Watch the live hearing on HR 822 now

[Ray Ray 3,566]

You too Ray.

 

Not saying classes are bad, as they are great for learning and shhtuff. But it shouldn't be a requirement.

[Maksim 1,504]

The 2A is very clear, and you can travel state to state under protection of FOPA.

 

 

Not talking about FOPA... I am saying if I can carry a loaded Saiga 12 and an RPG with me as a carry on.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

To Maks and all others- We DO know why the Founding Fathers insisted on the Second Amendment. It was to provide the people the means to overthrough an oppressive government. Like protection granted in the Forth Amendment

 

Get with it guys!

 

I think we get too hung up on the "gun" part of the RKBA... if we can learn any lesson from places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and the other revolutionary uprisings, it's that guns make a small part of any revolution. You wanna take on the Gov't, you're gonna need something with a little more firepower than an AR-15... So I don't get why some folks belittle people who agree that the 2A does, in all fairness, protect the right to own flamethrowers, RPGs, landmines, etc. Back in the day, some town militias and folks owned their own cannons!

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Not talking about FOPA... I am saying if I can carry a loaded Saiga 12 and an RPG with me as a carry on.

 

no, because the plane will blow up in mid-air

[bobblackrifle 28]

Not talking about FOPA... I am saying if I can carry a loaded Saiga 12 and an RPG with me as a carry on.

Why? To use them for self defense airborne is suicide.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Why? To use them for self defense airborne is suicide.

 

exactly, and don't the air marshalls carry frangible ammo anyway?

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Not talking about FOPA... I am saying if I can carry a loaded Saiga 12 and an RPG with me as a carry on.

 

Technically, that's the airlines' call since it's their property. Otherwise, if you owned your own private plane, then yeah, you can stow a Saiga as a carry-on.

[gunforhire 826]

exactly, and don't the air marshalls carry frangible ammo anyway?

Marshall's carry sig sauers. 357 sig with lawman hollow points. Nice.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Technically, that's the airlines' call since it's their property. Otherwise, if you owned your own private plane, then yeah, you can stow a Saiga as a carry-on.

 

I would carry a shotgun on my plane, birdshot baby!

[gunforhire 826]

Not saying classes are bad, as they are great for learning and shhtuff. But it shouldn't be a requirement.

I believe there should me I minimum requirement at least to carry a gun.

[Maksim 1,504]

Why? To use them for self defense airborne is suicide.

 

 

Why not? Its my 2A right to do so. Has nothing to do with being stupid. if 2A is unconditional, I should have that right.

 

get my drift? Obviously the statement above is taking it to the extreme, but it serves its purpose.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

Why not? Its my 2A right to do so. Has nothing to do with being stupid. if 2A is unconditional, I should have that right.

 

get my drift? Obviously the statement above is taking it to the extreme, but it serves its purpose.

 

I understand your point, but where talking about air travel. When a 22 could bring the whole plane down. It's kinda like, your right will cause others to die. Like yelling fire in a movie theater. You lose the right when others can die.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I believe there should me I minimum requirement at least to carry a gun.

 

 

I see your point.. and used to think that way.. and encourage EVERYONE to take proper instruction.. even if not carrying.. BUT the second it becomes required is where I lose interest.. I have taken many firearms classes.. I have take a few more than once.. you can never know enough.. especially when it comes to safely using a gun.. but requiring it at a government level? I just see it as a window to limiting access.. because it gets to be like NJ.. where they don't have to say "we don't issue CCW" they can say "sure you can have CCW... but you have to do this.. that and the other.." and at onset.. sure.. it might be a very modest single safe handling class.. but the second the wrong people are in charge it becomes 10+ classes... again.. they can say "sure we allow CCW" but just make it so financially limiting that most people can not keep up with it..

[vladtepes 1,060]

Why not? Its my 2A right to do so. Has nothing to do with being stupid. if 2A is unconditional, I should have that right.

 

get my drift? Obviously the statement above is taking it to the extreme, but it serves its purpose.

 

your statement is completely valid.. but more to the point someone else made..

 

and airplane is a private company.. you have the choice to use it or not.. if you use it.. you agree to the terms of service they have in place.. flying on a plane is not a right.. want to transport your fully auto s12? and don't want to check it? no problem.. drive.. but the airline.. a private business has policies to prevent you from taking it on board.. and I see nothing wrong with a business exercising it's rights.. I am a firm believer that my rights end where yours begin... a plane is a perfect example of that..

[Maksim 1,504]

I understand your point, but where talking about air travel. When a 22 could bring the whole plane down. It's kinda like, your right will cause others to die. Like yelling fire in a movie theater. You lose the right when others can die.

 

 

Exactly.

 

An untrained person, who is overzelous to help can potentially harm other people by trying to act Rambo.

 

If 44% of LEO shots are on target, where do the other 56% of the shots go?

 

What is that statistic for your average CCW?

 

When most people can't hit a piece of paper at 7 yards, stationary in well lit conditions, what do you think those numbers are when you are undress stress/pressure of life and death?

 

You can do more harm than good.

 

In a home, self defense situation, you are protecting yourself and your family. When you are CCW'ing in public, you are not the only one there.

 

For that, you should at least take a freaking class.

 

The people on this forum are leaps ahead of the typical gun owner. Think about your typical gun owner, your 500 rounds a year is a lot.

[Shane45 807]

The only solution I see to the class component of CCW is simply there is no pass or fail. You just need to attend.

[Maksim 1,504]

your statement is completely valid.. but more to the point someone else made..

 

and airplane is a private company.. you have the choice to use it or not.. if you use it.. you agree to the terms of service they have in place.. flying on a plane is not a right.. want to transport your fully auto s12? and don't want to check it? no problem.. drive.. but the airline.. a private business has policies to prevent you from taking it on board.. and I see nothing wrong with a business exercising it's rights.. I am a firm believer that my rights end where yours begin... a plane is a perfect example of that..

 

 

Ant,

 

Fine, change airplane to a public bus, or the NYC Subway.

[gunforhire 826]

I see your point.. and used to think that way.. and encourage EVERYONE to take proper instruction.. even if not carrying.. BUT the second it becomes required is where I lose interest.. I have taken many firearms classes.. I have take a few more than once.. you can never know enough.. especially when it comes to safely using a gun.. but requiring it at a government level? I just see it as a window to limiting access.. because it gets to be like NJ.. where they don't have to say "we don't issue CCW" they can say "sure you can have CCW... but you have to do this.. that and the other.." and at onset.. sure.. it might be a very modest single safe handling class.. but the second the wrong people are in charge it becomes 10+ classes... again.. they can say "sure we allow CCW" but just make it so financially limiting that most people can not keep up with it..

That is why the NRA as the national standard has been slowly introducing Personal Protection outside the Home and the new defensive pistol courses, in that hope that if a State like NJ is looking for a course they will choose the east route and defer to the NRA. Again even thought the NRA is against mandatory training they also have to be realistic, and if it does become mandatory they are ready with a prepared nationally recognized curriculum.

 

We live in a world we us pro 2A people will NEVER get what we want. It is all about compromise so why not be prepared with a plan.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Exactly.

 

An untrained person, who is overzelous to help can potentially harm other people by trying to act Rambo.

 

If 44% of LEO shots are on target, where do the other 56% of the shots go?

 

What is that statistic for your average CCW?

 

When most people can't hit a piece of paper at 7 yards, stationary in well lit conditions, what do you think those numbers are when you are undress stress/pressure of life and death?

 

You can do more harm than good.

 

In a home, self defense situation, you are protecting yourself and your family. When you are CCW'ing in public, you are not the only one there.

 

For that, you should at least take a freaking class.

 

The people on this forum are leaps ahead of the typical gun owner. Think about your typical gun owner, your 500 rounds a year is a lot.

 

 

right but one single class is a feel good do nothing policy..

it is essentially a knee jerk reaction to "having untrained armed people roaming the streets" I shoot a LOT.. not as much as you.. not as much as some on the board.. but I am fairly proficient with a gun.. even with ALL of that I dont know that I could save myself in a life or death situation.. the point of CCW is to allow me the opportunity.. sure.. CCW could go horribly wrong.. but given the countless states that allow it without ANY training needed.. how many CCW horror stories do you hear about a year.. in which an active crime lead to some problem due to someone CCW.. i don't know of many? (if any)

[gunforhire 826]

Exactly.

 

An untrained person, who is overzelous to help can potentially harm other people by trying to act Rambo.

 

If 44% of LEO shots are on target, where do the other 56% of the shots go?

 

What is that statistic for your average CCW?

 

When most people can't hit a piece of paper at 7 yards, stationary in well lit conditions, what do you think those numbers are when you are undress stress/pressure of life and death?

 

You can do more harm than good.

