Do You Support Nation Wide Constitutional Carry?

Do you support nation wide permitless carry?

  • Yes

    Votes: 160 79.2%
  • No

    Votes: 42 20.8%

  • Total voters
    202
  • Poll closed .
Of course I support it, by law we already have it. no where in the constitutionof the United States is the carry of firearms restricted in anyway. and if you look back to the original state constitutions none of them ever voiced that the state had a right to regulate carrying of a concealed firearm. All those "amedments" were amended by a 2/3rds majority vote of the legislative sessions within the last decade or so.What most stated need to do is put a preemption clause in and that would negate local governments from infringments like riquiring concelaled carry.. to carry at all. an things would be peachy keen oh and get those liberal tree huggin bastard democrap outta office.. they all should be run out on a rail!
 
I would vote yes to full national constitutional carry as long as they did background checks and still would not sell to convicted criminals or illegal aliens. It should be a citizens right to choose if you want to buy and or carry a handgun.
 
I support it but feel the chances are about equal to my going to Rooms To Go and coming home with Cindy Crawford. But we can always dream.

I've always been more partial to Brooke Balentine. :biggrin:

Now its getting interesting but if I were dreaming about taking a hot chick home it would have to be Jesse Jane. Hell why not go with a girl that you know could show you a trick or two LOL
 
Boomboy007:183105 said:
According to the constitution, that is a right that is already guaranteed. The fact that we have somehow let the government severely infringe that right is something that should be remedied sooner rather than later.

I agree
 
does nobody think?

I had to join this forum just to make a point that seems to have been missed. (Hi all, sorry for not doing a proper introduction)

Everyone seems hell bent on swaying each other to their side. WE ARE FREE! Everyone can think what they want but that three word fact is reality.

Honestly the point that's been missed all along is personal responsibility.

When you pick up a firearm, own a firearm, or carry a firearm, you make a personal decision for which you and you alone are responsible. Lack of proper responsibility and/or accidents are already punishable by a variety of laws but unfortunately underpunished and not setting the kind of examples to create more diligence of personal responsibilities within the general masses.

Tragedy is going to happen, no matter what we do to regulate people and their choices because among hundreds of others reasons; there will always be a vast number of irresponsible people in this world.

If some halfwit decides to own and carry a firearm and not train themselves on proper safety, tactics, and usage that is their right to do so (assuming they're of legal status to own/purchase said firearm, I do believe in criminal background checks for purchases because as stated earlier within this thread, once you are a criminal many states take away certain citizenship rights which I feel is a just addition to the punishment in most cases). If the above halfwit can get through life without proper safety, usage, and tactical training without any issues, more power to them; I thank the good Lord for it. But if by some chance tragedy does strike, then we have plenty of laws on the books that if properly enforced will make an example of them to clue-in the next halfwit that decides to strap on a firearm; the clue being: they better train and train well or they're going to end up being the criminal they were intending on protecting themselves from.

I am personally of the mindset that if it were not for my family and the issues it could cause them if I were to get into legal troubles; I would say everyone just quit getting permits and start carrying however you please where ever you please and do so myself (I already know a rather large number of otherwise law abiding citizens that illegally carry their firearms). Obey all other laws and give LEO no reason to interact with you and you'll go through life without issue. If you do something unrelated that's stupid and end up caught, guess what, it's your own fault for doing stupid things and getting yourself caught. YES, accidents may happen, but we must take responsibility for our mistakes and accidents. It is all about 100% personal responsibility. If attacked I'd still rather be a living breathing unlicensed carrier of a firearm than another dead victim of a senseless attack by (as only one of a thousand example scenarios that could be placed here) a drug addict needing their next fix.

Most folk that make the decision to carry understand what it is they are undertaking and don't need anyone else telling them how to do it unless they request said information. That being said, I've never found a single source to provide me with all the details truly required for successful and safe concealed carry and personal defensive tactics for all scenarios possible. Nor have I found any trainers that provide all that is truly required either...

There is no way to make something safe that is by all definitions; dangerous. Training courses can help some people, but shouldn't be a requirement of law; anyone smart enough to make the decision to carry is smart enough to seek the training they require. The only thing that a permit does; is give people around a person that carries a firearm a false sense of security thinking they're somehow qualified. A firearm is dangerous anytime the human component is added to the equation no matter the training or certification or permits those humans may have because accidents do happen. That is why there are charges on the books for such things, unlawful discharge of a firearm, involuntary manslaughter, etc...

Whoever it was way back in this thread said the N R A says gun accidents are down due to better training, I partly disagree with that. I think allot has to do with the simplicity of today's firearms. As far as training goes, there is only one thing I think everyone should require of themselves. I've always considered all this common sense as that was how it was taught to me, maybe it is not and I'm sure any disagreeing parties will spout off, but my advice to people considering a new gun, whether you want to carry or not, is keep the weapon unloaded and handle it anytime it won't yield you a brandishing charge (a.k.a. at the range or in your home) for the first several days/weeks/months. Learn everything there is about the gun and always handle it in super slow motion paying particular attention to where it is aimed at all times. Practice dry firing the weapon (as long as it will not harm your particular weapon, most of today's guns are fine with dry fires) to learn the trigger control, but most importantly if the gun has a manual safety, learn to unlock it on the way to aim and then enable the safety immediately (both disengaging and engaging the saftey as close to the aim point as possible). Practice keeping your finger off the trigger till you're on target and fine tuning the aim because if you're accidently squeezing the trigger when you turn the safety off, many guns will fire immediately. Lay it down and pick it up alot. Practice fast-draw from your favorite or new holster. Learn or relearn whatever handling skills or other safety procedures or safety devices that may be implemented on your particular firearm for each and every gun you ever get. Anytime that gun goes into or out of ready-to-fire position it should always be left in a "safe to carry" mode. Only once you have no safety or handling issues with it unloaded and you are truly confident in your handling of that specific firearm do you bring ammo near it, load it, fire it, or carry it. Then once you load it, you go back to step one of handling in slow motion again and only speed up if there is a threat to your life. Never ever feel "confident" when handling a loaded firearm. Never do tactical training exercises like fast draw with a loaded weapon, you only increase your risk of being shot before the bad guys ever arrive. Never even have ammo nearby when doing such things as it is easy to unload, practice a bit, reload, go do something else, then decide to practice again and forget to unload. The biggest thing to preventing firearms accidents doesn't come from any training, it comes from the care involved in knowing your weapon as well or better than the company that designed it and the awareness of exactly what is going on with your weapon at all times. A loaded weapon should always be in a holster and only come out of the holster to be unloaded or fired. If it is out of it's holster for 20 seconds and neither unloading or shooting has started, you made a bad choice on taking it out of the holster to begin with and should consider yourself to be brandishing.

Me personally, I chose my most recent carry weapon partly on the fact it has a manual safety that never needs disabled for any reasons other than to practice at the range or to take down bad guys. And that is the only time the safety has ever been turned off (first of those reasons and thankfully never the second). I can clean, load, unload, disassemble, whatever; safety stays on. It is reasons such as this I think is a major contributing factor in accidents going down.

It really isn't hard to remember you gotta stick that goes bang and can kill people; it doesn't take a smart person to understand care must be taken. Anyone who thinks that care must be taken for a group of people on their behalf by requiring training that most likely will do them no good is just clearly letting those people know what they think of their intelligence levels (which as stated earlier in this thread is an elitist attitude). Anyone in need of training will seek it out when making a decision such a carrying a firearm and if not will face any possible consequences to their possible stupidity to be an example so someone else doesn't make the same mistake. If they do or don't doesn't really matter in the end, if something happens, they are responsible. A government that is trying to lessen or increase that personal responsibility on them is wrong. It defies freedom.

If everyone spent a little more time on their own responsibilities and their own training and preparedness, and only helping those that request their help, the world would be a much better place and FAST. We don't have to change each other's minds. State the facts and move on. We have a right to carry, plain and simple. Do with it what you choose. Be warned bad things can and do happen no matter what you choose because the world doesn't revolve around you. Be a responsible person and live up to your potential and always answer for your actions whether they are right, wrong, accidental, or just a mistake.

I'm not stating anyone here is anything less than fully responsible for their actions and takes due care in all they do, nor am I trying to ruffle any feathers. I just read this thread for the first time tonight and saw many of the same points repeated repeatedly on both sides of the argument, but none stating the obvious point that we each have a responsibility to ourselves and those around us in the decisions we make and that the lack of responsibility is what needs regulated. If this poll were still open I would say yes, nationwide permitless carry of legal firearms by legal citizens is partly what 2A protects and should be allowed and I do support it and would be in support of anyone who was legal to own a firearm to carry that firearm anywhere that person has a legal right to be, permits be damned (private property excluded).
 
Last edited:
I would like for each of the states to adopt it, but I do not support the Feds getting involved. As for why...the 2nd Amendment says "the right to keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed." It's unconstitutional to have to ask the damn government for permission to exercise a right.
 
