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

Many states allow the public, not just law enforcement, to carry concealed guns. Depending on the state, the person has to either pass a written and practical test and/or attend a specified length of course. Although some states make it harder than it really should be. In addition, the person has to pass a criminal background check, be a US citizen, and follow certain restictions once the permit is issued. For instance, not to carry one into an airport terminal, Federal court house, and to not be drinking and carrying. What do you think about this idea? Should all citizens be required to carry and know how to use the gun they carry (show profiency)? Would this help to deter or reduce crime? Does this fall under the Second Admendment?

2006-08-17 17:21:52 · 26 answers · asked by msfyrebyrd 4 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

So Bling scoop, is it ok for the criminals to have guns though? I know that the ban would not affect their ability to get them. The only thing I see the ban doing is prevent law abiding citizens from having guns or am I missing something here?

2006-08-17 19:36:10 · update #1

brinlarrr: give me some details please likes names. Australia was one. However, the last I heard was that it's crime rate was increasing since the ban on guns for the general public.

2006-08-17 19:41:00 · update #2

.45 Peacemaker: I carry both concealed and openly. I live out in the country and we have VERY large animals (cougars, bears, deer, elk). We have domestic animals. The wild ones mind their own business and I could care less what they do. The minute they become threathening, is another story. The same with the two-legged variety of animal. I will do everything in my power to avoid a confrontation. The reason? If I have to pull my gun, I am shooting to kill. It is because by that time, I am feeling physically threatened and believe that I am in mortal danger. Those are my guidelines. I also cannot rely on the police to respond in timely manner.

2006-08-17 19:50:45 · update #3

I am a bit surprised by the number of perople who have advocated carrying openly. We can here in Oregon.

2006-08-17 19:52:02 · update #4

26 answers

Are you asking a question or writing a book?

2006-08-25 12:33:12 · answer #1 · answered by The Mick "7" 7 · 18 0

You need to look at how the crime rates were affected in the countries (ie:Australia) after taking gun rights away from their citizens. Crime went up.
Yes, I think everyone who buys a gun should go through a safety course. I don't like all the restrictions. The gov should not have so much say in the lives of law abiding citizens. When was the list time a criminal used their own legally registered gun to commit a crime?

2006-08-18 00:31:58 · answer #2 · answered by Camping Chick 3 · 2 0

Yes. The thing is a person needs to set up rules of when they are going to carry, what causes them to draw, and if they draw they need to realize that they might have to use it.

The closest I have come to drawing was a dog that was in a double fenced yard where he jumped the first fence, if he would have cleared the second it would have had two .45 rounds in it's head.

In this state we have had mountain lion attacks, I'm to old to fight off with a knife or worse my bare hands.

The last murder in this town was with a kitchen knife.

It falls under the second amendment because it gives the states the right to make any gun law. According to the Federalist papers the whole idea was to keep the Federal Government in check, as to protect the state and the citizenry.

The police have no responsibility to respond.

2006-08-18 00:38:15 · answer #3 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 2 0

Concealed carry has been more than proven as a deterrant in crimes against persons.

I believe if everyone did carry crime against persons would stop completely, at least statistically. I also do not think you could force eveyone to carry which I think would be a violation of a right although I am hard pressed to think of which one it would be. There is also the socialist contingent in Congress who are currently doing everything in their power to take weapons away completely from the citizens. That is their first step in taking away the rest of your rights.

Keep in mind the second amendment was created to prevent an oppressive government from taking our rights.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

Everyone that is pro RKBA have forgotten one thing, they have registered with the government as people who have weapons.

2006-08-24 15:07:00 · answer #4 · answered by rmagedon 6 · 1 0

In AZ we can carry a weapon as a side arm on our hip with out a permit,a shotgun in a scabbard on a bike,as long as it isn't concealed,you can obtain a permit to carry concealed too .I am a woman and I have a concealed permit,I carry a 357 magnum with a short barrel and a modified American grip,I feel safe going any where I am trained in weapons and am an excellent shot. I see nothing wrong with being able to carry a concealed weapon.Oh yeah I'm also a liberal lol

2006-08-24 20:55:02 · answer #5 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 1 0

rheins2000 is a complete right wing nit wit. If you have a brain give it an enema, you douche bag. I am a Democrat always have been always will be. But I support the right to carry. I live in the sticks about forty miles out side of St. Louis. You should hear the red necks out here go on about there guns. They vote one thing, there guns. Most of them are out of work are on some kind of bogus disability. The ones that work are working in low paying menial non union jobs. The reason they can't get a good job is because they can't pass a drug test. But they got there guns by God. That's the republicans you are referring too. To them people who say the gov. will get them if they don't have a gun, they are delusional. Do they really believe a lot of unwashed red necks running around with there guns are going to stop a gov.

2006-08-24 09:56:20 · answer #6 · answered by c321arty 3 · 1 1

Concealed handgun permits aren't usually a bad idea. Sure, every now and then someone slips through the cracks but that'll happen anywhere. Background checks are always done and the people we don't want carrying guns aren't eligible.

Besides, the criminals will carry guns wether or not they have a permit.

2006-08-18 00:27:56 · answer #7 · answered by Family Guy 3 · 3 0

In my opinion we should allow permit for people who need to carry the guns and may be the crime rate in Oakland California is going down.What about the right to bare arm in this country? Yes, it is The Second Amendment.I am 100% sure if we allow our citizens it will help the crime rate down in America.Look at Switzerland everyone who lives there has a gun permit but no crime rate at all.Thain about it.

2006-08-22 03:52:34 · answer #8 · answered by ryladie99 6 · 1 1

I have a concealed weapons permit. I believe it is my right to protect myself and my family, I also have been brought up around guns. But I agree with most of the liberals on yahoo, keep the guns out of the honest man and give them to the criminals.

2006-08-25 14:17:18 · answer #9 · answered by fire_side_2003 5 · 0 0

The right to bear arms is in the constitution.

In every single study done, locals who pass the conceal and carry, show a decrease in violent crime.

Liberal Democrats dont like people carrying guns, because they rely on the government to take care of them, while people like me look after myself and my own family....so when their iced up cousin comes to my door to rape and kill my children, they'll meet with the sound of my 9mm blasting shots through their chest.

I'd like to see Democrats like Rosie O'Donnell(whose bodyguards all carry guns, like most outspoken anti-gun liberal celebs) take my guns away from me.

The criminals arent turning in their concealed guns, so why should law abiding citizens like me become easy targets for those maniacs. They'll think twice about car-jacking, robbing and assaulting me and my family if they know I may or may not have a glock under my shirt.

Sure, you'll have a few drunks here and there do something stupid, but the day you write a law that completely stops gun violence is the day a liberal gets some common sense. (That means it will never happen)

So, liberals can stop their slogan spitting moronicism and try getting on board the logic train, because its leaving the station.

And maybe when one of them is about to be raped and murdered when I come down the street and save their buts, they might think twice about their ridiculous stance.

"Ban all Guns?!".....yeah...that will work....just like banning heroin stops those freaks from shooting up.

Get a brain

2006-08-18 00:35:36 · answer #10 · answered by rheins2000 2 · 2 1

Not for everyone. Definitely, I should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon, but Ive had experience with a lot of people that I dont think should even be allowed to own firearms.

2006-08-18 00:28:39 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers