Why are some gun owners afraid of permitless concealed carry?

[rambone]

permits keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms...even though it doesnt always work, permits help.

Good one. You should do stand up comedy.

 

[PatriotPride]

Good one. You should do stand up comedy.

I concur. I think he was serious.

 

[Bill of Rights]

permits keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms...even though it doesnt always work, permits help.

In case I didn't say it before, to ! I think I recall you identifying yourself as a police officer. Thank you for your service, if so.

I've recently read that about 95% of crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns. I would say that permits hardly ever help, and the evil in society will get guns anyway.

Good one. You should do stand up comedy.

I concur. I think he was serious.

Now hang on, guys... Let's break down what the man said:

permits keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms...

This is partially true. Not permits, but background checks do, in fact, keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms... At least the ones who've been convicted of something.

...even though it doesnt always work, permits help.

Also partially true. It's the background check that stops the criminal from walking into the local gun store like we do and purchasing his guns over the counter.

The catch is that for those background checks to do that, several things have to happen, not all of which do, reliably

• The criminal has to have been caught committing a crime.
• The mentally-ill person's problem has to be entered into the database.
• The government can't get anything wrong, like putting the citizen's information on the wrong file or mistaking two people with similar names... but we know government never makes a mistake, right? Right?
• The store has to actually run the check and catch the straw purchaser in the act, when they appear.
• The store employees have to be honest and not BE the straw purchaser.
• We have to not mind treating everyone like a criminal who needs to be checked to prove their innocence before trusting them with the God-given rights with which they were born.

As long as all of those things work like they're supposed to, criminals and the mentally incompetent cannot lawfully obtain firearms. Of course, whether the guns they have are obtained lawfully or not, they'll still kill you just as dead.

Officer(?) Giancola... This is just feel-good crap with which you've had your head filled. If it was true, all you guys'd have to do is see that pink paper and you wouldn't need to run licenses to carry, serial numbers on firearms, or any of the other things you're trained to do because in the opinions of some, people can't be trusted, they need to be controlled from without, even though there's no provision in our federal or state Constitutions allowing government to assume the powers commensurate to that level of control.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[PatriotPride]

^^^Well said. Besides, I make it a point to buy as many firearms as I can used. No background check. No requirement to have a LTCH. All as the Founders intended it to be. If the LTCH were truly all that was needed, then WHY do police officers insist on illegally running firearm serial numbers, disarming citizens during stops, etc? I thought the "permits keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms". Indoctrination at it's finest.

 

[FatGeek]

If the LTCH were truly all that was needed, then WHY do police officers insist on illegally running firearm serial numbers, disarming citizens during stops, etc?

Department Policy cannot be questioned! Beyond that, if he is in a new truck and has a nice pistol he has lots of money and we need it more than he does, he obviously doesn't know how to spend it right.

Just be patriotic and go along with it, its for the greater good !!!

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I've recently read that about 95% of crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns. I would say that permits hardly ever help, and the evil in society will get guns anyway.

And if they can't get guns for some reason, they will use anything that comes to hand; kitchen knives, hammers, baseball bats, 2 x 4s, icepicks, the list goes on...

 

[cqcn88]

^^^Well said. Besides, I make it a point to buy as many firearms as I can used. No background check. No requirement to have a LTCH. All as the Founders intended it to be. If the LTCH were truly all that was needed, then WHY do police officers insist on illegally running firearm serial numbers, disarming citizens during stops, etc? I thought the "permits keep the evil in society from legally obtaining firearms". Indoctrination at it's finest.

If we can buy guns person to person, why is it necessary to have a background check or a LTCH to buy from a store? Seems to me it just hurts gun store's business...government would never do that, would they?

 

[Vic_Mackey]

If we can buy guns person to person, why is it necessary to have a background check or a LTCH to buy from a store? Seems to me it just hurts gun store's business...government would never do that, would they?

I would think mainly for two very big reasons. 1) Liability. It would be very, very bad for business if they sold to known felons (like this one guy who doesn't want to make any money, just loves to sell guns) 2) The "man" requires it. I try and buy all of mine used and off the radar as well. It cracks me up some of the guys I deal with want to see an LTCH to sell me a rifle. I think per the State Police even person to person you are supposed to exhange information and have a bill of sale. Not sure, but that's what I've heard.

 

[XMil]

Just wanted to be on record as an actual supporter of the second amendment.

A.A. missiles at ACME hardware works for me!

 

[cqcn88]

I would think mainly for two very big reasons. 1) Liability. It would be very, very bad for business if they sold to known felons (like this one guy who doesn't want to make any money, just loves to sell guns) 2) The "man" requires it. I try and buy all of mine used and off the radar as well. It cracks me up some of the guys I deal with want to see an LTCH to sell me a rifle. I think per the State Police even person to person you are supposed to exhange information and have a bill of sale. Not sure, but that's what I've heard.

I don't think the shops should held responsible if someone buys a gun from them and they go commit a crime with it. The individual should be held responsible. Car dealerships don't get in trouble if they sell someone a car, and he gets drunk and hits someone while driving. What if someone buys a baseball bat from a store and assaults someone with it? I think its unfair and unreasonable to hold a business responsible for what people do with their merchandise after its sold.

Also I've heard that the only requirement to sell person to person is to make sure the buyer is of age. Could be wrong. Reference?

 

[ATM]

Also I've heard that the only requirement to sell person to person is to make sure the buyer is of age. Could be wrong. Reference?

Pretty much. Of age and same state resident.

Can't know they are otherwise prohibited from owning a firearm - but no requirement to check or trade info in Indiana,

Here's another link for this topic:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/general_firearms_discussion/85799-how_to_sell_a_pistol.html

 

[Vasili]

This.

Unfortunately, I am one of those folks that believes in a permit. Scream and yell all you want, but it's me. Realistically, given alot of the gun owners (not shooters) that I have met or seen, I would also be more comfortable with them going to a class as well.

Its like anything else technological or potentially dangerous: I am shocked as to folks and their "knowledge" of firearms. Would I want a 6 year old driving a car? No. But without training and "direction" (such as classes or permits), an adult will have the same mindset and lack of knowledge of the firearm's capability or safety instruction. Having folks ask the ROs I work with stuff like "this thing takes batteries?" when the slide is ajar (out of battery). Also, folks posting videos on youTube of their wife setting off a gun and either having it slam into their head or having it aimed in a poor direction.

Darwinism IS NOT a good idea sometimes, particularly if lets say your children are playing in the yard when some hilljack accidentally shoots off a round b/c he didn't bother to read the manual. The good ol days of folks learning to shoot properly from parents are gone, replaced with "I gotta have a gun befo' Obummer gets rid of 'em". Simple situation laced with someone who never knows what a gun is capable. For the one person that comes to a range and actually gets help in learning to shoot and maintain and safety from me, there are a thousand who wont, cannot or are egotistically opposed to getting help.

Folks can scream at me about regulation of common sense and human behavior. I understand. But the days of common sense are over. Some regulation in regards to carry and purchase (such as background checks) are necessary in my mind.

Now, that is my opinion. Realistically, I would love nothing more than all gun laws gone, period, no more laws on weapons. But, with the average intellect level and general common sense going into the gutter, then some things have to be done.

I bet I will get innundated with neg rep or things like "libtard" or "I bet you are for gun control aren't you" and other knee jerk reactions. The above is my opinion, based on a very narrow view and a very narrow worldview. Take it with a mountain of compressed salt and treat it as such.

I'm not betting, you just said you're for gun control.

The Constitution doesn't give two nickels whether someone's a felon, whether they're violent, or stupid, or dangerous, or just a bad guy.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Yeah, sure, AFTER someone screws up, take away whatever weapon he used in being a bad guy, and try him ACCORDING to the LAW OF THE LAND. don't pre judge my countrymen according to your bs desires. that's how all this crap got started, this sort of 'their oughta be a law' bs.

we're a nation of reaction, not pre emption. period.
and as long as you want this to be a free country, that's how it HAS to be.
you want to ask permission to bear arms or take a walk or drink coffee or posess a knife, go move to britian.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

+1 +1 +1
Okay, so lets say there is no tests, no permits. Now you walk down the street and an idiot playing with his new "toy" has a ND (i like how the word negligent fits with the whole concept here) and blows you or your wife's/kids brains all over the place. Or he drops it out of his pocket and a kid gets ahold of it.

