Believe In Constitutional Carry?

[benjamin101677]

You should let your employer know.
You should let your customer base know so they can & will shop elsewhere.




There's your sign. We don't let cops determine our civil rights. Cops in
fact have been anti-2A especially in California for ages. Now that they're
starting to get burned like us, they're coming around a bit.


Rights are rights sonny.
People traded their lives for freedom.
Too many instances of depts using arbitrary standards to deny.

If the illegal carriers (felons/5150s) can, why can't Joe Blow?

This is exactly what the left does, cancel culture people. Your telling me without knowing me that if I had a gun shop and was a CCW instructor you would boycott and have people spend their money else where. Why? Because I don't agree with you. I think a lot of people do this or say this without thinking.

I am not the only one that voted that it is not a good thing, yet I am the one that is willing to have a discussion as to why I feel this way. Instead of embracing that, and your not the only one it feels like everyone wants to go after my personally without knowing me from smart comments, to people won't spend money if I had a store. All because I think that training is needed, based on my real life experiences. I never said I want to be the only one allowed to carry concealed guns, I never said that all concealed gun was a bad thing. Even the more I think about it constitutional carry it probably different state to state.

You would never force me to agree with you, and if my views which are am willing to put out and have a discussion about in a adult manner caused you not to spend money at my store, etc. well than that be on you.

[oddball]

I would be very shocked if constitutional carry goes to more states, just because of the number of guns in play and carried in states there are going be more wrongful shootings / unjustified shootings which will highlight the news.

The majority of states in the U.S. have constitutional carry/permitless carry now, so you can cry in your pillow now. Your leftist elitist attitude towards carry is no different than the commies "guns should be like driving a car!!" Umm...there is this pesky thing called The 2nd Amendment...

Do America a favor and do not move to a free state, stay right where you are.

[k1dude]

1.) It is a good thing, representationally, to use in future court cases as 'sense of the people' and 'sense
of over half of state legislatures".

2.) As it stands now, many people may get in trouble due to Federal GFSZ laws (Fed Gun Free School Zone
Act), as amended, in late '90s.

'Constitutional carry' and 'reciprocal carry' are useless in school zones (1000' from *edge*, not center, of a school
property). Schools are poorly marked on maps and this is an easy violation - churches have K-3 day schools etc.
The only exemption to this Fed law is if you have a CCW from that actual state or locale, period.

"But Bill, they're not bustin' for that!" - yep. Not directlym and 99% of people will violate with impunity because no
self-defense activity occurred.

But once you DO have to utilize a firearm for SD purposes in a school zone, you and your lawyer will have to document
your behavior to not be up on assault/murder charges. Everything will be fine, except that docmentation to 'competent
authorities' makes it gift-wrapped for a Fed Asst US Attorney.

Even a no-jail minimum-fine misdemeanor violation+confiction of Fed GFSZ will result in your loss of gun rights, only
'fixable' by Presidential pardon.

95% of people should NOT use constitutional carry til this is fixed. It's nice but not worth the risk to your gun rights.

I did not know this. Thanks for the heads-up. If I ever move to a Constitutional Carry state, I'll make sure to get a CCW permit. Not only for GFSZ's in the home state, but for CCW reciprocity when travelling out-of-state.

[oddball]

I did not know this. Thanks for the heads-up. If I ever move to a Constitutional Carry state, I'll make sure to get a CCW permit. Not only for GFSZ's in the home state, but for CCW reciprocity when travelling out-of-state.

I just renewed my LTC (License To Carry), and many people in Texas still use theirs for reciprocity in non CC states, but also in Texas, a LTC holder bypasses the background check when buying a firearm from an FFL, just need to fill out the NICS form. In and out of a gun store in 15 minutes instead of 45 minutes. And it is a good piece of I.D to show to LE because LTC holders go through a thorough background check, it is almost a certified stamp of "good guy".

[boroberson]

It appears only Mississippi has holster requirements. This is what I was able to find on Wiki's constitutional carry page




Also Texas when open carrying a handgun, though it doesn't specify the type of holster required.

[emoji1417]thanks for the answer

[bwiese]

I did not know this. Thanks for the heads-up. If I ever move to a Constitutional Carry state, I'll make sure to get a CCW permit. Not only for GFSZ's in the home state, but for CCW reciprocity when travelling out-of-state.

