How many have concealed carry permit to carry a gun ?

[houstonscott]

To help you understand the language of bear arms you must go to meaning of the words in the 1700's. The reason the word arms is used is because it means, rifles and side arms, vs guns which means cannons or artillery. If you look at current SC thoughts on this where they are going is if it can be carried it's constitutional. What it is, how it's carried or constructed, or measures, auto, semi, full, is of no interest. So be ready leftists for what's next, if more cases are brought. HS

 

[BLUE ME]

What ????
You need a permit.
Cheers

 

[IslandTractor]

Old news? as in not important? The time of the ruling is not important what is important is that it is a major shift in policy for California. California has always been a "may issue" state. In other words if you had political affiliation with the Sheriff, and paid him enough money under the table, or some such, you "may" get a CCW. Now it would seem the court has ruled that California will become a "shall issue" state. And I am still surprised by that ruling. So pixx on it all you want, I say it is an important ruling.

I didn't say it was unimportant. I said it was old news. This came out months ago. Only the procedural stuff related to appeals is new.

 

[IslandTractor]

Because, the reality is that peoples' behavior is the core issue, no argument there. But, the NRA opposes any legislative measures designed to reduce risk from peoples' behaviors where guns are concerned. And as IT mentioned, the NRA has made it difficult or impossible to attain the data needed to build insights on those behaviors which could lead to identifying effective but minimal controls. The NRA's school shooting solution is a perfect example. They are explicitly saying that some of those folks with the right to bear arms are going attack your school so you should prepare for that. Never mind that those wacky arms bearers are enabled by the NRA; that is not their problem and they take no responsibility for their own culpability. Reducing the abilities of those attackers to have access to weapons will reduce the risks of those attacks taking place. Identifying those at high risk of becoming the attacker and having a legal means of preventative intervention would also help. The NRA hangs its hat on the 2nd Amendment simply because they have no other effective or ethical arguments. That is why the NRA fights tooth and nail on the 2nd A. The 2nd A. is antiquated, taken over by events. Mass shootings with a muzzle loader likely never entered the Founder's minds because it is not possible. The Founders could not have foreseen other factors in our society such as a large subculture of violence, or minds altered by the stew of chemicals present in the environment and our food, or purposely ingested recreation-ally. The rationale for the 2nd A., that people need to preserve the ability to defend themselves from tyranny of the government, has rarely if ever been realized, certainly not successfully, in our history. The 2nd A. rationale has become a fantasy that in the current age of weaponry and conflict capabilities, your deer rifle or hand gun is going to defend you. You will need a lot more than that. The constant, daily realized gun deaths due to violence, crime, mental instability, etc., are unintended consequences serving a fantasy. Those unintended consequences could be lessened without impairing the right and ability to defend against tyranny.

+1. Well stated.

 

[dave1949]

Interesting attempt to spin an illogical response .....

By declaring weaponizing and hardening useless tactics, I suppose you have contacted the US military to advise them of their error as well?

It is definitely brain dead to think that the answer to civil violence is to weaponize and harden potential targets. Which ones would you and the NRA omit or write-off as acceptable collateral damage--as the military is often forced to do? None? You writing the checks for all this?

What is your vision of a sane and safe society? Weapons and defenses to the max? That is the path promoted by the NRA with their "solutions." It is not very consistent with your New Testament avatar.

What does the US military's mission have to do with your local school's mission, or is it just all one big mission for you?

 

[KiotiKowboy]

Because, the reality is ........

WOW! YOUR "reality" is a tortured exercise in overdosing on Kool-Aid. It is frightening to know how gullible some people are.

 

[TomSeller]

You seem to want to connect the right to bear arms or just guns with needless deaths. That's the problem, they are not connected. It's not a tough one it's easy, they are not related. HS.

Sure they are. The more guns in the populace, the more convenient a gun is to use in a homicide. The recent school shooting up in Washington State was with a legal gun taken from a family member. This happens very often. The kid selected a gun for maximum killing effect, he did not choose a crowbar or anything else with less immediate killing capacity. Discussing this connection to guns with irresponsible gun supporters is pointless, I know. We need our guns but not at the cost of needless deaths.

 

[KiotiKowboy]

It is definitely brain dead to think that the answer to civil violence is to weaponize and harden potential targets.

Really? I guess we should fire all our police and security guards, remove bars from business windows and rip out the locks on the doors to our homes. Sounds like a great plan .... LMAO

What is your vision of a sane and safe society?

Sane would be to see liberals purchase proper fitting underwear and quit squealing about every little thing.

Safe is NOT going to happen - at least to the level you want. Living in a free society will always carry risks. You are either wise enough to understand the ultimate value of freedom - or not. Certainly we can work to lessen our risks - but not at the cost of infringing our rights. This is exactly where Bush betrayed the nation with actions like the Patriot Act and the police-state TSA.

Weapons and defenses to the max? That is the path promoted by the NRA with their "solutions."

Grab a napkin - Your Kool-Aid is showing.

It is not very consistent with your New Testament avatar.

NOW we're getting to it. Blast those bothersome Christians that don't fit into the liberal minded definition.

 

[KiotiKowboy]

We need our guns but not at the cost of needless deaths.

BZZZZZZZZZZZT ... Wrong!

School shootings are heart breaking. Drive-by shootings are tragedies as well. Acts of violence, firearms or not, destroy lives. We ALL would like to see these events reduced.

Punishing the innocent, threatening our freedom and liberty, putting the next generation at enhanced risk of tyranny - acting like scared little girls - is NOT acceptable at ANY cost.

 

[dave1949]

Really? I guess we should fire all our police and security guards, remove bars from business windows and rip out the locks on the doors to our homes. Sounds like a great plan .... LMAO



Sane would be to see liberals purchase proper fitting underwear and quit squealing about every little thing.

Safe is NOT going to happen - at least to the level you want. Living in a free society will always carry risks. You are either wise enough to understand the ultimate value of freedom - or not. Certainly we can work to lessen our risks - but not at the cost of infringing our rights. This is exactly where Bush betrayed the nation with actions like the Patriot Act and the police-state TSA.



Grab a napkin - Your Kool-Aid is showing.



NOW we're getting to it. Blast those bothersome Christians that don't fit into the liberal minded definition.

You provided zero intelligent answers. Good job!