Should people be required to know concealed carry laws before getting a permit?


In New York State, all permits are issued as Concealed Carry. Initially, they are issued as a 'restricted' license and can only be carried for hunting or target practice after one has reached his/her destination. In Broome County where I live, to be granted a full carry permit, one must take some extra training from an authorized trainer, get a certificate of completion, then write a letter to the Judge explaining why you want a full carry permit. I believe that all persons who have a carry permit have a responsibility to know the laws as they apply to them. Most of the trainers in my area go over the Article 35 (Use of Force) laws, as well as what is expected of you if you get stopped by a LEO for any reason and are carrying or have a firearm in the vehicle with you. But knowing the laws do not stop gun owners from being idiots to the inth degree, even when they know they are committing a felony. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits.
 

I suppose you have a law that says that too? I've been active in political speech since long before I was of age to vote. I can even complain about the idiotic speech that comes out of private individual's mouths/keyboards without fear of retribution, or while lacking the ability to vote on what they say/type. As a retired attorney, one might expect you to know the truthfulness of that statement since the legal basis for it is the very 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights. That attorneys can say such idiotic and untrue things with the imprimatur of legitimacy only serves to emphasize what politicians and judges believe they can get away with against The People's interests and in direct contravention to the Constitution that they're all sworn to protect, defend and uphold.

Most people on this site do vote. I happen to be one who doesn't because I know for a fact that the whole government, and its attendant institutions (elections being one of them), is corrupt beyond any minuscule hope of repair. I don't volunteer to engage in activity that I know is nothing more substantial than mental masturbation. But if you disagree with someone's criticisms of SCOTUS justices or the unconstitutional edicts (rulings) they hand down from their Ivory Tower, you would take them no more seriously than you'd take my criticisms now knowing that I am not a voter. To say that no one can complain for whatever reason you conjure up in your own mind is just a way to dismiss that person's thoughts without having to actually respond to the substance of them. I now lodge a complaint about your intellectually lazy discussion tactics, and in case you didn't notice, you cannot do anything to stop me from complaining about it.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that a right is dependent upon participation in a failed and corrupt system before that right can be exercised openly and freely. You have no right to say what rights of speech can or cannot be exercised, and neither does government, so even as a retired attorney your edict of "can't complain" is completely contradicted by the actual law of the land. Pure, unadulterated sophistry. I'll complain/criticize/excoriate/name-call/judge-as-traitors any politician, judge or individual who deserves such critical speech whether I ever voted for or against them in my entire life, and you Sir, can't do a damned thing about it but spew meaningless platitudes and slogans in response.

Blues
Then you have no one to blame but yourself. But this isn't about me or what I believe. It isn't about criticizing me. Obama didn't show you why it's important to vote? This guy damaged America far worse than anyone before him or anyone who was running against him. Possibly permanent, irreversible harm. If you don't have faith in the country that's fine, I don't either. But not voting is no answer. Sometimes we vote the lesser of two evils. When we don't we get Obama (or Hillary or Warren or Sanders). We let those with their hand in our pocket choose our leader.
 
In New York State, all permits are issued as Concealed Carry. Initially, they are issued as a 'restricted' license and can only be carried for hunting or target practice after one has reached his/her destination. In Broome County where I live, to be granted a full carry permit, one must take some extra training from an authorized trainer, get a certificate of completion, then write a letter to the Judge explaining why you want a full carry permit. I believe that all persons who have a carry permit have a responsibility to know the laws as they apply to them. Most of the trainers in my area go over the Article 35 (Use of Force) laws, as well as what is expected of you if you get stopped by a LEO for any reason and are carrying or have a firearm in the vehicle with you. But knowing the laws do not stop gun owners from being idiots to the inth degree, even when they know they are committing a felony. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's limits.
In NY all permits aren't issued restricted. It is common for unrestricted permits to be issued throughout NYS. Some counties only issue unrestricted permits. Not saying NY is good, just correcting the statement.
 
In NY all permits aren't issued restricted. It is common for unrestricted permits to be issued throughout NYS. Some counties only issue unrestricted permits. Not saying NY is good, just correcting the statement.

NY is ranked 50th based on it not so gun friendly laws. Only DC keeps them off the very bottom.
 
Then you have no one to blame but yourself.

What precisely should I be blaming myself for? In order for the math to work you'd have to come up with an issue/candidate of which the outcome would've been different had I voted.

"You have no one but yourself to blame" is one of those meaningless platitudes and slogans to which I previously referred.

Obama didn't show you why it's important to vote?

