Nothing to be scared of. There have been multiple studies done that show that an armed citizenry reduces crime. Also, according to state statistics people who are licensed to carry a sidearm almost never commit crimes, and actually prevent a lot of crimes. In America one of the first states that authorized concealed carry was Florida. All of the anti gun people claimed that people would be shooting each other like crazy. But when the law was enacted this just did not happen. Crime actually went down, including firearm crimes. Criminals know that people are armed, so the criminals are less likely to **** with people. Once other states in America realized the benefits of allowing their citizens to carry they started doing the same. Almost ever state in America allows their citizens to carry, some without a license. I don’t mean to be rude, but I think your fear is unfounded and more rooted in the fear of the unknown.
Originally Posted by KaneElson
The 2nd Amendment is part of the American Constitution (Bill of Rights) that says that Americans are allowed to bare arms. It is actually illegal for states to force us to get a license, but they get away with it because most people don’t stand up for their rights.
Originally Posted by syberia
The states that don’t require a license actually have lower crime rates.
The only people that gun laws affect are law abiding citizens. Criminals are just that, criminals, they aren’t going to follow gun laws. Gun laws just hurt law abiding citizens.
Don't bring that 2nd Amendment bullshit into this. It says quite plainly "in a well regulated milita," i.e. not the average joe.
Keep it on your lap maybe?
If i didn't have to go to my Physics Lab i'd come up with some sort of witty, eloquent reply. Basically- Fair enough, if your constitution says you can bare arms then the states shouldn't **** with it (i hate politics). As for liscences, true- ciriminals dont follow law. But on the upside, it one more law to get them on.
Originally Posted by AMH
I'm all for concealed carry, but always carrying 2 spare mags?
Federal law 10 USC 311
Originally Posted by kwoww
a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section
313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States
and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
I don’t like the lap idea, cold steel and testicles are not a good combo.
What happens if I run out of ammo and the ninjers keep coming?
Originally Posted by Bladesinger
Seriously though, the extra weight on the other side of my gun belt keeps things balanced. An unbalance gun belt can really jack up your lower back.
It seems like to me that you are trying to overcome the flooding of your country with firearms by flooding it with even more firearms.
Wow we had about 50 firearm homicides in 2001 http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi066.html
After we had a 35 people killed in tasmania the government enacted a gun buy back scheme and gun crime dropped 30% the following year.
Australia has always had tougher gun laws than the USA, despite its own frontier history and its cultural similarities to the United States. In 2003-04 (financial year) in Australia, 53 out of 305 homicides involved the use of firearms (17%) , while in the United States the number for 2004 was 10,654 out of a total of 16,138 homicides (66%) . It is useful to note that, excluding murders by firearm, that the USA still has a much higher rate than Australia (252 from 20 million versus 5,484 out of 278 million, equating to approximately double the rate of Australia).
Are you sure that law is still in force? If that were true, that would mean that, theoretically, the government would be able to conscript anyone at any time by considering them part of the "unorganized militia." It's really up to the Supreme Court to decide what the constitution means by "well-regulated militia," and from the looks of things it seems that the "unorganized milita" isn't considered "well-regulated."
Originally Posted by AMH
I'm all for owning guns. I just think that having licenses is a necessary safety measure. If you're using it for self-defense, who cares whether you have a license or not? The honest man has nothing to fear. And besides, the states make money off of registration fees.
Of course we have more firearm deaths in America, we have more guns, and neighborhoods with a lot of swimming pools have more drowning deaths.
The benefits out way the cons in my opinion.
America has had gun buy back programs. For what ever reason they did not share the same result that you had.
Yes it is still a valid law; feel free to look it up. I disagree about the licensing, but we may have to agree to disagree. Thanks for the spirited comments. Good night.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO