If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(First Coast News)   Florida becomes the first state to issue 1 million concealed gun licenses, since Texans say their permit to carry a hidden weapon is already granted by God   (firstcoastnews.com) divider line 89
    More: Florida, god, firearms licence, Brady Campaign, economic cycles, concealed weapons, target shooting, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Shooting Sports Foundation  
•       •       •

1819 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Dec 2012 at 11:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



89 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-14 12:41:06 PM  

Kuroshin: There aren't too many laws out there which absolve murder.


Every state in the union has a justifiable homicide statute, and I'm positive every one of them has deemed multiple homicides justifiable that you would disagree with.

It is sometimes a regrettable necessity to take a life in order to preserve your own or that of a third party, and it's a universal principle in western law that you can legitimately reply to an imminent threat of deadly force in kind.

FYI, "smashing someone's head into the pavement repeatedly" is deadly force.
 
2012-12-14 12:43:15 PM  

Itstoearly: You realize, subby, that the framers of the Constitution said that all of our rights were granted by God, and not from men, right?


To be fair, at that time in America, God and Jesus were the only higher powers anyone had ever heard of. There wasn't even different brands of Christianity available to most people. You went to the one church in your town and worshiped the same wy all your neighbors did.

If written today, the Constitution would be a very, very different document. Our Constitution is a testament to the art of comprimise, if they tried to write it today it would take 5 years and 800 pages to get to something everyone would reluctantly sign off on. You would have the right to own guns, but it would be 14 specific guns and they'd all have to be bright pink. You'd have the right to free speech as long as it didn't offend a single person ever. Cops would be completely hog tied when it comes to investigation and anyone with a GED in law would be able to find some flaw to set the criminal free as no human could be so perfect as to pass all the criteria for a legal arrest. In short, it would be a complete mess and not worth the paper it was written on.

Six pages and only 27 Amendments...keeping it simple for 236 years.
 
2012-12-14 12:43:58 PM  

Dimensio: Jacobin: If u carry a pistol in an exposed cowboy holster do you need a cocealed carry permit?

Florida prohibits the carrying of an openly displayed firearm.


IIRC, so does Texas unless it's a rifle. I was told you can't openly carry a 9mm pistol there, but a belt fed M60 is good to go.
 
2012-12-14 12:46:48 PM  

iheartscotch: Kuroshin: iheartscotch: Kuroshin: iheartscotch: dahmers love zombie: Just sayin':

It's almost as though there is a correlation between the increase in conceal carry permits and the decrease in crime. Who'd a thunk it.

And what is the rule re: correlation v. causation?

Granted; but, you also cannot say that it is not causal in nature.

/ I know people on both sides; the people against don't seem to completely understand how guns/bullets function. I'll give an example; a young lady I know is very much against people owning assault rifles. I pointed out to her that assault rifles have a perfectly valid use in hunting(as you can buy small magazines). She felt that the bullet would damage the meat. I explained that most assault rifles usually use cartrages that have less power when compared with bolt action hunting rifles.

Actually, I *can* say it isn't causal in nature. The two don't have anything to do with one-another. Violent crime rates declined across the entire country. Gun laws didn't change. People did.

I'm lazy, and Wiki has plenty of graphs, so... Link

I see there's a graph part way down of the 3 worst cities in the united states for murders, Detroit, DC and Baltimore. I know DC and Detroit have strict gun control laws and, last I knew, were both fighting against conceal carry. I don't know about Baltimore; but, if I remember correctly, Maryland is not a shall issue state.

What a coincidence!

/ I agree that it cannot be proven causal, but, my point was that it also cannot be proven that it is not causal


Single data points do not a picture make, especially when they are statistical outliers.

Concealed carry is only a deterrent to crime when the crims are paranoid enough about the potential to be shot that they choose not to commit crime. You're banking on nationwide criminal paranoia over people carrying. It just doesn't work that way. Not even in Florida. Violent criminals are often gang members, whose victims are often other gang members, who are just as armed as the first group.

The streets just aren't crawling with thugs looking to assault random passerby for funsies. It does *happen*, but those aren't your 'meat and potatoes' violent criminals. Gangs and domestic violence are much larger problems, which neither are influenced in the least by average people carrying a concealed piece.
 
2012-12-14 12:47:14 PM  

sethen320: iheartscotch: Kuroshin: iheartscotch: dahmers love zombie: Just sayin':

It's almost as though there is a correlation between the increase in conceal carry permits and the decrease in crime. Who'd a thunk it.

And what is the rule re: correlation v. causation?

Granted; but, you also cannot say that it is not causal in nature.

/ I know people on both sides; the people against don't seem to completely understand how guns/bullets function. I'll give an example; a young lady I know is very much against people owning assault rifles. I pointed out to her that assault rifles have a perfectly valid use in hunting(as you can buy small magazines). She felt that the bullet would damage the meat. I explained that most assault rifles usually use cartrages that have less power when compared with bolt action hunting rifles.

"Assault rifles"....

Stop using those words. You're not helping. A better idea would be to explain that the term is ambiguous and political bullshiat.


Agreed; assault rifle is an ambiguous, media/politically generated term. But, you also have to realize; it is a legitimate term to people on the pro-gun control side. Like I said; most people on the pro-gun contol side seem not to understand how guns/ammunition work.
 
2012-12-14 12:49:47 PM  

Kuroshin: The streets just aren't crawling with thugs looking to assault random passerby for funsies. It does *happen*, but those aren't your 'meat and potatoes' violent criminals. Gangs and domestic violence are much larger problems, which neither are influenced in the least by average people carrying a concealed piece.


How dare you introduce rationality into an emotional argument.
 
2012-12-14 12:50:11 PM  

clyph: Kuroshin: There aren't too many laws out there which absolve murder.

Every state in the union has a justifiable homicide statute, and I'm positive every one of them has deemed multiple homicides justifiable that you would disagree with.

It is sometimes a regrettable necessity to take a life in order to preserve your own or that of a third party, and it's a universal principle in western law that you can legitimately reply to an imminent threat of deadly force in kind.

FYI, "smashing someone's head into the pavement repeatedly" is deadly force.


You're missing my point. The 'SYG' law can be, and has been taken to mean you can provoke aggression, then gun the other person down. Treyvon Martin is only a big deal today because the Internet got hold of it. It's a bad law that can easily be abused in such a way as to absolve someone of cold-blooded murder.

My problem isn't with deadly force - it's with 'get out of murder free' laws. Zimmerman nearly got away with it cleanly.
 
2012-12-14 12:51:02 PM  

clyph: Kuroshin: The streets just aren't crawling with thugs looking to assault random passerby for funsies. It does *happen*, but those aren't your 'meat and potatoes' violent criminals. Gangs and domestic violence are much larger problems, which neither are influenced in the least by average people carrying a concealed piece.

How dare you introduce rationality into an emotional argument.


Especially since I'm pro-concealed carry!

/just haven't bothered to get my permit yet
 
2012-12-14 12:51:52 PM  

Kuroshin: Gangs and domestic violence are much larger problems, which neither are influenced in the least by average people carrying a concealed piece.


Me and a Sig P225 ended up standing between my neighbors, one of whom is/was a Marine and had broken both of the door doors into our apartment building and the other who had multiple broken ribs.

It was nice to have until the cops arrived.
 
2012-12-14 12:55:54 PM  
farm4.static.flickr.com
Get ready, Zimmerman thread is coming.
 
2012-12-14 12:58:33 PM  

Pick: A Shambling Mound, very few. With what you have to go through to get one, most do not want to put their permits in jeopardy. Yeah, I know, George Zimmerman, blah, blah, blah. I think after what he is going through, most folks are going to think twice about using their firearms unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. As a CCW holder, I know I will.


If it took the Zimmerman debacle to make you realize the only time you use a firearm is when it is ABSOLUTELY necessary, you might want to rethink carrying.
 
2012-12-14 12:58:38 PM  

Billified: If written today, the Constitution would be a very, very different document. Our Constitution is a testament to the art of comprimise, if they tried to write it today it would take 5 years and 800 pages to get to something everyone would reluctantly sign off on


I don't know. I think if you took fifty random Congressmen, dressed them head-to-toe in heavy woolen garments, took away their phones, turned the heat up to 95, locked them in a room, and somehow simulated the smell of Benjamin Franklin's legendary herring farts, you might get consensus fairly quickly. I'm not saying you'd get a very good document out of it, but there wouldn't be a lot of unnecessary bickering over little details.

This is how I explain away the parts of the original Constitution I don't like. "Wait, did we ſay we were for ſlavery, or againſt ſlavery?" "Jeſus, I don't care, just write it down ſo I can get the fark out of this shiathole."
 
2012-12-14 12:58:53 PM  

Kuroshin: clyph: Kuroshin: There aren't too many laws out there which absolve murder.

Every state in the union has a justifiable homicide statute, and I'm positive every one of them has deemed multiple homicides justifiable that you would disagree with.

It is sometimes a regrettable necessity to take a life in order to preserve your own or that of a third party, and it's a universal principle in western law that you can legitimately reply to an imminent threat of deadly force in kind.

FYI, "smashing someone's head into the pavement repeatedly" is deadly force.

You're missing my point. The 'SYG' law can be, and has been taken to mean you can provoke aggression, then gun the other person down. Treyvon Martin is only a big deal today because the Internet got hold of it. It's a bad law that can easily be abused in such a way as to absolve someone of cold-blooded murder.

My problem isn't with deadly force - it's with 'get out of murder free' laws. Zimmerman nearly got away with it cleanly.


No, it isn't, and it hasn't.

Please link to where a stand your ground law in any state (Florida isn't the only one) has been abused in such an egregious way as to garner widespread public outcry over an obvious injustice.
 
2012-12-14 12:59:30 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 500x281]
Get ready, Zimmerman thread is coming.


Because of one trolling tard.
 
2012-12-14 01:00:58 PM  

Kuroshin: Electrify: Is this where the gunnuts proclaim that cities with relaxed gun laws have lower rates of gun crime than those that don't?

Nope.

Is this also where we point out that Toronto, a city with a similar as Chicago and far more restrictive laws, has had 1/10th the number of gun crimes than said city?

Weak argument, because...

/if the only way to keep your population feeling safe is for everyone to own a firearm, then you have much deeper problems than gun laws

...that.

Guns aren't the problem. They aren't even a problem. Americans are the problem. The society we've made is the problem. Ban guns outright, and there will still be more than enough shootings to go around. Can't pack that genie back into the bottle.


Which is the frustrating irony of the situation: those who tend to be pro-gun are the first to be against programs which are proven to reduce crime.
 
2012-12-14 01:01:16 PM  
Ahem. "ſhiathole."

And that's not the firſt time it's gotten me for that, either. Fool me once, Fark filter, ſhame on you. Fool me twice, ſhame on ſemiotix.
 
2012-12-14 01:01:37 PM  
I live in the "murder capital" of Florida (Jacksonville). I don't personally own a gun. Not that I have a problem with folks who do; my family never seemed to find a good reason to own firearms and I guess I'm the same. After all, I don't live in a particularly dangerous part of town and I don't engage in behaviors that would heighten my risk to become a victim of violence.

I have several friends who own multiple guns apiece and seem to think that makes them invincible to danger. They are appalled to find out that I don't carry a gun with me or drive around with one in my truck. To them, I'm only asking to become a victim or some horrible crime by not carrying.

To be honest, I'm more wary of any Wild West type who thinks a gun makes them invincible out on the street than I am of any methhead that may break into my home.
 
2012-12-14 01:05:10 PM  

sarajlewis83: I live in the "murder capital" of Florida (Jacksonville). I don't personally own a gun. Not that I have a problem with folks who do; my family never seemed to find a good reason to own firearms and I guess I'm the same. After all, I don't live in a particularly dangerous part of town and I don't engage in behaviors that would heighten my risk to become a victim of violence.

I have several friends who own multiple guns apiece and seem to think that makes them invincible to danger. They are appalled to find out that I don't carry a gun with me or drive around with one in my truck. To them, I'm only asking to become a victim or some horrible crime by not carrying.

To be honest, I'm more wary of any Wild West type who thinks a gun makes them invincible out on the street than I am of any methhead that may break into my home.


What great logic.

As we all know, people who have went through the process to obtain a concealed carry permit commit far more crimes than methheads.
 
2012-12-14 01:05:27 PM  

iheartscotch: I see there's a graph part way down of the 3 worst cities in the united states for murders, Detroit, DC and Baltimore. I know DC and Detroit have strict gun control laws and, last I knew, were both fighting against conceal carry. I don't know about Baltimore; but, if I remember correctly, Maryland is not a shall issue state.

What a coincidence!

/ I agree that it cannot be proven causal, but, my point was that it also cannot be proven that it is not causal


Actually it's quite easy to prove it isn't causal. All we have to do is show places with restrictive gun laws that have low crime rates. Low and behold, Honolulu and San Jose, which are on that same graph for having the lowest crime rates, have very restrictive gun laws. Just as restrictive as Baltimore or D.C.

So that ends that.
 
2012-12-14 01:06:12 PM  

Kuroshin: clyph: Kuroshin: There aren't too many laws out there which absolve murder.

Every state in the union has a justifiable homicide statute, and I'm positive every one of them has deemed multiple homicides justifiable that you would disagree with.

It is sometimes a regrettable necessity to take a life in order to preserve your own or that of a third party, and it's a universal principle in western law that you can legitimately reply to an imminent threat of deadly force in kind.

FYI, "smashing someone's head into the pavement repeatedly" is deadly force.

You're missing my point. The 'SYG' law can be, and has been taken to mean you can provoke aggression, then gun the other person down. Treyvon Martin is only a big deal today because the Internet got hold of it. It's a bad law that can easily be abused in such a way as to absolve someone of cold-blooded murder.

My problem isn't with deadly force - it's with 'get out of murder free' laws. Zimmerman nearly got away with it cleanly.


I'm ok with guns. I have several. Not a fan of Joe Horn or Zimmerman. I think they were both in the wrong and deserve charges. Those are the bad apples.
 
2012-12-14 01:07:57 PM  

Spade: Dimensio: Jacobin: If u carry a pistol in an exposed cowboy holster do you need a cocealed carry permit?

Florida prohibits the carrying of an openly displayed firearm.

IIRC, so does Texas unless it's a rifle. I was told you can't openly carry a 9mm pistol there, but a belt fed M60 is good to go.


INAL, but GA has a similar law; no open carry without a permit excepting long guns. Tho I haven't looked up if full auto rifles are included in 'long gun' category the since I don't own one.

/want one tho
 
2012-12-14 01:08:46 PM  

topcon:
Please link to where a stand your ground law in any state (Florida isn't the only one) has been abused in such an egregious way as to garner widespread public outcry over an obvious injustice.


How about this Tampa Bay Times study from this past June? Worth perusing.

Copy & paste

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/article1233133.ece
 
2012-12-14 01:12:55 PM  

topcon: sarajlewis83: I live in the "murder capital" of Florida (Jacksonville). I don't personally own a gun. Not that I have a problem with folks who do; my family never seemed to find a good reason to own firearms and I guess I'm the same. After all, I don't live in a particularly dangerous part of town and I don't engage in behaviors that would heighten my risk to become a victim of violence.

I have several friends who own multiple guns apiece and seem to think that makes them invincible to danger. They are appalled to find out that I don't carry a gun with me or drive around with one in my truck. To them, I'm only asking to become a victim or some horrible crime by not carrying.

To be honest, I'm more wary of any Wild West type who thinks a gun makes them invincible out on the street than I am of any methhead that may break into my home.

What great logic.

As we all know, people who have went through the process to obtain a concealed carry permit commit far more crimes than methheads.


Maybe that has more bearing on how afraid I am of methheads than you think.
 
2012-12-14 01:16:41 PM  

sarajlewis83: topcon: sarajlewis83: I live in the "murder capital" of Florida (Jacksonville). I don't personally own a gun. Not that I have a problem with folks who do; my family never seemed to find a good reason to own firearms and I guess I'm the same. After all, I don't live in a particularly dangerous part of town and I don't engage in behaviors that would heighten my risk to become a victim of violence.

I have several friends who own multiple guns apiece and seem to think that makes them invincible to danger. They are appalled to find out that I don't carry a gun with me or drive around with one in my truck. To them, I'm only asking to become a victim or some horrible crime by not carrying.

To be honest, I'm more wary of any Wild West type who thinks a gun makes them invincible out on the street than I am of any methhead that may break into my home.

What great logic.

As we all know, people who have went through the process to obtain a concealed carry permit commit far more crimes than methheads.

Maybe that has more bearing on how afraid I am of methheads than you think.


Really? You're cool with some whacked out druggie breaking in to your house, yet a guy with a gun you don't even know about minding his own business scares you?

Paranoid much?
 
2012-12-14 01:17:13 PM  

topcon: Fark Rye For Many Whores: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 500x281]
Get ready, Zimmerman thread is coming.

Because of one trolling tard.


Pointing out a red herring isn't trolling.


Electrify: Guns aren't the problem. They aren't even a problem. Americans are the problem. The society we've made is the problem. Ban guns outright, and there will still be more than enough shootings to go around. Can't pack that genie back into the bottle.