Obama is one among many people who proved to me the utter uselessness of voting. GW Bush is another one. This is what voting Republican got us:

supreme_court_obamacares_first_deat.jpg


BlameBush.jpg


This guy damaged America far worse than anyone before him or anyone who was running against him.

This is not a defense of Obama in any way, shape, manner or form, but the above quote is utter nonsense. Lincoln suspending the Constitution in order to justify the wholesale slaughter, torture, raping and pillaging of Americans who wished to separate from their current government just exactly like the government that formed just 80 years before had severed the ties that bound them involuntarily was WAY worse damage to the Constitution than anything Obama's done.

Woodrow Wilson overseeing the illegal insertion of the 16th and 17th Amendments into the Constitution, and then creating the Federal Reserve, was WAY worse damage to the Constitution than anything Obama's done.

The burgeoning police state that every President for the last ~60 years has contributed mightily to includes Obama, but his predecessors are no less responsible just because he happens to be President now.

I could go on and on about how nearly every politician who ever served contributed every bit as much as Obama has to the decline of America, and to the criminalization and/or destruction of fundamental, God-given rights. Individual responsibility, self-reliance and as close to unlimited liberty that humans are capable of providing for themselves that attends that national mindset were dead long before any one of us ever even heard the name(s) Barack Barry Dunham Soetero Obama.

Possibly permanent, irreversible harm.

No "possibly" about it - the Constitution is dead, and along with it, the American Dream. Are you seriously trying to argue that either McCain or Romney could've resuscitated it? Pffft.

RyanRecord.jpg



Re-electing Obama was like backing the Titanic up and hitting the iceberg a second time. Electing Romney would've been like hitting a second iceberg. Not a gnat's nose-hair worth of difference between either of 'em, or "any" of 'em if you want to expand the election cycles we're talking about.

If you don't have faith in the country that's fine, I don't either. But not voting is no answer. Sometimes we vote the lesser of two evils. When we don't we get Obama (or Hillary or Warren or Sanders).

More utter nonsense. I "let" you and the dupes who think their vote matters pretend to choose their leaders, while you try to hold me responsible for your own piss-poor decisions because I have the gall to call voting exactly what it is - a total waste of time. I'm not responsible for anyone who's in office if I didn't punch a hole in a card next to their name. By this pretzel-logic, you not voting for Obama makes you responsible for him being in office! Your presumption is that anyone who decided to vote because of this type of brow-beating and shaming by holier-than-thou people like you would've voted for McCain or Romney in the first place. To the extent that non-voters in the last two elections were more conservative than not, for many of us it is precisely because McCain and Romney were the candidates that we didn't vote. What conservative could possibly vote for a baby-killing, gun-grabbing, Unpatriot Act-supporting, 4th-Amendment-destroying, global-warming-believing hack like Romney? For you, I guess you need look no further than the closest mirror to answer that question. For me, I neither knowingly vote for such obviously progessives-in-Republican-clothing people, nor associate with people who do, so I'd have to look far and wide for someone I'd call a compatriot who voted for Obama with Good Hair, otherwise known as Romney.

And this lesser of two evils stuff is so much bovine excrement that I can hardly stand it. When you vote for evil in any degree, you are responsible for the evil those people or their policies commit. If the "lesser" evil starts another war, blood is on your hands. When they expand the police state, that is your police state. And when they rip away what tiny morsels of freedom you still have, it is you who has no one to blame but yourself. In every one of those examples, I am responsible for none of it because my conscience doesn't allow me to knowingly vote for evil, whether evil has a (D) or and (R) next to its name.

james_madison_veto_principle.jpg


387724_495758713790725_380286179_n.jpg


Voting-TheSlavesSuggestionBox.jpg


Bakemycake.jpg


obama-romney-morph.jpg


WhiterShadeOfFail_zpsce9556ca.jpg
 
Actually, I dont have to prove a thing.... The constitution applies to the ENTIRE government, Local, county, state, AND federal.... Anyone who knows a solitary thing about RIGHTS and the Constitution already know this... Whats YOUR EXCUSE MR LAWYER???? Too long at bending the "laws" to prove cases in court to remember the extreme basics anymore?

And WITF makes you think I would EVER have to go to court about it????? Project your fears much? Man up and grow a pair, and STOP thinking others are ******* like yourself...

So if an Ohio cop stops you, you are not going to tell him/her you are carrying? Or are you just going to pay the fine when they find out you have a ccw and you didn't tell them you were when first stopped? Or do you never carry and do not have a ccw permit. Do you ever go within 1000 feet of a school?

By the way, I do think the Ohio notify law is pure and simple bull excrement. As are the gun free zone laws. So I am just wondering how you would handle those things that could land you in court for violating a law you say is unConstitutional without going to court.
 
