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
My Worthless CCW "training" class & Constitutional Carry Opponets
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="henschman" data-source="post: 2877260" data-attributes="member: 4235"><p>Do you think people like that lady would ever have the notion to carry a gun around with them everywhere if they never heard that you could get a fancy license from the gubmint for it? If there were simply no laws against carrying weapons and it was treated as no big deal, like it has always been in Vermont, you wouldn't see near as much of this phenomenon where untrained/undertrained people get interested in carrying a gun and getting the CCL becomes a "fad" among certain segments of the population. For the most part, only people who take self defense very seriously would carry regularly... the type of people who train regularly and are probably a lot more proficient with a handgun than the average police officer. That is certainly the category most people I know who carry regularly fall into even under our current laws.</p><p></p><p>But the bottom line when it comes to all of this is that there should be no victimless crimes. It doesn't hurt or threaten anyone for a person to simply be in possession of a weapon, so it should not be prohibited. The only thing that should be prohibited regarding weapons is using them to initiate violence, placing people in imminent fear of having violence initiated against them, damaging other people's property with them, etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="henschman, post: 2877260, member: 4235"] Do you think people like that lady would ever have the notion to carry a gun around with them everywhere if they never heard that you could get a fancy license from the gubmint for it? If there were simply no laws against carrying weapons and it was treated as no big deal, like it has always been in Vermont, you wouldn't see near as much of this phenomenon where untrained/undertrained people get interested in carrying a gun and getting the CCL becomes a "fad" among certain segments of the population. For the most part, only people who take self defense very seriously would carry regularly... the type of people who train regularly and are probably a lot more proficient with a handgun than the average police officer. That is certainly the category most people I know who carry regularly fall into even under our current laws. But the bottom line when it comes to all of this is that there should be no victimless crimes. It doesn't hurt or threaten anyone for a person to simply be in possession of a weapon, so it should not be prohibited. The only thing that should be prohibited regarding weapons is using them to initiate violence, placing people in imminent fear of having violence initiated against them, damaging other people's property with them, etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
My Worthless CCW "training" class & Constitutional Carry Opponets
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom