tuscl

VA passes law allowing concealed weapons in bars and clubs.

Thursday, July 1, 2010 10:29 PM
In VA it is now legal to have a concealed weapon in a bar/club as long as you 1. have a concealed weapons permit 2. you can not drink in said bar/club if you are carrying a concealed weapon. Now I support gun rights, but how is this a good idea? Alcohol, half-naked ladies, and guns do not mix period. I was really looking forward to going to the strip club later this month but might not go simply because of this change in the law. The news did not mention strip clubs but I would assume strip clubs are legally seen as clubs and with the location of Richmond clubs already kind of iffy and it has me a little worried. One caveat to this law is that the owners may place a sign that says no guns allowed and if they catch someone on the property with a concealed weapon regardless of permit status they're allowed to force the person to leace or face charges of tresspassing. Bar owners across the state fought this law and are not happy to see that it passed. I suppose on the upside this will create more jobs for security because I cannot imagine any strip club wanting a customer walking in with a concealed weapon. More bouncers will probably be needed to keep weapons out of the strip clubs

64 comments

  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    While Kentucky does not allow carrying (concealed or otherwise) in any establishment that "serves alcohol by the drink", it does have the provision in law that *any* property owner can prohibit the carrying of deadly weapons if they so choose, similar to the VA provision you mention above. Seems to work out pretty well.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    In Florida I have been told two things about concealed weapons in bars. With a carry permit, one can carry in an establishment that has a bar AND food service, but you can not sit at the bar. Another, no carry is allowed in a place where alcohol is served. Both were told to me by the police. I wrote to my state representatives and AG as to the true intent of the carry laws. I received no reply. Typical! I carry, but rarely sit at a bar. Never had a problem.
  • bigdude012
    •
    14 years ago
    I'm just curious how that is enforced. I'm assuming that if you have a concealed weapon on a bar you have some sort of obligation to let the owner know (not necessarily legal, but definitely a practical one) that you're packing heat. I can't imagine this scenario: Dude walks up to bar for a drink, bartender asks for his ID and if he has a gun. In any event the fact is if someone wants to bring a gun in a club and start shit there is no law that's going to stop them.
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    don't go to strip clubs with metal detectors, sure they feel safe inside but what about all the people waiting outside with guns...they know you don't got one
  • sanitago
    •
    14 years ago
    damn, I have to agree with the statement that this is only good for folks looking to work as bouncers! does anyone, anywhere really think guns and booze mix any better than booze and cars? even if you're not drinking (and I have to agree, how is that going to be checked or enforced), what happens if a bar fight breaks out and one of the people caught up in it is the person with a gun? why do I see "Gunfight at the OK Corral" being remade?
  • CTQWERTY
    •
    14 years ago
    Woo-hoo! I'll bring my horse whip next time I visit 'Ye Ol' Paper Moon - Springfield' so I can keep the ingratious, obnoxious DJ 'behaved'.
  • SnakePlissken
    •
    14 years ago
    I am a Virginia resident and have had a concealed carry permit for about 2 years. I carry a Walther PPK .380 caliber with me whenever I leave the house, and like previous extensions of the rights of concealed carry owners, I'm glad to see the rights of law abiding gun owners extended, but once again I'm insulted by the insinuations by those opposed that this is going to lead to put people in danger. To get my concealed carry permit, I had to pass a criminal and mental health background check, take a class where a retired cop told all prospective concealed carry holders when and where they could legally use their weapons, and then go to a firing range and demonstrate that I could safely operate and accurately fire my handgun. Just like every time the right to carry has been introduced or extended, people like you claim that this is going to lead to rampant gun battles and murders; as if all the people who want to concealed carry are violent rednecks, just itching for some excuse to play Dirty Harry with real bullets. And every time, they have been wrong and crime has dropped and not risen. Actually, in two other right to carry states, Florida and Arkansas, concealed carry owners were shown to be 300 and 1,000 times less likely to commit a violent crime than average citizens. If the average American was as likely to commit a crime as the average concealed carry permit holder, the US would have the least crime of any country on the planet. I can tell you exactly how this is going to play out. The Democrats, Million Mom March-type housewives, and do-gooder college students are going to piss and moan for about a week, saying that very soon our state is going to look like Mogadishu or Baghdad, then nothing will happen and everyone will go on with business as usual. Then another bill that extends gun owner rights will be put before the legislature and the same hysterical predictions will be made.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    SP, The anti folks ALWAYS plead "bloodbath" to make their point, when in FACT, it never happens. Most of those, "bloodbaths" happen in gun free zones with ILLEGAL guns. Every great once in a while the anti media acknowledges a legal gun stopping a "bloodbath". I heard it in Florida when the carry law was debated and, of course, once again, when the castle doctrine was extended outside the home.
