gnatshooter Posted May 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Only 50%? I would have figured that the number should be much higher. Figuring just how STUPID that most of the sheeple are. Half of all people are below average, there's no other way it could be. It's for the same reason that everyone dies within 6 months of their birthday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Even though I prefer concealed carry I'd like to have the option of open carry. This is something that's being seriously considered here in Florida. I agree , but I think most here are above avg. in weapons handling, & I believe can be trusted to do so ,but if you get one bonehead like the guy above , firing a Black rifle in the air , for what , road rage ( grow a set ), it screws us all . I don't believe that my rights should be curtailed because some in society cannot be trusted to think or act correctly with their rights. Never in my 40 years of carrying guns have I needed to be told how to act responsibly with them. I live in the people's republic of NY (because the Army decided I needed to live in Hell for a while) and this POS state is horrible with its gun laws, taxes and general Nanny behavior. I agree , but as said above , with the Media mostly owned & run with the opposition , it only takes one incident ( as in Sandy hook ) they will be on it like the stink on $hit. Maybe there should be levels of competency to be able to carrie what you want . I know the a$$holes we have for politicians , in most cases , wouldn't make it a hoop jumping contest , but maybe we would weed some of the Boneheads out of it . You have competency testing in every day life , for work or driver license types , why not firearm carrie .I don't really think thats too much to ask of society in general . Its not depriving you of the right & with proper training , most would over come any deficiencies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rsquared Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 But just think of how easy they hand out a drivers license. The way that some people drive (vacuous and self-centered.....the same way they live), I've said that they're handed out way too easily for years. No common sense portion of the test. So how do think that the state would crew up a CCW test? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsdmmat Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 You have competency testing in every day life , for work or driver license types , why not firearm carrie .I don't really think thats too much to ask of society in general . Its not depriving you of the right & with proper training , most would over come any deficiencies. Too easy for the government to abuse and disarm the public. "Shall not be infringed," doesn't mean a little bit is ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted May 18, 2014 Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Maybe a drivers license was a poor example , but it should have given an idea of what you need in every day life to show your capabilities . Why shouldn't we expect any less for carrying a firearm ,be it concealed or open , long gun or handgun. It is more responsibility to carrie a firearm & you should show that your not going to open up in traffic because you don't like the way some one drives. Too easy for the government to abuse and disarm the public. "Shall not be infringed," doesn't mean a little bit is ok. Has nothing to do with infringing , its all about sensibility , what makes sense to be able to carrie a dangerous weapon & keeping it out of the hands of idiots . Lets face it , the Politicians have never made a firearms law thats meant to keep them out of a criminals hands , its all about the law abiding citizens to jump through hoops to have one . If anyone is going to jump on the " shall not be infringed " part of it , why can't we have RPGs', 155 howitzers , you can own one if your a Gasillionair , but normal every day people like us can't , now that is infringing . Why not NFA weapons , 25 K & up for a transferable M16, but if you have the money you can buy one , so they say its not infringing , because even though they stopped making them for individual transfer in 1986 . It boosted the price over night , I was there & a class three dealer then.Put me & so many others, right out of business , just what they wanted to happen. So just asking for some one to pass some kind of proficiency testing , should not be a big deal to carry a firearm . If anything it may stifle some of those out to really infringe on your second amendment rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted May 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2014 Maybe a drivers license was a poor example , but it should have given an idea of what you need in every day life to show your capabilities . Has nothing to do with infringing , its all about sensibility , what makes sense to be able to carrie a dangerous weapon & keeping it out of the hands of idiots . The ideal situation is where those holding a handgun license are consistently better shooters than those without the license. I recently got my CCW license here in Iowa and was alarmed at how little was required. I need never have shot anything in my life, ever even once. And I needed no understanding whatsoever of who I can shoot, and when, and why. Basically, all I needed to prove is that I can surf the internet and run a printer off my computer. If they had the same standards out there for getting a drivers' license, it would be carnage on the roads. But I can say with confidence that, even though Iowa has permissive standards for CCW, it's not "carnage out there". Maybe there's something about legal gun owners that they understand that rights come with responsibilities, while other people don't. That's not a guaranteed outcome, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 I'd be willing to bet a $5 breakfast that most Americans can do a lot more damage, maiming, and killing, with a '69 Cadillac and a full tank of gas, than those same people could with an AR-15 and thirty 30-round magazines. So just asking for some one to pass some kind of proficiency testing , should not be a big deal to carry a firearm . If anything it may stifle some of those out to really infringe on your second amendment rights. And who will be determining that proficiency? I can guarantee that 80% of the shooters on this forum wouldn't be happy with the safety/competency evaluation I do on them. And that's another shooter who would rather see everyone armed than arbitrary requirements agreed to by Chucky Schumer and Lindsey Graham. If they had the same standards out there for getting a drivers' license, it would be carnage on the roads. Uummm…okay. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNP Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 I'd be willing to bet a $5 breakfast that most Americans can do a lot more damage, maiming, and killing, with a '69 Cadillac and a full tank of gas, than those same people could with an AR-15 and thirty 30-round magazines. ....and I'd be willing to bet most people would be just as shocked to see someone enter Starbucks with a 69 Cadillac as the would a rifle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 Just a simple error with a car, versus a simple error with a firearm: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted May 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 And who will be determining that proficiency? I can guarantee that 80% of the shooters on this forum wouldn't be happy with the safety/competency evaluation I do on them. My son in law, who's an amazingly good shooter and did a tour "at the sharp end" in Iraq, told me some of what he saw for US military training with pistols. He said that lots of guys could not hit a four-feet by eight-feet sheet of plywood from a distance of ten feet. Shooters like that were not given a discharge or given intensive training to overcome their obvious disability. So, "good enough for government work" might be an acceptable standard for civilian CCW. At least we'd know they shot a few rounds before they got their permit. Heck, they'd even get to learn something about Rules Of Engagement, which is something else that Iowa does not require. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 Club members keep shooting up our target frames, standard IPSC stuff…even the metal bases. An obvious flinching issue. The club president said we need to do this or that to make money for damages. I told him "None of my students hit the frames. How about we make them take a class on how to shoot?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 I like open carry in the summer as apposed to concealed sometimes, and when I want to go hunting on my motorcycle, the longgun goes on my back. Maybe if more people got their feathers ruffled, they would become educated. Worst case scenario, which would never happen, but if our rights, as well as open carry, did turn america into the wildwest like the libs are afraid it would, we would have some population and stupid control. These people couldn't continue to breed... and maybe, just maybe, it would bring the average iq up a few points :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue109 Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 Club members keep shooting up our target frames, standard IPSC stuff…even the metal bases. An obvious flinching issue. The club president said we need to do this or that to make money for damages. I told him "None of my students hit the frames. How about we make them take a class on how to shoot?" expect a few new holes if my boss ever gets our range day organized out there lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted May 19, 2014 Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 I like the sentence that the guy who shot himself said " Then my Training took over " , I know what he meant , but I can't help thinking , it should have took over as soon as he loaded his firearm. Good he made a Video of this incident , got to hand it to him . Couple years ago a range member ( former Marine ) was practicing something , what we may never know , but discharged his Pistol putting it back into a shoulder holster & sadly he was deceased before other members showed up to shoot & found him . The media was all set to go into Frenzy mode until they found out he has had experience with firearms & they shut up . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsdmmat Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Maybe a drivers license was a poor example , but it should have given an idea of what you need in every day life to show your capabilities . Why shouldn't we expect any less for carrying a firearm ,be it concealed or open , long gun or handgun. It is more responsibility to carrie a firearm & you should show that your not going to open up in traffic because you don't like the way some one drives. Has nothing to do with infringing , its all about sensibility , what makes sense to be able to carrie a dangerous weapon & keeping it out of the hands of idiots . Lets face it , the Politicians have never made a firearms law thats meant to keep them out of a criminals hands , its all about the law abiding citizens to jump through hoops to have one . If anyone is going to jump on the " shall not be infringed " part of it , why can't we have RPGs', 155 howitzers , you can own one if your a Gasillionair , but normal every day people like us can't , now that is infringing . Why not NFA weapons , 25 K & up for a transferable M16, but if you have the money you can buy one , so they say its not infringing , because even though they stopped making them for individual transfer in 1986 . It boosted the price over night , I was there & a class three dealer then.Put me & so many others, right out of business , just what they wanted to happen. So just asking for some one to pass some