Video+ http://www.kpho.com/video/22961502/index.html
PHOENIX -- The Arizona House and Senate will soon vote on proposals that would abolish the concealed-carry weapons permit law.
The votes are expected to take placed before the end of next week.
If the law passes, Arizona will be one of three states that allows gun owners to carry concealed weapons without a permit.
Only Alaska and Vermont currently do not require concealed-carry weapons permits.
"It's the second amendment. The second amendment says we have the right to keep and carry arms. The founding fathers wanted no regulation in that," said Ken Logan, the range manager at Shooter's World in Phoenix.
He supports the state proposal, despite the fact that it could hurt his business.
Right now, potential owners must complete an eight hour training class, which Shooter's World offers, to obtain their weapons permits.
Logan said gun owners usually seek out training, regardless of legal requirements.
"You're responsible for that bullet wherever it goes," he said. "You need to know how to use that firearm before you carry it."
His customers weren't convinced it would be safe to get rid of the training requirement for concealed weapons permits.
"I think should they keep the permits going," said Justin Ivy, a lifelong gun owner who said he learned a lot during the required training class.
"You have to know how to use it," said Dennis Fiorillo, a gun owner who also said he benefited training classes. "You know have to know how to use it safely so nobody gets hurt."
I don't about this bill.... there are alot of nuts out there that wouldn't qualify for a CCW permit that will be pack'en. Especially the "Lobo Beaners" a mex. gang from El Mirage.
Hell Yes, they ought to pass this bill!
Almost a 100% chance that it will pass.
I actually contacted our state senator recently asking for the same thing. They're having a vote to lower the costs of the cc permits but i told him they need to be abolished altogether considering they aren't constitutional (same with requiring a class). Requiring a class and a permit is just as bad as not allowing it at all. They are all infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. >:(
I have a CC permit and I believe in the 2nd Amendments rights, but I can tell you that there are way to many idiots, drug users, mentally unstable, and hot tempered people that should not be allowed to carry a weapon. The one thing the CC permit requires is a full back ground check, and it turns up a lot of people with troubled backgrounds that dictate that they should not be allowed to have a weapon accessible all the time. To turn everyone loose with a concealed weapon and no background checks is a mistake. When the 2nd amendment was written there were 2 million people in this country and no Dope, Meth, etc being used. Today there are 310 million people and widespread use of drugs that impair judgment. There will be a lot of innocent people killed if we just turn everyone loose to carry a weapon with no training, no back ground checks, etc. It seems to me a few hours training and a background check is not to much to ask to save the lives of innocent people.
Just like gun bans... gun permits will only affect the innocent. If a criminal wants to have a gun and carry a gun, they will do it regardless of the law.
I am not talking about people with a criminal record or background. There are a lot of law abiding people that cannot pass a CC permit background check and when they don't many of them abide by the law and don't carry.
In what way does a CC permit background check differ from a background check when you purchase a firearm?
Probably little or none, but people can buy weapons all day long from other individuals and not be checked at all. I just think requiring a CC permit and Background check keeps a lot of people from carrying that shouldn't.
I disagree, I don't believe requiring a permit will keep people that wouldn't normally be allowed to carry from doing so. All that happens when a permit is required is
1. Breaks the Constitution
2. Forces innocent individuals to pay a fee to get the permit, a ridiculously high fee here in Kansas and I'm sure elsewhere
3. Forces the innocent individuals to wait until they get their permit
4. Doesn't allow the innocent individual to protect themselves right away because of the above and more
Plain and simple, requiring permits is absolutely unconstitutional. It clearly says the right is not to be infringed and requiring a permit is clearly infringing on that right.
How about background checks and permits for religions? A lot of liberals seem to think religions are what causes most of the violence in this world so would you accept the government requiring permits to practice what religion you want? Its no different, they are our Constitutional rights.
Quote from: frawin on April 01, 2010, 04:05:34 PM
Probably little or none, but people can buy weapons all day long from other individuals and not be checked at all. I just think requiring a CC permit and Background check keeps a lot of people from carrying that shouldn't.
Not at all there frank. Haven't ever had a permit and have always carried. Not that i can't get one, but requiring one is unconstitutional and I won't surrender my 2nd amendment right.
Opium has been around for a very long time, but it's not likely to send anyone into a red rage and have them start shooting every which way and have no memory of it later. I guess at baby showers now its going to be onesies. rattles and handguns?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 01, 2010, 06:01:03 PM
Opium has been around for a very long time, but it's not likely to send anyone into a red rage and have them start shooting every which way and have no memory of it later. I guess at baby showers now its going to be onesies. rattles and handguns?
why not. Got my kids their own .22 when they were born for when they got old enough to shoot it. Used to set out back and help them hold it while they all shot it when they were 3 and 4 years old. When they were 7 they could sit there shooting a target and depending on how their maturity level one got to go hunting by himself around 11 and the others around 13. they got shotguns at 14 and rifles at 15.
Goodbye CC Permits.... AZ House and Senate approve bills. That leaves only a final roll call by each chamber to send it to Gov. Brewer to sign it into law.
All Arizona adults are just a few steps away from being able to carry a concealed weapon.
HB 2347, given preliminary House approval Thursday, removes all the criminal penalties that now exist for having a weapon in a purse, under a jacket or tucked into a boot without having a state-issued permit. That permit requires certain training and a background check.
Measure would make hunting constitutional right
Senate votes to allow concealed weapons
Measure would let college profs carry guns
Identical legislation already has been approved by the Senate. That leaves only a final roll call by each chamber to send it to Gov. Jan Brewer.
And Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who crafted the language, said Brewer agreed to support the bill once he made several changes. Those alterations already are incorporated into both HB 2347 and SB 1108.
