November 16 2009, 20:47:42 #45 [2 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
My wife and I are about to get our Concealed Handgun Licenses. How does that make you feel?
Replies: 41
November 16 2009, 22:17:28 #48 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
Reminds me of a convo I had Saturday night, while stoned, with a drunk girl.
"You would hate my best friend. He's a lutheran christian and always talks about concealed carry handgun laws. I can't stand it!"
I lol'd since I found both of those things awesome ;\
November 16 2009, 23:35:28 #50 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@46 Surprisingly, Texas has stricter gun laws than Ohio.
November 16 2009, 23:51:47 #53 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@50
It's not quite as cut and dried as that. Open Carry or even the "printing" of a concealed gun is a _crime_ in Texas, which is silly.
Ohio has it's own set of bizarre restrictions on concealed carry, as well as some odd laws (31 round or larger magazines are technically illegal, sort of kind of). Open carry is legal, but "law enforcement" doesn't like it.
Texas has a much stronger set of self-defense laws, including IIRC some provisions for deadly force in defense of property, which Ohio definitely does not have.
November 18 2009, 18:14:32 #78 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@53
What does it mean to print a concealed gun?
November 18 2009, 23:52:57 #98 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@78
"Printing" means that the outline of the gun is clearly visible through the clothing. It could also be used, albeit less accurately, to describe the unintended display of the gun.
November 20 2009, 21:29:39 #150 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
What would be the point of not "nonconcealing" a weapon when you're just going to not_unintentionally have a nondisplayed_weapon??? :D
November 20 2009, 21:56:56 #153 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@47 Do you think this license Will be easier than getting your driver's license?
November 20 2009, 22:18:43 #157 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@150 There are far too many double negatives in that sentence...
November 20 2009, 22:19:51 #158 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@153
No, a CHL is not easy to get in Ohio, compared to some states. There is a 12 hour class (NRA Basic Pistol) which must be passed (cost $75-150 depending where you go), and then there are application fees (around $75 I think), and you must get fingerprinted & background checked by the sheriff's department. Oh, and you have to be 21 or older.
Also, once you have one, there are lots of asinine laws that make it easy to accidentally become a felon which do not necessarily apply to non-licensed persons.
In neighboring Indiana, you can get your license to carry at 18 with only the background check & fee. Indiana also offers a lifetime permit for $125.
November 20 2009, 23:51:16 #161 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@158 Oh, so it Will be difficult to obtain or I guess you can get the license in Indiana.
November 21 2009, 10:03:48 #178 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
Also:
1. Ohio doesn't recognize an Indiana CHL because Indiana doesn't require training. Unlike driver's licenses, concealed weapon permit reciprocity must be negotiated between states, or they can take the Indiana approach and codify their recognition of any state's license with or without agreement to recognize Indiana's.
2. Generally speaking, you must get your license from the state in which you live, with very few exceptions. Some states offer non-resident permits, which usually are only valid within the issuing state. Most states will only honor permits issued by the bearer's state of residence.
November 22 2009, 09:00:47 #197 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@45 Just curious... Why you feel the need to carry a concealed weapon? Do you have a career which requires it? Do you feel you will be the object of a crime or maybe it's just your right as an American?
November 22 2009, 11:06:19 #199 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@197
I don't feel a need to carry a concealed weapon. It is, however, my personal responsibility to defend myself (and my wife) if at all possible. I can choose to be prepared for that, or I can choose not to be. I have chosen to be. And it is also an individual right which belongs to ALL in the United States, although we have allowed the government to infringe upon that right time and time again.
The best possible outcome of concealed carry is to come home at the end of the day, not having removed gun from holster. Some people have been duped into thinking that people who want to carry a gun are out for blood. Some may be (mostly the ones that we carry to defend ourselves from), but the majority don't want to have to use their guns.
November 22 2009, 11:21:46 #203 [2 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@199 By going the route of taking mandatory classes and applying (or requesting permission) for the license, the right to bear arms remains no longer a right but has now become a privilege.
What are your thoughts on that?
November 22 2009, 11:54:10 #204 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@203
It varies by state. On the federal level, there aren't any laws to prevent carry. On the state level there frequently are. In Ohio, you can openly carry without any license; still a right. Concealed carry in most states is either completely prohibited for the average person or a privilege due to the licensing requirement.
Alaska and Vermont allow concealed carry without a license.