K1Dude,

Absolutely. This also means/includes _not_relying on reciprocity from another state's
permit because those are not GFSZ-exemptive either

I'm a perfect example: I wanted to legally carry in NV. NV CCW requires in-state class &
firing demo, there's no 'remote' training in CA. I could've gotten an AZ/UT etc CCW easier
and taken class(es) in CA and gottan a AZ or UT etc one that way - and that would've been
OK for reciprocity use in NV and saved me time & grief!

But given I don't know every nook & cranny in Vegas or Henderson (where my 2nd rental
home is) or know where every little church school or private day school is - or know where
adult job training centers are which take school district funds and train HS juniors/seniors
in trades - I could easily be at Fed risk for a lifetime gun ban if I ever had to have even a
legit SD incidence totally cleared by Vegas Metro and Clark Cty DA.

[bwiese]

I just renewed my LTC (License To Carry), and many people in Texas still use theirs for reciprocity in non CC states, but also in Texas, a LTC holder bypasses the background check when buying a firearm from an FFL, just need to fill out the NICS form. In and out of a gun store in 15 minutes instead of 45 minutes. And it is a good piece of I.D to show to LE because LTC holders go through a thorough background check, it is almost a certified stamp of "good guy".

Good points.

Yes, CCW tickets have some side benefits.

[bwiese]

The majority of states in the U.S. have constitutional carry/permitless carry now, so you can cry in your pillow now. Your leftist elitist attitude towards carry is no different than the commies "guns should be like driving a car!!" Umm...there is this pesky thing called The 2nd Amendment...

Yup....
- 27 states now 'constitutional carry' (though Fed GFSZ issues as I reported)
- 44? states "shall issue" with achievable reasonable standards
- and 15? states have general 'non cooperation' laws vs Feds on Fed gun control

Do America a favor and do not move to a free state, stay right where
you are.

Yep, sad I helped this bastard with some Roster questions [except I
think I was help his boss' shop, not just him.]

You can tell he was a former gov't employee.

He also thinks "rights are votable on". Ask the South about that one.

[The Gleam]

I am not the only one that voted that it is not a good thing, yet I am the one that is willing to have a discussion as to why I feel this way.

Probably if you had logged a single post as to your view, that would have been a shoulder shrug and most wouldn't care; few would have agreed, but would have moved on.

There were after all, 2 answers in the poll, and the thread title poses a question which solicits a single answer, not an invite to turn the thread into an argument for your view.

However, you now have the most number of posts in this thread now, which has transcended to advocacy against Constitutional Carry. Once you start preaching, it seems like you then have an agenda against it without contemplating options.

Just as nobody is arguing against the benefit of training, you seem to make it sound as if they are.

The mistake you are making sets up training as mandatory, which is then the welcome mat to it being a licensing/permitting scheme, and subsequently moves it to being a privilege and not a right.

The 'right' part is the point of Constitutional Carry. Training can be promoted, even profitable, by good marketing, expressing the positive attributes of it, showing it is the byproduct of a life well lived, and itemizing advice in showing its benefits, no different than other healthy and safe habits.

How amazing it would be if legislators, teachers, doctors, guidance counselors, employer Human Resource departments, media, fitness-trainers, and life-coach types included the benefits of voluntary firearm training in their regular rotation of advice.

They could take up noting that it pairs well with our 2nd Amendment and its aspect of Constitutional Carry, and how important it is to protect that right through proficiency and meticulous application, rather than making training a mandated hoop to jump through to acquire governmental 'permission' to carry which in the latter, only comes with biased scrutiny and animosity toward the individual and wish to carry.

For much of California, if you have a CCW, you're the subservient bad guy, and that's the marketing scheme Sacramento has been propping up for the past 30 years. Becerra, and now Bonta, at Newsom's prompt, have merely ramped up that disdain by several-fold over the last 5 years. More humanistic consideration and leeway is given to criminals caught carrying illegally, as if they are the unfortunate puppet by-products of gun manufacturers, the NRA, and even Calguns.

It's perverted. We're the good guys, but the law almost treats us as the criminals.

There is a better way to change hearts and minds about making carry ubiquitous and common - but instead, we have the Socialist media working against us with an agenda, and they have the mic.

Don't be their mic.

----

[L84CABO]

The rules always swing one way far and the than the other way far. Give it time in these other states without requirements for innocent people to get killed / hurt by someone who didn't know what they were doing with a gun and see where everything goes.

For laws, and change in people they need a face. Let some ccw holder fire 20 rounds in some situation in a mall and hit a lot of innocent people and see how the views change.

"Views" do not trump rights.

Moreover, CCW has been around for decades and constitutional carry has been around for decades too, albeit for a lesser number of states. However, that's a whole lot of years and we have not seen the "wild wild west" and blood running in the streets that the left has assured us this would lead to. Nor have we seen some person cap off 20 rounds in a mall, hitting a bunch of innocents...or even one innocent to the best of my knowledge.

Now with that said, I'm sure it will happen some day...a CCW holder will be defending himself or others and hit an innocent person. That happens. The police do it from time to time. Because gunfights are chaotic and dangerous. And I'm sure when the day comes, the left will be screaming, "See! We told you!" They will, of course, completely neglect all the times CCW holders have done good and the numerous DECADES where NOTHING happened. The left is corrupt like this and they will completely neglect the facts and details in order to push their stupid agenda. But there is still that pesky Second Amendment so good luck to them and their B.S.

As for the requirement for CCW holders to have training, we can agree to disagree on that. There will always be stupid people in our society. Nothing is foolproof because fools are so ingenious. But I do not believe you structure society to attempt to safeguard it from the lowest common denominator. You can't legislate against stupidity.

Additionally, we have seen...and more than once...somebody who needed to be able to defend themselves but was killed while they were waiting for the paperwork and bureaucratic bullcrap to do so...The young woman who is making her way in this world, working hard and doing everything right, and goes on a couple dates with a dude who turns out to be a major...and dangerous...A Hole. He's not happy about being rejected and so he starts stalking her and threatens to kill her.

That woman needs a gun right G-DAMN now! Not a ten day waiting period from now, and NOT a 6 month to one year bureaucratic process to submit a CCW application...wade through the backlog...take an eight hour training class...wait for the background check to come back...pay $450 in permit fees and training...etc., etc. She'll be DEAD by the time all that crap happens.

To be clear, I absolutely believe in training. But it should not be mandated by law. The ability to defend oneself is the most fundamental and basic of human rights. And any means to hamper that by way of a CCW permit or training process is both unconstitutional and immoral IMO. YMMV.

[SilveradoColt21]

I think the vast majority of us here are believers in constitutional carry

[ar15robert]

IMO good and bad good if your able to own a weapon you should be able to carry it. The bad I can see is a trigger happy person who?s itching to use it for any reason they can.

It will only be a life threatening incident for me to draw mine. As it should be.

[GraveTPO]

I am anti carry without training; I have seen too many people in CCW classes that had 0 clue about things, have no idea when to use force when not to use force. The questions and beliefs that some people have, that the CCW instructors are at least allowed a opportunity to address may have done good.

The life saved with training may just be my life. I have been a deputy sheriff investigating a incident at night when someone scared home owner who had no real training randomly opened fire on us. Could have easily been killed by him.

I think people argue for constitutional carry without thinking about everything A to Z.

I think you've exposed your bias here. Whenever there is resistance to Constitutional carry it is, without fail, police agencies leading the opposition. Behind this vocal group, you may find dissent by those whose income depends on training for Concealed Carry Licenses which, of course, is shamefully self-serving but law enforcement represents the primary hostility to Constitutional carry.

[CheapBloke]

I think the vast majority of us here are believers in constitutional carry [emoji106]

I somehow doubt that. Not you, but a member or 2 of this thread who thinks CC is the law of the land.

When looking at the Text/History/Tradition, between 1790-1869, there is no foundation for anything but constitutional carry.

If like Justice Thomas write is true, and the second amendment is not a second class right and equal to the First and sixth amendments, constitutional carry is the law of the land.

As for States, I preach they no longer have authority under the 10th amendment to regulate firearms.

The first thing you learn in your CCW class is not to escalate situations.
You engaged another in a negative way.
Had you been carrying you would have avoided any conflict that didn?t find you.
Yes someone unlawfully brandished a firearm, as a reaction to your engagement.
Not sure either of you should be carrying, but since it?s legal, you and he both can.
Don?t cuss people out, you won?t have these issues.
Best advice I ever got was;
?keep your big mouth shut?.

Which is it?

[CheapBloke]

The ability to defend oneself is the most fundamental and basic of human rights. And any means to hamper that by way of a CCW permit or training process is both unconstitutional and immoral IMO. YMMV.

[emoji106]

I agree.