you ever had to use it. People who want to outlaw guns are stupid and obviously haven't read the constitution and don't see the need for guns in our world. Think how fast terrorism would be stopped if people carried guns.

2006-07-13 15:27:31 · answer #9 · answered by redneckgal 3 · 0 0

Uh, yeah - the right to bear arms. Please remember that guns do not kill people, people kill people. The more regulations we place on lawful Americans being able to carry guns, the closer we get to a helpless, unarmed society like ..... oh, Nazi Germany? Does anybody think that criminals honestly go through the steps? If you take the rights away from honest people, you make it so that only the criminals have guns.

2006-07-17 06:19:32 · answer #10 · answered by Fortune Favors the Brave 4 · 0 0

It is a constitutional right for every American to bear arms. America is quick to take our rights away, and SLOW if they ever give them back. Also, if no one knew who had a gun, I guarantee that everyone would be more careful as to how they behave, and I also think that crime WOULD go down. If a criminal wants to carry a gun, he will carry a gun regardless of law. If an honest man wants to carry a gun America should legally let him.

2006-07-03 18:04:29 · answer #11 · answered by ilovekokonut 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers