Nationwide concealed carry-voting now

[Maine_Nurse]

I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. The snippets I've caught of the debate so far make me believe that stupid (or lies) should hurt. WOW.

ETA:http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN/

[TheWraith]

1. It's amazing the number of people who are simply clueless on this, yet hold very strong opinions...

I personally am Facebook friends with one of the top guys in a national-name left-wing action group that's opposing this. Despite being a very smart guy, he doesn't know things like that background checks are still required at gun shows. Not to mention it seems a little absurd for this to be fought by Vermonters, while living in the state with the loosest gun laws in the US.

[Maine_Nurse]

2. I hated that Illinois spoke, they don't have a horse in this race.

Some of the statements have been completely ridiculous.

[kickysnana]

35. Everybody has a horse in this race. n/t

[snappyturtle]

3. Here's my opinion (probably ignorant but,,,,) If you want to carry a gun

I'd like to know you have it. Strap on a gun hip holster as in the cowboy days.

[jeepnstein]

4. Are you quoting someone else?

I hope so because if you aren't you're going to have to try harder to post something as moronic as some of our regular anti-gun posters.

[RSillsbee]

56. I don't see that his/ her post was moronic

for most of this country's history honest men wore their guns outside their pants. I agree that isn't always feasible now but I don't think it's moronic

[jeepnstein]

62. You're probably right.

I was thinking of another poster who brags of detaining open carriers for questioning and forcibly disarming them. I'm sorry for any hard feelings.

[spin]

11. Many people panic at the sight of a holstered weapon on a belt ...

Oh my God! He has a GUN! Call the police! Call the FBI! Call the CIA! Call Janet Napolitano!

In Florida a person with a carry permit has to conceal the weapon while in public. I have no problem with this and I have carried concealed for fifteen years. So far I do not believe that even a single person suspected that I had a concealed snub nosed revolver on my person.

That means that I didn't scare or bother a single person. I didn't disrupt one person's meal in a restaurant and not one customer standing in line with me ever was worried that I intended to rob the store or that my weapon might suddenly decide to fire all by itself.

The chances of you ever being shot by a person with a legally concealed weapon are far less than your chances of getting hit by lightning.

[Hoyt]

18. How about, I can't be without my gun -- someone might accost me on a city street?

The chances of being shot by a criminal are pretty small too, but you guys are always fretting over it.

[jmg257]

19. Do you think the odds of getting shot

by a criminal are bigger or smaller then the odds of getting shot by a lawful concealed carry toter?

[Hoyt]

28. I think the odds of getting shot by a criminal are greater than they would otherwise be because

more and more people are packing guns, promoting guns in public, the NRA is bribing more Congressmen and our laws regarding the selling, transfer, manufacturing, storing, use, etc., are too lax because gunners want ever more "efficient" killing apparatus.

You don't?

[gejohnston]

30. the criminals would be packing anyway

and there seems to be fewer of them.

[Hoyt]

And if we keep going like we are now, they'll have even more guns to select from in future.

A decade or so from now, we'll just have another 100 million guns made and bought to deal with -- but those addicted to them don't want to do anything that might cutoff the gun pipeline.

[oneshooter]

31. Do you have proof to back this up?

"the NRA is bribing more Congressmen"

Or are you just pulling this out of your ass, by way of your mouth.

Prove it, or retract it, your choice.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

39. You don't consider contributions bribes? If not, you are one of the very few on DU.

[gejohnston]

53. you realize it works both ways don't you?

just that the Bradys spend most of their astro turf money on salaries and have little left over for bribes, I mean contributions.

[spin]

33. Actually since "shall issue" concealed carry swept across the nation ...

in the last two decades, the violent crime rate has fallen to levels last seen in the 60s. That it no way means that allowing people to carry firearms caused the decrease in the violent crime rate. However if what you suggest in your post was true, the rate would have definitely increased.

You are definitely correct that more and more people are legally packing guns and there are far more firearms in civilian hands than there were even a decade ago.

Please explain why this proliferation of firearms and the carry of these weapons have NOT led to an increase in crime.

Steady Decline in Major Crime Baffles Experts
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
Published: May 23, 2011

The number of violent crimes in the United States dropped significantly last year, to what appeared to be the lowest rate in nearly 40 years, a development that was considered puzzling partly because it ran counter to the prevailing expectation that crime would increase during a recession.

In all regions, the country appears to be safer. The odds of being murdered or robbed are now less than half of what they were in the early 1990s, when violent crime peaked in the United States. Small towns, especially, are seeing far fewer murders: In cities with populations under 10,000, the number plunged by more than 25 percent last year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/us/24crime.html

[Hoyt]

37. And, if we didn't have so many friggin guns it might have fallen even further.

[rl6214]

44. Why don't you answer the question?

"Please explain why this proliferation of firearms and the carry of these weapons have NOT led to an increase in crime."

[jmg257]

36. I think the odds of getting shot by a criminal are higher, for lots of reasons. Would you have

A problem with concealed carry if gun control laws were more stringent?

[Hoyt]

38. I have a problem with people polluting society by carrying guns in public.

And their whining about allowing guns in churches, parks, bars, colleges, etc., is just more proof that people can't limit their gun carrying to high crime areas or home protection.

And to cater to these fearful/addicted people, we have to allow right wing bigots to carry, people who are unstable (but not diagnosed), etc. It's dang sick.

[rl6214]

46. I have a problem with people polluting society with their constant

whining about people carrying guns in public.

They whine about people being allowed to carry guns in churches, bars, colleges etc. and it's just more proof that they will whine about almost anything when it comes to legal gun owners.

And to cater to these fearful anti-gun zealots, we have to listen to these anti-gun bigots, most of them being unstable. It's just dang sick.

[Hoyt]

49. You should learn to write your own shit.

[rl6214]

51. Actually the only one writing "shit" here is you

I just thought I would share your style.

[jmg257]

47. So I should take that as a "no"?

But it would be OK if limited to crime areas...so which areas are those, exactly, and why?...Is it the increase in odds of being a victim in such areas that makes it more tolerable?

The odds of being a victim in one's home seem much less, so limiting to home use doesn't help much.

Anyway, a bit of fear is a good thing...keeps people from doing all kinds of stupid things, and causes them to do all kinds of smart things, so no issue there.
Be careful, ideological bigots can be pretty annoying too. They often use irrational opinions and their own narrow experience to think they know what is best for all.

[spin]

29. We also often have fire extinguishers and wear seat belts ...

many of us have first aid kits in our home and we often secure our homes to prevent easy entry by burglars.

That doesn't mean that we "fret" about the possibility of a fire or being in an auto accident every time we get into a car or that we fear injuries or expect our houses to be targeted by criminals.

It merely means that we are aware of risks and prefer to be prepared and to have the equipment to respond in case an unlikely event happens.

You have an entirely different outlook on life and I have no problem with that. I fully realize that it is highly unlikely that I will ever have to use my concealed weapon for legitimate self defense. However, I have invested the time and money to get a carry permit and to have a firearm specifically designed for self defense ( a .38 snub nosed revolver). I can see no reason why I should not carry my concealed weapon on a regular basis. It's very easy for me to grab my snubbie and its holster and slip them into my pants pocket when I leave the house. It takes no longer than it does to grab my keys and my wallet and since the firearm is extremely light and compact it's not at all uncomfortable to carry.

I don't insult you because you have different views than I do but you consistently accuse people like me as being afraid to leave my house without my firearm. Let me assure you that I am far from a coward which is what you are suggesting. Nor am I a fool. I am just a person who believes in being prepared for possible eventualities.

I don't go looking for trouble and will do everything to avoid it if it comes my way. The last thing that I ever want to do is to have to use my firearm for self defense. I hope to just pass it along to one of my grandsons.

[SteveM]

42. The chances my house may burn down are "pretty small." But I don't fret that.

[AtheistCrusader]

12. National Open Carry? Ok, i'd go for that.

[slackmaster]

14. It's considered socially inappropriate in many areas to wear a sidearm openly unless you are also...

...wearing some kind of attire that is perceived as a uniform.

[DonP]

21. Is that Sister Mary Magnum? Ntxt

[gejohnston]

26. Dirty Mary? nt

[SteveM]

40. Well, that is "allowed" in many states...

Unfortunately, in a spasm of gun-control, California just outlawed open-carry. Since the state virtually outlaws concealed-carry, they will now face lawsuits restricting the right to keep and BEAR arms; you have to allow at least one way. What's the law in your state? Personally, I prefer concealed (so as to keep from being the subject of potential attack by some enabled thug out for juice).
But you may prefer open. One or the other.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

63. What you'd like to know...

...and what you have a right to know about someone are two very different things.

It is no more your business that I am carrying concealed than it is my business to know if you shave your pubes.

[county worker]

5. Well at least we are tackling the most important issues of the day.

Gun rights
Abortion
Sex education


I'm sure Americans feel better about life in this country. You can carry a gun but you can't get a job or help on your foreclosure or pay for education or pay off your student loan or get decent health care.

[gejohnston]

41. agreed, there are higher priorities

I mean what good is it for some New Yorker to be able to carry a gun in Wyoming (Wyoming does not accept their nor California's CCWs)when he can't afford to buy the gun in the first place?

[SteveM]

43. I share you concern at the lack of progress on many issues...

I had to draw SS 5 yrs. earlier than I anticipated; no prospects for jobs at my age. I have been to OWS demos, contribute to other progressive social causes, and put my 2 Cents in when I can make a difference. The lack of progress on these issues is NOT the fault of 2A activists in this forum. It is the result of a far-right GOP which has tremendous organization, a rigid ideology, and plenty of money; and an "opposition" which doesn't know what it stands for; nay, even runs away from "labels" (as one of the "new" centrist organizations would have it), and is openly hostile to anyone to the left of Eisenhower.

In the meantime, I support national reciprocity. And guaranteed health care for all.

[jmg257]

6. Any idea when it started? McCarthy on now. nt

[Maine_Nurse]

8. It was due for 1:15. Don't know if it started on time.

[Hoyt]

7. Listened to some. Seems like women legislators make a lot more sense on this than those who grew up

loving, even sleeping with their guns.

[TheWraith]

9. Every time you type, you prove you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

And that your opinions are based on some wildly exaggerated cartoon image of what you think gun owners are like.

[Maine_Nurse]

10. What scares me worse are the Reps that...

apparently don't even know the existing laws of their own states or of the federal government.

[virginia mountainman]

15. I know...

They don't realize that they are PROVING how little they actually know..

You would think they would be embarrassed, but they are not.

[Maine_Nurse]

17. I'm embarrassed enough, trust me.

If we ever get a national referendum policy in place, I'm putting one in for mandatory IQ testing and civic courses for all state and federal legislators. Their brains, they are full of fuck.

[iverglas]

22. well hell

... your opinions are based on some wildly exaggerated cartoon image of what you think gun owners are like.

That's what reading stuff in this forum for too long will do to ya, eh?

[oneshooter]

32. Something else you managed to pull out of your ass, by way of your mouth. n/t

[SteveM]

45. Who are "sleeping with their guns?" How do you know this intimate secret, Hoyt?

;)

[rl6214]

48. Blah, blah, blab

:eyes:

[spin]

58. Knowledgeable gun owners never sleep with their guns ...

Once again you show a lack of knowledge about actual gun owners.

You always want to have the firearm located in a area that requires you to get out of your bed in order to insure that you are fully awake.

A lot of spouses have been shot by their mate who woke up from a nightmare and seeing a silhouette of a person in their bedroom grabbed their gun and started shooting. The result is a dead mate who was just returning to bed from the bathroom.

I did read one story about a person who woke up after a nightmare and seeing something move in his bedroom, shot his toe off.

[Hoyt]

60. So, how do a "lot of spouses" get shot if people aren't sleeping with their gun close by?

Let's take a poll and see how many keep a gun that far from their bed?

People have even posted here about hanging their guns on the bed post, putting them on nightstands, etc.

And, as your post indicates, gunners do sleep with their guns.

"Knowledgeable" is not that common among gun owners -- maybe you and maybe a higher percentage on this forum are, but there are lots of losers carrying and "sleeping" with guns.

[spin]

65. How do you define "a lot" ...

I don't believe that all that many spouses are shot accidentally by someone "who sleeps with a gun". However, it can happen which is why it is wise to move the firearm from under the pillow to somewhere a little further from the bed.

When I was in the service we were told that an individual is not responsible for anything that he does for 30 seconds after you wake him up.

[Hoyt]

66. You said it first, so how do you define it?

Spin: "A lot of spouses have been shot by their mate . . . . . ."

[spin]

67. You got me on that one ...

I should have worded it better -- something like, "Some spouses have been shot by their mates." (My excuse is that I was watching the OWS demonstrations while I was composing the message.)

I did a Google search and found one incident from 2009

Man says he accidentally shot wife
Tuesday, July 21, 2009

WILLIS, TX (KTRK) -- A man told police he thought he was shooting an intruder inside his Willis home, but instead wounded his wife.

The shooting happened around 2:30am Tuesday in the 9000 block of Zapata Drive. When Montgomery County Sheriff's deputies responded, they say they found Sarah Hanel, 27, in the bedroom with a gunshot wound to the chest.

Her husband, Justin Hanel, 25, told deputies he had woken up in the middle of the night and thought he heard an intruder. That's when he said he noticed a figure walking towards him, so he fired a handgun several times.

It was after the shooting, he told police, that he realized the figure walking towards him was his wife.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6925920

So it appears that waking up and shooting your spouse is relatively rare.

[Hoyt]

68. I bet we can say that a lot of spouses have been intimidated by their mate wielding a gun.

[spin]

69. I can agree on that. (n/t)

[Euromutt]

61. Speaking for myself, my "bedside" gun is in a quick-access lock-box

As in, I need to correctly key the correct code into the Simplex mechanical lock to get the box to open, assuming I turn the dial the right way. I don't actually need to get out of bed to get to it, but I do need to have the presence of mind to get the box open. That's not going to happen by accident, but even assuming that it does, the gun has an Insight M3 on the rail, so if I take aim at my toe, it'll be sufficiently illuminated that hopefully I won't blow it off.

[spin]

64. Mine is also in a gun box in the night stand ...

beside the bed. The box has a coded electronic lock. Inside is my trusty .38 S&W snub nosed revolver, a Surefire flashlight, a canister of pepper spray and a cell phone.

[jmg257]

13. Has anyone investigated how the passage of HR 822 might affect current

state laws?

What are the odds states will modify their current laws, because they now have to 'control' out of state carriers too?

Is there a chance state laws for CC will get more strict?

[Maine_Nurse]

16. I heard Cali threatened to eliminate them but I can't confirm.

I think most states would have a hard time revoking the right at this point.

[gejohnston]

20. good question

I am more interested in knowing how state AGs decide how to honor and who not? For example, Wyoming does not honor permits from any of the may issue states.

[jmg257]

50. Is it up to the state AG? I thought that was a change which was voted down? nt

[gejohnston]

54. current law is up to state AG, at least in

Wyoming. Your state may vary. I don't know enough about the proposed federal law.

[jmg257]

57. Ahh got ya. There was a proposed change to the proposed law that would

Leave it up to state officers. I see what you are saying now, as an answer to state mods to their laws...sorry.

[RC]

23. I wish people would stop talking about "Guns" as if they were all the same.

There is a major difference in the amount and kind of abuses between hand guns and long rifles.
It is the hand guns that are the problem. They need to be more tightly regulated.

[gejohnston]

25. they are just not to the degree

you may like.

[spin]

70. What type of regulations would you suggest? (n/t)

[burf]

24. The motion to recommit is toast n/t

[Dr_Scholl]

27. The bill passed 272-154

44 Dems voted for it.

[rhett o rick]

34. So what the hell did the bill say? nm

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

52. Basically, if a state allows concealed carry, they must honor other states' permits too.

Basically, the way it works now is that some states honor others' permts on a self-selected basis. The new bill just makes laws uniform throughou all of the states. It has nothing to with requirements to obtain a license to carry and does not change a states' carry rules. If you carry in another state, you must follow thier rules... kind of like how drivers licenses are nationally recognized but you must follow the traffic laws of the local state.

States that do not allow concealed carry are not affected by the bill.

It really changes nothing other than making interstate travel easier for those who choose to carry a firearm since the states that it affects already permit their residents to carry anyways.

[Doctor_J]

55. Whew. I was afraid the entire BoR was about to be gone.

At least one will remain. Remember how the gun culture used to tell us that more guns would protect the other 9 Amendments? At least that canard's been put to bed.

[Hoopla Phil]

59. Now it's on to the Senate. Hope it passes there too.