And that's fine by me. I'm of sound mind and judgement. My eyes are 20/20, and I know for a fact that I would pass training.

And training doesn't stop the things you mentioned either. THIS IS NOT A BASH ON LEOS. But I remember a thread on here where a trained LEO left his pistol in the bathroom at I think a Home depot, and I've heard of similar things happening also. There was a very sad story about a LEO who's young child got a hold of his firearm and shot and killed themselves. And as for NGs There is an officer on here who was shot at the range by I think one of the instructors. There was another officer who was doing training and shot himself in the hand showing how to (i think) take down a glock. Then there was the BART incident where the LEO shot and killed a guy because he drew his firearm rather than his taser. Or look at these two videos. Sorry for the title on the first one, but I didn't write it.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aSJgcpqePk"]YouTube - stupid fat cop with a gun[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IZlcbJwfP4"]YouTube - Accidental Discharge[/ame]

And the list goes on.

And as for being sure you could pass the test, can you put 10 shots in the 10 ring at 50 ft in low light conditions in 5 seconds on 5 different targets with "innocent" targets mixed in? I don't know of any state that has that requirement, but it wouldn't surprise me if an anti politician tried to get something similar to pass.

What about just having to show you completed nra basic pistol 1 or hell even pop guns training when you go to get a LTCH? That way it's unbiased because it's a private range/training program, not state run.

If it wasn't state run, just that you had to get some "training" what is to stop someone from opening up shop and handing out a card with the 4 rules on it and saying give me $50 here's your certificate? Heck I'm even qualified to do that. Shoot my 4yr old daughter could do that. Would that increase safety? Or just be an added cost and restriction?

Or for a actual example. FL requires training, but the IN DNR hunter safety course qualifies, and you can take it online. Never have to even see a firearm let alone handle or shoot one.

 

[cqcn88]

I don't think formal training is the biggest impact on safety. I've shot with several people that have had no formal training whatsoever, and they are safe and smart with firearms. I think it comes down to individual attitude. If a person is arrogant and thinks they are safe with firearms, there is a problem. As soon as complacency sets in, I don't care how much training you've had, how many years you've been shooting, or what branch of the military you served, you are dangerous with a complacent mind set.

My point is this: training or no training, there will still be people that think they are safe, getting complacent and therefore, dangerous. Personally I am very careful when it comes to shooting with other people. I never take a person's safety habits for granted. A person can tell me all of his qualifications and training, and until I've personally observed this person's safety habits, I won't trust him.

I think everyone should be allowed to own guns, but its up to each individual to decide how they want to stay safe. I say if a person is being unsafe, speak up and/or walk out the door/off the range. As for a random fellow blowing my head off as I walk down the street with a negligent discharge...the chances of that happening are so minor, I'm willing to take the risk to defend my right to carry guns.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I think anybody who wishes to register to vote should first be required to earn a degree in either political science or public administration, in order to teach them what they need to know in order to wade through all the BS and make an INFORMED vote.

Yeah, that'll work.

You'd have the worst pack of liberal arrogant incompetent morons on the planet. Congress is dumb enought already and THINK they are experts on every thing from building cars to designing toilets and most of them couldn't change a light bulb for their self.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I'd like to see you guys who want more red tape, regulations, or "education" like some other state turn to face your state of preference and every one in Indiana kick you until you arrive there.

 

[MTC]

Jack, in the case of JBombelli's post, recalibrate your sarcometer.

+1 for your other sentiments.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Jack, in the case of JBombelli's post, recalibrate your sarcometer.

+1 for your other sentiments.

Yeah I been think'n about that since I hit the "post" button wondering if I was may be wound a little too tight. I probably should have done a few warm up posts and loosened up a little before jumping on one like that.

Too late now, I hate to make any significant changes in one after there's a reply below it. It feels like cheating.

 

[MTC]

Go right ahead. Wind it on up tighter'n dick's hatband. Nobody can ever accuse you of not being a straight shooter.

 

[Ocelot]

Well, that would be amazing if they made it lawless, but it's true criminals don't carry guns because of law...