Replies to Msg. #653243
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
33377 Re: Concealed Guns in NYC Backed by 243 in U.S. House
   I'm also willing to bet you that if you bring a gun into NYC and you'r...
zzstar   FFFT   12 Sep 2011
10:13 PM
33374 Re: Concealed Guns in NYC Backed by 243 in U.S. House
   You'd think we live in the old wild west with your commentary. But...
zzstar   FFFT   12 Sep 2011
9:56 PM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Re: Concealed Guns in NYC Backed by 243 in U.S. House

By: Riana in FFFT
Mon, 12 Sep 11 7:43 PM
Msg. 33345 of 65535
(This msg. is a reply to 33319 by clo)
Jump to msg. #  

The only part of the article I find disturbing is that the permit was issued despite the clerical error - rather than a letter saying he needed something additional, the permit should have been invalidated.

As for zzstar's comment, in AK, AZ, and VT, no permit is required for concealed carry at all. Contrary to what you may think, there's no blood running in the streets as a result of that. And the law doesn't only apply to in-state residents - I carry my handgun in VT all the time, with nary a problem.

I loathe travelling through NY, especially the more populated areas, simply because in order to be a law-abiding citizen, I must also be defenseless (handgun must be unloaded/disassembled/locked up).

I believe the vast majority of law-abiding folks who wish to purchase and carry a concealed handgun for self-defense are responsible gun owners. Most of them will have some form of training, even if it's not required by Big Brother.

It's those who aren't law-abiding that are the problem, and adding more laws (which they are, by definition, ignoring) isn't going to fix that.




Avatar

What is the point of rules that are not enforced?