 

In a home, self defense situation, you are protecting yourself and your family. When you are CCW'ing in public, you are not the only one there.

 

For that, you should at least take a freaking class.

 

The people on this forum are leaps ahead of the typical gun owner. Think about your typical gun owner, your 500 rounds a year is a lot.

 

The stats I read about civilian hit ratio's are very varied but it is about 30% overall from USA Carry and FBI stats.

[Shane45 807]

The airplane argument is silly and some of you guys have some funny ideas about the fragility of an airplane. Also one could easily argue the opposite position that an armed passenger could have averted a thousand deaths on 9/11......

[DevsAdvocate 112]

I understand your point, but where talking about air travel. When a 22 could bring the whole plane down. It's kinda like, your right will cause others to die. Like yelling fire in a movie theater. You lose the right when others can die.

 

Not really true at all...

 

As for the whole 'right would cause others to die' bit... you do realize we buy weapons that are intended to cause harm and death to those they're pointed at, right? John Browning didn't build the 1911 and designed the .45acp to put pretty holes in paper. He designed and built them with the intent to kill other human beings in mind. Even in the 1700s, the Founding Fathers were aware of the power of firearms at the time and how they would cause others to die.

 

If you want to make the point about air travel, just talk about how commercial airliners are no different from any other business establishment, where the property owner has the final say.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I don't want a "requirement" for a "right". End of story.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Ant,

 

Fine, change airplane to a public bus, or the NYC Subway.

 

fair enough.. in all honesty.. I dont see a problem with you transporting a rifle on the bus.. but I KNOW that is not the norm.. and I KNOW in most places that is kind of unreasonable.. but I think it crosses the point of creating a sense of public alarm depending on where you are.. like most pro 2 a states you CAN just walk around with a rifle over your shoulder.. kind of not reasonable.. but still allowed.. there was a video just recently of a guy walking down a public street with an AK47 and the cops stopping him.. and him reaming them out..

[bobblackrifle 28]

The airplane argument is silly and some of you guys have some funny ideas about the fragility of an airplane. Also one could easily argue the opposite position that an armed passenger could have averted a thousand deaths on 9/11......

Not with an RPG. If the terrorist knew we were armed it would not have happened in the first place.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Ant,

 

Fine, change airplane to a public bus, or the NYC Subway.

 

This is actually an excellent point... what about folks who want to take a bus or subway to the shooting range? They can't really check their luggage when on the bus, now can they?

 

Let's just dispense with the BS and equate the bus/train with that of a crowded room with limited exits. Does that really make a difference? There are a zillion ways for bad people to kill a lot of innocent people, but punishing law-abiding citizens in an attempt to protect them is asinine at best.

[CageFighter 236]

just think, u guys can be like my FL friend.

He carries a Kimber .45 and ask him when the last time he shot?

I will answer that for you!

 

......it was when they gave him his CCW class w a pellet gun in his driveway. -WTF!

 

his excuse was NO time, NO $$, etc.

I ended up buying him 2 boxes of ammo to shoot once he got back to FL from visiting up here.

 

with that said, how do u feel about him carrying near you? do u trust him w/ a .45?

[Maksim 1,504]

The point is, you cant argue... 2a is a right that cannot be limited.... and at the same time agree with the fact that...

 

1. Nics is a good idea.

2. Violent criminals should not own guns.

3. Mentally unstable people should not own guns.

 

 

If you are truly believing that the 2A is all encompassing, then you have to disagree with the 3 statements above.

 

If criminals dont lose the right to free speech and religion, why should they lose the right to own guns?

[vladtepes 1,060]

just think, u guys can be like my FL friend.

He carries a Kimber .45 and ask him when the last time he shot?

I will answer that for you!

 

......it was when they gave him his CCW class w a pellet gun in his driveway. -WTF!

 

his excuse was NO time, NO $$, etc.

I ended up buying him 2 boxes of ammo to shoot once he got back to FL from visiting up here.

 

with that said, how do u feel about him carrying near you? do u trust him w/ a .45?

 

I trust him more than a thug on the street corner of Camden who is going to carry anyway with complete disregard for the law, and safety of others.. and that is my honest answer..

[djg0770 481]

I believe there should me I minimum requirement at least to carry a gun.

 

Sorry Anthony - not a personal attack - but of course you do as it would make business for you. Let's face it, there are some who have taken classes and STILL can't hit the side of a barn and there are others that have never stepped foot in a school and have a natural innate ability to shoot the vestigial wings off of a fruit fly at 100 yards.