Which is the frustrating irony of the situation: those who tend to be pro-gun are the first to be against programs which are proven to reduce crime.


You know, I haven't actually seen that correlation myself. The pro-gun types are generally solely concerned with having their guns taken away. I haven't met too many that are against better mental health screening and treatment.

Now, they *do* tend to fall onto the side of "NO SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!!", but even the more rabid among them tends to soften when it comes to identifying crazies and locking them up in an institution. As far as blotting out gangs, they also tend to favor the 'nuke 'em from orbit' solutions.

Improving the life of the impoverished, so as to reduce the likelihood of them turning to crime, does seem to be off the table, however...
 
2012-12-14 01:24:35 PM  

Kuroshin: topcon: Fark Rye For Many Whores: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 500x281]
Get ready, Zimmerman thread is coming.

Because of one trolling tard.

Pointing out a red herring isn't trolling.


Electrify: Guns aren't the problem. They aren't even a problem. Americans are the problem. The society we've made is the problem. Ban guns outright, and there will still be more than enough shootings to go around. Can't pack that genie back into the bottle.

Which is the frustrating irony of the situation: those who tend to be pro-gun are the first to be against programs which are proven to reduce crime.

You know, I haven't actually seen that correlation myself. The pro-gun types are generally solely concerned with having their guns taken away. I haven't met too many that are against better mental health screening and treatment.

Now, they *do* tend to fall onto the side of "NO SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!!", but even the more rabid among them tends to soften when it comes to identifying crazies and locking them up in an institution. As far as blotting out gangs, they also tend to favor the 'nuke 'em from orbit' solutions.

Improving the life of the impoverished, so as to reduce the likelihood of them turning to crime, does seem to be off the table, however...


I'm pro-gun and I agree with you totally. I also agree with your stereotype of us because the sad truth is that it always seems to be like that. The gun issue aside, how can there be so many people with absolutely no compassion for others? I don't have any answers as to how to handle those issues, but it kills me that people aren't even willing to talk about them because...socialism.
 
2012-12-14 01:31:22 PM  

Billified: Itstoearly: You realize, subby, that the framers of the Constitution said that all of our rights were granted by God, and not from men, right?

To be fair, at that time in America, God and Jesus were the only higher powers anyone had ever heard of. There wasn't even different brands of Christianity available to most people. You went to the one church in your town and worshiped the same wy all your neighbors did.

If written today, the Constitution would be a very, very different document. Our Constitution is a testament to the art of comprimise, if they tried to write it today it would take 5 years and 800 pages to get to something everyone would reluctantly sign off on. You would have the right to own guns, but it would be 14 specific guns and they'd all have to be bright pink. You'd have the right to free speech as long as it didn't offend a single person ever. Cops would be completely hog tied when it comes to investigation and anyone with a GED in law would be able to find some flaw to set the criminal free as no human could be so perfect as to pass all the criteria for a legal arrest. In short, it would be a complete mess and not worth the paper it was written on.

Six pages and only 27 Amendments...keeping it simple for 236 years.


Like the EU Constitution.

Part of the genius of the Founders was to make the process unpleasant so they were eager to get it done and go home. The EU Consitution was written by Pols who were paid, had expense accounts and every incentive to draw out the process while being schmoozed by every interested organization.
 
2012-12-14 01:31:33 PM  

sarajlewis83: topcon:
Please link to where a stand your ground law in any state (Florida isn't the only one) has been abused in such an egregious way as to garner widespread public outcry over an obvious injustice.

How about this Tampa Bay Times study from this past June? Worth perusing.

Copy & paste

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/article1233133.ece


That 'study' seemed to have much more of a problem with people using SYG as a defense rather than if it was used successfully to get out of being tried.

Lots of examples where they were tried, but aquited by a jury of their peers. Or where prosecutors struck a deal.

I don't think they expected people to actually click their source links.
 
2012-12-14 01:32:28 PM  

semiotix: Billified: If written today, the Constitution would be a very, very different document. Our Constitution is a testament to the art of comprimise, if they tried to write it today it would take 5 years and 800 pages to get to something everyone would reluctantly sign off on

I don't know. I think if you took fifty random Congressmen, dressed them head-to-toe in heavy woolen garments, took away their phones, turned the heat up to 95, locked them in a room, and somehow simulated the smell of Benjamin Franklin's legendary herring farts, you might get consensus fairly quickly. I'm not saying you'd get a very good document out of it, but there wouldn't be a lot of unnecessary bickering over little details.

This is how I explain away the parts of the original Constitution I don't like. "Wait, did we ſay we were for ſlavery, or againſt ſlavery?" "Jeſus, I don't care, just write it down ſo I can get the fark out of this shiathole."


Exactly!

That herring fart thing for real? If so. LOL
 
2012-12-14 01:33:54 PM  
"The U.S. Constitution is less than a quarter the length of the owner's manual for a 1998 Toyota Camry, and yet it has managed to keep 300 million of the world's most unruly, passionate and energetic people safe, prosperous and free." - P. J. O'Rourke
 
2012-12-14 01:35:36 PM  

semiotix: Billified: If written today, the Constitution would be a very, very different document. Our Constitution is a testament to the art of comprimise, if they tried to write it today it would take 5 years and 800 pages to get to something everyone would reluctantly sign off on

I don't know. I think if you took fifty random Congressmen, dressed them head-to-toe in heavy woolen garments, took away their phones, turned the heat up to 95, locked them in a room, and somehow simulated the smell of Benjamin Franklin's legendary herring farts, you might get consensus fairly quickly. I'm not saying you'd get a very good document out of it, but there wouldn't be a lot of unnecessary bickering over little details.

This is how I explain away the parts of the original Constitution I don't like. "Wait, did we ſay we were for ſlavery, or againſt ſlavery?" "Jeſus, I don't care, just write it down ſo I can get the fark out of this shiathole."


So lets cut the A/C at the Capitol and put Boehner on a broccoli and asperagus diet?
 
2012-12-14 01:43:36 PM  

cgraves67: tricycleracer: My dad's not very inconspicuous about his concealed permit. He wears an NRA cap everywhere and uses his CCW card as his primary form of identification.

May as well wear a t-shirt that says "I'm carrying a firearm".

I've never understood the allure of concealed carry. Wouldn't open carry be better? Why is having a gun hidden in a waistband holster or under your coat better than having it on your belt like a cop?


Most feel that open carry is the worse option, because it makes you a primary target.
 
2012-12-14 01:59:34 PM  

LargeCanine: That herring fart thing for real? If so. LOL


He was, in fact, the 18th century's acknowledged scientific expert on farting.

He was also a notorious pussy hound and could drink you under the table. He once made a list of thirteen virtues (sincerity, frugality, chastity, humility, etc.) and solemnly committed himself to becoming a model of exactly one of them at a time, on a rotating weekly basis. What's that you say, Goodwife Smith? You wish to indulge in the amorous congress behind the chandler's shed? Sorry, baby, it's chastity week. Hit me up next Monday.

So yeah, Franklin was that guy.
 
2012-12-14 02:37:39 PM  
Quick observation, I would get a conceal carry permit just to prevent accidently getting a felony gun charge. I have absolutely no intention of carrying a gun around with me, but if we could get a conceal I would. I live one of those unconstitutional states, where if you get caught with a handgun in the car and you aren't directly driving to or from your home and a range, you got yourself a criminal charge. I have no intention of routinely carrying a gun.
 
2012-12-14 02:50:01 PM  

GanjSmokr: cgraves67: tricycleracer: My dad's not very inconspicuous about his concealed permit. He wears an NRA cap everywhere and uses his CCW card as his primary form of identification.

May as well wear a t-shirt that says "I'm carrying a firearm".

I've never understood the allure of concealed carry. Wouldn't open carry be better? Why is having a gun hidden in a waistband holster or under your coat better than having it on your belt like a cop?

Because some of the more delicate people get all "OMG HE'S GOT A GUNNNNNNN!!!!!! CALL THE POLICE!" if people open carry.


My brother-in-law open carries in VA 100% of the time. I don't understand why he does, but I never saw anyone freak out "OMG HES GOT A GUN!".

chi_tino: cgraves67: I've never understood the allure of concealed carry. Wouldn't open carry be better? Why is having a gun hidden in a waistband holster or under your coat better than having it on your belt like a cop?

It's too easy for someone to grab it from you.

/FL CCW permit holder


Only if you've got a craptastic holster. If you've got a good, locking holster, the thief would have to know exactly what holster you have, exactly how to unlock it, and to be in a position to unlock it properly and draw the weapon straight up.
 
2012-12-14 03:34:54 PM  

chi_tino: It's too easy for someone to grab it from you.


Never happens.

tricycleracer: The downside to open carry is that you become the first target.


