Skip to main content

View Diary: RKBA: Open Thread (205 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  responses (14+ / 0-)
    everywhere do you think getting a concealed carry permit should require more or less time spent training in the safe use of said gun as, for example, a car.
    I'm a big fan of what I like to call multi-tier training. Think of Arizona. You can carry within Arizona (open or concealed) without a class. You want to carry outside Arizona, you take a class. I'd like to see a third level of training (at least) at the national level that requires some training and would allow you to carry in any state. Want to carry on a plane? Open up the FFDO classes to civilians. (Just one example.)

    So I think that it depends on the state and where you'll be carrying.

    Would you support weeks of training as is required for a drivers licence. and periodic retesting. Manditory insurance restrictions in carry or use while under the influnce.
    Where did you get your license? There's a paper test. Wooho. You just got your license. There is no retesting. There are already laws against carrying while drunk in most states.
    How does your position on concealed carry differ from the NRA's position on concealed carry.
    What's the NRA's position on concealed carry?
    Do you think large cities have the right to regulate guns differently than other areas considering the unique problems large cities have with gun use?
    No. I don't think civil rights should be regulated differently based on geography. The same rules that apply in downtown Ironwood (few thousands of people) work in downtown Detroit.

    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

    by KVoimakas on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 09:19:51 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't know about you.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oldpunk

      ...but in Illinois I had to take a certain number of hours of training, granted the local HS offerd it.  I had a learners permitfor months.  We took a paper test on the rules and law, easy for me. and a practicle exam.  Rather hard.  I have occasionaly been asked to retest on the eye exam but not the practicle since I have virtually no tickets.

      But you evaded the question.  How much training do you think a person should have before a concealed carry permit is issued?  Would you support a practicle exam in gun use saftey and proper concealed carry and in the law.  Would you support random retests.

      And while I don't think the 2nd admendment is a civil right I should point out that our civil rights get regulated every day.  Hell zoning laws can even regulate civil rights by geography.  The number of lawsuits about where Mosques can be built should show you that is at least at issue.

      I don't know the NRA's position of concealed carry.  I just figured you did as that is both of your's area of intrest.

      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

      by delver rootnose on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 09:46:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I told you what I would like to see (10+ / 0-)

        when it comes to concealed carry. Different levels of required training for different levels of license.

        I do not support random retests. I support retests based on evidence, just like I would for drivers licenses, if a test is required for that level of license.

        Your right to free speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to vote, should not be regulated by geography. Neither should the right to keep and bear arms.

        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 09:59:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  but they are... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldpunk

          ...just limiting where I can put a sign is an limitation on my freedom of speech.  Laws, which I don't agree with, on loitering and with whom I want are limitation of freedom of free association.  So I do not see why limitation on arms ownership should not be limited.  Hell the 2nd admendment says in a well regulated militia so even the authors implied limitations.

          We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

          by delver rootnose on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 10:06:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  This training seems to fit within the concept of (0+ / 0-)

          linking rightful arms possession within a requirement of mantaining a 'well-regulated militia', as the Second Amendment seems to do, which would require the arms bearer to have received instruction, participated in proper handling and usage drills, respect lines of authority, and imparting a strong sense of duty to community and the significant load of personal accountability. Whe one is going outside the home state community, it seems reasonable for the traveling gun bearer to have sought and obtained the certifications from the destination community, and the national level, in order to be recognized as having a valid claim to the right to conceal carry.  

          I'm not sure it's productive thing to try to impose on New Yorkers what seems good to Arizonans, Westeners or mid-Westerners.  The density of human population really does need to be taken into account as it reaches shoulder to shoulder closeness.  When you walk the crowded sidewalks of a larger urban city, bumping shoulders along with other incidental contacts, and often encountering frustrating delays as you go, it is not likely to be easy to sell the proposals for having a gun in every such pocket to that state's citizenry.

          The prevailing perception in a high density urban setting is that wielding such a lethal weapon in such conditions is likely to harm innocents and risky even when it's uniformed police pulling their guns. Asking for a large number of armed citizens allowed in such crowds will be deemed questionable--crazy even, from the outset, basically a non-starter. It might make more sense in New York to advocate for a Taser in every pocket or pepper spray, rather than have promoting the idea of having frightened people popping off rounds that might carry a mile or more, penetrating bodies of close by or far away innocents as well as property damage and possibly chaotic resulting stampede.

          When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

          by antirove on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 01:23:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Once you start (7+ / 0-)

            selectively truncating an innate right of a person because of where that person happens to be located, you open up a loophole that will allow a bunch of terrible results.

            Such as, you would allow a place like kansas to truncate the rights of those who possess a uterus in locations governed by a municipality - and watch all the municipalities ban abortion, leaving the only places legal for an abortion to be outside the limits of any town, meaning way far off down some dirt road to a place without power.

            Such as, you would allow a place like louisiana to truncate the rights of those who possess a lot of skin color.

            It is exactly this simple:
            When you allow the laws of the land to be selectively disabled in a way that creates a second class of citizenry, you effectively allow that selective disablement to be used to discriminate and persecute anyone.

            We are supposed to be ruled by laws which blanket us from end to end.

          •  "a well regulated militia" is NOT (4+ / 0-)

            a limiting factor on the Second Amendment, either through grammar, or history, or case law.

            •  More specifically, the "well-regulated militia" is (3+ / 0-)

              not a requirement of the 2nd. The prefatory clause states a desirable condition, and the operative prohibits the restriction of a right so as to facilitate that condition.

              Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

              by Robobagpiper on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 05:27:43 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Then we are doing it wrong since we're clearly (0+ / 0-)

                are not following through with creating the desirable condition--a citizen community of gun owners with disciplined unit cohesion, skilled in their use of their arms, trained in right usage, and able to work as teams.

                When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

                by antirove on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:42:10 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I've proposed the removal of (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  theatre goon

                  the standing army and enrolling EVERYONE between 18 and 45 in the citizen militia. The government gives you a rifle, ammo, and you train ever so often with it.

                  And you keep all your other firearms in the meantime.

                  Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                  by KVoimakas on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:42:51 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Do you know how many veterans... (0+ / 0-)

                  are in the civilian populace?

                  They are the cadre for the "unorganized militia".

                  If you want anything else, please propose your ideas for government funding and organization.  We'll wait....

                  P.S.  Better fire up Article 5 while you're at it.  Good luck with that.

      •  You don't think the 2nd is a civil right? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BlackSheep1, KVoimakas, theatre goon

        It's a right granted to you by law....or restated, a 'civil' right.

    •  and if you don't think..... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PavePusher

      ...your civil rights should be regulated by geography then how could you support your geographically determined traing scheme you stated above.

      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

      by delver rootnose on Thu Nov 29, 2012 at 09:57:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  In CA, there is a driver's test. Like in the car. (0+ / 0-)

      And a paper test.

      202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

      by cany on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 09:20:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In Mi, for your carry permit, there's (0+ / 0-)

        a shooter's test. Like with a gun. And a paper test.

        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 06:14:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was merely responding to the assertion that (0+ / 0-)

          driving tests were paper tests only. Depends on where they are taken.

          202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

          by cany on Thu Dec 06, 2012 at 04:34:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site