Unfortunately, the court of public opinion does not understand the carry of firearms by those who are not agents of government, so regardless of whether or not it's a constitutional right, the exercise of that right can make you a felon, which is government-speak for "we will deny your rights as we please and the people will support it because you're labeled a felon now".
There's also some bullshit ruling from the supreme court a very long time ago where they said that the 2nd amendment did not preclude regulations on concealed carry. It was not a ruling on a case regarding concealed carry though, which pisses me off to no end.
Summary: the bill of rights does not exempt concealed carry or carry by felons from the declaration of it being a right to keep and to bear arms. Good luck trying to use that as a defense though.
November 22 2009, 12:37:11 #205 [0 Agree] [0 S] [3 T]
@199 Why does being prepared mean you have to carry a gun? Why can't you be prepared to defend yourself in other ways? Also, do you really feel a few training lesson are going to make you qualified to handle a gun especially in a stressful situation? What if your wife, child or other innocent person gets harmed because of it? What are the laws if your weapon gets in the wrong hands and someone gets hurt or worse?
November 22 2009, 16:45:46 #207 [2 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@205 A gun requires the least training and physical ability out of the widely available legal self defense options, while providing an equality of power with most human agressors. Keep in mind that self defense occurs primarily at distances less than 21 feet. At those ranges, minimal competency is required to hit a human target. Many concealed carriers are better trained and more accurate than the average police officer, because they tend to practice far more often and seek out training of their own volition. As to your other points, we carriers spend a lot of time choosing proper equipment, ammunition, and tactics to prevent accidents.
November 22 2009, 17:23:13 #212 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
Also, remember that the point is usually to be threatening, not to actually shoot people. Shooting people gets messy, legally.
November 22 2009, 17:28:05 #213 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@212
Many many confrontations are ended by the mere display of a gun, sometimes even just the passive indication of being armed is enough. And that is something that is impossible to collect stats on because there's no crime to report. Usually if there's any record it's somebody recounting the experience on a gun forum.
November 22 2009, 19:38:20 #225 [0 Agree] [0 S] [3 T]
@207 You didn't answer the question. What if you or someone else hurt someone with the weapon that wasn't intended or deserved? Are you legally (morally) responsible? Could you not get a taser so that no mortal harm could be done. Several of my friends are officers and I disagree with your statement that you will be better trained then them unless of course you are an officer.
@213 If the weapon is "displayed" it is no longer concealed!!!
November 22 2009, 20:14:25 #226 [1 Agree] [0 S] [-1 T]
@225
Of course I'm responsible for every round I fire. I don't even understand why you would ask a question like that when it's clearly the case, legally and morally. One of the four rules of gun safety is "know your target and what lies beyond it".
As for somebody else taking my gun, it's my responsibility (including legally) to secure my guns and to retain them. That said, I'm not responsible for the actions of somebody who stole my gun any more than you are for the actions of somebody who stole your car, UNLESS I was clearly negligent in my handling/storage. If I were to hand my gun to somebody, I would be responsible for their actions until they refuse to return my gun, at which point they are committing theft.
Legally speaking, defense of property is not an acceptable justification for use of lethal force (in my state), so if somebody steals my gun and doesn't try to shoot me with it, I have no recourse other than to call the police and provide them with the serial number of the gun and a description of the thief.
Tasers are not legal except for "law enforcement" in my state. Stun guns are, but they require physical contact and that's not going to do shit for me if my attacker has a gun or a knife, or a long baton, or practically anything. Stun guns are for disarmed subjects and people who are afraid of guns.
Keep in mind that police training is not the same as civilian gun training. The police are trained to stop and arrest a threat; civilians are trained to stop the threat and retreat. We are checked by much more stringent legal standards than police. We do not get away with it if we shoot somebody holding a wallet (Amadou Diallo) which we think is a gun.
Ask your officer friends how often they practice with their duty gun. As far as I know most police are only required to qualify annually.
Regarding your response to @213, what's your point? A weapon displayed is arguably a better deterrent than a weapon concealed in almost every scenario. I have nothing to hide when I carry; it's not a crime and I prefer not to allow the firearms issue to go "out of sight, out of mind" for the public at large.
I would posit that you are not aware of the number of legal carriers in the United States. Unless you're from Illinois, Wisconsin, California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, or a few other "anti-carry" states, chances are you are around concealed carriers all the time.
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or not, which is why I have tried to address all of your points seriously. If you are serious, take a look at these links:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/factsheets/read.aspx?ID=18 [link]
http://www.gunfacts.info/ [link]
November 22 2009, 20:47:30 #227 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
Police shoot innocent people far more often then civilians shoot innocent people.
