Concealed carry: What for?
11-01-2011, 05:06 AM
#61
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 321
I guess I haven't asked the question correctly because I don't feel it's been answered. Because it's legal, why don't we commonly see people who own guns carrying them in the open? Why is there a need to conceal them at all? I do not see a meaningful relationship between the 2nd ammendment (as it's written), and permission to conceal and carry.
11-01-2011, 05:10 AM
#62
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Big Lick
Posts: 1,090
Oh...and I don't carry.
And davidka....my personal opinion on it is that open carry in some populated and urban areas just creates a lot of unnecessary "stir", although it doesn't in more rural or small town areas. Concealed carry eliminates that, plus no one really needs to know, especially the bad guys. I have a friend that I ride with who carries. I never even knew it for several years. That's really the way it should be, and often is. Those that carry don't generally go around announcing it, or showing it off. I've asked him about it. He doesn't usually carry in town, only when traveling, and we're often in out of the way places where law enforcement isn't readily available.
The difficult part in answering your question is that there isn't one general answer that covers everyone. As is always the case, each person has his own reasons for carrying and it often varies from others. given today's clothing styles, it's sometimes even easier to carry concealed than open. If you are only allowed to carry open, and you have on a coat in cold weather that covers your belt holster, then you are in violation.
Last edited by Old Yeller; 11-01-2011 at 05:31 AM.
11-01-2011, 05:45 AM
#64
Administrator
MotoGP
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kempner, TX
Posts: 4,402
Pretty sure, no make that Very sure it has already been detailed.. above..
But once again.
THREE reasons that I know, commonly hear, understand.
ONE: It is not legal to open carry in some states.
TWO: Tactical advantage
THREE: Sheeple
Last edited by E.Marquez; 11-01-2011 at 05:47 AM.
11-01-2011, 07:32 AM
#65
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Norman OK
Posts: 121
The pros of open carry:
Easier access to the weapon
Discourages would be attackers
The cons:
Criminals know where your weapon is located on your body, meaning they can bodyblock you from getting to it.
Concealed carry pros:
No one knows you have a gun, so the element of surprise is yours.
If the gun is concealed you aren't a problem for criminals, so they may just ignore you.
cons:
Takes longer to access your weapon.
Requires you to wear clothing that covers the weapon.
Just my opinion here, but if open and concealed carry are available, I'd carry an unloaded gun in the open just to scare would be criminals, and I'd have a loaded concealed weapon as well. This prevents any problems with someone identifying my weapon and either taking it or bodyblocking me so I can't get to it.
Easier access to the weapon
Discourages would be attackers
The cons:
Criminals know where your weapon is located on your body, meaning they can bodyblock you from getting to it.
Concealed carry pros:
No one knows you have a gun, so the element of surprise is yours.
If the gun is concealed you aren't a problem for criminals, so they may just ignore you.
cons:
Takes longer to access your weapon.
Requires you to wear clothing that covers the weapon.
Just my opinion here, but if open and concealed carry are available, I'd carry an unloaded gun in the open just to scare would be criminals, and I'd have a loaded concealed weapon as well. This prevents any problems with someone identifying my weapon and either taking it or bodyblocking me so I can't get to it.
11-01-2011, 08:28 AM
#66
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 321
Those touch on it a little better though I am of the opinion that open carry discourages criminals more. Anyone that would attack you for your gun I think would be a remarkably bold assailant, kinda' like tackling a large dog to take his teeth (not really, but you get the idea).
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
11-01-2011, 08:41 AM
#67
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Big Lick
Posts: 1,090
Those touch on it a little better though I am of the opinion that open carry discourages criminals more. Anyone that would attack you for your gun I think would be a remarkably bold assailant, kinda' like tackling a large dog to take his teeth (not really, but you get the idea).
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
to answer your question though, I think you're right with the tooth analogy. Seems to me that people would steer clear just by seeing the gun. But in some cases, I suppose if someone was walking into a bank, for example, they'd focus on you just because you are carrying and would create even more problems for you.
on your question about training, I don't know the laws specifically, so someone might have better input. To get a permit to conceal carry, you have to apply. I THINK (pretty sure) training is required for that approval...at least around here. One thing I've noticed personally (but should not be generalized too much) is that the people who conceal carry tend to be very familiar with their sidearms and are very proficient with their use and care. That tends toward them knowing how to safely carry...IMHO. Keep in mind that along with the permit comes the responsibility to not use it negatively. that's a LOT of responsibility to carry, and I personally find those I know that carry take that very seriously.