Training courses can help some people, but shouldn't be a requirement of law; anyone smart enough to make the decision to carry is smart enough to seek the training they require

If you believe that you are living in a dream world. I have known people all my life that regularly carried a gun on them and very few of them could tell you the four rules of gun safety or any close version of it. I remember back during the "Saturday Night Special" discussions my Father having to go get at least one of the fellows that lived on our "place" out of jail every weekend for some kind of gun violation, usually threatening to shoot someone. After the gun laws changed the frequency of having to get someone out dropped but not a lot.

No laws are going to stop people from carrying or make them learn safety and they sure aren't going to learn it on their own for the most part.
 
If you believe that you are living in a dream world.

I don't think so. They're all plenty smart enough, they just lack the personal responsibility my entire post was about. They also are lacking any reason to take their responsibility seriously because there simply are not enough stern punishments for those committing irresponsible actions to create examples for others that might be irresponsible as well.

We are supposed to be responsible for our decisions and actions and we already have enforcable laws for those that have proven themselves irresponsible

You've just simply proven the point that putting information in front of someone doesn't mean they will be any less clue-free than when they started. I clearly stated it was about personal responsibility. One should be able to gather from the context that when I stated "they are smart enough" I was also indicating "responsible enough" and as also stated, if they happen to not be smart enough or responsible enough, we can deal with their irresponsibility with current laws as needed.

Freedom is not freedom without the freedom to fail. There is no single method to set someone up for successful and safe firearm handling, and for anyone to think some mandated class will is nothing short of foolish. People just need to understand failure to safely and successfully carry a firearm without incident is punishable by law and mistakes, ignorance, or accidents are not allowed.
 
Last edited:
I would like for each of the states to adopt it, but I do not support the Feds getting involved. As for why...the 2nd Amendment says "the right to keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed." It's unconstitutional to have to ask the damn government for permission to exercise a right.

I agree, but part of the Federal Government's role (at least in my mind) is to assist in managing cooperative efforts between the states. I think for it to be nationally recognized it would take at least a minimal inclusion of the Feds for managing specifics and assist in keeping all the states on the same path. I think with the right to keep and bear being protected under 2A of the US Constitution and a nationwide right, they somewhat have a responsibility to protect us from state and local governments that might seek to limit us.
 
I don't think so. They're all plenty smart enough, they just lack the personal responsibility my entire post was about. They also are lacking any reason to take their responsibility seriously because there simply are not enough stern punishments for those committing irresponsible actions to create examples for others that might be irresponsible as well.

We are supposed to be responsible for our decisions and actions and we already have enforcable laws for those that have proven themselves irresponsible

You've just simply proven the point that putting information in front of someone doesn't mean they will be any less clue-free than when they started. I clearly stated it was about personal responsibility. One should be able to gather from the context that when I stated "they are smart enough" I was also indicating "responsible enough" and as also stated, if they happen to not be smart enough or responsible enough, we can deal with their irresponsibility with current laws as needed.

Freedom is not freedom without the freedom to fail. There is no single method to set someone up for successful and safe firearm handling, and for anyone to think some mandated class will is nothing short of foolish. People just need to understand failure to safely and successfully carry a firearm without incident is punishable by law and mistakes, ignorance, or accidents are not allowed.

The biggest issue is that people should be responsible for themselves and their actions. That being said certain people get defensive because they know that some or even many people will never be responsible so they think that mandating some training will make it all better. Obviously this never works, Hell look at NY we require a 5 or 6 hour safe drivers safety course before people can get a drivers license. If you have ever driven here you know that everything in that class is forgotten by many as soon as the class lets out.
 
The biggest issue is that people should be responsible for themselves and their actions. That being said certain people get defensive because they know that some or even many people will never be responsible so they think that mandating some training will make it all better. Obviously this never works, Hell look at NY we require a 5 or 6 hour safe drivers safety course before people can get a drivers license. If you have ever driven here you know that everything in that class is forgotten by many as soon as the class lets out.

Amen brother! Punish those that prove themselves irresponsible without the useless hoops for the good people doing what is right and doing it the right way. The hoops have proven themselves to be expensive and useless. I've also found many that become defensive over personal responsibility topics in most cases have somewhat deemed themselves irresponsible at some point but aren't readily willing to admit it.
 
I agree, but part of the Federal Government's role (at least in my mind) is to assist in managing cooperative efforts between the states. I think for it to be nationally recognized it would take at least a minimal inclusion of the Feds for managing specifics and assist in keeping all the states on the same path. I think with the right to keep and bear being protected under 2A of the US Constitution and a nationwide right, they somewhat have a responsibility to protect us from state and local governments that might seek to limit us.

I guess, what I really meant was the Federal Government passing a law that would force the states to allow it. Once they do that, they can repeal it and abolish concealed carry all together. What I would really like is the states to repeal the laws stating it's a crime to carry a concealed weapon. That way it's default constitutional carry without a bill they can simply repeal.
 
You get the gold medal for overreaction. Yet another constitutional Chicken-little running around in a panic. What next - will the U.S. collapse into anarchy if I don't excercise my constitutional right to have croutons on my salad!

Just like a license to drive, practice medicine, or be an electrician......a permit to carry a deadly weapon just makes sense.

A license to drive for private use of the highways is unconstitutional, Why are we being taxed on any rights? The answer is simple: CONTROLL of you because they fear a free being. But more likely Money.

United States Code: Title 18,31. Definitions | LII / Legal Information Institute

Right to Travel

Supreme Law School : E-mail : Box 036 : Msg 03678
 
Here are the firearm death rates for each state according to the most recent data from the Center for Disease Control. I have highlighted the 3 states you spoke of as requiring no permit for carrying.

# 1 District of Columbia: 31.2
# 2 Alaska: 20
# 3 Louisiana: 19.5
# 4 Wyoming: 18.8
# 5 Arizona: 18
# 6 Nevada: 17.3
# 6 Mississippi: 17.3
# 8 New Mexico: 16.6
# 9 Arkansas: 16.3
# 10 Alabama: 16.2
# 11 Tennessee: 15.4
# 12 West Virginia: 14.7
# 13 Montana: 14.5
# 14 South Carolina: 13.8
# 15 North Carolina: 13.6
# 16 Georgia: 13.4
# 17 Kentucky: 13.1
# 17 Oklahoma: 13.1
# 19 Missouri: 12.3
# 19 Idaho: 12.3
# 21 Indiana: 11.7
# 22 Colorado: 11.5
# 22 Maryland: 11.5
# 24 Florida: 11.1
# 24 Virginia: 11.1
# 26 Texas: 11
# 27 Michigan: 10.9
# 28 Oregon: 10.5
# 29 Pennsylvania: 9.9
# 30 California: 9.8
# 31 Illinois: 9.7
# 31 Kansas: 9.7
# 31 Utah: 9.7
# 34 Vermont: 9.6
# 35 Ohio: 9.3
# 35 Washington: 9.3
# 37 Delaware: 9.1
# 37 North Dakota: 9.1
# 39 Wisconsin: 8.1
# 39 Nebraska: 8.1
# 41 South Dakota: 7.9
# 42 Iowa: 6.7
# 43 Maine: 6.5
# 44 Minnesota: 6
# 45 New Hampshire: 5.8
# 46 Rhode Island: 5.1
# 46 New York: 5.1
# 48 New Jersey: 4.9
# 49 Connecticut: 4.3
# 50 Massachusetts: 3.1
# 51 Hawaii: 2.8
Weighted average: 11.5

You're starting to become my best ally in this argument. Earlier you pointed out that gun deaths are comparatively low and when I went to check on the stats (you were correct) I learned that the NRA and others attributed this to increased training and safety education w/ respect to firearms - exactly what I've been preaching.

Now you point out that Vermont (a permit-free state) has a low firearm death rate and when I check on those stats I find that the other 2 permit-free states are among the worst in terms of firearm deaths. The very stats that you have presented seem to point in favor of my view and not yours.

This aspect of your argument isn't holding much water.

Cite the source or don't put it out there.
 
driving or traveling in a private means is not a prilvege, but a right. I have posted links on this site.

Traveling on the public highways is a right and I do not know of any restrictions of that either Federal or by any state.
Operating a motor vehicle on the public highways on the other hand is a privlege that is restricted by both Feveral and state laws. Driving and traveling are two totally different things.
 
Hello to the people that say no to being able to carry you gun legally in what ever state you go visit or drive through. Can you please post the reason why you said No. It would help me to understand you better. Because I know you are not anti-gun since you are posting on a gun website so please share your reasons for saying no.

Just because this is a gun site doesn't mean that anti-gun liberals don't infest it. Look at the one poster on the first page for an excellent example.
 
"the right of the people" I support constitutional carry in every state of the union, 2nd amendment already grants right.
 
I agree with this point of view with one exception, I think the fed needs to get involved because the states have done such an awfull job of it so far... If the federal gov enacts the legislation it is out of the states hands and should superceed any stupid state laws.... Personall I think all gov should stay out of our rights, but if it means getting our rights back, I'm all for the fed passing this bill.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,695
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6
Back
Top