Gun Threads - Merged

[KCFlyer]

Well! Well! Well!....... Looky here! Watch yourself K.C.! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/1...-allowing-concealed-carry-without-permit.html

Yep....good old wild west days. Tell me....would you REALLY feel safe if the person sitting at the table next to yours just bought a gun and was carrying a loaded weapon and their "training" consisted asking the clerk "Where do you put the bullets"?

This is an example of a couple of things. First, you make the assumption that I am anti gun...I'm not. Because I believe that SOME regulation isn't a bad thing, that makes me "anti gun" in NRA land. I've said before....I have a friend at work who has a CCW permit and SHE got hers back in the days when Kansas required some training to conceal carry. She said many of the other women in her class had no business carrying a gun..they were more concerned with "accessorizing" than on how to safely use it.

Today though, they can buy and carry and not have any safety training whatsoever. It's kind of like tossing the keys to the car to a 16 year old who has never been behind the wheel and telling them to have a good time. And instead of admitting that maybe requiring safety training to conceal carry is a good idea, the nutjobs that the NRA has created simply fall back on the 'driving is a privilege, not a right" argument.

I wonder though...Missouri doesn't really like Kansas and vice versa....since Missouri required training to conceal carry, a "buy and tote" Kansan could not carry across the state line without going thru training. I wonder - should Missouri become "buy and tote", will they now welcome Kansans who are also buy and tote into their state with open arms (no pun intended).

 

[KCFlyer]

How many of these CC individuals committed gun crimes? Very few.

Your hysteria over an individual obtaining a CC permit is idiotic at best.

It's not law abiding gun owners can't noting the majority of gun crimes.

Pro tip: Get a clue before you open your mouth. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Where did I say I opposed concealed carry? Where did I say that these people were committing crimes? Here is what I said - in Kansas..and soon to be in Missouri...you can by AND conceal carry without any training whatsoever. I don't necessarily mind concealed carry....I just think that we should *gasp* REGULATE who can carry by requiring them to take and PASS a safety training course. Do I take it to mean that gun safety training is a non issue in your world?

FWIW - I grew up around guns and have had safety training on how to use them when I was young. I don't choose to own them today. My first gun was a .410 shotgun while other kids had BB guns. And here's a toss to Pete....I never owned an non automatic automatic weapon.

 

[KCFlyer]

Based on your ridiculous hysteria, pretty sure you never owned a gun nor even held one.

Pete....is it "hysteria" in saying that I don't oppose concealed carry but that I think safety training should be required? Or does that "non automatic automatic weapon" thing just really get under your skin?

 

[Kev3188]

Thanks, Pete.

 

[KCFlyer]

Pretty sure you never held a gun. Your delicate disposition would send you overboard. You already suffer PTSD just discussing it.

Well Pete...enlighten me...what part of safety training do you disagree with?

 

[KCFlyer]

You know absolutely nothing about firearms.

End of story.

You are getting closer...let's assume you are correct (even though you aren't). In Kansas, I can know nothing about firearms but I CAN walk into my local gun shop...put money on the counter and walk out with a gun concealed on my person. Still WITHOUT knowing a single thing about firearms. You really don't have a problem with that?

You guys like to say "it's not the guns fault" that someone was accidentally shot ..and you'd be right - it isn't...it's the PERSON with the gun that is at fault. I think that the person should be trained on what a gun is...how it works...how to use it...how to use it safely....how to use it safely while defending yourself. You disagree with that?

I haven't said in a single gun related thread that I oppose concealed carry. I HAVE said that concealed carry and/or guns are not the solution to a problem. But I haven't opposed concealed carry. I just said that I believe that if people are allowed to carry guns in public, they should be required to have at least basic safety training.

Tell you what...give your 15 year old a gun, but don't say a word about gun safety when you hand it over...If you oppose safety training to get a CCW, then it's apparently a "sixth sense" that people have and there would be no need to train your kid on safety.

 

[KCFlyer]

Show me the current problem caused by CC persons.

Oh wait, there is none.

Stop saying stupid things.

Why do you ignore the question. It's simple and can be answered with yes or no. Let's try again...Do you oppose gun safety training for people who wish to conceal carry?

