Arizona to Allow Concealed Weapons Without Permit !

[warbeak2099]

Criminals should not have owned the gun in the first place. No reason to 'stack' the crimes against otherwise law abiding citizens.

I'm not saying we should. I'm saying that not just anyone should be allowed to carry a concealed handgun. I know plenty of non-criminals who have no business doing so. It should only be a right afforded to competent individuals and you should therefore have to pass some kind of test to make sure you are indeed competent. If you're not, there's no point in you carrying a gun.

[drg]

It also has the strongest secessionist movement in the country, and may even elect some who have openly stated it in the upcoming election. Its just different. Different good...

Electing crackpots on a local level is hardly the same thing as electing a socialist senator (IMO the best person currently in congress).

[Lohman446]

Electing crackpots on a local level is hardly the same thing as electing a socialist senator (IMO the best person currently in congress).

Your right, my bad. I forgot. Elections that support your viewpoint far outweight any other election or political movement results. I keep forgetting that even acknowledgement of other interesting views or comments might not fit into that reality.

[drg]

Your right, my bad. I forgot. Elections that support your viewpoint far outweight any other election or political movement results. I keep forgetting that even acknowledgement of other interesting views or comments might not fit into that reality.

No, it's a simple "reality based" truth, since you like to use that term. Congress is dominated by the "big two" parties, with scant few independents, and of those only one is an actual socialist. There are no members from other parties.

On the local level, however, a host of other parties have enjoyed much greater success, being that it's easier to win smaller elections.There are hundreds of libertarians, Greens, etc. in elected office at the local level around the country.

[MANN]

Wow... A little suprised you can carry in a bar with the permit!

im not sure how other states are, but in TN you are not allowed to consume alcohol while carrying. This IMO is much better than trying to limit where you go with a firearm.

[DevilMan]

im not sure how other states are, but in TN you are not allowed to consume alcohol while carrying. This IMO is much better than trying to limit where you go with a firearm.

That would be logical and all... but then you would know for sure that the drunk guy coming out of the bar isn't "supposed" to be armed and would be an easy target. The sober guy the same, but at least sober it's a bit more chancy than picking on someone already at the disadvantage. Of course then you just learn to hit up bars in general because you know no one is supposed to be packin. But then that includes regular resturants as well where alcohol may be served...

WHAT TO DO? WHAT TO DO??



DM

[MANN]

I have always had the moto of I would rather shoot someone somewhere I was not suposto have a firearm than to be shot by someone somewhere they where they were not suposto have a firearm

On a side note we had a guy locally that went to a hospital, and shot 3 or 4 people. Thankfully he was stupid enough to shoot himself too. It probably saved another life, and a lot of taxpayer dollars.

[DevilMan]

I have always had the moto of I would rather shoot someone somewhere I was not suposto have a firearm than to be shot by someone somewhere they where they were not suposto have a firearm

On a side note we had a guy locally that went to a hospital, and shot 3 or 4 people. Thankfully he was stupid enough to shoot himself too. It probably saved another life, and a lot of taxpayer dollars.

I agree... Tis better to have and not need, than to need and not have.

And I've been hearing about that incident.... crazy people will always find a way. No matter what.

DM

[DevilMan]

Are you guys serious about the criminal who has planned out the scenario well enough to figure out where you cannot carry a firearm?

Either you have incredible skills or an over inflated ego. I carry a handgun to protect me from random acts of violence. Someone who is going to go through planning to figure out where and when to attack someone is going to give you problems. Your best hope is that all they want is some money because if they intend to do you harm I highly doubt your handgun is going to clear leather against a determined, planned attacker using any level of surprise.

/Cue responses about "situational awareness, martial arts training, speed draws, etc". Unless part of it is "I never travel with less than two buddies" check your ego.

I think you wanted this note in this thread Lohman, so I moved it over here for ya... If not just say so and I'll remove it.

And no I was not serious about it, but was serious. Just stating that the restrictions are 2 fold on what they can and can't do. Instead of making laws that tell you where you can and can't go with it (I do know of folks that ride motorcycles that pack.. you stop to eat at a place that serves beer... where do you put the pistol?) Even though you aren't drinking you still have to have a place to put it.

Meaning that instead of saying you can and can't pack places other than private buildings that have signs up that say no firearms allowed (personal choice, same as not smoking in someone's house) why not make it to where if you are found brandishing or doing bad stuff with a gun while you are intoxicated that you get charged heavily. I really wish the charges for drunk driving were higher. But I also wish there was are better system to test/prove that you were incapable or a threat. Not just the "sir, we think you are drunk" crap.

I don't find any reason that someone can get totally drunk and not know before hand that they are going to and arrange a ride accordingly. So if you make it to where the cost to do something wrong is so great that you will not take that chance as often then you leave it legal, to do for those with the sense to heed the warning and you make it hell on those idiots that choose to do otherwise. I'm a big believer in the "spare the rod, spoil the child" way of life. I think if the laws were enforced and made so that they scare the crap outta ya BEFORE you do something you'll be a lot less inclined to do it.

DM

[Lohman446]

Meaning that instead of saying you can and can't pack places other than private buildings that have signs up that say no firearms allowed (personal choice, same as not smoking in someone's house) why not make it to where if you are found brandishing or doing bad stuff with a gun while you are intoxicated that you get charged heavily. I really wish the charges for drunk driving were higher. But I also wish there was are better system to test/prove that you were incapable or a threat. Not just the "sir, we think you are drunk" crap.

That I can agree with. Lets legislate against the actual crime rather than to stop all possible causes. If someone shoots someone (outside of justification) the answer is to make shooting someone illegal (obviously it is) not to ban all guns. Just as if someone bludgeons someone with a baseball bat make such activity illegal and not baseball bats. I do not drink and yet in MI I am still prohibited from places that "make more than 50% of there revenuw from serving alchohol for consumption on the premises". Interestingly that would include bowling alleys. And this is not based on the reasonable person should have known theory its based on numbers.

/thanks for moving it, apparently my early thought process in posting area was way off

[DevilMan]

That I can agree with. Lets legislate against the actual crime rather than to stop all possible causes. If someone shoots someone (outside of justification) the answer is to make shooting someone illegal (obviously it is) not to ban all guns. Just as if someone bludgeons someone with a baseball bat make such activity illegal and not baseball bats. I do not drink and yet in MI I am still prohibited from places that "make more than 50% of there revenuw from serving alchohol for consumption on the premises". Interestingly that would include bowling alleys. And this is not based on the reasonable person should have known theory its based on numbers.

/thanks for moving it, apparently my early thought process in posting area was way off

No problem on the "move" though it's only really a copy and drag... But yeah... no problem.

And LOOK!!! WE AGREE ON SOMETHING!!!! (but only if you put down your gun)



But yes, I wish that they would stop trying to control every little thing that someone does. Make it free to do what ever you like. IF you wish to do this though... Here's what's gonna happen to ya if you get caught. And not a slap on the wrist and not a 5 year trial. I don't think that people on death row should spend more than 365 days there. PERIOD! Some/most even less. I mean really... why is Charles Manson still in jail? That man has cost more money to you, I and the rest of us, than most of us will ever see!

Kill??? Be killed! Steal? Lose a digit... Steal more? Lose more digits. et al. It's funny how everyone seems to think that taking away the guns will reduce the crime... and yet the same ones that yell and scream that crap are too afraid to say instead... Let's make it easy for everyone to carry and see where the crime rate goes! Here's 10 years. Lets see what happens. The bad part is... numbers and head counts can be turned and twisted to meet any outlook. Same as they say that deaths from motorcycle wrecks went up by 50% when they repeal the helmet law . What they don't say is that motorcycle ownership went up by 150%! Gun crimes went up 20%. But there was a population increase of 35%. Crap like that. And so since they can't control it, can't make it reasonable, can't do it fairly. Just leave it alone. Make it known that if you are caught on 7-11 security camera tape of walking in and shooting the cashier to take the money, NO MATTER if the person lives or dies, you get put down. No different than a rabid dog. Don't care the reason, the rhyme etc... And this isn't a 25 year death row sentence. This is a 90 day after conviction. Only because it may take that long to get a spot in line for ya. You have those that are in the pen for lesser crimes out diggin holes in the field. Archaic? Maybe. But you made that choice when you shot the other person.

Anywho... I'm betting that if that ruling was passed that the crime rates for those areas would plummet. Oh well... one can wish right?

DM

[Army]

Those who think a permit is a good idea, need to study up on what a "Constitutional right" is.


Permission must never be required to excersize a right given by our Creator. The Constitution enumerates this.

[Soopa Villain17]

Devil's Advocate here........

When you do not require a permit, you allow people who shouldn't carry carry without worry of being checked. I'm not saying they wouldn't carry anyways, but you're taking the conceived punishment out of carrying illegally.

That being said, I carry here in Indiana. A lot of the time I "open" carry when I'm only wearing a t-shirt. I get a lot of looks and some comments, but I can easily whip out my permit and show that I'm legal.

I totally love the fact that they are giving us our rights back, but it has some potential to backfire. I just hope that decent citizens put the fear into the criminals and make them GTFO of there.

Now for these silly Class 3 laws...

how can this backfire ? a criminal will carry regardless of the laws. this law can only help us law abiding people. make this legal in all 50 and ill be happy. that being said i have a permit to carry here in maine. another thing that angers me is not being allowed to carry in certain places , this only makes it easier for the criminals to commit a crime when they know that noone else is carrying in that establishment. and yea , class 3 laws are bs i want a legal fully automatic ak without having to spend a fortune.

[Nick E]

Those who think a permit is a good idea, need to study up on what a "Constitutional right" is.


Permission must never be required to exercise a right given by our Creator. The Constitution enumerates this.

But I don't want to give some stupid asshat a gun, when he has no qualification to use it.
I don't like this law, not because I think you need a permit to carry, but because I think you need a competency test to carry. If you can prove that you can pass a basic firearms safety and accuracy course, then please go ahead. But to just let your average joe dumbass who has no firearms experience outside of counterstrike carry concealed...I'm not sure that's the best idea.

[behemoth]

But I don't want to give some stupid asshat a gun, when he has no qualification to use it.
I don't like this law, not because I think you need a permit to carry, but because I think you need a competency test to carry. If you can prove that you can pass a basic firearms safety and accuracy course, then please go ahead. But to just let your average joe dumbass who has no firearms experience outside of counterstrike carry concealed...I'm not sure that's the best idea.

Yeah, well, we let people reproduce without a competency test....