No class. No license. No permit. Ok! I live in the state of Idaho, in the USA.
This year, July 1st, 2016, the state of Idaho began allowing any person in it's border to carry concealed weapons as long as they were federally allowed to possess a firearm.
No class. No license. No permit. Ok!
Knives and other weapons were also allowed by this law as long as the person was allowed to possess such and not a felon.
What do you think about that in the wake of all of the gun violence around the US and the world today?
Open debate, let's do this.
I am fine with it. I do not believe we need to ban or regulate anything. A tool is a tool. Whether it is a gun, a knife, a baseball bat, a sword, a hammer, or a truck/lorry. People can misuse tools. If they are going to then banning the tool will stop nothing. It will create a black market which could lead to more violence.
IF a person harms a person with a tool. We have laws for when a person harms someone. We can use those laws without having to go after the tool.
IF a person kills another person with a tool. We have laws for when a person kills someone. We can use those laws without having to go after the tool.
The legal system is needlessly complex when rules for how to deal with choices and the consequences of those choices already exist.
We need to stop making laws for pre-crime. We need to stop arresting people for things that MIGHT happen.
No victim. No crime.
If I were to kill a person with a gun should I be treated more harsh than if I smash my monitor over someone's head and kill them?
There is the argument of a gun makes it easier.
Yes... so does mixing chemicals like bleach and amonia in an enclosed space.
People are too quick to recommend banning things.
Banning things including drugs, alcohol, etc is all PRE-CRIME and creates a black market opportunity that ushers in government corruption and empowers crime syndicates and families who often go on to be the government officials. Perhaps that is why they are so fond of using FEAR and terror on the news, and over reporting it so they can get people to endorse banning more things. Anytime we ban something we potentially increase their power.
NO VICTIM. NO CRIME.
A smart person who truly wants to kill someone can do so easily. Banning anything will not stop that.
The problem I see with this is that a gun is a tool that was created for death specifically. Most of those other tools here, have death as a secondary use. For me that separates it from others tools. Plus we've seen how effective it is at its purpose. A knife, etc. can't be that effective.
The nice thing about guns is they are the great equalizer. It gives your grandmother a fighting chance against a 300 lb thug. So think of a gun as first and foremost a prosthetic safety device for your grandmother.
Knives can be quite effective. Anyone can close 20+ feet in 3 seconds with a knife, that is why they shoot from that distance.
If you could ask Cain and Abel about how effective a ROCK is , they would tell you that a ROCK is quite effective
ME-TARZAN
See that is where i differ in how i was raised, what i was taught and how i train. I have never been told nor believed that a gun is for the killing and taking of innocent life. It is my belief that the true purpose of the gun is to defend life, liberty, freedom and if needed to harvest meat for survival. If a person attempts to encroach on these values, gets shot and then dies then that was a destiny of their choosing.
I have never held my gun and thought to myself, yeah man! This is a killing machine, im go kill some folks today!!. No i have held it many times respecting the ability that it gives me to defend the principles that i believe in and were taught at a young age and will one day pass onto my children the same beliefs.
dwinblood well said sir
ME-Tarzan
The constitution should be our concealed Cary permit. In reality, the constitution should not even be needed.
Good point. What part of the words "shall not be infringed" is hard to understand?
I'm okay with it, but not without critique. I don't know your laws. But, I think you should have a fire-rate limit and a limit on how many bullets you are legally allowed to carry in public. I think the latter should be in the single digits. I think violating those laws should have serious ramifications.
Obvious Gun-holders might have to allow themselves to be subject to search for me to be comfortable.
The violent community might not abide by the law. But it doesn't seem like anybody gets less safe either. It also shows action focused on safety while not leaving law-abiding gun owners out to dry. Which is ultimately what I would like to see.
Safety is very important. Personally I don't trust a good guy with a gun.
So a motorcycle gang with a dozen thugs catches up to you on a long stretch of lonely road and all you've got is a rate/capacity limited weapon to defend yourself...
Safety is not a problem. Where I come from every father drilled that into his son before he sent him out squirrel hunting at age 12.
Good guy gun owners are like sheep dogs. If you are a sheep, it's good to know they are there when the wolves start circling. :)
It's a league game, Smoke.. and not everyone gives a shit about the rules.
In a perfect world, sure everyone should be able to possess whatever they want. In that same perfect world, people would be expected to be kind to one another and live as decent human beings. You don't need to do anything spectacular... just be a good person! Unfortunately people just don't behave that way. Free will and tools as powerful as guns don't always go well together.
Free will and tryany are not great together either.
I'm ok with it. At the end of the day, people kill people, guns don't kill people. Case in point, look at the recent attack in France. No guns were used yet 84 people were senselessly killed. Law abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns and carry.
With that said, I don't see too many cases where you need to carry. Example, there is no need to carry a gun into a grocery store. Also, I am not sure military grade weapons should be allowed to own, although my family currently owns some assault rifles.
I guess the people who were attending a company Christmas party in California didn't need to carry guns. And those people at a concert in France, no need to have a gun in there...
Are you suggesting all citizens should be armed all the time?
Yes, guns in clubs usually end well. Never heard of a story where guns and alcohol ended badly....
Don't go there then.
No, most citizens (the sheep) are not qualified to handle a firearm. But the 10% who are "sheepdogs" with the right attitude and training should never be disarmed. (The sheep automatically disarm themselves). So there is no reason for government to get involved disarming either.
Face it, "when seconds count the police are minutes away." ... or hours away, on their bull horns negotiating hostage terms. All police can do is try to catch the guys whodunit.
Sheep dogs, on the other hand, can stop the incident in the first 20 seconds.
We need sheepdogs everywhere. How many more incidents will it take before we realize this?
He used guns and explosives.
No he didn't? He used a truck.
He started and ended with guns according to reports. Truck was the main event.
He had one real gun, multiple replicas and a defective grenade, to be clear