To my way of thinking, if I don't need the state regulating my perfectly lawful way of life, then I don't need them regulating others' lives either.
With that said, since only law abiding citizens follow the law, and criminals do not, do you suggest we just abolish all laws and let everyone do as they please? And no, it's not a rhetorical question. I mean after all, criminals disregard the law, why should we? Wouldn't that make us criminals too?
There isn't a single statistic that you can pull up that proves that permission slip schemes provide any positive affect whatsoever on violent crime rates.
Well, I guess it's kind of an oxymoron because only law abiding people are eligible for a permit. But atleast with it being the way it is, if I see someone openly carrying or if I learn someone is conceal carrying, hopefully I could assume they aren't a criminal because they're carrying. Someone carrying that isn't supposed to is either really, really dumb or they just got balls of solid rock.
All they do instead is create statewide databases of people who own guns, and the people on those lists have to pay for the intrusion against their privacy to get on them.
This only pertains to those that look at it that way.
As I
understand it, you not only have to have a mug-shot style picture of yourself on your permission slip in OK,....
Mugshot picture, huh? Good one. Guess the photograph on my drivers license is a mugshot style pic too?
.......you also have to submit fingerprints like a common criminal.
The only thing I can think of is that the fingerprinting is part of the background check. Whether it is or isn't, I got nothin' as to why it's required.
I will never understand what there is to be "proud" of by submitting to such indignities and violations of your rights. It's one thing to begrudgingly comply just to make one's life easier, but "damn proud of" submitting to having to pay to exercise your God-given rights? I honestly don't get it. You do seem reasonably articulate. Perhaps you can explain what there is to be proud of by submitting to state-sponsored extortion before you can exercise your rights.
Again, it all depends on one's perspective. To legally carry a loaded firearm on your person for protection is a legally obtained permit. Maybe "damn proud" was a bad choice of word but, I am glad to have it because I feel as though I am legally viewed as authorized to carry my gun and not have to worry about breaking any laws. And until the law changes, this is how it is.
Is it also state sponsored extortion to drive a car? Have insurance on your car? Build a house? Add on to a house? Kill a deer? Catch a fish? Talk on a ham radio?? These are normal ways of life. Carrying a loaded gun on you in public shouldn't be any different. But I am curious. If you have this ability and have a permit to do so, why the problem with it? Because it's an infringement?
Yes, of course, everybody, including you, has the right to recognize and accept truth and reality. I wasn't looking for your permission to do that.
Sorry you took it that way but me saying what I did was not saying I grant you permission. Basically I was saying I didn't care. What you do or believe is none of my business.
How much does Oklahoma charge criminals for finger prints during booking? And don't say it's included in whatever fines are assessed subsequent to booking, because not everyone who gets booked, gets convicted of anything, or even necessarily gets charged with anything. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that suspected or actual criminals don't have to pay anything for submitting to being printed......
I really don't know. Never been a criminal. But if I had to guess, it's probly free along with wearing the matching chrome bracelets free of charge as well.
And you're "damn proud" of this theft of your money and rights, why?
Again, it's only considered theft of you look it that way. Freedom isn't free. Last I checked, everything comes with a price.
Hmm.... Yeah, I think you're again failing to recognize truth and reality.
Maybe I am. I'm just wondering why it bothers you. You act like I'm fighting tooth and nail to keep it this way.
I simply asked a one-line question that you spent three paragraphs of tangential banter on after answering it unequivocally in the first sentence.
Probably because I didn't think your one line question deserved a one line answer.
Maybe I should've just replied with a simple "no" so we wouldn't be having the type of discussion I said I usually try to avoid because this is how it usually ends up, just like this one.
I simply engaged you based entirely on what you said, which is how actual discussions go in the real world and on internet forums if two or more parties are willing to engage in a back-and-forth, give-and-take discussion.Obviously, I mistook you for such a person.
Blues
As I said, my saying what part of trying to avoid discussions like this did you not understand? I thought it was pretty clear, maybe that's just me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