That would make Arizona only the third state in the nation to let all of its adult residents have concealed weapons, after Vermont and Alaska.
The House also gave preliminary approval Thursday to a separate measure designed to curb the ability of cities to enact their own regulations on weapons. Among the provisions of HB 2543 would be overruling ordinances that some communities now have against carrying guns in parks.
And the Senate separately voted to say that any gun which is manufactured in Arizona and sold within this state is exempt from federal firearms regulations. Backers say SB 1098 is designed to be a preemptive strike against possible future efforts by the federal government to impose new restrictions on firearms ownership.
Existing law allows all adults to carry a weapon as long as it is visible. There are only a handful of exceptions such as those who have been convicted of a felony.
A 1994 law permitted weapons to be concealed. But the legislation also said that right would be limited to those who get the required permit from the Department of Public Safety.
That includes a one-day class which covers issues like when someone is legally entitled to use deadly physical force. Would-be permit holders also are required to actually show they know how to fire the weapon accurately.
There also is a requirement for a background check.
Rep. Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, said the requirement should remain in place.
"I'm still trying to figure out what exactly is the necessity for this," he said. Campbell said the system seems to work, providing an option for those who want concealed weapons.
"It expands our liberty and supports the Second Amendment," responded Rep. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista. He said the ability to be armed is a right, whether the person chooses to have a weapon visible or not.
Campbell, who said he owns two guns, argued that the hurdles to getting the necessary permit are minimal, including attending the training session.
"If a person is not willing to go to an 8-hour class, get some skill training and pay a small fine to get a concealed weapons permit, then I'm not sure I want that person carrying a concealed weapon in this state," he said.
Gowan suggested that Campbell was making too much of the required training. He pointed out individuals remain free to carry a gun in the open without going to a single class at all.
Even if Brewer signs the measure, Arizona will retain the ability to get a CCW permit. One reason is they would still have rights that won't extend to anyone else who wants to have a hidden gun without the training.
For example, state law allows permit holders to bring their loaded weapons into bars and restaurants where alcohol is served as long as the owner or manager does not post it as a gun-free zone. That right would not extend to those without a permit who simply choose to carry a gun.
And other states which let their own residents carry concealed weapons extend that right to Arizonans who have permits.
The measure actually goes beyond simply eliminating the need for adults to have a permit.
Current law does not permit anyone younger than 21 to have a concealed weapon. This legislation would let someone younger than that have a hidden gun if he or she is in a home or business owned or leased by a parent, grandparent or legal guardian.
And someone younger than 21 could have a gun that is not visible if any part of the holster or carrying case is wholly or partially visible.
Quote from: srkruzich on April 01, 2010, 05:23:15 PM
Not at all there frank. Haven't ever had a permit and have always carried. Not that i can't get one, but requiring one is unconstitutional and I won't surrender my 2nd amendment right.
Hear, hear!
I like Alaska's setup. You don't need a permit to conceal in the state but you can get one to go to the other states (that allow it) that have the unconstitutional laws. I probably still wouldn't get one but at least the option is there for people who want it.
One of the main reasons I am getting a permit is so I can have it when I travel. I have to say that I learned a lot from the course and think it would be very beneficial for people to take, especially since so many people anymore don't come from families that have the background or the inclination to teach them these things as children. Still, we are back to the constituion and the difference between people choosing to do something and being forced to do something. Last night our legislators in Missouri were supposed to vote on a bill that would extend our rights to protect ourselves from our home, to the boundaries ofany property that we own or lease. It never made sense to me that you had to wait until someone breaks into your house to be able to defend yourself from violence. o bad they can't get those laws on our border states. I'll let you know what happens.
Roma Jean good move in obtaining your CCP, Texas and Oklahoma both have passed the so called "Castle Law" and other states are looking at it. I think Homeowners have every right to protect their life and their family from criminals. I think more states will be passing similar legislation in the future.
Quote from: Roma Jean Turner on April 07, 2010, 12:58:38 PM
One of the main reasons I am getting a permit is so I can have it when I travel. I have to say that I learned a lot from the course and think it would be very beneficial for people to take, especially since so many people anymore don't come from families that have the background or the inclination to teach them these things as children. Still, we are back to the constituion and the difference between people choosing to do something and being forced to do something. Last night our legislators in Missouri were supposed to vote on a bill that would extend our rights to protect ourselves from our home, to the boundaries ofany property that we own or lease. It never made sense to me that you had to wait until someone breaks into your house to be able to defend yourself from violence. o bad they can't get those laws on our border states. I'll let you know what happens.
Many states are passing that law so that you can protect yourself. Its too late really when the criminal is in your house. You basically have one chance to get it right. At least if you can shoot them at the line, you can get in a second shot if you miss the first one. Not so in a house plus it reduces the danger of possibly shooting one of your family members tremendously!
I take it you have your property posted?
When carrying.. make sure each state you carry in is reciprocal to Kansas.. :)
Quote from: Teresa on April 07, 2010, 01:58:47 PM
When carrying.. make sure each state you carry in is reciprocal to Kansas.. :)
Good point Teresa, Roma Jean, isn't your state of residence Missouri??? If that is the case make sure each state you carry is recprocal with Missouri, whichever is the case you can print a list from the internet. I check it each time I travel.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 07, 2010, 01:48:12 PM
I take it you have your property posted?
Doesn't need to be under the castle law. The fact is if you are not the owner, and you don't have permission to be there, then you need to stay off the property. Under the law, if you challange anyone on the property, and they refuse to leave when directed to do so, you can reasonably assume they are a threat. Also if their in the process of committing a crime on your property, you can reasonably assume that their a danger.
You can't just bust a cap into joe who just wandered onto the property, but no one is going to do that to begin with unless their criminals like meth producers.
Quote from: Teresa on April 07, 2010, 01:58:47 PM
When carrying.. make sure each state you carry in is reciprocal to Kansas.. :)
That is a biggie. You have to be really careful venturing into commie states.
http://apps.carryconcealed.net/legal/kansas-ccw-state-laws.php
here ya go. This is a kansas reciprocity map......
I have a book with the laws for each state and which ones we have reciprocity with. I will update it again this year. I keep it in the car. Not that I travel much, but when I went to Kentucky last year, I checked out each state before I went. We have really good gun laws in Mo. I haven't heard how the vote came out, it was the Judiciary of our legislature, not the entire legislature that was voting on it. Yes Diane, I have chain link around my entire yard. When I first bought the house, I thought the fence was ugly, but that was ten years ago. Two weeks ago, two unmarked SUV's full of armed police came to our neighborhood and busted a house just across and east of mine. We have suspected it of drugs for a year because of all the acitivity at all hours of the night. Would you believe they found nothing. They should have done that at 3:00 am instead of 7:0opm. I did not turn these people it, but I can tell you that the people who did are very scared. They have been evicted, but we will see what happens. This last Saturday night my next door neighbor's car was stolen out of his driveway. I got up two or three times that night because of my dogs barking but didn't see anything. So now, I pad lock my front gates at night. I am so used to the fence now, that I can't imagine not having one.
Gov. Jan Brewer to get concealed-gun bill
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/04/09/20100409gunbill0409.html
Within the next week, Arizona could become the first state with a large urban population to allow U.S. citizens 21 and older to carry a concealed firearm without a permit. Only Alaska and Vermont have similar allowances.
Senate Bill 1108, crafted by Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, passed in the House of Representatives on Thursday with a vote of 36-19 and no comments from either side.
"This is a big day," National Rifle Association lobbyist Matt Dogali said. "This is a major restoration of a principal right."
The bill will go to the governor Monday, and Gov. Jan Brewer will have until the following Saturday to sign it, veto it, or do nothing and allow it to become law. The law would go into effect 90 days after the legislative session ends, which could happen within the next few weeks.
Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman said she has not made a final decision on whether she will sign the bill. "But she has a long track record of strong, vigorous support of the Second Amendment," he said.
As of April 4, there were 154,279 active concealed-carry weapon permits in Arizona. The permits generated $1.8 million in revenue last fiscal year, according to Harold Sanders, Arizona Department of Public Safety spokesman. The money is used to help cover costs for enforcing laws related to the Highway Patrol, operating the concealed-carry weapon-licensing program and impounding vehicles. Sanders said it's impossible to know how the legislation would affect that budget or state employees.
Dogali said many gun owners will still likely get a permit. They would still be needed in order to carry a weapon into a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol as well as for an Arizonan to carry his or her weapon concealed in most states.
The training requirements to get the permit would change under the proposed law. John Thomas, lobbyist for the Arizona Chiefs of Police, said the new provisions don't require the training class to be a set number of hours or include any hands-on use of the weapon.
A background check would still be required to get a permit, as well as to buy a gun in most cases. Brewer this week signed another law that exempts guns made and kept in Arizona from federal regulation, including background checks.
The chiefs association was originally opposed to the concealed-weapons bill. It worked to get several provisions added, and the group now is neutral. Those provisions include requiring gun owners to accurately answer an officer when asked if they are carrying a weapon and allowing police to temporarily confiscate the weapon while they are in contact with someone.
If the bill becomes law, Thomas said both law enforcement and residents should expect changes.
"You're going to have officers approaching people and asking them if they are carrying a weapon," he said. "And if a policeman asks you if you are carrying a weapon and you do not answer accurately, it's a Class 1 misdemeanor punishable with six months in jail."
He said Arizonans also should start assuming that starting sometime late this summer, a lot more people with no training will likely be carrying concealed guns.
Hope nobody does what one of our "paramedics'' did yesterday. He was driving down the road with a weapon in his waistband. I guess he must have reached or something, but for some reason the gun went off and he shot himself in the thigh. The bullet traveled down and lodged against his knee cap. I heard the call and didn't know whether to laugh or cry. The more guns out there ,the more the ambulances will be busy.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 09, 2010, 03:47:02 PM
Hope nobody does what one of our "paramedics'' did yesterday. He was driving down the road with a weapon in his waistband. I guess he must have reached or something, but for some reason the gun went off and he shot himself in the thigh. The bullet traveled down and lodged against his knee cap. I heard the call and didn't know whether to laugh or cry. The more guns out there ,the more the ambulances will be busy.
uhm you know, Your paramedic was stupid. He deserved to be shot in the ass. Bet he won't do that again.
Why people won't put the safety on is beyond comprehension. Well he'll put it on next time. You know thinking about it, he had to have had that weapon cocked and ready to fire with a round in the chamber....
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 09, 2010, 03:47:02 PM
The more guns out there ,the more the ambulances will be busy.
The same thing can be said about bathrooms, more people suffer from injuries in the bathroom than from guns each year.
Sorry Varmit, he didn't shoot himself with a bathtub. My point was how stupid he was! I'm guessing that the more people do carry guns, the more stupid gun accidents there will be. As far as I know, no innocent kid was ever killed by two yahoos out in the street having a bathtub fight. I'm not anti guns, never have been. I'm very much against stupid people doing stupid things with them .One of my Doctor friends works at Einstein in Philly in the ER. also known as the knife and gun club. He has more stories than a snake has scales. He too talks about the innocent people who get shot through walls, doors, and windows by people who have guns and are clueless about how they work. As far as I know, people don't get knife stabbed to death through their apartment walls or the back window of a car, or the front door of their house. Stupid gun incidents need their own category.
I agree, stupid people do stupid things. Unfortunetly, you can't regulate "stupid". And yes, the more people carry the greater the chances of something stupid happening. However, those people should be made to pay the price for their actions, not the rest of us.
I never even suggested such a thing. ::)
Oh boy, here we go...... Welcome to the wild west, pardner! :(
More details released on Walmart gun incident
azcentral.com
Maricopa County Superior Court documents revealed further details involving the 30-year-old Surprise man whose gun apparently fired into the ceiling of a Walmart store Thursday morning.
Records show that the gun David Sterling Walters fired was a loaded Jennings 9mm semiautomatic handgun. Customers and store workers were standing within a few feet from Walters, and all feared for their safety, the report said.
The report also states that at least six witnesses were willing to testify and all agreed they were "victims of endangerment."
No injuries were reported.
Walters could face multiple charges, including six counts of endangerment, one count of disorderly conduct with a weapon and one count of discharging a firearm in city limits, according to the court report.
Police gave the following account:
Walters entered the Walmart near 129th Avenue and West Thunderbird Road about 1 a.m. While in the store, witnesses told police, Walters repeatedly fidgeted with a holstered semiautomatic pistol, El Mirage police Detective Robert People said.
At one point, a clerk working the electronics section told police that Walters took the gun out of its holster and then removed and replaced the gun's magazine. The woman feared she was about to be robbed and notified the store manager. Walters continued through the store, apparently with a video game he told the clerk he would pay for at the front registers.
Walters wound up near a register where he later told police he intended to purchase the game. Several customers were nearby.
He removed the Jennings from the holster again, causing the magazine to come loose and fall to the floor. Walters re-inserted the magazine and continued manipulating the handgun when it fired, sending one round into the ceiling, Peoples said.
The identity of the gun's owner was unclear, but authorities were able to determine that the firearm had not been reported stolen.
El Mirage police arrested Walters about 1:30 a.m. and booked him into Fourth Avenue Jail. His bond was set at $1,530, and his next court hearing is April 15.
Ok warph, so somone did something stupid with a gun. It cannot be said definitavely that a class in proper firearm useage would have prevented this. I have a photo of a police woman holding her M4 with the magizine inserted backwards. I'll post it as soon as I figure out how.
Quote from: Varmit on April 10, 2010, 10:24:30 PM
Ok warph, so somone did something stupid with a gun. It cannot be said definitavely that a class in proper firearm useage would have prevented this. I have a photo of a police woman holding her M4 with the magizine inserted backwards. I'll post it as soon as I figure out how.
Also one metro area that i know of for sure, the cop that does the testing for the cops on their firearms, failed 90% of the entire department. 3 out of 10 shots missed. He told them that he was embarressed to be associated with them.
Also told them that if he would rather have a regular joe citizen gun owner to back him up in a firefight cause he knows they know how to hit what they shoot at.
Its because they push them through and dump em out on the street fast and also because they get lazy and quit practicing. If you do not practice, owning a gun and using one is meaningless to you. Its pretty much a status symbol thats going to get you or some innocent killed.
I will defend your right to own a gun, but that doesn't necessarily mean i think you should own one. My mom asked me if she should get one. She's almost 70 years old. I asked her one question. Do you know in your heart that you could take a life and told her to think and pray on that. Her answer after a few days was No she don't believe that she could.
So i told her no she didn't need a gun. I told her instead to get a can of wasp and hornet spray and put in her purse and in places around the house. She can totally disable a person with that if need be.
And they say cops are well trained...
(http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac286/billyroe2004/dumbwoman.jpg)
Note the magazine placement, not to mention the fact that she is almost completely exposed from the waist up. Somehow I don't think requiring people to attend a class on firearm useage will do much to stop people from doing stupid things with firearms.
Not much you can say about dumb asses like this...
Seriously.... when you're at a checkout counter.. there's only one reason to pull your gun from the holster...
He gives credible gun owners a bad name. He needs to be charged and lose his ccw. :police:
Had another one near Philly sometime back. Two dopes, both with permits, got into it at a bar and shot each other in the middle of a crowded room. A number of shots went wild but luckily only damaged the walls and furniture.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 12, 2010, 09:23:46 AM
Had another one near Philly sometime back. Two dopes, both with permits, got into it at a bar and shot each other in the middle of a crowded room. A number of shots went wild but luckily only damaged the walls and furniture.
Well you know what, i've seen it on the other end of the spectrum too there Diane, you always going to have stupid people. Usually Darwins law takes care of the stupid gene. BUt they said it would lead to more killings in florida when they made it legal to open carry. It didn't. They said that there would be bloodshed in the streets when Kennessaw Georgia passed a law requiring every household to have a gun, It didn't. In fact the town is safe to walk down the street at night, safe to work in a 7/11 store. The criminals leave kennessaw alone and their right next to a pretty rough area of atlanta.
Colorado enacted make my day laws, and to the lefts chagrin no bloodshed occurred.
I'm certainly not against trying to make the streets safe, but I'm afraid the accidental and innocent bystander shootings will continue just the same, or increase because of how poorly the people with the guns shoot!
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 12, 2010, 09:37:43 PM
I'm certainly not against trying to make the streets safe, but I'm afraid the accidental and innocent bystander shootings will continue just the same, or increase because of how poorly the people with the guns shoot!
You know what, thats not going to change with a ccw or without a ccw. Stupid people exist.
You can't change that with a law.
My sisters ex boyfriend lost his brother because some stupid idiot decided he would go hunting before daylight. he shot in the dark as his brother was walking to his deer stand and hit him at 25 yards with a full bore shotgun blast. It happened.
It was his time to go and that idiots time to spend some time in jail reflecting on his stupidity.
I'm not going to worry about those that are stupid. They will weed themselves out of society that is if we don't let them breed.
Why are the stupid people stupid? Maybe instead of unconstitutional gun laws we could improve our schools to produce less stupid people? Not that the schools are only producing stupid people but the government sure is on track to make our kids pretty dumb.
Quote from: mtcookson on April 13, 2010, 12:01:14 PM
Why are the stupid people stupid? Maybe instead of unconstitutional gun laws we could improve our schools to produce less stupid people? Not that the schools are only producing stupid people but the government sure is on track to make our kids pretty dumb.
Ain't that the truth!!
Gee, thanks a lot! I don't recall that teaching folks to be sensible with guns was part of teaching reading, writing or math or science or history or geography or spelling or anything else that I taught. Just where does that belong? Maybe with the parents? Hummmm? I'm sure your local teachers would love to hear you talk about school like that. Such encouragement from parents must really make your teachers just LOVE their jobs and especially want to spend extra time with YOUR kids....so fulfilling!!!!!
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 13, 2010, 02:05:15 PM
Gee, thanks a lot! I don't recall that teaching folks to be sensible with guns was part of teaching reading, writing or math or science or history or geography or spelling or anything else that I taught. Just where does that belong? Maybe with the parents? Hummmm? I'm sure your local teachers would love to hear you talk about school like that. Such encouragement from parents must really make your teachers just LOVE their jobs and especially want to spend extra time with YOUR kids....so fulfilling!!!!!
Well Diane, teaching someone about guns starts from the cradle. Not when their adults. Teachers used to teach kids how to handle guns. Used to have classes after school (Note AFTER School and Volenteer). It wasn't unusual to see a dozen or so guns in the principals office when i was in school.
Part of the problem is that kids today are sheilded from the sight of a gun. Look at what happens to a kid these days if the point their fingers wrong. They get suspended.
So you get kids that turn into adults that turn into the guy you told us about acting like a 5 year old does with a toy gun.
Thats why you have stupidity running rampant. That fella was all but pointing the gun going pow pow pow.....
I know that the DI at Paris Island told me on my sons graduation day commented on my sons ability to handle a weapon from day one. He said they normally unteach kids how to handle weapons if they have ever handled one. But he said they didn't have to unteach him as he already knew how to handle a weapon the marine way as far as shooting was concerend. He said that it is amazing that these kids coming into the corp do not kill themselves with one as they have NO clue about which end fires the bullet and no common sense to go with it.
Thats because society is trying to protect them too much. Hell in 10 years we'll probably have to use that spray foam on them and wrap in a bubblewrap suit to let them go riding a bike.
Many families here absolutely do not want their kids exposed to guns, period. Most grew up in a town of some sort, or Philadelphia or Wilmington and moved to the 'burbs. Very few of them hunt, some do fish and that's more salt water than freshwater. Their kids are taught not to touch, but very few will ever own a gun, shoot a gun or be around a gun. Golf or shooting pool is more their style. Having said that, there are also lots of people who do hunt deer, rabbit, dove, duck and goose. Kids here are more encouraged to go fish because fishing accidents aren't even remotely fatal.
You got me confused Diane. You say"very few of them hunt' and"very few kids will own or shoot a gun "------then you say,"lots of people who hunt deer, rabbit etc" What y'all hunt with---a beanie flipper ? :)
New Castle County, where I live, has most of the population and very few hunters. Downstate which is more rural has 2 counties of people who do hunt a lot. Sorry, that was confusing wasn't it? ;D
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 13, 2010, 08:57:53 PM
New Castle County, where I live, has most of the population and very few hunters. Downstate which is more rural has 2 counties of people who do hunt a lot. Sorry, that was confusing wasn't it? ;D
And therein lies the problem. The parents have done more harm than good by that.
if kids are around the guns, see them, can touch them, hold them and shoot them as kids, then you don't have a problem with them growing up and ending up doing something stupid. They also don't get hurt when some city kid finds daddys gun and starts brandishing it around. THey know what a gun will do and they will leave.
There ought to be more gun ownership by Americans.
As only black economist Dr. Walter Williams can write 'em,
here's one entitled "Kids and Guns"
http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/index.php?news=505
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 13, 2010, 05:38:55 PM
Kids here are more encouraged to go fish because fishing accidents aren't even remotely fatal.
Actually, that is not true. More people drown, suffer broken bones, head injuries, while fishing each year than those injuries incurred from shooting sports.
Maybe...the ones who drown here are adults fishing out in small boats, (and there is almost always alcohol involved), not kids out alone, or they were with a family when a boat went down. Broken bones yes, but not usually kids and not fatal. One of my recent dinner guests tangled with a trout last summer and lost, slipped on a rock and broke his ankle. ;D The kids here who drown, and sadly there are some every summer, are almost always in swimming pools or high water after a storm. Fishing isn't a factor. A few have been lost jumping off bridges into water deeper than they thought it was. Don't know of any fatal head injuries connected to fishing here.
So then, should we ban fishing and swimming in order to protect the children? Afterall, there is no constitutional admendment protecting fishing and swimming.
So when did I ever say anything about banning anything? I don't want minor kids out unsupervised with guns, but I still think it's up to the states to decide what's best for them. With the exception of a few "Hunting Farms" down on the southern edge, there is no place left in NCC that you could safely hunt anyway. We are simply too close together. The state park up the road from me culls out some deer from time to thin the herds. The lower counties have shotgun deer season, and plenty of duck and goose etc. To my knowledge, knives, bows and fishing gear doesn't hurt or kill through walls into the house next door, or from outside into a home. Elk county is practically empty of people. Of course you can and should have much more latitude about who uses what weapons and where. Do the people who live in Howard shoot deer from the back porch?
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 15, 2010, 09:33:13 AM
So when did I ever say anything about banning anything? I don't want minor kids out unsupervised with guns, but I still think it's up to the states to decide what's best for them.
No, you never said that we should ban anything. But you didn't have to actually come out and say it, one can infer it from your posts. As far as the States deciding on this issue...No Ma'am. The Bill of Rights is clear, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Just this time...................I 'on purpose' deleted a couple things.......................................
Maybe shouldn't have.... but I could feel another war breaking out..
and frankly right now today?? I"m just not in the frickin mood.! :police:
Varmit...please don't try to "infer'' things. Imply is the word you wanted and you'd be once again wrong. I'm not against guns, not for complete gun control, never have been and I don't know how many times I've said it before! Our own Delaware State Constitution allows guns for protection of self and property and for hunting and recreation.
Quote from: Diane Amberg on April 16, 2010, 09:38:23 AM
Varmit...please don't try to "infer'' things. Imply is the word you wanted and you'd be once again wrong.
No ma'am, its not. If you re-read my post I said that a person could INFER from your post that you were for gun control. Although you didn't actually state it, you IMPLYed it. See the difference? For clarification...
Infer - verb (used with object)
1.to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence:
Imply - –verb (used with object),-plied, -ply·ing.
1.to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated:
His words implied a lack of faith.
Your posts indicate that you are in favor of laws that infringe upon our Constitutionaly protected and God given rights in the interest of so-called safety, i.e. Gun Control.
I guess for me it is about "With Freedome Comes Responsibility". It would be great if we could just count on that from everyone. But responsibility has to be taught and we were all fortunate enough to have been born in a time, in places, with families who just did that as a part of life. Many young people today are coming from much different backgrounds than most of us did. How do we handle this situation of combining our 2nd Amendments rights for everyone and yet instilling a responsibility for that right and not diminish either. Boy that is the question isn't it. For this reason I have to favor training, because as a culture, overall we are dropping the ball on responsibility.
Roma Jean, Could I recommend a place to train these kids ? It's called MCRD and there's one at San Diego and another at Parris Island !! :)
As far as I know they don't take 10 year old boys. ;D
Actually I have no problem with that at all.
As far as the ten year olds, it would be nice if we could count on some adults...now we are back into the problem.
Ain't it the truth! :-\
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed CCW bill
Citing her belief in the individual rights of her state's citizens, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed into law the ability for people to carry a concealed weapon without first obtaining a permit.
Brewer, a Republican, signed Senate Bill 1108 into law Friday, allowing people 21 or older to forego background checks and classes that are now required to get a concealed carry permit in that state.
"I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well," Brewer said in a press release. "I am joined in support of this legislation by both Republican and Democratic members of the Arizona legislature, and I laud the strong number of bipartisan supporters who join with me to defend the rights of our citizens."
The bill was passed in the state Senate on March 29th, 20 to 10. It cleared the House on April 8th, with 36 votes for its passage, 19 against, and 5 no-votes. It headed to the governor on April 12th, four days before she signed it.
Arizona is the third state to grant such a gun right to its people. Vermont and Alaska are the other two.
Rest of story:
http://www.kpsplocal2.com/news/local/story/Arizona-Extends-Gun-Rights-Concealed-Carry-Bill/yw6Gp_b_w0yvUAydPUKjvg.cspx
Quote from: jarhead on April 16, 2010, 04:40:06 PM
Roma Jean, Could I recommend a place to train these kids ? It's called MCRD and there's one at San Diego and another at Parris Island !! :)
Dang you beat me to it, i second the idea.
Quote from: Roma Jean Turner on April 17, 2010, 09:42:02 AM
As far as the ten year olds, it would be nice if we could count on some adults...now we are back into the problem.
Welll i am doing my part, got my grandson a .22 for him to learn with. he's 7 years old.
Good for you, he will grow up with a respect for it and it's use.
May I assume his parents were OK with it? ;) What did you get him?
Diane --- he already said what he got him ~~~~~~~~~~~?????
I meant what kind of a 22? Winchester, Smith & Wesson, Crickett? Sorry, I didn't know I wasn't clear. I assumed it wasn't a hand gun.
long rifle for him, but i have a .22 handgun i'll let him use when he's here. He has to learn how to shoot matchsticks with the longrifle before he can shoot the handgun.
Friday.. the Republican Governor Jan Brewer has signed into law Arizona's Constitutional Carry Law. Anyone in this state can now carry concealed, as well as open without a permit! They now join Vermont and Alaska as the only 3 states who allow people to exercise unrestricted freedoms when carrying a weapon. Janet Napolitano vetoed most every gun bill that came across her desk as she led the state down the economic road to ruin with all of her Hussein style, progressive politics.
"Second Amendment Jan" is well on her way to rectifying that situation.
She has already signed into law a bill that allows concealed carry in bars. The whining, liberal, anti gun crowd wasted no time starting in with their whole, "there will be blood in the streets", and, "we are returning to the Wild West", nonsense. It's driving them nuts. Jan and the gun crowd love it!
If I lived in Arizona she would have my vote based on this alone. Show me a woman that likes guns and the people who own them... and I'll show you someone who should hold public office!
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/1528
And here's some more information about the recent changes to AZ law.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/04/16/20100416arizona-concealed-weapons-bill16-ON.html
The Arizona Republic .
Starting later this summer, U.S. citizens 21 and older can begin carrying a concealed firearm without a permit in Arizona.
Arizona immigration bill faces Senate vote Monday
Gov. Jan Brewer signed Senate Bill 1108 into law Friday afternoon. It eliminates the requirement for a concealed-carry weapons permit, but does require gun owners to accurately answer if an officer asks them if they are carrying weapon concealed. It also allows officers to temporarily confiscate a weapon while they are talking to an individual, including during a traffic stop.
"I believe strongly in the individual rights and responsibilities of a free society, and as governor I have pledged a solemn and important oath to protect and defend the Constitution," Brewer said in a news release. "I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well."
The law goes into effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for this session, which could happen in the next couple of weeks.
Arizona joins Vermont and Alaska in not requiring such permits.
"If you want to carry concealed, and you have no criminal history, you are a good guy, you can do it," bill sponsor Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, has said of his bill. "It's a freedom that poses no threat to the public."
National Rifle Association lobbyist Matt Dogali said the new state law would not violate any current federal requirements.
"There is no federal requirement for a permit or lack thereof," Dogali said.
The federal government oversees the background-check program required to purchase a weapon, which will still be required in Arizona in most cases.
Brewer last week did sign a separate law that exempts guns made and kept in Arizona from federal regulation, including background checks.
Arizona had 154,279 active permits as of April 4. Permit holders are spread across all ages, races and counties, but White males older than 30 in Maricopa and Pima counties hold the majority, according to the Arizona Department of Public Safety data.
The permits generated $1.8 million in revenue last fiscal year, according to DPS. The money is used to help cover costs for enforcing laws related to the Highway Patrol, operating the concealed-carry weapon-licensing program and impounding vehicles.
Arizona's permit process will remain in place, and many gun owners may still choose to get a permit. Permits would still be needed in order to carry a weapon into a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol. They would also be needed if an Arizonan wants to carry his or her gun concealed in most other states.
For those who do choose to get a permit, the education requirements do change under the new law. Classes are no longer required to be a set number of hours or include any hands-on use of the weapon. Those who don't get a permit would not be required to get any training or education.
Retired Mesa police officer Dan Furbee runs a business teaching permit and other gun safety classes. He said if most people choose not to get a permit, it will put several hundred Arizona firearms instructors out of business.
"It's going to hurt," he said.
But he said what really concerns him is that the new law will allow people who have had no education about Arizona's laws and no training on the shooting range to carry a concealed gun. The eight-hour class currently required to get a permit includes information on state law and gun safety, as well as requires students to be able to hit a target 14 out of 20 times. Furbee said his class at Mesa-based Ultimate Accessories costs $79, plus $60 for the five-year permit.
"I fully agree that we have a right to keep and bear arms," Furbee said. "But if you are not responsible enough to take a class and learn the laws, you are worse than part of the problem."
He said it's not uncommon for students to walk into his classroom and pull a new gun out of a box with no idea how to hold it and no understanding of the laws surrounding it.
"If you are going to carry a concealed weapon, you should have some kind of training and show that you are at least competent to know how the gun works and be able to hit a target," he said. "You owe the people around you a measure of responsibility."
This new law is the latest of several that have passed over the past year since Brewer took over the office from former Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat.
Napolitano vetoed at least a dozen weapons bills that crossed her desk during her seven years in office, all of which would have loosened gun restrictions. In 2005, Napolitano rejected a bill that would have allowed patrons to carry loaded guns into bars and restaurants. In 2008, she also vetoed a bill that would have allowed people to have a hidden gun in vehicles without a concealed-carry permit.
In January 2009, Napolitano resigned to become U.S. Homeland Security secretary and Republican Secretary of State Brewer became governor.
During her first year in office, Brewer signed a bill allowing loaded guns in bars and restaurants, as well as another that prohibits property owners from banning guns from parking areas, so long as the weapons are kept locked in vehicles.
((Parts I highlighted in maroon color....... I agree....
I have seen some pretty stupid people pulling guns out and swinging them around and not even knowing what way the bullets are loaded from... I think that you should have to take a class then be able to take that certificate of passing.. and then buy whatever gun you want..and carry it where ever you want..whenever you want..on your hip or concealed..))
COMMON MYTHS ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY
Q: Why is the CCW permit being eliminated?
A: The CCW permit is not being eliminated -- that appears to have been misinformation designed to scuttle the bill. The permit system remains completely unaffected by Freedom To Carry. The permit, its advantages, the training, reciprocity schemes, the classes, fees and taxes are unchanged. That all remains voluntary as it always has been. Anyone who meets that law's requirements can apply. Shame on the "news" media that has repeatedly said otherwise.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: What's the difference between Constitutional Carry and Freedom To Carry?
A: There's no difference, they're just two names for the same thing. Constitutional Carry, the more formal term, comes from following the Arizona Constitution's provision that "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired...". Freedom To Carry (no government interference with the right to arms) refers to the next step after so-called Right To Carry (massive government interference with the right to arms).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: If people can just carry guns, won't crime and gun problems skyrocket?
A: Half of Arizonans keep and bear arms now, without any of the CCW red tape and government supervision, and without any "skyrocketing" problems. Removing the requirement to only carry openly doesn't change who people are or how they act, it just restores their rights. Restoration of rights and becoming mentally unhinged are not related -- but the same arguments have been made everywhere CCW programs passed.
It's commonly recognized that some folks, especially people who lean left politically, do seem to equate discreetly bearing arms and becoming unglued. Decades of experience however provide no evidence of any such behavior. Those concerns have been repeatedly proven false and often turn out to be irrational fear mongering. Government permission slips for the exercise of rights have not turned people into homicidal maniacs. Restoring the right to discreetly bear arms will not change people into something they are not, and brings the state into proper compliance with its Constitution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: Can anyone carry a gun?
A: Anyone who could legally carry a gun previously can legally carry under this law, no more, no less. "Prohibited possessors" -- criminals, illegal aliens and others forbidden to carry arms remain banned as always. The main change is that now a woman can put a handgun in her handbag without being subject to arrest for carrying discreetly without a government permission slip (and a man has equal right to carry a gun in any discreet manner -- under a sport coat or shirt, in a pocket or pants holster, fanny pack, attaché case, etc.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: Training is a good thing, why was it eliminated?
