I agree. As great as total US reciprocity would be it's literally an impossibility.
-
If you are having trouble changng your password please click here for help.
Eliminating Georgia's weapons "license" - For God's sake people, do it!
- Thread starter GeauxLSU
- Start date
I deal with this daily....doing 4473's. Do you really think a NICS background check is that bad or that intrusive in order to obtain a License to carry a firearm??........What about all the people who would NOT pass a NICS check, are you going to feel safe with them walking around carrying a firearm because "they can".......Let me ask you something....
If you were driving your car, minding your own business, obeying all the laws, and someone out of the blue T-boned you, damaged your car, maybe you or your loved ones, and then told you, License?? I don't have a license.....it's my right as an American citizen to drive my car......how would you feel?? It's no different than carrying a loaded firearm. With it like driving, comes a level of responsibility and accountability for our actions....There are lots of people out there that should NOT be allowed to carry a firearm, just as there are lots of people out there that should not drive. Licensing is the best Vetting process we have right now.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 69,473
- Reaction score
- 82,692
Oh my God. I REALLY hope I'm misunderstanding your point because if I'm not you are defending the need for a 'permission slip' to carry. Am I understanding that correctly?
This statement of yours. --> "What about all the people who would NOT pass a NICS check, are you going to feel safe with them walking around carrying a firearm because "they can"
Can you tell me EXACTLY what would change without a GWL from today? Are you suggesting criminals today don't carry because they can't get a GWL?
To answer your question, (I think), yes I'd feel perfectly safe with allowing legal citizens to exercise their Constitutional right and carry any weapon they choose without the need for a permission slip from the government. You would not I take it?
PLEASE tell me I'm completely misunderstanding your point.
Driving is not a Constitutional right and I'm perfectly fine with a driver's license requirement for an infinite number reasons that have nothing to do with guns. As a rule, I'm not scared of guns, or legal citizens with guns.
Last edited:
Licensing is an infringement, plain and simple. I don't believe that you should be required to have one to travel throughout the country either, but that's a separate subject.
I'm not concerned with whether people "feel safe" when it comes to trampling on my rights. Criminals are gonna be criminals with or without a "required" gwcl, and law abiding citizens are gonna continue to obey the law.
The argument carries over to mandatory training. And magazine restrictions. And assault weapons bans. Either bearing and is a free right, or it's not. According to the constitution and the ones who built this country, it's a right.
Yep.......your both correct!!
how many criminals do you know who subject themselves to a nics check before they carry? the only people being infringed are law-abiding citizens...there is no amendment covering driving a car....people have become so accustomed to having their rights infringed they not only don't notice they actually believe it is a good idea...that seems especially true for gun owners....licensing doesn't stop a single criminal from carrying nor using a gun to commit a crime (in addition to the crime of being a felon in possession of a firearm)..
Friendly daily reminder that the authors of the Constitution were domestic terrorists according to the legitimate controller of the territory at the time and nowhere in 2A is "law-abiding citizen" mentioned as a prerequisite for exercising the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. If being a "law-abiding citizen" as determined by "the government" was required in order to exercise 2A in 1776, it is quite possible that Queen Elizabeth II would be our Head of State in 2016.
It's a divisive tactic used by those on both sides who wish to disarm the populace. Keep in mind some of the "laws" we've had in this State over the years. http://www.findingsources.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/jimcrowlawsgeorgia.pdf
What a wonderful way to lose your Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The "criminal" excuse is how they managed to get the NFA and GCA passed, along with Clinton's AWB. They'll continue to use that line because people are scared to death of "unsavory folks" exercising their freedoms.
One final note on my rant: innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of your peers. A criminal is not a criminal until a conviction.
It's a divisive tactic used by those on both sides who wish to disarm the populace. Keep in mind some of the "laws" we've had in this State over the years. http://www.findingsources.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/jimcrowlawsgeorgia.pdf
What a wonderful way to lose your Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The "criminal" excuse is how they managed to get the NFA and GCA passed, along with Clinton's AWB. They'll continue to use that line because people are scared to death of "unsavory folks" exercising their freedoms.
One final note on my rant: innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of your peers. A criminal is not a criminal until a conviction.
i thought the conviction part was understood
...i do agree to a point, murder, rape, burglary, home invasion, assault and battery, that sort of thing should disqualify one from possessing a firearm...non-violent drug felonies not so muchi thought the conviction part was understood
No free man should be denied his rights. If a man is a danger to society as per conviction, he should not be walking freely among the population. But if a man had been convicted, served his time, and been released...why shouldn't be able to defend himself?
make a choice to commit a felony, if it is first offence one can go through a process to get rights back and the felony expunged...i don't have a problem with consequences for breaking the law...again, i'm talking about violent offenses, not property crime...
