Sherrif Begins Taking Away Concealed Weapons Permits, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 04:50 PM by thisguyrighthere
It's death by 1,000 cuts for gun owners. Always has been. Every time some politician says "sure, I respect the 2nd Amendment" there's always the caveat. No carrying guns, no scary guns, no short range guns, no long range guns, no guns I've seen in movies, no guns that shoot a certain mythical ammo, no guns that shoot faster than an arbitrary speed I've set, and blah blah blah.

I'm in a state where open carry is perfectly "legal" (like the 2nd makes it anything less than perfectly legal) but a permit is required for concealed carry (the permitting process includes of showing a utility bill proving you live in the town and a $10 fee) and I'm still worried that one day for any reason that will all change. You other "shall-issue" people should be equally concerned. If we truly had any damn rights at all the matter would stop at the 2nd. There wouldnt be any permits, arbitrary criteria to meet, bullS bans on stupid crap being rammed down our throats (Biden I'm looking at you) or any of this other nonsense decades of "common sense" crap and bent over compromise has gotten us.

The moment the first idiot agreed to any other idiot who cried for some pointless regulation or registration we've been doomed.

I wouldnt hold the Heller decision up like it was some saving grace either. If that decision meant anything or any politician thought it truly meant anything CT, MA, NYC, CA and the other gun-phobic dependent heavy cesspools in this loosely connected conglomerate called a country would have immediately ceased all of their crap laws and regulations but they didn't.

If Obama/Biden get in and their little permanent AWB is even mentioned in Washington we're done for. Once something like that passes into law only an act of god could get it repealed.

No more compromise. No more "common sense."

Those of you in states that have that NRA safety crap class as a requirement know how BS it is. I'm an instructor and I know it's BS. As long as your check clears you pass. I have never come across a student so thick and clueless they couldn't apply the knowledge of "this end will kill you." The NRA supports this crap because they get money training the crooks like me to satisfy some arbitrary criteria by taking the money of people like you in states that require you comply with the scheme. It's a great racket I had when in CT. $100 a pop and a day at the range. Thanks NRA! And thank-you sucker states who mandate your residents get scammed by people like me. What do I need for full auto? $200? That makes me "safe" in the eyes of anti-gunner fools? That I can write a $200 check that will clear?

I know for a fact the fools that push for these pointless restriction which boil down to simply being able to spend money have absolutely no idea what an NFA stamp requires or what an NRA safety class consists of. Yet they support them whole-heartedly (as long as they help build the bridge to complete banning they do).

Hunters better stop pretending that bans dont matter too. You like your bolt 7mm? That's great. I like my AR-15. Leave it the !@#$ alone. If you dont think once they take mine they'll stop coming for yours your kidding yourself right into disarmament.

Then there's Bloomberg suing a gun shop in VA because he claims the shop sold somebody a gun that was used in a NY crime. The shop settled!! There's a terrible precedent for you. Anybody else live in NH? It wont be long before every crackhead ghetto-trash gang-banging dropout POS who commits a crime with a gun will be NH's fault. That leads to interstate and federal lever bans and restrictions even without the passing of Obama/Bidens AWB.

The situation is much, much worse than I'm afraid many "pro-gun" people are noticing.


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:02 PM by ninthaxis
reply to post by Constitutional Scholar



Has anyone attempted to take this stance in the appeal of a gun charge related to illegal concealed caryy? I remember a reading about a guy in Montana who refused to get a driver's license and had the case thrown out as he successfully proved that citizens have the right to travel by common means without the need for a special license or permit.


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:05 PM by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by ninthaxis



I honestly do not know. However, if I am ever presented with that situation, I will indeed challenge it to the highest courts as possible.

I know there have been some court cases where people have been both convicted and in other cases acquitted for refusing to get a drivers license on religious grounds, but to the best of my knowledge no one has challenged concealed carry laws, as most likely it would be in vain anyways. Courts these days tend not to side with freedom.


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:07 PM by ninthaxis
reply to post by Constitutional Scholar



Didn't need a concealed carry permit to carry a six-shooter in the wild west days, didn't need a license for the horse either. If this is what the founding fathers intended, wouldn't they have taken the initiative themselves?


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:09 PM by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by ninthaxis



Exactly my point.

If the founding fathers had intended for the people to get permission first, they could have simply added a phrase along the lines of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed as long as proper permits have been issued."


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:11 PM by ninthaxis
reply to post by Constitutional Scholar



Not to be nit picky, but I would like to change one letter of your post. I would like to change "could" to "would" to read "the founding fathers would have...."


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:20 PM by Constitutional Scholar
reply to post by krestan



Did you actually read what you typed before you posted it?

I hope not.



reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:50 PM by ANNED
What most have not heard about the CCW permits in the OC Sheriff Mike Carona was there were two ways to get your permit.
under the old sheriff you could go the regular route or you could buy a permit by donating to the old sheriff election campaign.

Sheriff Sandra Hutchens decided to review the county’s 1,024 concealed weapons permits after allegations that previous Sheriff Mike Carona may have handed them out as political favors. Carona will soon go on trial on federal corruption charges.

www.publicradio.org...

Here are a few more excerpts from the Times article:

An indictment would mark a spectacular fall for the 52-year-old sheriff, who only five years ago was widely seen as a rising star in California Republican politics.

His conduct had hurt the department’s integrity and morale, according to the critics, who pointed in particular to allegations that he had issued badges and concealed-weapons permits to campaign contributors without background checks or ensuring that they had proper training.


from what i understand the ones getting revoked are the holders with the badges and CCWs

[edit on 12-10-2008 by ANNED]


reply posted on 12-10-2008 @ 06:55 PM by ashamedamerican
Originally posted by Double Eights
There should be no permits in the first place.

Where in the Constitution does it state permits must be given to those who want to posses arms? Where?

Exactly...
They want you to THINK that they can tell you whether you can carry a gun or not.
Originally posted by Tiloke
It is a big deal because for no reason, the authorities simply decided that 15% of permit holders are now not permit holders.


Yep and then another 15 or 20% then another 15 or 20%...

Originally posted by krestan

Uhh, law-abiding citizens shouldn't have guns in the first place..

You, my misguided little friend... need your head examined...
Are you on drugs or something?
Why would a law abiding citizen need a gun? o let me count the ways...
1.To hunt and feed their family (saving ridiculous ammounts of money)or for sport.
2. To protect yourself and your family from criminals.
3. To protect yourself and your family from our government.
All of these are valid reasons to own a gun, which I would like to add, is a constitutionally given, and protected right.
If you think no law abiding citizen has the need for a gun (I'm assuming because you think our government will, and should do everything for us including protecting us in our own homes) than I think you need to move to another country where you can be surrounded by communists or socialists where you would fit in just fine.
However, here in the good 'ol U.S. EVERY law abiding citizen should own a gun.
Try reading the constitution before you run your mouth under the assumption that you know what you are talking about.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 4 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 17 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 5 days ago with 49 member flags