How does being allowed to carry a concealed weapon

Our driver's licenses work from State to State. Unifying Concealed carry across the states makes a great deal of sense. Since this does not infringe on the rights of gun owners, Congress has every right to pass this law. Progs won't like it, but then Progs carried very few states with a robust gun culture. MN, VT, NH, NV come to mind, but that's about it.

 

Are you including suicides like most left wing stats do?

Chicago has the most restrictive gun laws yet more folks are murdered every day than practically anywhere.

 

Nahhhh, its just that youre paranoid of lawful citizens carrying a lawful weapon across state lines legally. Unlike your incorrect use of the word paranoid a person afraid of a person ccing across state lines is the most pathetic paranoid delusion Ive ever seen. How weak can a person get. A person carries for personal protection. Want some examples?

 

when i bought my gun, i had to go to sheriff's office for a background check. Question for you, if everyone has to be submitted ti background checks, would be be happy? irrespective of whether they can go across state lines or not.

I think the problem is that not everyone has to go through a thorough background check and i don't understand why conservatives fight this.

 

Ah, then you are against States determining abortion rights. Why indeed should a woman's right to make her own healthcare decisions depend upon what state she's in? Welcome aboard, and glad to see you're in the common sense camp on that one

 

They like to confuse people with "red state/blue state" wording to overlook that no matter what state it is, they all have huge liberal CITIES that have the highest crime, poverty, violence. A "blue state" is a state where the city residence out number the rural population. The cities are blue while most of the state is red. The "red states" are places with large blue cities but ones that don't out number the rural towns which are red. The crime in GA isn't rampant throughout the state, just in the places where they mostly vote for dems, like Macon, ATL, Savannah etc.

 

We fight any and all gun control efforts because of the slippery slope that progressives want to create with gun control. Little restrictions here and there that won't do a thing to stop gun violence, and when they predictably fail, they'll push for more gun control. They won't stop until guns are effectively banned, like they are in Europe, Australia, etc. That's the goal. However, very few want to admit this, because they know that, politically, they are in the minority on that issue at the moment.

This country's problem with gun violence is due to non-white gangs, which is an issue that progressives won't touch with a 10 foot pole, so they try and take guns away from the white, law-abiding majority.

 

Regulating to the point of prohibiting is the same as prohibiting.

 

Murder is not a right...

 

this is nonsense, there is no slippery slope by simply advocating a thorough background check across the entire Country (with no loopholes). Now other measures, i agree, could result in a slippery slope so citizens should fight it. Background checks? given me a break

and yes, it can make a difference. Many people who want to get a gun in heat of a moment can be stopped by background checks, not everyone will go through any length to obtain a gun. Will it stop everyone? no but it can make a difference, especially if we work towards having a consistent background check system across the Country. Your argument that 'it won't stop every bad person from obtaining a gun' falls flat it's face because it's like me saying 'why do we have seat belts in cars? they don't stop all accidents and deaths'

 

The majority of gun murders in the country are from minority gangs, who are not going into gun stores and legally purchasing their weapons. If gun deaths are what you are concerned about, why not pay attention to the biggest problem? How many murders are being prevented by some hot head having to submit to a background check? Do you know? Care?

 

What is this loophole you speak of?

 

it makes a difference, arguing that it doesn't stop everyone or most people, is not a good argument.

 

It makes the owner of the gun safer. DUH. Or maybe you're calling everyone who owns a gun a terrorist.

 

If you want to penalize law-abiding people and make it harder for them to purchase firearms, why shouldn't you have to prove that your regulation does something? How many murders is mandatory background checks going to prevent? And, more importantly, what safeguards do people have to keep you from enacting more gun control should the background check issue fail to prevent murders?

 

Well, gun background checks are usually by the upper and middle class who will have a "good life" and income to support their kids. They don't care about the kids in the hood or projects or ghettos they made getting killed by illegal guns because its like abortion, they need to control the population of their slaves. Why do you think 80% of the abortion mills (PPH) are located in poor minority neighborhoods and not around trailer parks? Their whole argument for on demand abortions in these areas is "if the kid is born, they will have a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty life with a parent that can barely support the kid. It more 'humane' to just abort the kid." Random gun deaths in these areas by gangs is just their way of getting a few kids that slip through the cracks.

 

The same way that concealed carry, in and of itself, makes America safer.
As a citizen of the state of OH, I have the right to carry a gun. The state of IL cannot take that right from me because I happen to be in IL.

 

One can no longer soundly claim the 'slippery slope fallacy' when you're already halfway down the hill.

 

Everyone that buys a gun from a dealer undergoes a background check.
A requirement for background checks on private sales is impossible to enforce; as such, it will do nothing to prevent criminals from getting guns.

 

The 2nd amendment shall not be infringed upon. What is the problem with a law abiding citizen carrying a gun anywhere? It's the criminals that we need to look out for. I can promise you, if guns were banned criminals would still have them. Do you think a criminal wanting to kill somebody with a gun is going to purchase one that has a paper trail? Do you think guns are not brought across the border illegally for purchase or already purchased, specifically for a planned murder already? The border is not secure, and some people think it needs left open. So banning guns does nothing against those who wish to use them for harm, they get them now illegally, banning guns they would still get them illegally (black market). The problem with banning them is we won't be able to defend ourselves from these criminals or foreign invaders (war), once they see we have weakened ourselves by getting rid of them.

I know your not suggesting banning guns, but any law that infringes on the 2nd amendment leads to the banning of guns, that is specifically why they said it shall not be infringed upon. And banning them is the most crucial thing we can do, and yet even banning them solves nothing. Look far more people are killed by car accident's, cigarettes, cholesterol, pharmaceuticals, and guns is one of the least used weapons in crimes of murder. This is all just a political stunt for those politicians that no longer want guns for complete control. They have to slowly do it, thus they have to see what areas people will go for, and where people will not. Once they get there, they go from there repeating this cycle.

We live in a world of sin, and there is always going to be terrible deeds carried out. The most important thing we can possibly do on the matter, is pay very close attention to how we educate our young. Right now, not so good. School programs seem to be dumbing down the young. A feeling of imprisonment, sitting on a chair almost all day, disturbing the blood flow, causing anxiety from such high levels of energy yet forcing them to stay seated. There are many different ways our schools can educate the young. Yet we seem to stick with only one, even though the results are rather embarrassing.

 

no, you are twisting my argument. I'm a law abiding citizen and how did i obtain my gun permit? I drove to sherrif's office, submitted an application, paid $8 and in 6 weeks, i got it. I was very happy with the process as i felt good that i subjected to a background check and the fact that it was painless and easy.

safeguards? there is nothing to worry, most democrats respect the 2nd amendment and constitution, 99% of them do not want to make it difficult for someone like me to obtain a gun.

 

Only if the stat used is family and associates. Unless you are involved in gang activity/drug trade, it's not likely that your family will be hurt by your gun.

 

Gun control laws always encourage more gun crime.

 

Do you have to get a license for an abortion? That is the issue, whether licenses apply to travellers. You made an incorrect analogy.

 

I don't believe that for a second. The Democrats have tried several times during the past 8 years to ban guns. Almost every semi-automatic gun in the country would have been banned if this had passed through a Democratic Congress with a Democratic President. Thankfully a Democratic Congress didn't exist at the time.