Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Do You Want Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2775580" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>If experience counts, then stop marginalizing the experience of the seven states that have some level of Constitutional Carry which have not experienced an increase in the types of violations or abuses that you allude to. Yours is a statistical data set of one, which doesn't extend beyond your controlled environment. Excuse me if I value their practical experience more than your theoretical experience (and yes, classroom experience is theoretical).</p><p></p><p>You've also admitted that your primary income derives from training, which includes these government mandated classes. Regardless of what you profess, that has to factor into the weight given to your position. You have an undeniable vested interest in retaining government mandated classes. You may have other legitimate reasons for wanting them to remain a requirement, but that reason cannot be discounted in this discussion.</p><p></p><p>Further, there is no constitutional right to be a dentist, nor is there a requirement to allow them in your mouth. I'll just chalk that up to a horrible analogy on your part. On that point, there is no constitutional right for individuals to make money off the constitutional rights of others. I don't have a right to make money off you in exchange for a certificate that allows you to purchase a license to post your free speech on the internet. As someone else alluded to, more people have been killed as a result of exercising free speech than all the accidental shootings in the world. </p><p></p><p>Speaking to those rights, you've made attempts to add gravitas to your speech through the use of emotion based arguments. I don't need to put words in your mouth when you post things like this:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In the 2A debate, that type of argument is best left to the anti's. And finally:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In one paragraph you expose your own contradictions. You believe in the 2A right to keep and bear arms, but you want them to be licensed and subject to mandatory training in order to exercise that right. A right which you yourself say not everyone should be granted a license for, "just because they asked for one". I'd say you don't have a solid grasp on exactly what a constitutionally enumerated "right" is. In a nutshell, <em>respectfully</em> I think you are wrong.</p><p></p><p>I'll end with this nice little GIF:</p><p></p><p><img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Rtc.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>Beyond that, 20 states have introduced CC bills. Coupled with the graphic above, that's what we in the business call "a clue". It's coming whether you like it or not. You might as well reconcile with it, because you're standing in the way of progress. The nattering naybobs of negativity will not win this one! <img src="/images/smilies/new/patriot.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":patriot:" title="Patriot :patriot:" data-shortname=":patriot:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2775580, member: 1132"] If experience counts, then stop marginalizing the experience of the seven states that have some level of Constitutional Carry which have not experienced an increase in the types of violations or abuses that you allude to. Yours is a statistical data set of one, which doesn't extend beyond your controlled environment. Excuse me if I value their practical experience more than your theoretical experience (and yes, classroom experience is theoretical). You've also admitted that your primary income derives from training, which includes these government mandated classes. Regardless of what you profess, that has to factor into the weight given to your position. You have an undeniable vested interest in retaining government mandated classes. You may have other legitimate reasons for wanting them to remain a requirement, but that reason cannot be discounted in this discussion. Further, there is no constitutional right to be a dentist, nor is there a requirement to allow them in your mouth. I'll just chalk that up to a horrible analogy on your part. On that point, there is no constitutional right for individuals to make money off the constitutional rights of others. I don't have a right to make money off you in exchange for a certificate that allows you to purchase a license to post your free speech on the internet. As someone else alluded to, more people have been killed as a result of exercising free speech than all the accidental shootings in the world. Speaking to those rights, you've made attempts to add gravitas to your speech through the use of emotion based arguments. I don't need to put words in your mouth when you post things like this: In the 2A debate, that type of argument is best left to the anti's. And finally: In one paragraph you expose your own contradictions. You believe in the 2A right to keep and bear arms, but you want them to be licensed and subject to mandatory training in order to exercise that right. A right which you yourself say not everyone should be granted a license for, "just because they asked for one". I'd say you don't have a solid grasp on exactly what a constitutionally enumerated "right" is. In a nutshell, [I]respectfully[/I] I think you are wrong. I'll end with this nice little GIF: [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Rtc.gif[/IMG] Beyond that, 20 states have introduced CC bills. Coupled with the graphic above, that's what we in the business call "a clue". It's coming whether you like it or not. You might as well reconcile with it, because you're standing in the way of progress. The nattering naybobs of negativity will not win this one! :patriot: [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Do You Want Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom