Author Topic: National Right to Carry  (Read 1586 times)

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
National Right to Carry
« Reply #60 on: February 02, 2007, 11:12:38 AM »
What do you advocate Hap? Time for you to state your position I'd think.
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline StarOfAfrica2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5162
      • http://www.vf-17.org
National Right to Carry
« Reply #61 on: February 02, 2007, 12:06:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by x0847Marine
One problem is some states don't honor out of state sworn officers CCW.


Again, "limited reciprocity" is going to have to go out the window if they sign something like this.  Whether you are a private citizen with a CCW or a sworn police officer of any level.  Even retired police officers have the right to carry thanks to Bush.

Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's really not as all encompassing as you think it is. There are still states that won't give their citizens CCW permits. So it doesn't matter if other states honor your permit if you can't get one in the first place.


And again, thats the beauty of forcing states that dont allow concealed carry to honor those from other states.  Many of the minority of states that still have no CCW permit of any type vote on it fairly regularly and have a large percentage of people who vote FOR it.  Having a federal law in place that says you have to honor the permits of every other state is going to rather put a damper on the arguments keeping concealed weapons out of the hands (and pockets) of their own citizens.  If by some miracle this law did come to pass, I can see at least 3 states that currently have no CCW options passing laws to change their status shortly after.  This law may not be all encompassing, but it will help to establish precedent for people carrying concealed weapons in those states and give more ammo (sorry, couldnt resist) to the folks lobbying to get a CCW law passed.

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
National Right to Carry
« Reply #62 on: February 02, 2007, 12:08:32 PM »
Quote
Look at our hand wringing brit friend nashwan and others... In their countries I could get a firearm in no time... a day... a week at most. The law does not stop me... it is the penalty that stops me.


Can I give you a sample case that shows how hard it is to get a gun in the UK if you don't have serious connections?

There's a woman called Dawn Fields. Lived in London, her boyfriend was an American criminal. He sent her £400,000 ($600,000 at the time) cash for her to launder. The money went missing.

Fields believed she knew who had taken it, and flew over 3 thugs from New York. They went to get the money from the man they believed had stolen it, but he was out. Fields had ordered them to kidnap his 10 year old son if he was out, which they did. They held him for 2 days and threatened to kill him if the £400,000 wasn't returned. The police eventually rescued him.

They were all convicted on firearms charges, kidnapping, false imprisonment and blackmail. Fields got 15 years, the leader of the New York gang got 13 years, his two gang members got 12 years each and Fields' brother, the getaway driver, got 10 years. These are all substantial sentences, far more than you get for possession of a gun.

The "guns" they used were 3 replica pistols, incapable of firing anything more than a plastic bb. In a dispute over $600,000 of illegal money, with criminals flown in from the US, abduction of a child etc, and all they could come up with was 3 toy guns.

In the eyes of the law in the UK, there is no difference between a replica gun used in a crime and a real gun. They attract the same penalties. Indeed, the law regards anything the criminal portrays as a gun as a firearm, with the same penalties. The only reason to use a toy gun instead of a real one is cost or availability.

The Home Office recently concluded a study into firearms availability amongst criminals. They interviewed 80 men serving sentences for crimes involving firearms.

Shotguns were fairly cheap, and fairly easily available (shotguns have a much more relaxed licensing regime in the UK).

Handguns started at £400 - £800 ($800 - $1600) for converted toys and replicas, usually firing 22 LR. They are not liked because they are frequently dangerous to the user, aren't very reliable, and of limited effectiveness.

New genuine handguns started at about £1000 - £1400 ($2000 - $2800).

Ammunition was reported as even harder to get than the guns themselves.

The prices are high, but unless you have the right contacts, you can't even find a gun for sale. Both these factors keep guns out of the hands of the vast majority of criminals.

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
National Right to Carry
« Reply #63 on: February 02, 2007, 01:17:19 PM »
<>

i bet the smugglers love them prices.

Offline lukster

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
National Right to Carry
« Reply #64 on: February 02, 2007, 06:30:19 PM »
They couldn't get guns but worse than that, they got caught. Sounds like some stupid thugs Nashwan. Perhaps not the best example.

Offline StarOfAfrica2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5162
      • http://www.vf-17.org
National Right to Carry
« Reply #65 on: February 02, 2007, 11:51:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nashwan
Can I give you a sample case that shows how hard it is to get a gun in the UK if you don't have serious connections?

The prices are high, but unless you have the right contacts, you can't even find a gun for sale. Both these factors keep guns out of the hands of the vast majority of criminals.


Not trying to be argumentative, but you could have just posted the facts about the costs of the guns without the story (which, btw, did not seem to have anything to do with trying to acquire guns).  I understand when you say its expensive, but that doesnt necessarily mean "difficult".  Also, how was the story you gave a "sample case" showing how difficult it is to buy guns in the UK?  

Last, what does buying guns in the UK have to do with an American right to carry law?

Offline Leslie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2212
National Right to Carry
« Reply #66 on: February 03, 2007, 05:35:40 AM »
Not long ago here a man shot a house burglar with a .270 deer rifle from a  hundred yards away.  The burglar was a repeat offender on that property and the shooter shot him in his car as he was driving away.  He went to court and he was exonerated by the trial.  Everyone was defending him and his actions.

I'm not saying it's right.  Dunno if I would do that, probably not unless I was protecting a loved one.  Thing is, everyone in that neighborhood wanted him to not be punished for that, and that's mainly why he was exonerated.   Everyone was so fed up with that one burglar they pretty much adopted a stance of taking the law into their own hands...and the court agreed with them!!!

Mobile is like Dodge City, there are lots of homicides in this town.  I'm not gonna say whether I carry or not.  I have a permit though and have had it for 20 years thereabouts.  Never had to shoot, though I did point at someone trying to get in my car (gun still in holster, I did not unholster the gun.)  He was trying to kick in my right rear passenger window at a traffic deadlock (I was at a bus stop.)  Guy came up like I was his cab and tried the passenger door first but it was locked.  Thankfully traffic moved on and I think I ran over the guys foot because he was screaming as I drove off.  He was trying to get in my car.  Complete stranger, probably nuts.




Les

storch

  • Guest
National Right to Carry
« Reply #67 on: February 03, 2007, 08:48:13 AM »
jury nullification.  a good and decent person commits a questionable act of violence under trying circumstances against a wanton felon.  if that person is living in a red state no jury will convict him (or her)

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
National Right to Carry
« Reply #68 on: February 03, 2007, 09:45:45 AM »
Quote
i bet the smugglers love them prices.


No, it's still too cheap to make much money smuggling them. Remember, that's the end user price, the dealer has to make his money out of that price as well. A kilo of the cheapest drug (cannabis) goes for a lot more than that, and the penalties for cannabis are quite light. Guns attract the same sort of penalties as hard drugs, and you can get £20,000 - £50,000 a kilo for those.

Quote
They couldn't get guns but worse than that, they got caught. Sounds like some stupid thugs Nashwan. Perhaps not the best example.


Most serious criminals do get caught, and most are very stupid. Not many give up medical school or law school for a life of armed robbery and kidnapping.

Their biggest mistake is that they thought the mother of the boy they kidnapped wouldn't go to the police because she was involved in stealing the money. She wasn't, and did go to the police.

Quote
Not trying to be argumentative, but you could have just posted the facts about the costs of the guns without the story (which, btw, did not seem to have anything to do with trying to acquire guns). I understand when you say its expensive, but that doesnt necessarily mean "difficult".


No, it doesn't. But if guns are easily available, the price would be a lot lower. The intrinsic value of a handgun is nothing like £1000+.

Quote
Also, how was the story you gave a "sample case" showing how difficult it is to buy guns in the UK?


Because they couldn't get guns. They had to settle for toys instead. (and they got the same sentence for carrying the toys as they would real guns)

Quote
Last, what does buying guns in the UK have to do with an American right to carry law?


I don't know. Ask Lazs, who brought it up.

Offline Brenjen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1514
National Right to Carry
« Reply #69 on: February 03, 2007, 09:53:20 AM »
Here in Arkansas shooting someone that is not a clear & present threat to your life is illegal. Even inside your own home the use of deadly force will land you in court. If you use deadly force against someone inside your home here....there better be evidence of a break in, simple illegal entry won't do it. You'll be convicted & go to prison, of course there are always local exceptions where the police & prosecutor just shrug it off & call it justified.

 The problem comes in with the individuals involved from the attacker/attacked to the judge & jury & the vagueness of the laws. We currently have bills up for votes in our state congress that they call "stand your ground" & "your home is your castle" laws. With the stand your ground law, it's pretty self explanatory, you can stand your ground wherever you are & you need not flee for your life; with the, your home is your castle law, you would be able to use deadly force inside your home to defend yourself even if there was no break in.

 Here are two examples that stand out in my mind that occurred here in Arkansas, what would you do in these two situations:

 A guy was driving on a remote stretch of highway, he passes a truck driving erratically. A short distance down the road the truck he passed comes up fast & passes him & then slows down. This goes on for a bit, them passing each other with the truck always catching up going around & slowing down. Eventually the guy runs from the guy in the truck & it turns into a high speed chase. Then the guy in the truck starts slamming into the guy in the car with his truck trying to run the guy off the road. The guy in the car decides if this keeps up he is going to wreck so he pulls over; the guy in the truck pulls up behind him & gets out, walks up to the car & attacks the guy in the car through the window. The guy in the car has had enough & shoots the guy attacking him & kills him. The jury says he should have continued to flee when the guy got out of his truck & they sent him to prison for murder.

 I would have shot the S.O.B. too! Only I learned a lesson from this; "Your honor, my car died & I guess it was flooded because it wouldn't restart"


 Then there was the case of the old man who was having coffee in a small restaurant, you know the type where old men gather in the mornings to talk trash for hours over coffee. Well, he gets into a heated argument over politics with a younger man, apparently much younger something like nearly half his age. He decides enough is enough when the younger guy challenges him to a fight outside. He pays for his coffee & leaves. The younger man follows him outside & attacks him. He falls to the ground where the younger man begins to kick him in the head (remember, the old guy is in his 80's) & he draws his concealed weapon & kills the younger man who is attacking him. The jury said he aggravated the situation by leaving (I call that fleeing, don't you?) when the man told him to go outside to fight. They convicted the old guy for murder because his assailant was unarmed (I guess they think being kicked in the head couldn't be fatal) & he went outside instead of staying in the restaraunt & calling police.

That one is different for me because; if I have a weapon on me I will try to avoid confrontations. If you get into a scuffle & your weapon falls out or your attacker gets it, then your screwed. You can't use it before that point & after that point, he's armed & you aren't. I'm 220 pounds & 6'1" & I love a good brawl so if anything the weapon keeps me OUT of fights. But I'm afraid if I were 80 & being kicked in the head after already having my butt handed to me; I'd have shot the S.O.B. in that situation too.

Offline Xargos

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4281
National Right to Carry
« Reply #70 on: February 03, 2007, 09:57:14 AM »
It's against the law in SC for the courts to charge you for defending yourself in your home.
Jeffery R."Xargos" Ward

"At least I have chicken." 
Member DFC

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
National Right to Carry
« Reply #71 on: February 03, 2007, 10:11:06 AM »
nashwan... you don't know they couldn't get guns...  You have no way of knowing.

You have sidestepped the question.   I could get a handgun in your country in a day... week at most.   I could get a shotgun even faster and cut it to about 18" overall length in 5 minutes and have a far more deadly weapon than a handgun.

I could make a firearm in any home in england in less than a day.  I can make ammo...  I am not any kind of gun genius or supercriminal but I was raised in a country that understands firearms.

you don't... your people don't...  watching your movies is laughable when it come to guns....

But.. the real crux of the whole thing is..  your people can get all the guns they want... why don't they do it?

No matter how you wiggle...  they don't do it cause they are afraid of the penalties.

The exact same results (or close enough) could be obtained by making guns readily available to citizens but harsh penalties for use in crimes.

Really.. you don't know anything about guns or our country.... when I read your posts I see an appologist for the people in your country who have taken away the god given right of your citizens to protect themselves.   I see someone who is justifying his fear of firearms and his willingness to nanny others by attacking a country that remains free.

You haven't made your crime or even homicide rate go down with all your stupid gun laws... you never had a high homicide rate in the last few centuries... even when guns were common.

Your people are not the same as ours... if you lived here for a while you would know that.   You would be as shocked by us as I was of your people.

lazs

Offline CpMorgan

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 71
Where is this going to end?
« Reply #72 on: February 06, 2007, 04:48:09 AM »
Spotted this link and followed up with reading it. As a Vet and a patriotic individual, I'm truly concerned with where this country is going. And I don't see any alternative with the other side of the isle either. Is this really where we want this country to go? Honestly? Can we even turn the tide as it seems impossible to get any kind of consensus to even declare where it went wrong. Or if it really is wrong. Are we going to continue to debate the facts ad naseum until we're faced with a suspention of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights? Obviously, our elected officials are NOT keeping faith with the will of our Founding Fathers, and obviously they are NOT concerned with the Will of the People they are sworn to serve. When it comes right down to it, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO WORK FOR US, NOT AGAINST. If an employee doesn't perform adequately in their position, they are fired. Period. I think it's more than time to take OUR Government to task for the obvious lack of concern over the overall welfare of the Union.

   

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
National Right to Carry
« Reply #73 on: February 06, 2007, 08:37:48 AM »
I also would like to point out that using fake guns is not the sole pervue of the limeys.

If nashwan is using the number of fake guns used by criminals as proof that they can't get or, it is very to difficult to get the real thing then...

If I could show that more fake guns are used by criminals in the U.S. than in england then... by his logic... it would mean that guns are harder to get here than there.

nashwan... since you don't like or want firearms...you probly should stay in england... if you are only ever around law abiding citizens...you will probly never have to even see one in real life.... not even if you wished you or another citizen did have one...  I am pretty sure that in your lifetime you will see the police and military on your street with guns tho and that guns in the hands of criminals will be a real threat in your life.

Your hiding from them all this time will be seen as the folly it is.

lazs