kind of proficiency testing , should not be a big deal to carry a firearm . If anything it may stifle some of those out to really infringe on your second amendment rights. The problem is anytime a government body is incharge of testing or training for qualifications there is room for abuse. I can make a proficiency test so hard that you will not be able to pass. In the PRNY we have to have a license in order to touch a handgun, that license takes months to over a year to get and costs anywhere from 125-300 dollars, there are requirements for training, background checks and references. That is the type of abuse I am talking about. Once you let the government treat your rights as a privilage you have lost your rights. I am not in favor of any govenment mandated training, testing or licensing, never have been and never will be. Freedom is a dangerous thing, that is why we are all individually responsible for our actions and our safety. A govenment that controls the freedoms is even more dangerouse than a madman with a gun. As for RPGs, tanks and the like those are weapons that based on the threat that citizens have the right to own. The limiting factors should be your wallet not the govenment. Read a little of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's opinions on the subject to get where I am coming from. . The second amendment also applies to knives and swords. In my opinion any law that prohibits the citizen from obtaining arms (of any type) especially if the government is allowed to obtain them is unconstitutional. Neither the govenment or the constitution granted us the right to keep and bear arms therefore they cannot restrict it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Once you let the government treat your rights as a privilage you have lost your rights. Verdad. And even when those rights are reaffirmed by legal/due process, you will hear little of it and business will continue as usual (trampling rights). Anyone heard of the driver's license case Oklahoma vs. King? Didn't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Chipotle asks customers not to bring their guns. Cue the backlash! - Market Watch - May 20, 2014http://blogs.marketwatch.com/themargin/2014/05/20/chipotle-asks-customers-not-to-bring-their-guns-cue-the-backlash/ The guac peddler, at risk of alienating a segment of its customers, said on Monday that “the display of firearms in our restaurants has now created an environment that is potentially intimidating or uncomfortable for many of our customers.” Maybe it’s not so much a ban as a polite request. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StainTrain Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) Why give up the tactical advantage of a concealed weapon? If you think open carry is a deterrent, think again, since 1964 over 4200 Police Officers were killed and the overwhelming majority were "open carrying." Before someone says...but but but they were cops...... They represent the same thing that civilian gun owners do...an obstacle to their objectives. People at Chipotle and Starbucks may be intimidated by ours weapons, but criminals are not. Sometimes the element of surprise is more valuable than a reload. Edited May 20, 2014 by StainTrain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 You do have a good point . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StainTrain Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Trust me...it is rare that do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 In many ways, a gun is just as much a symbol as a device. As a symbol, it represents a radical position on individualism and personal responsibility that was advocated by the framers of the Constitution. This naturally offends statists and collectivists. You can likely make people just as extremely uncomfortable by wearing a Nazi swastika arm band, like the New York taxi driver who was suspended for wearing one. What this means is that carrying a gun openly could be a type of free speech, guaranteed by the First Amendment. But that right/freedom only reaches so far. The coffee shop, the burger joint and the cab company can all throw you out on your keister for speeching/symboling in a way they don't want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StainTrain Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) I completely agree with you about being a form of free speech and if that is the OCer's motivation then more power to him/her. I, however, am not that symbolic. When I wear a weapon, it is to protect my family, your family and myself (both on duty and off), I step into the game to win, not merely play, because as many of you know...the second place winner in a gunfight is tits-up in a grave. I want every advantage I can get in a deadly force situation...fair...unfair...it doesn't matter. This is why I carry concealed. It is a personal choice. Edited May 20, 2014 by StainTrain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue109 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 it does deter bums asking for money...or so I've found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 it does deter bums asking for money...or so I've found. Hm. When you see a man carrying, literally, the ultimate symbol of self-reliance and personal responsibility, do you beg money from him? No, it's too freaking wrong and embarrassing, even to someone who's fallen all the way to the bottom and given up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
392heminut Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 "Customers can thank/blame Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, the Michael Bloomberg-backed gun-control group, for petitioning the Mexican-food chain to ban firearms. But Chipotle and Starbucks seem to be tiptoeing around the issue a bit. Money from a left-leaning mom is worth the same as cash from a double-barreled Texan." No doubt! <thumbsup> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.