Anyone Lucky Enough To Live Here? Constitutional Carry States!

#41

@wedge the same reason silencer manufacturers oppose the HPA. The same reason full auto owners oppose the repeal of the NFA. Their cash cow would roll over and die. There are many many people in the 2A community against our constitutional rights. It’s just a shame people won’t wake up.

8 Likes
#42

Interesting discussion, I got stomped hard by a previous moderator for asking if anyone here was a member of the NRA-ILA app some time ago. Huh.

5 Likes
#43

@books I went back and looked at what you were talking about. That moderator did a great job but ran things maybe a little too tight. The current regime realizes you can only control so much content in a 2A community and is trying to find a balance somewhere between a free-for-all and tightening down on certain things. Some light 2A discussion is fine but anything wading into heavy politics/religion/arguing/ranting is gonna get swatted down. I think another thing that got you was mentioning “progressive socialist propaganda” or something to that effect. :+1:t2:

5 Likes
#44

Thank you for that Kona. Much appreciated.

5 Likes
#45

In NJ now… moving to ME in the upcoming months.

Even though they are Constitutional Carry, still going for their permit. There are a few perks the permit offers over restrictions with Constitutional Carry (carry while hunting, and in certain parks).

Plus, I’ve wanted to get my PA non-resident permit for years… but haven’t been able to since I don’t have a NJ permit (need home state permit to apply). It likely would never be used, since I’m going into Federal law enforcement anyway… but I want it just because.

8 Likes
#46

North Dakota checking in…yep. But I still have a class 1 for reciprocity sake. Those con carry are for residents, if ya travel across state lines you still need one, like going to Minne-snowta or South Dakota. BTW this is my first post…hey all.

8 Likes
#47

pffff, I don’t want to hear about your spineless politicians. Jump on over the border here to Illinois and see how good you have it…

Chicago ain’t broke, it’s fixed. ~Dan Proft

7 Likes
#48

Well said, the system is set up to be changed as is necessary. Just look to the civil right verbiage added in our lifetime. That’s why we need to keep pro gun majorities in both house. Notice I said pro gun and not a political party.

8 Likes
#49

welcome to the forum @Sscenters

5 Likes
#51

KKy CC takes effect 7/1/19, hundreds of years after it was codified as a God given right to protect ourself. Been a Ky CCDW permit holder since 1997 and will renew again when needed for interstate CCW reciprocity and for the ease of the 4473 checks. Having said that, those who have the skills and time should be encouraging active shooter, self defense and especially safe storage training so we don’t end up with any ignorance related firearm injuries that the media will use to force the next gen to rescind . Next up is to ask our US Legislators or even POTUS by way of an executive order to drop the ban at Federal properties such as USPS etc.

7 Likes
#52

Chicago messes things up in more ways than you know, skewing for example the numbers cited by gun control advocates. Let me give you some solid numbers you can use the next time someone starts spouting off about 40,000 gun deaths per year. It’s true that the CDC reported 38,658 firearm related deaths in 2016. That is in a total U.S. population of 323,127,513 and therefore represents a comparatively low incidence rate of .00012%. Of these, however, only 11,004 or 28.5% were actually homicides . The remaining 71.5% was composed primarily of suicides (roughly 23,000 or 59.5%), with the remainder consisting of accidental discharge deaths, shootings by law enforcement, justifiable shootings in self-defense and deaths which could not clearly be categorized such as those where it could not be determined whether a death was accidental or a suicide.

Of the 11,004 homicides, a significant percentage were concentrated in three (3) major cities which also happen to have some of the most strict gun control laws in the nation.

687 of them (6.25%) were in Chicago;
275 of them (2.50%) were in Baltimore; and
248 of them (2.25%) were in Detroit (This is an estimate based on historical percentages because the 2016 Detroit data does not break out gun homicides).

In other words, 1,210 or 11% of the 11,004 homicides occurred in just three (3) US cities, all of which have strict gun laws. That leaves 9,794 homicides for the entire remainder of the nation but even that is misleading as some states have more than their share of gun homicides. California, for example had 1,368 of the gun homicides in 2016; 12.4% of the total. And like Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit, California has very strict gun laws. If you subtract the California gun homicides, you are left with just 8,426 to allocate among the remaining 49 states; roughly 172 per state if you divide them equally.

Remember, however, that a substantial percentage of those remaining homicides – at least 30% – involve gang on gang or drug related violence between criminals, and are unlikely to directly impact the average law abiding American. As a result, the “epidemic” of gun related homicides is more like 70% of the remaining 8,426 or a total of 5898 homicides – at least if you do not live in California or one of the three cities referenced above. That translates into an extremely low incidence rate of .0000183.

For more details and citations to the data backing up those numbers, see:
http://joefridaysays.com/Epidemic.html

11 Likes
#53

Man I love it when someone points out facts instead of opinions. After the shooting in New Zealand and the resulting knee-jerk reaction of banning “assault weapons” and large capacity mags there I’m thinking it is going to energize the anti gunners here. Get ready, pretty sure we will see fresh attacks on our inalienable right to keep and bear here in the U.S.A.

10 Likes
#54

South Central KY Whoo Hooo Open carry w/o permit.

7 Likes
#55

Texprep, there’s no doubt that the tragedy in New Zealand will cause more outrage by the liberal left in the USA. DemoRats will never stop attacking our rights as law abiding citizens to own and or carry guns. Encourage your friends to vote them out of office if they want to protect our rights to bear arms. I’m stocking up on ammo. It’s only going to get more expensive.

I just renewed my TEXAS concealed carry permit online. Thankfully it was simple and only took a few minutes.

Thanks MCARBO, I :heart: all my new improved Sub2000. Thanks to all your parts. You have definitely enhanced my rifle. Can’t wait to get for your new Red Dot mount.
Chris your customer service Rocks!

Remember the Alamo!

george :sunglasses::us::octopus:

9 Likes
#56

@Sscenters

Welcome to the M*CARBO Brotherhood.

4 Likes
#57

Wish I lived in one of those states, but alas I’m stuck in kommiefornia :dizzy_face::dizzy_face:

6 Likes
#58

Thanx Lone Wolf… looking forward to hanging out and learning a bit while having fun in the chats.

4 Likes
#59

Proponents of new regulation likely will cite Australia as an example given the proximity to New Zealand and the affection for those laws. Following a widely publicized mass shooting in 1996, Australia enacted sweeping gun control laws. Beginning with a gun buyback program, the laws quickly morphed into restrictions on caliber, barrel length and magazine capacity. You now need to provide a justification to even own a gun and self-defense is NOT a legitimate reason.

Proponents will claim those laws resulted in massive reductions in gun related deaths depending on who is speaking and how willing they are to fudge the numbers. But you have to distinguish between suicides, homicides, accidental deaths and other causes. You also have to understand that gun homicides already were steadily declining in both Australia and the US along with homicides in general and that trend continued after Australia enacted its laws.

I am working on a more detailed presentation and will provide the citation when it is available, but in the meantime there are a couple of key points to know. While gun homicides did decline in Australia after 1996 that may well have just been the continuation of a trend. A 2016 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association looked at the issue and concluded: “There was a statistically significant acceleration in the preexisting downward trend for firearm suicide (ratio of trends, 0.981; 95% CI, 0.970-0.993), but this was not statistically significant for firearm homicide (ratio of trends, 0.975; 95% CI, 0.949-1.001). That means no causal link could be established between the reduction in gun homicides and the Australian laws. The paper went on to make that crystal clear:

There was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997 but also a decline in total nonfirearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude. Because of this, it is not possible to determine whether the change in firearm deaths can be attributed to the gun law reforms.

Read that again. Nonfirearm homicide deaths declined even faster. So something other than the laws clearly is responsible for the reduction in deaths. Many other studies have reached the same conclusion.

Remember too that the US was experiencing a decline in gun homicides without such draconian measures. During roughly the same time period (1993 – 2014), US gun homicides declined from 7 per 100,000 people to 3.6 per 100,000 people, a reduction of 48.6%. At the same time, US gun ownership rose dramatically. (There are lots of ways to determine that percentage – you can average years on each side of the Australian law, etc. The point is that the US also had a big decline; whatever the actual percentage you use.).

To be fair, there were two US measures implemented during that time period; one of which may have had some small impact on the decline. In 1993, the “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act” was passed. It did several things, and has since been amended, but it primarily established the NICS database and the requirement of background checks for all sales through licensed dealers. The second, of course, was the Federal Assault Weapons Ban in effect from 1994 through 2004 which studies have found had no discernable impact on homicides; hardly surprising as so few homicides are committed with long guns. And, of course, there was no spike in the gun homicide rate when the ban expired and such weapons again became available.

To summarize then; 1) there is no solid evidence that the decline in Australian gun homicides was the result of the laws and strong reason to believe other societal forces are driving the trend; and 2) the US experienced similar declines without such laws (yet more evidence of Point One).

9 Likes
#60

welcome to the forum jim @JSimon

6 Likes
#61

guns don’t kill people ,people kill people if these killers didnt have guns they would find another way to do it ; example 130 people killed in niece france not too long ago and some more not long after that in germany london using trucks and cars , so are we going to restrict all of them , im not in the usa but i suport you 2nd amendent

9 Likes