 

[KCFlyer]

Is that all you have to do with your life is sit on the Internet all day and come up with idiotic solutions for problems that don't exist?

Get a life.

Why is that you and others on the right, when asked a simple question, resort to insults and/or name calling? And before mentioning anything about a life...remember that this new forum shows who had been agreeing or disagreeing with you....and for a while there were a lot of "Harry Peter disagrees with your comment"...almost like a 3 a.m. twitter rant.

 

[KCFlyer]

Your goal is only to bait people with your idiotic juvenile idiology.

Juvenile ideology would be something like supporting the right for a person to carry a gun in public regardless of whether or not they know how to use it.

This "ideology" that you speak of...In this discussion I never said ban concealed carry. I never said ban guns. I simply said that if one wishes to carry a gun in public, they should have training on how to use it safely. That doesn't sound like a juvenile stance to me. Let me rephrase my argument and let me know if it is still juvenile...and if it is, would you please be so kind as to let me know which part of it is juvenile:

Here we go - "I support an American's right to own a gun, and I support an American's right to carry the gun in public, so long as they have had training in how to use the gun safely. "

What part of that is juvenile, dumb, anti-gun or supports a looney left ideology?

 

[Hackman]

Yep....good old wild west days. Tell me....would you REALLY feel safe if the person sitting at the table next to yours just bought a gun and was carrying a loaded weapon and their "training" consisted asking the clerk "Where do you put the bullets"?

This is an example of a couple of things. First, you make the assumption that I am anti gun...I'm not. Because I believe that SOME regulation isn't a bad thing, that makes me "anti gun" in NRA land. I've said before....I have a friend at work who has a CCW permit and SHE got hers back in the days when Kansas required some training to conceal carry. She said many of the other women in her class had no business carrying a gun..they were more concerned with "accessorizing" than on how to safely use it.

Today though, they can buy and carry and not have any safety training whatsoever. It's kind of like tossing the keys to the car to a 16 year old who has never been behind the wheel and telling them to have a good time. And instead of admitting that maybe requiring safety training to conceal carry is a good idea, the nutjobs that the NRA has created simply fall back on the 'driving is a privilege, not a right" argument.

I wonder though...Missouri doesn't really like Kansas and vice versa....since Missouri required training to conceal carry, a "buy and tote" Kansan could not carry across the state line without going thru training. I wonder - should Missouri become "buy and tote", will they now welcome Kansans who are also buy and tote into their state with open arms (no pun intended).

How would you know how much training someone has? Your believing hear-say evidence and same old regurgitated libtard anti-gun talking points that some friend says they experienced? You were not there, you didn't see or hear anything. You don't know jack about firearms and you have proved it over and over again. You ARE anti-gun, you don't like ANYONE carrying training or not, no matter what you claim. If you knew anything about the NRA, you would know they recommend highly to all, members or not, to take as much firearm training as you can get. They preach firearm safety. Your the nutjob.

Constitutional Carry will be the law of the land, it's already in Kansas and many other states as you know. The NRA hasn't "created" anything, it's in the Constitution. The second amendment states any lawful individual has a right to bear arms, carry license or not. You disagree with it, and that's just fine. However, as a "hair on fire" leftist, you don't have the right to tell others they don't have the right to protect themselves if they so choose. The Supreme Court has overruled you. Get over it and shut up before you make anymore foolish uninformed rants about it.

 

[Traymark]

I Love happy endings.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ws-gun-kills-one-two-suspected-armed-robbers/

 

[Traymark]

And another wonderful bedtime story with of course, a happy ending...

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/1...-alleged-burglars-obviously-missed-that-memo/

 

[Zom JFK]

And another wonderful bedtime story with of course, a happy ending...

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/1...-alleged-burglars-obviously-missed-that-memo/

Yep. I just love happy endings!

 

[delldude]

Good guy with gun meets bad guy with gun.

Police just released video footage of real-life hero stopping an armed robber at an Illinois bank in January, and gun controllers are not going to like it.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/03/15/good-guy-gun-stops-bank-robbery-bad-guy-gun/?sf62885499=1