April 21, 2014 |
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
Until you can demonstrate that you are free of the normal mistakes and misunderstandings we are all heir to as human beings — mistaken understanding, misperceptions, mis-hearing of things said, not always knowing all the facts — then adding an easily usable deadly weapon to the mix will always raise the risk of injury or death.
It seems silly and unwise not to take into account human foibles, to imagine that someone carrying a gun will never make a mistake, never misunderstand a situation they find themselves in, never mistake who is at fault in a fight they might witness and wish to intervene within.
The very first human family — if we trust the Bible — produced a murderer.
You simply cannot argue, admitting human history, that adding such a potentially deadly tool as a catalyst to social interaction does not increase risk to other people. You might accept that risk, but you cannot expect all other people to accept that risk to themselves, especially when that risk is not their choice.
just means they got a gun and I don't
In the cases where I feel the need to carry mine I feel a LOT safer. I hope somebody else has there's when mine is at home.
CCW and driving...both are privileges not rights. There are those that should have the privileges revoked. I am for CCW, but with adequate demonstration of skills. I enjoy shooting but occasionally there is someone who scares the hell out of me just like so many drivers on the road.
A little thing I picked up on The Daily Paul. It looks like Obamacare is an obstacle to gathering any information for the lawful use of firearms including health records under the ACA. The secretary the language refers to is the HHS. If I read it correctly any health records that could be provided by Health and Human Services is inadmissible. So if you have someone covered by this act that would be deemed unsuitable for the possession of firearms they might very well slip through.
So much for Pelosi's "we need to pass this bill to find out whats in it."
Senate Amendment 3276, Sec. 2716, part c. On page 2037 of the ACA. added by Harry Reid
(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION- None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to–(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or`(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition...
(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;
Here's the video
Another nugget I found was language in the Brady Bill that addresses a registry using data collected through The National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
(i) PROHIBITION RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF REGISTRATION SYSTEMS WITH RESPECT TO FIREARMS- No department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States may--
(1) require that any record or portion thereof generated by be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) use the system established under this section to establish any system for the registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions or dispositions, except with respect to persons, prohibited by section 922 (g) or (n) of title 18, United States Code or State law, from receiving a firearm.
Big bills contain big obstacles. The gun control lobby will still get mostly what it wants but hopefully it will take time to work out....at least enough time for me to obtain my own AR-15
Don't forget January 19th is gun appreciation day in America. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms. Let's remind the morons in Washington DC who pays their salary. http://gunappreciationday.com/
Maybe the NRA wasn't so wrong after all.
Newtown parents WANT armed security.
I stick with facts over emotions and the facts show that the more guns, the more people get shot with guns.
Anything else is hyperboly, emotional outburst or dishonest.
Situational training? SO it will be a live fire encounter with someone firing live ammunition at you as you attempt to shoot them? If not, exactly what use is this "class"?
In most armed confrontations, the bad guy has his gun out first.
I personally know 4 people (that I'm aware of) that have CC. I'd only trust one of them when it came to crunch time.
I feel much safer in those areas. Look at the statistics in areas like Chicago (check multiple resources and not just CNN). Kinda interesting how the recent mass shhotings were in gun free zones and lets not forget the incident in MS where the school principal stopped a mass shooter from running up the death toll with his personal firearm.
I can go months on end and never think of guns until I read something about it in the news. I don't feel more or less safe whether people around me have guns or nor, concealed or not.
I would like to officailly ask that people who train other Kansas for concealed carry start producing remedial news letters to remind the not so experienced firearms owners of safe carrying practices, proper ways to conceal, and even use of cover and concealment in addition to watching your back drop and avoiding tunnel vision.
Updates on laws, and a way to safely call un unbaiased number to record statistics of protection where the ccws holders did not call the police after using the firearm as a deterant to crime would also be beneficial.
before cc, I would carry a concealed weapon if I thought I would be in a situation that required one. I suspect many other people have done the same. However, I have gone to cc training and it needs to be strengthened. It is not sufficient as it is now. No situational awareness taught at all. Unless you are former law enforcement or military that had that training, there are bunch of folks out there with cc who are questionable.
No matter what they do to control the gun laws, It's just like drugs somebody is always going to be carrying.
It is not the Concealed Carry License holders that should be making you feel less safe, it is the ones without the license that are carring guns that should be causing that feeling. Crime rates are down in every State that issues licenses. Comment on that if you will.
Safe? Hell no!!! All these gun-nut cats think they are Clint Eastwood when in fact they are more like this Merican
I Just F***ING Shot Myself
Make guns harder to get than Sudafed!
John Lott, an accomplished academic, has shown more guns means less crime. The police can't be everywhere they're needed in time so honest law abiding citizens can and do have a positive effect when bad guys with guns act badly. Don't be afraid of what you don't know or understand folks, ask a gun owning friend to take you to the shooting range before you emote uncontrollably, make a fool of yourself and endanger those in the community around you.
Don't have to worry only about the "nuts" and "psychos" but throw in the drunks, hotheads, road ragers, conspiracy theriorists and bigots and you have a bad mix brewing.
I think it is a good deal, the nuts will now have some fear on who is and who's not carrying. They need some doubt in their world. Hey nuts, the stakes just went up ...
After reading the story of the bozo in Lenexa who shot his wife, accidentally,in a Longhorn Steakhouse, I would say a resounding no to the question!!!
Not at all. The two people I know personally who have CC would NEVER have qualified if it had been up to me. Just because you have a CC doesn't make you immune to making bad decisions.
Kind of a dumb question. I feel pretty darn safe now and I certainly don't feel less safe because of legal CC.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·