A: Training is indeed a good thing and it is not eliminated. Anyone can and should take as much training as they want, which is voluntary. What has changed is that you are no longer forced to take government-mandated classes, registration and taxes before you can exercise your right to carry discreetly. This is the same formula working in Arizona since statehood for open carry (which includes concealed carry in your home, business, land, vehicle (with some minor conditions), and in a visible scabbard or case designed for carrying weapons, or in luggage. Now that the half of the public that bears arms can do so discreetly, many experts expect statewide gun training to flourish.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: Won't people shoot each other if they're not required to take the training?
A: Twelve states currently issue CCW permits without a training requirement and they're doing just fine. Half of Arizonans exercise their right to arms without government-demanded training and they're doing just fine. The idea that you're only safe if government requires training is statist, foolish and incorrect. That said, responsible people should get education and training for firearms—and swimming, machine tools, medical care, raising children, being married, owning a home, preparing food, writing articles, etc., without government mandates.
If government could require training for everything that has risk, your freedom would be evaporated and your government would be out of line. Government has no legitimate delegated authority in this country to be your nanny like that, or to require anything beyond the specific, limited delegated powers given to it in the Constitution and subsequent valid legislation. The fact that government has in many cases abandoned those constraints is part of why the Tea Party movement has gained such ground and, in some cases, driven the public out into the streets with pitchforks (figuratively).
Currently, 11 states issue carry permits without training and they're fine (AL, DE, GA, ID, IN, MD, MS, NH, PA, SD, WA). Because Arizona recognizes all other permits, many of our snowbirds have been carrying under those permits, without problems.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: Why are children of any age going to be allowed to carry guns to school?
A: That is total nonsense. No such thing occurs. The bill has no effect on children. That appears to be part of a misinformation campaign designed to scuttle the bill. There is no change as to who has the right to keep and bear arms. School grounds are unaffected by the law. That question is typical of similar lies and disinformation used to defeat and mislead the public about many good bills that seek to restore our civil rights. It's almost as bad as the lies told about blacks during the civil rights era of the 1960s. Almost.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Q: Will other states imitate Arizona and enact Constitutional Carry?
A: Many people hope so, and it has the backing of the gun-rights groups.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AFTERWORD: INSIDER INFORMATION:
There is one reason and one reason only why this got done --
The Arizona Citizens Defense League.
That small handful of guys running this group, the two full-time volunteer lobbyists Dave Kopp and John Wentling, and the thousands of members who supported the effort with their tiny membership dues are exactly and precisely why our rights have expanded.
It was a deliberate, conscientious, focused and tireless effort from what must be a candidate for the best pro-rights organization in the nation. Get your friends to join, send a donation or buy a t-shirt or hat, attend the meetings, and in your little way, make a difference and preserve our rights. http://www.azcdl.org
One other tidbit -- the NRA was rightfully nervous about this whole Freedom To Carry, permit-less, no training, no red tape expansion of our rights. They dragged their feet at first, that's putting it mildly, and I can't say I blame them. An awful lot was on the line.
They wanted to be prudent. Limit exposure and risk. They have all their trainers to think about and that revenue stream. The chance of falling flat on your face in total embarrassment is a serious concern. The ease with which the antis might cast us as dangerous gun-toting (their media's favorite slur) nuts is a real issue.
I personally debated hard with some of the top brass, and to their credit, they finally agreed not to fight the effort in Arizona, and eventually saw the light and got on board. Some gun owners like to pick on the NRA, but the NRA is going to be at the forefront of this battle. The Constitutional Carry issue does make sense, for them and for us. It will be a winner in some states, maybe yours, and does advance everything for which NRA members stand.
Yes, some of those members, steeped in darkness, or hooked on the government-permit feed trough, believe that red-tapeless carry is a bad idea. They crave government supervision. They want that permission slip in their wallet. They'll learn, and come around. And continue to get fine training from NRA certified and other trainers because it's the right thing to do, not because the government commands it.
Quote from: Teresa on April 21, 2010, 12:48:53 AM
((Parts I highlighted in maroon color....... I agree....
I have seen some pretty stupid people pulling guns out and swinging them around and not even knowing what way the bullets are loaded from... I think that you should have to take a class then be able to take that certificate of passing.. and then buy whatever gun you want..and carry it where ever you want..whenever you want..on your hip or concealed..))
I would agree if and ONLY if it was the gun dealer requiring it, but I doubt any would as that would be a loss of business in most cases. The government, constitutionally, can not interfere with us possessing and carrying arms. Requiring a class to purchase a firearm would be a violation of that.
Now... I think a good, and constitutional, way to get people trained that are going to buy are incentives. Gun dealers offering discounts on classes for buying a gun or discounts on a gun for bringing in a certificate from a class, etc. Simply offer something to make people want to take the class. That would be a good way to get people trained without infringing on their rights. For instance, I know of a class in Wichita (actually I think its in El Dorado, can't remember off hand) that teaches you how to use weapons correctly and you get to train on fun weapons... like so:
(http://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd58/charlie0369/P3260168.jpg)
That particular class has had people come by and take it even though they already had their conceal carry permits :D
You are right on the infringement part.. and this would be an excellent way to get them to take a class...
Teresa, I think you and I should open a gun Boutique for women, so they would want to come in and shop. Wouldn't that be fun. I suggested it to my favorite pawn shop here, of course I was talking to men. Pretty setting with the guns displayed well and of course all the accessories. Classes with brunch. Hey, I'm not kidding.
I'll take a bright pink 38 special please, or maybe pink and green polka dots. I"d get the bad guy laughing so hard maybe I wouldn't have to shoot him after all. I am serious.
I'm for whatever works.
Quote from: Roma Jean Turner on April 28, 2010, 03:53:11 PM
I'm for whatever works.
Well if you dispatch the bad guy, you save the taxpayers a whole lot of money!