Thread: Open or Conceal Carry?

Originally Posted by Steve

What a nonsensical question.

What if they interprented [sic] that barber shop chairs not fitted with seatbelts need to have pillow top matress pads?

Asking "What if they didn't?" is to ask a question for which there is no answer that's either worthwhile or sensible. They decided as they did, and that's pretty much the end of the discussion...

Until next time...

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

Until next time...

No, not until next time.

There is a doctrine in law known as Stare Decisis. The Court is not likely to go back and reverse itself on Heller.

Matt

Originally Posted by MattLarson

No, not until next time.

There is a doctrine in law known as Stare Decisis. The Court is not likely to go back and reverse itself on Heller.

Matt

If it indeed is impossible to ban handguns, then why does Obama think he can do it?

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

If it indeed is impossible to ban handguns, then why do Obama think he can do it?

Who knows? He seems to think his opinion is superior to the laws of 40 of the 50 states. Hubris?

Matt

Originally Posted by MattLarson

Who knows? He seems to think his opinion is superior to the laws of 40 of the 50 states. Hubris?

Matt

Maybe Obama got it all nicely figured out when it comes to banning the things he wanna ban.

Could he perhaps point out new judges for the supreme court who would have no problems with banning firearm carrying and semi-automatics?

I support both open and concealed carry, but prefer open. If someone who may mean you harm knows you're armed, you're less likely to need to pull it.

Unfortunately for myself, carrying as much as $5,000 of my employers cash in extreme cases, I can't carry a weapon despite having found the need for one on the job once. Regularly entering bars and schools prevents it.

Originally Posted by Porras

I support both open and concealed carry, but prefer open. If someone who may mean you harm knows you're armed, you're less likely to need to pull it.

Unfortunately for myself, carrying as much as $5,000 of my employers cash in extreme cases, I can't carry a weapon despite having found the need for one on the job once. Regularly entering bars and schools prevents it.

The only place I don't carry a weapon concealed is when I'm going to go through a metal detector...

Originally Posted by Imperator

I am already on record, no I am not for issuing ccps on a profligate basis. I think ther should be cause shown as example as to the right to carry in public etc. A demonstration of need is all I am saying. A man or woman who have been victims of abuse with a high likely hood for it to ocurr again sure, as an example.

So you beleive "the govt." should decide who gets to carry firearms ?

A demonstration of need ?

Scary thinking IMO

Originally Posted by Imperator

And there’s the use factor as in education and practice of handling firearms. I think there should be classes for those acquiring handguns especially.

I don't agree.

There should be classes required for those wanting/getting CCP's maybe.

But just so one can own a gun ?

Should there be classes required for people before they're allowed to own a knife ?

Originally Posted by Imperator

Persons, who handle larger tha normal cash, as I said in another thread, tow truck operators contracted to tow public vehicles, even if you pushed it, meter maids etc. folks who deal in wand with possibly confrontational jobs etc.

As a citizen if a guy goes out for a pack of smokes or drives to their job, I just don’t see the need for them to pack, just because they can.

So ?

Who are you to decide that ?

Originally Posted by Steve

The only place I don't carry a weapon concealed is when I'm going to go through a metal detector...

Your ass would be grass if you did - at least in an airport.

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

Your ass would be grass if you did - at least in an airport.

I know this may be difficult for you to follow, but that's why I said I don't...

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

If it indeed is impossible to ban handguns, then why does Obama think he can do it?

In truth, he probably doesn't think he can. What he apparently does think, and rightfully so, is that libs are fucking stupid enough to vote for him if he tells them he'll do things he can't do.

They're stupid, so he knows they'll buy his bullshit...

Originally Posted by Steve

In truth, he probably doesn't think he can. What he apparently does think, and rightfully so, is that libs are fucking stupid enough to vote for him if he tells them he'll do things he can't do.

They're stupid, so he knows they'll buy his bullshit...

I dont know about that. The most educated in the U.S are libs, and lots of them carry handguns too, which makes you wonder why they are even libs at all...

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

I dont know about that. The most educated in the U.S are libs, and lots of them carry handguns too, which makes you wonder why they are even libs at all...

They're the worst kind of libs. They'll bitch and moan about how we need more "gun control", right up until the time they're told they have to give up their guns.

As for libs being the "most educated", I question that.

I don't think it's any great stretch to say that a large portion of Obama supporters are young people. I look at some of my daughter's friends. Many of them are in their 20's and haven't been to college. I've no reason to suspect that the same wouldn't be true around the country. Surely there are people in their 20's who go, or have gone, to college, but there are also many who haven't.

On what do you base your opinion, that libs are the most educated?