Sigh......
Let me get this straight... YOU think that Shall not be infringed doesnt mean what it says? You must be a special kind of stu***.....

If you're going to insult me, please at least be clever about it and not just nasty.

If you are against any form of gun control, then you pose the greatest threat to 2A rights, even more so than the most hostile liberals out there. It's when guns get into the hands of criminals and crazies that gives the anti-gunners their ammo. So yes, judicious gun control is the best protection for our 2A rights.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If you're going to insult me, please at least be clever about it and not just nasty.

If you are against any form of gun control, then you pose the greatest threat to 2A rights, even more so than the most hostile liberals out there. It's when guns get into the hands of criminals and crazies that gives the anti-gunners their ammo. So yes, judicious gun control is the best protection for our 2A rights.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sarah? I just knew it was you....


On a more serious note... You have got to be the biggest antigun person I have ever had the displeasure of seeing on here.... STOP BLAMING GUNS for what CRIMINALS do with them...... If you have a problem with CRIMINALS then fight to get and keep THEM off the streets.... Do you even effing know what criminals do? THEY DISOBEY LAWS YOU EFFING IDIOT!!!!!
Yet YOU think MORE LAWS INFRINGING ON THAT WHICH SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ON IS THE "ANSWER"......
 
So if an Ohio cop stops you, you are not going to tell him/her you are carrying? Or are you just going to pay the fine when they find out you have a ccw and you didn't tell them you were when first stopped? Or do you never carry and do not have a ccw permit. Do you ever go within 1000 feet of a school?

By the way, I do think the Ohio notify law is pure and simple bull excrement. As are the gun free zone laws. So I am just wondering how you would handle those things that could land you in court for violating a law you say is unConstitutional without going to court.

If you cannot figure out what a person would have to do to keep from going to jail when discovered breaking fake laws, I cannot help you... Perhaps you need to think about it some...
 
NY is ranked 50th based on it not so gun friendly laws. Only DC keeps them off the very bottom.
Spending several decades practicing in NY I know the laws better than those who write the list. We're not going into a discussion over who's state is good and bad. NJ gun law is the worst, followed by NYC where no one caries without very special considerations. Gun laws follow political affiliation. States with high lib counts like NY, NJ, CT, MA, CA have a problem beating the libs. Large cities in those states control the entire state vote.

However, wherever one goes armed s/he must know the law. The biggest problem is the variation in laws between states. In VT you're called a sportsman while in NY or NJ you're a criminal for the same thing. And the differences are where people get jammed-up. Gun laws must be the same for every state. People shouldn't become a felon for crossing a state line. But most states will charge anyone carrying concealed without either a reciprocal agreement or in some cases OC.

Can anyone tell me what sates will accept the carrying of a concealed weapon by a non-resident without any type of license? I believe only Vermont at this time.
 
Can anyone tell me what sates will accept the carrying of a concealed weapon by a non-resident without any type of license? I believe only Vermont at this time.

Link Removed, there will be five states total that have true Constitutional carry for everyone regardless of residency, with Wyoming being the only additional Constitutional carry state that limits it to residents only. Maine will be the new addition to the "true" list in October which includes Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, and Vermont. I personally think that, in practice, Arkansas is a stretch. r!derbike can probably lend some insight into that if he sees this, but starting in October, there will be at least four states that have no licensing requirement for anyone. All but Vermont do have a licensing scheme that they passed simply so that their residents could enjoy reciprocity agreements with other states, but permission slips are 100% voluntary in all of those states.

There are also several states (don't know the exact number, but I know it's more than the states that have Constitutional carry as it applies to concealed carry) that allow open carry for everyone regardless of residency. Alabama (my home state) is one of those.

Blues
 
Link Removed, there will be five states total that have true Constitutional carry for everyone regardless of residency, with Wyoming being the only additional Constitutional carry state that limits it to residents only. Maine will be the new addition to the "true" list in October which includes Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, and Vermont. I personally think that, in practice, Arkansas is a stretch. r!derbike can probably lend some insight into that if he sees this, but starting in October, there will be at least four states that have no licensing requirement for anyone. All but Vermont do have a licensing scheme that they passed simply so that their residents could enjoy reciprocity agreements with other states, but permission slips are 100% voluntary in all of those states.

There are also several states (don't know the exact number, but I know it's more than the states that have Constitutional carry as it applies to concealed carry) that allow open carry for everyone regardless of residency. Alabama (my home state) is one of those.

Blues
Thanks for the info.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,259
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1
Back
Top