Also never happens.
 
2012-12-14 08:55:07 PM  
Given the past and recent events, I do not believe that banning guns or more gun control will resolve the issue. Guns can be obtained, legally or illegally from almost anywhere, even manufactured in a small machine shop. I believe the bigger issue is bullets. It is bullets that need to be regulated. Let me explain.

It is much more difficult to manufacture a bullet than a gun. To do so one has to get a casing, primer, propellent, and projectile. While projectile are easy, the rest is more difficult, especially if these items become strongly regulated.

The only propellent that is easy to make and reliable is black powder, but it has many disadvantages which discourage its serious use. More sophisticated propellents and primer are manufactured by chemical companies need to be purchased. As such I believe the following regulations need to be put in place:

ALL primer and propellent casing, and projectile manufactures must be registered with the Federal Government and agree that their records will be open to investigators without restriction.

ALL lots of primers and propellents shall be tagged (chemically) with a manufacture code and the month and year of manufacture. Casings and projectiles must be similarly marked. This includes product destined for the military (can be stolen).

Companies must keep detailed records of the above and to whom sold for a minimum of 10 years.

All ammunition manufactures must keep detailed records of receipt of the above, be Federally licensed, and mark each product made with date, manufacture, location of manufacture, and to whom distributed.

All distributers must keep open books show receipt of above items, date, and to whom sold, quantity and when. The includes verified full contact information of the buyer.

It order to purchase a bullet(s) or shell(s) from a distributor, the person must physically visit their local police or sheriff's office and obtain the equivalent of a prescription from that office. That prescription must contain their full contact information, quantity and type they are able to purchase, an expiration date for the prescription, on police stationary with a signature and seal. In order to get the prescription the buyer must go through a full background check, address verification, and state/justify the purpose for the purchase, the quantity needed, and the expected length of time they are intended to be used. If a refill is requested a monitory wait of 24 hours must take place before the prescription is issued. The buy may be asked as well to present the weapon the ammunition is to be used in, which must also be registered.

Forging a prescription, a buyer distributing ammunition, will be punishable by a mandatory jail sentence.

All self loading equipment will be banned, other than that for single fire black powder ammunition for historical purposes.

All purchasers must show evidence of being able to safely secure ammunition in a securely locked container bolted to a solid object.

Manufacturers or distributers who violate these rules will permanently lose their Federal license at minimum.

With such a system in place. obtaining large quantities of ammunition will be quite difficult and the user will need to have an intended purpose for any purchase, along with a through background check. They can have all the guns they want. They just won't be able to use them. Should someone manage to circumvent this, the ammunition will have a traceable path back to the distributer and manufacturer so hopefully it will not happen again.
 
2012-12-14 10:38:59 PM  

jimw: Given the past and recent events, I do not believe that banning guns or more gun control will resolve the issue. Guns can be obtained, legally or illegally from almost anywhere, even manufactured in a small machine shop. I believe the bigger issue is bullets. It is bullets that need to be regulated. Let me explain.

It is much more difficult to manufacture a bullet than a gun. To do so one has to get a casing, primer, propellent, and projectile. While projectile are easy, the rest is more difficult, especially if these items become strongly regulated.

The only propellent that is easy to make and reliable is black powder, but it has many disadvantages which discourage its serious use. More sophisticated propellents and primer are manufactured by chemical companies need to be purchased. As such I believe the following regulations need to be put in place:

ALL primer and propellent casing, and projectile manufactures must be registered with the Federal Government and agree that their records will be open to investigators without restriction.

ALL lots of primers and propellents shall be tagged (chemically) with a manufacture code and the month and year of manufacture. Casings and projectiles must be similarly marked. This includes product destined for the military (can be stolen).

Companies must keep detailed records of the above and to whom sold for a minimum of 10 years.

All ammunition manufactures must keep detailed records of receipt of the above, be Federally licensed, and mark each product made with date, manufacture, location of manufacture, and to whom distributed.

All distributers must keep open books show receipt of above items, date, and to whom sold, quantity and when. The includes verified full contact information of the buyer.

It order to purchase a bullet(s) or shell(s) from a distributor, the person must physically visit their local police or sheriff's office and obtain the equivalent of a prescription from that office. That prescription must cont ...


No.
 
2012-12-14 11:36:22 PM  
img560.imageshack.us

Can anyone spot the concealed firearm?

/FL CCW holder
 
Displayed 39 of 89 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report