11-01-2011, 09:18 AM
#68
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,869
on your question about training, I don't know the laws specifically, so someone might have better input. To get a permit to conceal carry, you have to apply. I THINK (pretty sure) training is required for that approval...at least around here. One thing I've noticed personally (but should not be generalized too much) is that the people who conceal carry tend to be very familiar with their sidearms and are very proficient with their use and care. That tends toward them knowing how to safely carry...IMHO. Keep in mind that along with the permit comes the responsibility to not use it negatively. that's a LOT of responsibility to carry, and I personally find those I know that carry take that very seriously.
+1... It is very easy to visualize a nut swinging around a gun. And there are those nuts around, so you can't discount them. But for the most part people are very respectful of the weapons- you've certainly met people carrying and don't even know it. In fact, most people carrying are doing so to be responsible (they see a need to defend themselves and are taking measures to do so). Very rarely does someone buy a gun and not practice firing. Most people are introduced to them, visit ranges, and are instructed by people who are familiar with them (at least in my limited experience).
As far as the laws go, there are only a few states that don't require a permit process to conceal. Rules vary, but often states have transferable permits, meaning that a CCW permit in Arizona will also work for me in Nevada. So even though I wouldn't be required to take a CCW class, it is in my best interest to do so. My personal opinion is that there is a somewhat skewed view of the danger of guns because we read about and only see the outstanding cases. Cop shoots himself in the foot: bad move (I've seen that video probably posted in 10 different sources). But if you think about how many cops there are with loaded guns, it's a pretty low number.
Now, like Tweety said, because of the freedom of guns, there are a lot floating around, and that means some end up in the wrong hands. And limiting any gun ownership may reduce this. Our country is designed differently, though. The Constitution was designed explicitly so that the government couldn't take over the citizens (as they had done in England when it was written). If the people were given the right "bear arms" (not just own them), then the government could never take over. It was meant to have a well armed melitia to defend the country, but also so that the citizens could defend themselves from their own country. If you look at how dictators take over, they do so by making laws favorable to it. Take away the guns, take away free speech, etc. and pretty soon you have a helpless population that you can do whatever you want with. It's usually not a hostile takover, but subtle laws.
Some people argue that this is very outdated, and not meant for modern times. We are much more populated now, and have some pretty big things on our plate to take care of to be worrying about carrying handguns in specific areas. I think the duration of time that the Constitution of the U.S. has held proves it's value, and it has limited as best it can the power hungry. I'm definitely not in the midset that my views are by chance 100% correct. Statistically that just couldn't work
, but it's where I'm at at this point.
11-01-2011, 09:39 AM
#69
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Norman OK
Posts: 121
Those touch on it a little better though I am of the opinion that open carry discourages criminals more. Anyone that would attack you for your gun I think would be a remarkably bold assailant, kinda' like tackling a large dog to take his teeth (not really, but you get the idea).
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
Does anyone believe that specific concealed carry instruction should be necessary? From what little I know about gun carry there are all kinds of things that can go wrong like accidental discharge from the weapon snagging on things, incorrect weapon choice related to that, etc..
And to address possibly the second most important question posted here, Red. Everyone knows Red motorcycles are faster than other colors. Sorry Yeller, you need a paint job! ;-)
And yes it's a requirement here in Oklahoma to pass a course to get your concealed permit. It's rare than a gun just "goes off" in a holster or even in a pocket if it's properly maintained and carried.
And sorry Yellar, Red is best.
11-01-2011, 03:14 PM
#70
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
The US Constitution doesn't 'give' us the right to own guns. It merely enumerates a right we all have and protects that right from abridgement by tyrannical government.
Of course regulating guns is a prelude to confiscation of guns. It has historically been that way and will always be that way. Gun laws, as I and others have said many times, serve only to penalize the law abiding and facilitate governments and other criminal organizations as they go about the business of exploiting the law abiding. Criminals and tyrants don't like the righteous resistance of an armed citizenry.
The idea that someone is somehow responsible when another commits a crime against their property is ludicrous. The idea that laws will prevent criminals from committing crimes is even more ludicrous.
It must be noted that 99+% of the people in this country will never be victims of gun crimes, which puts the lie to any arguments proponents of "gun control" promulgate about gun laws and public safety. Useful idiots may believe they're doing a public service by promoting gun laws, but those driving the gun control agenda know well that the real reason for gun laws is and always has been citizen control.
Of course regulating guns is a prelude to confiscation of guns. It has historically been that way and will always be that way. Gun laws, as I and others have said many times, serve only to penalize the law abiding and facilitate governments and other criminal organizations as they go about the business of exploiting the law abiding. Criminals and tyrants don't like the righteous resistance of an armed citizenry.
The idea that someone is somehow responsible when another commits a crime against their property is ludicrous. The idea that laws will prevent criminals from committing crimes is even more ludicrous.
It must be noted that 99+% of the people in this country will never be victims of gun crimes, which puts the lie to any arguments proponents of "gun control" promulgate about gun laws and public safety. Useful idiots may believe they're doing a public service by promoting gun laws, but those driving the gun control agenda know well that the real reason for gun laws is and always has been citizen control.
You however didn't even attempt at answering my question as far as I could see...
I'm not sure if interpreted what you said right though... Are you saying you find it ludicrous that I suggest the owner of the guns should be responsible for storing it in a way that prevents theft? ie that the glovebox of the car might not be a really secure storage...
I'm not saying the gun owners as a group are responsible for the theft of a specific gun in particular, but since it's fairly obvious that people store guns in ways that make it very easy to steal them, they as a collective have a responsibility... Ie since the irresponsible people owning weapons can't store them securely the smart people that already store them safely might have to live with a law saying you need store them safely, to stem the flow of stolen guns to the "wrong hands"... And since they most likely would do what the law said anyways, I'm pretty sure it's not a big problem...
And this is where you and I differ on opinion... You say that a law, any law is bad, and only serves to penalise the law abiding, and I say that it's very possible that has been historically true, but it doesn't need to be that way... But since you then have made it fairly clear that you believe the US governement to be corrupt, why not start a revolution... From what I have read you have that right too?
11-01-2011, 03:32 PM
#71
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
if appears obvious from your statements I read that your intent is to make comments about people blended into your statements of facts and opinions. I can have a constructive conversation with anyone about facts or even opinions, but the negative comments thrown in about people is what would get you popped in the nose.
But hide behind "stating" that I'm making inflammatory posts, and doing the same... Well, I do have a problem with that... A big problem...
And if your quoting of my post was meant as an example... Read it again, and read the context...
Big Shepp and I started a discussion, he left out some facts, I corrected him, and assumed he was making an assumption... We where both missing the mark to some degree with what we said to each other, and I applogised for the fact that I had missunderstood and mistakenly targeted him in another post... He replied, and we both clarified... As far as I know, no hard feelings either way, even though we have different opinions in the discussion...
So either you are trying to make that into something it isn't... Or you are in fact trying to inflame this... Which is it?
11-01-2011, 07:20 PM
#73
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,869
I saw a Top Gear once where they talked about the Swedish car licence process and it was amazing the difference between it and most U.S. systems. Everyone in the country with a car I would trust to drive... If I remember right, they were drifting around on dirt roads, the guy saying that all Swedes can do this, partially because the roads are common and partially because the tests are much more involved.
Back to the gun issue: One of the problems that we have is that we also have a lot of fanatics that say take away all of the guns forever and we won't have problems. People get scared of guns, and rather than learn about them and become more comfortable, they work up stereotypes that cause irrational behavior. That same mindset would probably take away cars that go over 80mph . I don't think it will ever get to this (I hate the "slippery slope" argument), but when people yell at you to take away your stuff, you just want to say "shut up and mind your own. I ain't hurtin' no one".
I can't really speak for any other system... my background has given me very limited experience with other first world countries. It has also most definitely influenced the way that I think about gun rights and government in general. I'm sure if I experienced a more socialist government like found in Sweden I'd have much different views... which overall is also interesting. I'm convicted in views based in part on my location in the world. You should see some of the more extreme anti-gun people over here, Tweety- they're sometimes scarier than the ones who walk around with an arsenal on their back.
11-01-2011, 08:02 PM
#74
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
...I think that that is the key. If any law is on the books, it should be to keep people from hurting others (and themselves, I suppose). There are just two sides of a story and some people lean more toward one or the other. On one hand, having a required permit process and safe storage instructions keeps people honest about their gun handling and ensures that people know what they are doing. On the other hand, it's a way for the court system to get you in jail or fined or your weapon revoked on a technicality b/c you can't keep up with our already ridiculously intricate laws. It's fascinating to me that if I unbuckle my seat belt, I'm a criminal. I'm all for seat belts, always wear one, but it's so strange to me that I have to pay for getting my own self in danger.
I saw a Top Gear once where they talked about the Swedish car licence process and it was amazing the difference between it and most U.S. systems. Everyone in the country with a car I would trust to drive... If I remember right, they were drifting around on dirt roads, the guy saying that all Swedes can do this, partially because the roads are common and partially because the tests are much more involved.
Back to the gun issue: One of the problems that we have is that we also have a lot of fanatics that say take away all of the guns forever and we won't have problems. People get scared of guns, and rather than learn about them and become more comfortable, they work up stereotypes that cause irrational behavior. That same mindset would probably take away cars that go over 80mph . I don't think it will ever get to this (I hate the "slippery slope" argument), but when people yell at you to take away your stuff, you just want to say "shut up and mind your own. I ain't hurtin' no one".
I can't really speak for any other system... my background has given me very limited experience with other first world countries. It has also most definitely influenced the way that I think about gun rights and government in general. I'm sure if I experienced a more socialist government like found in Sweden I'd have much different views... which overall is also interesting. I'm convicted in views based in part on my location in the world. You should see some of the more extreme anti-gun people over here, Tweety- they're sometimes scarier than the ones who walk around with an arsenal on their back.
I saw a Top Gear once where they talked about the Swedish car licence process and it was amazing the difference between it and most U.S. systems. Everyone in the country with a car I would trust to drive... If I remember right, they were drifting around on dirt roads, the guy saying that all Swedes can do this, partially because the roads are common and partially because the tests are much more involved.
Back to the gun issue: One of the problems that we have is that we also have a lot of fanatics that say take away all of the guns forever and we won't have problems. People get scared of guns, and rather than learn about them and become more comfortable, they work up stereotypes that cause irrational behavior. That same mindset would probably take away cars that go over 80mph . I don't think it will ever get to this (I hate the "slippery slope" argument), but when people yell at you to take away your stuff, you just want to say "shut up and mind your own. I ain't hurtin' no one".
I can't really speak for any other system... my background has given me very limited experience with other first world countries. It has also most definitely influenced the way that I think about gun rights and government in general. I'm sure if I experienced a more socialist government like found in Sweden I'd have much different views... which overall is also interesting. I'm convicted in views based in part on my location in the world. You should see some of the more extreme anti-gun people over here, Tweety- they're sometimes scarier than the ones who walk around with an arsenal on their back.
I love guns. Lots. In fact, I cant think about anything else except for blasting some deer in a few weeks. When it came time for me to hunt, I was more than happy to go to hunters ed. When it came time to drive, I went to drivers ed. When it came time to boat, I went to boaters ed. And if I were to carry, I would got to a course for it without throwing a fit. This isnt an over-complication of laws, rules, and the such.
11-01-2011, 08:05 PM
#75
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
And Ireland, but I am an decedent of Adam and Eve, just like all the rest of yous guys, right?
11-01-2011, 08:13 PM
#76
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
Oh, and I would like to hang out with Tweety, but not because I want an authoritarianism society, but because he is a gentleman and a scholar. He doesn't pull out his "jump to conclusions mat" to start arguments but seeks truth and facts, no matter how unpleasant those get. Well, I better get going. I need to head out in my oppression-mobile where I am forced to wear my seatbelt.
11-01-2011, 08:24 PM
#77
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,869
I agree with you. I was just illustrating a point with the seat belt thing... I'm aware that it's exaggerated. I don't think you can even get pulled over in Arizona for it unless you have a primary infraction.
I am also aware that the gun toting crazies "balance" the anti-gun ones... probably even more so because when they get mad they have physical weapons.
I understand the positives to classes and permits. And, as you did, I took a motorcycle course before I owned one and gun classes as well. The idea of a course is fine, but I don't know if its some weirdly placed nostalgia before I was born or what, I just am not comfortable with the idea of discounting the Second Amendment. I'm not sure where the line of complacency is (hell I could be WAY off with this), but feel that crossing over it too far is just as dangerous as free for all guns.
I am also aware that the gun toting crazies "balance" the anti-gun ones... probably even more so because when they get mad they have physical weapons.
I understand the positives to classes and permits. And, as you did, I took a motorcycle course before I owned one and gun classes as well. The idea of a course is fine, but I don't know if its some weirdly placed nostalgia before I was born or what, I just am not comfortable with the idea of discounting the Second Amendment. I'm not sure where the line of complacency is (hell I could be WAY off with this), but feel that crossing over it too far is just as dangerous as free for all guns.
Last edited by 7moore7; 11-01-2011 at 08:28 PM. Reason: grammar
11-01-2011, 08:32 PM
#78
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,869
11-01-2011, 08:35 PM
#79
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
If I didnt say it, I also took the motorcycle course as well...lots of school.
11-01-2011, 08:52 PM
#81
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,802
Formal education can be a very good thing and it can be a very bad thing as shown by our public education "system", but it's certainly not required to learn how to drive, ride, shoot, hunt, etc.
11-01-2011, 09:04 PM
#83
Senior Member
Superstock
Superstock
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 321
Another reason for the seatbelt requirement (and airbags, crash safety standards in cars, etc.) is to help the driver and passengers survive to later be held accountable for damages they may cause.
11-01-2011, 09:08 PM
#84
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
...Because lord knows how capable a human being ,that was in a near fatal crash, will be in paying off the hospital bills and the damages.
By far the single best argument I have ever heard against seat belts...That the govt wants you alive so they can punish you. Damn Sadist!
By far the single best argument I have ever heard against seat belts...That the govt wants you alive so they can punish you. Damn Sadist!
11-01-2011, 10:43 PM
#85
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,802
11-02-2011, 03:40 AM
#86
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
...I think that that is the key. If any law is on the books, it should be to keep people from hurting others (and themselves, I suppose). There are just two sides of a story and some people lean more toward one or the other. On one hand, having a required permit process and safe storage instructions keeps people honest about their gun handling and ensures that people know what they are doing. On the other hand, it's a way for the court system to get you in jail or fined or your weapon revoked on a technicality b/c you can't keep up with our already ridiculously intricate laws. It's fascinating to me that if I unbuckle my seat belt, I'm a criminal. I'm all for seat belts, always wear one, but it's so strange to me that I have to pay for getting my own self in danger.
I saw a Top Gear once where they talked about the Swedish car licence process and it was amazing the difference between it and most U.S. systems. Everyone in the country with a car I would trust to drive... If I remember right, they were drifting around on dirt roads, the guy saying that all Swedes can do this, partially because the roads are common and partially because the tests are much more involved.
Back to the gun issue: One of the problems that we have is that we also have a lot of fanatics that say take away all of the guns forever and we won't have problems. People get scared of guns, and rather than learn about them and become more comfortable, they work up stereotypes that cause irrational behavior. That same mindset would probably take away cars that go over 80mph . I don't think it will ever get to this (I hate the "slippery slope" argument), but when people yell at you to take away your stuff, you just want to say "shut up and mind your own. I ain't hurtin' no one".
I can't really speak for any other system... my background has given me very limited experience with other first world countries. It has also most definitely influenced the way that I think about gun rights and government in general. I'm sure if I experienced a more socialist government like found in Sweden I'd have much different views... which overall is also interesting. I'm convicted in views based in part on my location in the world. You should see some of the more extreme anti-gun people over here, Tweety- they're sometimes scarier than the ones who walk around with an arsenal on their back.
I saw a Top Gear once where they talked about the Swedish car licence process and it was amazing the difference between it and most U.S. systems. Everyone in the country with a car I would trust to drive... If I remember right, they were drifting around on dirt roads, the guy saying that all Swedes can do this, partially because the roads are common and partially because the tests are much more involved.
Back to the gun issue: One of the problems that we have is that we also have a lot of fanatics that say take away all of the guns forever and we won't have problems. People get scared of guns, and rather than learn about them and become more comfortable, they work up stereotypes that cause irrational behavior. That same mindset would probably take away cars that go over 80mph . I don't think it will ever get to this (I hate the "slippery slope" argument), but when people yell at you to take away your stuff, you just want to say "shut up and mind your own. I ain't hurtin' no one".
I can't really speak for any other system... my background has given me very limited experience with other first world countries. It has also most definitely influenced the way that I think about gun rights and government in general. I'm sure if I experienced a more socialist government like found in Sweden I'd have much different views... which overall is also interesting. I'm convicted in views based in part on my location in the world. You should see some of the more extreme anti-gun people over here, Tweety- they're sometimes scarier than the ones who walk around with an arsenal on their back.
The laws will then tell you how to safely store the guns so they are unlikely to fall into criminal hands, and require a fairly minimum amount of education before you get to play with guns... Not becuase it's needed if you got your head on right, but because it will hopefully weed out the craziest ones that for everybody's safety shouldnt have a gun...
But, you could go on opposing the attempts to regulate, on basis of fear, principle and ideologi, and in the end it's fairly likely all your fears will be justified, since you leave the lawmaking to the crazies...
I'm not saying I have to solution to your problems, I'm saying you have... But not having laws isn't the solution, history has proved that, just as well as it has proven that unjust laws and corrupt governements means regulation = confiscation... Somewhere there is a middle ground, you can't find it if you refuse all laws as oppressive...
To answer a couple of other things in the post... About Swedish drivers.. There are about the same amount of inattentive soccer moms or morons here as any other place, unfortunately... And I wouldn't say that all "can do that" in terms of drifting, but there is one majour difference in how drivers are educated in Sweden vs the US...
Here you are required to have a certain amount of lessons, on a "skidpad" i a concrete track flooded with water to make it slippery like ice... The reason is simple, every winter the whole country is at some point completely iced over... Even in the most southern parts, one or two weeks of "real winter" occurs... So, it's considered fairly basic to be able to handle an emergency stop or avoiding an obstacle on an icy road... The lessons doesn't make you competent to go drifting, it's more aimed at having experienced how the car behaves on ice, so not to panic once it happens...
And before you get behind the wheel on your own, you have to pass the written and practical exams... Up to that point you are only allowed to practice on closed roads, with an instructor or a parent that has had a very basic course as an instructor... Which i believe differs from how it works in the US?
But, yeah... Most motorheads around here consider it fairly normal to go sideways on dirt roads narrow enough to chip the paint on both fenders at the same time... And it's not limited to the male part of the population... I spent most of my free time the first couple of winters I had a license chasing my mates on dirt roads... And as a sidenote, most Swedish police officers have more practice than young drivers, and better cars... Not the best idea to try and get away...
And how I know that, is another story...
11-02-2011, 03:46 AM
#87
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
As for hanging out... I would probably enjoy a get together with beer and barbeque with the lot of you... Even Old Yeller and me would probably have fun... Heated discussion would probably ensue, but I doubt we would end up swinging...
11-02-2011, 03:50 AM
#88
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
In the very next post he confirms it with all his talk of various "ed's."
Formal education can be a very good thing and it can be a very bad thing as shown by our public education "system", but it's certainly not required to learn how to drive, ride, shoot, hunt, etc.
Formal education can be a very good thing and it can be a very bad thing as shown by our public education "system", but it's certainly not required to learn how to drive, ride, shoot, hunt, etc.
I'm guessing that in your case you would have learned the right way to handle a gun from your parents, and a course to get licensed would be a mere formality... It would however be challenge to some people... And those people are usually the one's I wouldn't want to be around if they handle a loaded gun... I'm not so sure you rally feel differently, even though we have different opinions in other things...
11-02-2011, 05:39 AM
#89
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Big Lick
Posts: 1,090
It strikes me through all this conversation that people have the idea that many/everyone in the US is walking around with guns on their hips like the wild west days. I'd have to look up the statistics to be sure, but I'd hazard a guess that it's a VERY small percentage of the population that does so, and even less that open carry (from what I have seen).
On top of that, I wonder just how many guns (handguns) are stolen each year. I gotta look that up. I asked my son, who is a cop in a city of 25,000. He said he couldn't recall the last time there was a burglery with a gun theft. I just wonder how much information is "inflamed" by each side in trying to support their own position.
(did I do any good at trying to turn this into a political debate?) :-D
On top of that, I wonder just how many guns (handguns) are stolen each year. I gotta look that up. I asked my son, who is a cop in a city of 25,000. He said he couldn't recall the last time there was a burglery with a gun theft. I just wonder how much information is "inflamed" by each side in trying to support their own position.
(did I do any good at trying to turn this into a political debate?) :-D
11-02-2011, 06:26 AM
#90
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Big Lick
Posts: 1,090
Stats are hard to come by, but I did find some info that said handgun thefts are not the largest percentage of those used in crimes. More come from "straw purchases", where someone buys a gun legally for someone else (a criminal), and another larger source is "corrupt" sales to criminals by licensed dealers. Not definitive information, but interesting to debate.
