National Carry Permit

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jkratzer1982

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 31, 2010
    18
    1
    If we made a national carry permit and charged like $500 for it for a lifetime permit it would help with the national debt.
     

    clt46910

    Master
    Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 4, 2008
    1,633
    36
    Akron Indiana
    No, it would not. Too few carry to make any difference to our debt.

    Best would be for each state to honor other states carry permits just as driver's license
     

    E5RANGER375

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Feb 22, 2010
    11,507
    38
    BOATS n' HO's, Indy East
    i thought the costitution took care of that :dunno:

    oh thats right never mind I forgot what george w. bush told us about the constitution, that it's "just a god da*n piece of paper". and NOBAMA dont care about it because nancy pelosey wont read it to him before bed time.

    thats what the government thinks about our rights people. dont look to the feds for help securing your rights. look to your state government, and heavens forbid if you live in NY or CA, your screwed
     
    Last edited by a moderator:

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    i thought the costitution took care of that :dunno:

    oh thats right never mind I forgot what george w. bush told us about the constitution, that it's "just a god da*n piece of paper". and NOBAMA dont care about it because nancy pelosey wont read it to him before bed time.

    thats what the government thinks about our rights people. dont look to the feds for help securing your rights. look to your state government, and heavens forbid if you live in NY or CA, your screwed

    Just FYI, all the reports I've heard of Bush saying that seem to have come from the same otherwise-unsubstantiated source. It's generally discredited.

    That doesn't mean that government doesn't view the Constitution that way, but they do enough bad things that we don't need to fault them for things they don't do.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Oh, and addressing the OP, I don't think we need to voluntarily give the fedgov any more power over our fundamental rights than they already take without our permission, nor do I think it appropriate for us to offer to pay a prohibitive amount for the "privilege" of giving them more power.

    :twocents:

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    E5RANGER375

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Feb 22, 2010
    11,507
    38
    BOATS n' HO's, Indy East
    Just FYI, all the reports I've heard of Bush saying that seem to have come from the same otherwise-unsubstantiated source. It's generally discredited.

    That doesn't mean that government doesn't view the Constitution that way, but they do enough bad things that we don't need to fault them for things they don't do.

    Blessings,
    Bill


    well if he would have respected the constitution alittle more then i might tend to believe your reasoning. but since he made a mockery of it, i will believe what i posted.
     

    Joe Williams

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 26, 2008
    10,431
    38
    well if he would have respected the constitution alittle more then i might tend to believe your reasoning. but since he made a mockery of it, i will believe what i posted.

    The fact that he never said it is irrelevant to you, huh? You'll just keep claiming he did?
     
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Mar 18, 2009
    57
    6
    Detroit
    "National Debt"

    Even if this would make a difference they would have it all out of wack before long. There is no such thing as a balanced budget when they say it's balanced they just borrow from Peter to pay Paul. With all the poverty and welfare in this country we'll never get it right. Revo doesn't seem like a bad idea at times at least to cut these bums from riding on our coat tails.....
     

    groovatron

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Oct 9, 2009
    3,270
    38
    calumet township
    I agree with the others. It would only be a drop in the bucket. If we want to reduce the national debt and control infinite inflation, we should stop allowing the government to conterfeit money.

    And FTR, GWB was an irrefutable jacktard of a president. Anyone who thinks otherwise should do us all a favor and get themselves a lobotomy.............
     

    dwh79

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 20, 2008
    939
    18
    Wanamaker/ Acton
    Sorry I don't believe he was 100% jacktard and I will not get a lobotomy. He was better than Clinton and better than Obama. Most may not like it but he has been the best president in about 20 years. Not saying everything was right but I would rather have another president like him than Obama. I also believe that a large group of people on this site would be completely unhappy with any president except for if they were president.
     

    Joe Williams

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 26, 2008
    10,431
    38
    And FTR, GWB was an irrefutable jacktard of a president. Anyone who thinks otherwise should do us all a favor and get themselves a lobotomy.............

    The fact that he was actually dedicated to defending this nation against it's enemies really does torque leftists off. It's one of the best things about him, since leftists are evil to the core.
     

    Rizzo

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 26, 2010
    399
    18
    The fact that he was actually dedicated to defending this nation against it's enemies really does torque leftists off. It's one of the best things about him, since leftists are evil to the core.

    Bull! GW is just a fake conservative using the "war on terror" to give the feds more power over our lives while never eliminating terrorist threats because as long as we are afraid they can keep up profit making wars and passing "patriot acts' that steal our fundamental rights. He increased the size of government more than clinton and initiated spying on all americans for our "safety"

    He never stopped our immigration problem and was treasonous in not upholding the constitution. He is a liar and a fraud. i am ashamed i voted for him. but my eyes have been opened to what is going on. republicans and democrats are two side of the same evil coin.
     

    BearArms

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 19, 2008
    128
    16
    If every single person in the country paid the $500 it would knock out like 2% of the national debt.
     

    360

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 7, 2009
    3,626
    38
    I could have swore that I had a post on Post #6. But it seems to be gone. Either someone wiped it out, or I forgot to hit Post Quick Reply. :dunno:
     

    downzero

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 16, 2010
    2,965
    36
    It would trample states rights.

    A one time payment of $500 by a few million of us equals less money than they waist in Washington every day and wouldn't even put a pock mark in the skin of our national debt.

    States do not have "rights."

    Just to put perspective on the amount of unfunded liability our government has currently, it's in the range of $50 trillion. What that means is that every single dollar earned by American citizens for the next 3+ years would have to be put aside to make any meaningful dent in those liabilities. What that would mean is that we would have to spent every single cent of our economy's productive capacity for YEARS in order to save enough to pay for debts and promises to pay that we've already made. Obviously that couldn't happen because people need to eat, and we need things from government other than to pay debts (national defense, among others) so in reality we'll probably never be able to pay the debts we owe.

    The federal government also does not have any enumerated authority that could, under currently understood doctrine, demand that states allow the carrying of loaded firearms. And absent some rather extreme vision of the 2nd amendment used against state power, it is well within the states' police power to control (democratically) who may carry a loaded firearm and who may not.

    I know it seems like a good idea to look to the courts to solve these sorts of problems, but this isn't an issue that the courts should be solving. How, who, when, and where we may carry is a question for a democratically-elected legislature.
     
    Top Bottom