November 24 2009, 10:37:37 #234 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
Well then.
Also, http://www.thedailycougar.com/legal-gunowners-not-a-threat-1.1650977 [link]
November 25 2009, 19:18:42 #240 [-2 Agree] [1 S] [2 T]
@226 Why can't someone have an opinion different from your's? Why would you ask "How does it make you feel?" if you did want honest replies?
November 25 2009, 19:29:42 #242 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@240
It's pretty clear that people did and do have different opinions. I was asked specific questions, so I answered them.
I'm sorry that offends you.
November 25 2009, 23:16:38 #249 [1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@240 When did anyone say that your opinion had to match theirs? When did they say that they didn't want honest replies? When did they do anything but answer - in detail - each of your questions?
November 27 2009, 19:01:17 #275 [-2 Agree] [0 S] [2 T]
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or not, [+/- 2 Troll]
You say you want to protect your family. You may want to do some research from the other side.eg
According to the CDC, the rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. American children are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die in a firearm accident than children in these other countries.
What do we know about kids and gun accidents and suicides?
When researchers studied the 30,000 accidental gun deaths of Americans of all ages that occurred between 1979-1997, they found that preschoolers aged 0-4 were 17 times more likely to die from a gun accident in the 4 states with the most guns versus the 4 states with the least guns. Likewise, school kids aged 5-14 were over 13 times more at risk of accidental firearm death in the states with high gun ownership rates. The findings indicate that gun availability is associated with accidental death by shooting.
The AAP supports evaluating firearm injury prevention and intervention strategies such as conflict resolution, alternatives to violence, storage techniques (like trigger locks, lock boxes, and gun safes), and educational programs for kids and teens.
http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/guns.htm [link]
Anyone been in a situation where a weapon was useful or harmful?
November 27 2009, 19:33:17 #277 [1 Agree] [0 S] [-1 T]
"The findings indicate that gun availability is associated with accidental death by shooting." DUH.
This is very poor logic. There are more automobile-related deaths in countries where there are more automobiles too. Yet you wouldn't use that fact to try to claim that people shouldn't own automobiles, would you?
November 27 2009, 21:36:35 #280 [1 Agree] [0 S] [-1 T]
@275
It's been shown many times that anti-gun groups include gang members as old as 26 when counting "children" killed by guns.
They also count people killed while committing crimes, and people who committed suicide.
Getting shot while committing a crime is, frankly, deserved. It's not an accidental shooting. Also, people kill themselves with items other than guns and we don't ban those things, so banning guns because of suicide is illogical. Frankly, if you want to kill yourself you might as well, rather than take it out on others.
But the reality of it is, the United States doesn't have the option of banning guns. It's a constitutional right and there *will* be a revolt if they try to outlaw gun ownership. So...
It's really like everything else:
The government and stupid/emotional people want to ban it. People who believe in freedom and personal responsibility just want people to accept responsibility for what they do with it.
November 27 2009, 21:36:51 #281 [0 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@277
Is it poor logic?
I don't support gun control, but if we're arguing pragmatism:
We can deal with traffic accidents because it is, by and large, necessary for most people to have a vehicle just to get by on a daily basis.
The vast majority of people do not use or need a gun on a daily basis.
November 27 2009, 21:40:09 #282 [1 Agree] [0 S] [-1 T]
@281
They can ride bikes.
We can deal with gun accidents because it is, by and large, necessary for the people to be able to defend themselves, and keep the government at bay.
OH SHIII----
November 27 2009, 21:48:21 #283 [-1 Agree] [0 S] [0 T]
@282
Playing devil's advocate:
1. If I don't believe the government needs to be kept at bay, is there then no reason to keep guns around?
2. If I'm living in city, arguably I could ride bikes. I could also arguably rely on heavy police presence, rather than a gun, for safety.
If I'm living in the county, I could NOT ride a bike everywhere, but arguably won't need a gun to protect myself (since there are so few people around to begin with).
November 27 2009, 22:26:11 #284 [1 Agree] [0 S] [-1 T]
@283
Country = wild animals, a great reason to own guns. Also, much longer emergency services response time.
As to your other points... well, check out crime statistics for a big city like Chicago and let me know how that works for you. And... if you're comfortable having all the power be under control of the biggest liars in the world, then you are welcome to.
For myself, one of the best non-violent things I can do to help keep the government at bay is own firearms and support pro-gun groups. They know how many people own guns and it keeps them from doing anything ridiculous.