Constitutional Carry Act of 2011

[Irving]

I don't support it anymore; posted about it a few days ago

Which thread? I want to read it.

[ghettodub]

Which thread? I want to read it.

Here ya go

http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showpo...5&postcount=59

[Irving]

thank you much. I miss a lot of posts these days.

[CO303]

Getto, I think your argument has some merit. However, maybe an addition to the bill could be an education requirement.

[ghettodub]

Getto, I think your argument has some merit. However, maybe an addition to the bill could be an education requirement.

I would feel a lot better about it if that was the case.

[FireMoth]

Sorry Dub, but I am STRONGLY opposed to your position.

Open carry is already legal throughout the state with a few exception without permitting or education requirement.
Some how, that has not turned this into the wild west.
More over, plenty of people carry illegally anyway. laws, as we know, are for the law abiding.

But i think its most important to recognize what the education requirements have accomplished for the CCW laws as they exist.

We have people who are serious about educating and training themselves getting good information and skill sets, because that's what they would do anyway. We have many more simply going through the process because that is what is required of them. Regardless of the quality of the education beign offered them, they arent absorbing it, because they don't care.

Compounding this is the bad training and misinformation beign offered by oppertunistic people who recognized that attitude as a business opportunity.

Which makes it exactly like the treatment a far more dangerous weapon system has been given for many years.
Most of the people on the road passed the same driving test as the rest of us, but that didn't suddenly make them competent and capable drivers any more than takign trig in high school made them mathematicians.
Yet we don't sit here frightened to go out on the roads or cross streets because of it.

So we come again to what power legislation actually has for enforcement: None at all. If it had enforcement power, we wouldn't be having these discussions , because drugs and murder, and assault, etc. are all illegal.

So i think demanding a training process invites the same sort of bureaucratic bullshit that regulating firearms by 'type' does.
Some one has to make the determination about what training is valid or not, based on whose doctrine got the political clout to be presented. It becomes doctrine, and so does not evolve, despite the fact that conflict is not a static or constant thing. And like the laws regulation firearms and features by type, there will be odd exceptions by the letter of the law simply because of wording, and much that doesn't make sense.
All so you can feel more comfortable with people having a PERCEIVED greater access to arms.
Imagine if this law was presented and passed back when guys like Thell Reed defined action shooting. Then it becomes law that you'd train the way they shoot... but things have changed since then, haven't they?

Something to consider is that if someone illegally conceals under the current laws, you're not going to know about it unless the break a law to be discovered.
If they break a law with the gun, shouldn't THAT be our concern? Not the means, or the pre amble, but the crime?

Then, there is the effect of the current CCW laws. The social implication is that those with free time and disposable income have a greater value to their lives than those who don't. Argue it all you want, but the fact is a society segment that's largely middle class males are NOT the people who most need tools for self defense.
The single Young mother who works herself ragged supporting a kid and going to school, coming and going early and late without escort needs a gun more than i do. But she cant afford the time and money to get a ccw.

And if we already trust people to have guns, what is this training requirement supposed to do about them having a coat over it? does that require greater trust than having a gun in the first place?

And maybe that single mom can afford a CCW and the time to get it... or she can afford ammo and some semi regular practice... but not both. which would you prefer she had? I don't think the current requirements make people feel compelled to continue training, and many don't. So what does it accomplish?

And of course i am posting this on CO-AR15... a rifle user forum. You'd think we of all people would see it as silly to worry about piss ant hand guns as avowed users of a far more violent weapon system that is available to 18 year olds across this country. We don't fight wars with hand guns. Why are we so fussy about them?

I'll tell you why; Fear of the unknown. It can be hidden... but so can lots of things, and life is a gamble. is that driver next to you drunk? or paying attention? who knows. Security cant be promised to anyone, no matter how long it took you to get over being afraid of the dark.

We had a gun law when this country was founded. One, that by its wording should have precluded the writing of any other.
Show me where any of these laws written since then in defiance of that law have improved things, and i'll jump on your training band wagon. untill that is demonstrated... "...Shall NOT be infringed..."

[hurley842002]

The single Young mother who works herself ragged supporting a kid and going to school, coming and going early and late without escort needs a gun more than i do. But she cant afford the time and money to get a ccw.

Good post brother, and AMEN to the above! If this is the ONLY reason (which its not), to pass a constitutional carry, it's good enough for me.

[Irving]

[DeusExMachina]

I like this sudden rash of Rob posting.

Just read it...you need to do a little editing and send that along to every CO senator...seriously.

[newracer]

Very well said.