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    There was a town in GA I think called Kennesaw that had a mandatory gun law. It decreased the crime rate for Kennesaw and helped it generate tourism as the town was known as "gun town"
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    ss1, You are correct. Homeowners had to have a gun in their home. The bad guys don't like to be bad guys on a level playing field!
  • EarlTee
    •
    14 years ago
    Arizona takes the prize. A law was just passed allowing concealed carry without a permit.
  • bigdude012
    •
    14 years ago
    @SnakePlisskin I assuming the comment was directed at me. I'm not claiming that this is going to lead to rampant gun battles and murders; my point was simply that it was unnecessary.
  • shadowcat
    •
    14 years ago
    Why a concealed weapon? If you carry a gun for your protection, why not wear it visible? Seems to me that would be a deterent.
  • shadowcat
    •
    14 years ago
    Also it would eliminate a stripper asking "is that a gun or are you just happy to see me?"
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    EarlTee: Vermont and Alaska have had no permit concealed carry for several years.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    shadowcat: An openly carried gun protects the carrier for the deterrent reason you give. A *concealed* weapon,'on the other hand, protects *everyone*, since the bad guys don't know who's carrying and who isn't. :) Another reason I've heard forwarded is that, even in places where open carry is permitted, actually doing so may get you charged with something like "creating ampubkic nuisance" or "disturbing the peace" when some idiot freaks out when they see a gun.
  • jabthehut
    •
    14 years ago
    bigdude, you said, "Alcohol, half-naked ladies, and guns do not mix period.", yet you set forth the jist of the law. In VA it is now legal to have a concealed weapon in a bar/club as long as you 1. have a concealed weapons permit 2. you can not drink in said bar/club if you are carrying a concealed weapon. Did you not read the part that said "you can not drink in said bar/club?" I'm assuming that bars/clubs were in the VA law as places that gun toting was illegal and the legislature decided why not and changed the law.
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    shadowcat says: Posted: 07/02/10 Also it would eliminate a stripper asking "is that a gun or are you just happy to see me? ------------------------------------------------------ in my case.. the answer might be both! lol
  • potheadpl
    •
    14 years ago
    Of course nothing bad will happen from this. People who go to all the trouble to get a concealed carry permit tend to stay out of trouble. Open carry would deter criminals, no doubt.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    I can tell you this, I make no bones that I carry, and I KNOW that I have NOT been involved in scuffles because others KNOW I carry. They listen when I restore calm!
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    "Now I support gun rights, but how is this a good idea?" It isn't...guns & bars have a loooong history of this country of not mixing well at all. Welcome to the Old West VA! "Bar owners across the state fought this law and are not happy to see that it passed." Thanx NRA! ------------------------ "To get my concealed carry permit, I had to pass a criminal and mental health background check, take a class where a retired cop told all prospective concealed carry holders when and where they could legally use their weapons, and then go to a firing range and demonstrate that I could safely operate and accurately fire my handgun." Great...now try & do all of that while you're drunk off of your ass...ugh... ---------------------- "Most of those, 'bloodbaths' happen in gun free zones with ILLEGAL guns." Sheer & utter nonsense. The deadliest peacetime shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S history, on or off a school campus, occurred at VA Tech by a gunman that purchased guns through legal loopholes that allowed him, an individual adjudicated as mentally unsound, to purchase handguns without detection by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). --------------------------- "There was a town in GA I think called Kennesaw that had a mandatory gun law. It decreased the crime rate for Kennesaw" Statistical analysis of data over a long period of time did NOT show ANY evidence that the town's law reduced the rate of home burglaries in Kennesaw, period. -------------------- "A *concealed* weapon,'on the other hand, protects *everyone*, since the bad guys don't know who's carrying and who isn't" ...which perpetuates a pattern of living in fear for which the Right-wing in this country derives much of its power. ------------------------------ "Did you not read the part that said 'you can not drink in said bar/club?'" Did you not use your head & realize (as has already bee pointed out) that there's really no way to enforce that law, since the people in question will be carrying *concealed weapons*, which are, by definition, not in view of the people in the bar that are dispensing alcohol?? Did you also not read that many bar owners themselves were apparently against this law in the first place?? Sheesh... ------------------------- "They listen when I restore calm!" Nobody listens to a proven idiot racist like you clubber...
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    YAWN!
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    Since this topic is again active, one simple fact seems to always be omitted when talking guns, carry, bars, shootings, whatever. You do not see incidents where legally carried guns are used by the responsible owner in an illegal manner. Illegal guns are the problem, not legal ones. Criminals , by definition, do not care how many laws they break. However, they DO care about breaking into a house with an ARMED owner, or trying to rob and ARMED citizen!!!
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    New Mexico passed a similar law to this. As in VA, any owner of a restaurant, bar, or club can post a sign banning guns inside. That would seem to make the establishment owners satisfied, and keep the law in line with constitutional provisions. However, the establishment owners typically resent that law, because they think having a "no guns allowed" sign will hurt their business. Would a "no guns allowed" sign actually cause any of you to refuse to patronize a particular establishment?
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    Also, I have the impression that in all states, drinking alcohol while carrying a gun outside one's own domicile is prohibited. Any information to the contrary?
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    <"There was a town in GA I think called Kennesaw that had a mandatory gun law. It decreased the crime rate for Kennesaw" Statistical analysis of data over a long period of time did NOT show ANY evidence that the town's law reduced the rate of home burglaries in Kennesaw, period. > MG: How come the original poster said "crime rate" and you rebut (if it can even be called a rebuttal without a citation) with alleged statistics of *one* category of crime? Isn't that what's commonly referred to as a "straw man" argument? Or maybe "selective observation".
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    Don't be surprised, georgmicrodong. MG is a leftist, and therefore an enemy of the United States.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    gmd, ANYTHING, when it comes to the village idiot deserves no more than a YAWN from me. Reason, simple. He was caught in a bold faces lie and refuses to even admit it. Now, likely, he will barf up his typical, "Oh yeah, well prove it." Of course this is many many posts after it occurred and certainly not worth my time to research. The village idiot...YAWN!
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    "You do not see incidents where legally carried guns are used by the responsible owner in an illegal manner." LOL...dude, there was an article just recently highlighted on this very discussion board where some guy shot an innocent bystander in a club while carrying a CCW! Wake up! "Illegal guns are the problem, not legal ones." Easy access to guns is the problem, not common-sense laws that restrict some access to guns, period. --------------------------- "Would a 'no guns allowed' sign actually cause any of you to refuse to patronize a particular establishment?" Nope. ------------------------- "How come the original poster said 'crime rate' and you rebut (if it can even be called a rebuttal without a citation) with alleged statistics of *one* category of crime?" LOL...after the 1982 law (which required almost every head of household residing in the city limits to maintain a firearm & ammunition) was passed in Kennesaw, GA, prominent gun right activist David Kopel claimed that there was evidence that this gun law reduced the incident rate of home burglaries in the first year of its existence. However, statistical analysis of data over a much longer period of time did NOT show ANY evidence that the law reduced the rate of home burglaries in Kennesaw, GA. [view link] [view link] Hemenway, David (2006). "Private Guns, Public Health". Ann Arbor, Mich: University of Michigan Press. pp. 65. ISBN 0-472-03162-7. "...a careful analysis of the data did not show that guns reduce crime." Squires, Peter (2000). "Gun culture or gun control?: firearms, violence and society". New York: Routledge. pp. 82. ISBN 0-415-17087-7. "Later research, however, found no reduction in Kenensaw burglary rates when the figures were re-examined over a longer time period." This story, which samsung1 got slightly wrong, is a MYTH, period end of story. ----------------------------- "ANYTHING, when it comes to the village idiot deserves no more than a YAWN from me" ...because you simply don't know how to respond in any meaningful way to my pwning you over & over again old man...lol...run along now...
  • bigdude012
    •
    14 years ago
    I'd just like to make something clear: I never mentioned a crime rate in my original post. Just the simple fact that the parking lot at the Richmond Club I go to has no lights.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    The original comment was about a lower "crime rate" and you continue to claim that an unchanged "home burglary rate" is a refutation of that. I call "straw man".
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    YAWN!!
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    gmd, You are wasting your time. You can use "ignore" on the village idiot, but then you will miss some good laughs at his idiocy. You will notice that he didn't bring up his being caught in bold faces lies, as he was. Of course, if he does, I'll ask that you refer back to my previous post about this. bd012, I mentioned the crime rate.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    In fairness to MG, the person who originally posted should also have cited facts to support the statement as well. The fact that it would be quick and simple for others to do so does not relieve that person of the burden of proof. I was simply commenting on the inconsistency, some might say hypocrisy, of requiring rigor in others' fact checking, and then not employing that same rigor oneself.
  • SnakePlissken
    •
    14 years ago
    "Great...now try & do all of that while you're drunk off of your ass...ugh... " Just goes to show that you think all gun owners are stupid psychopathic hillbillies who need one little push to let their homicidal fantasies run wild. Once again, the law said you cannot drink in the establishment. You claim that that is unenforceable. It's just as unenforceable as the laws that say you can't carry concealed weapons into a restaurant at all, that you can't carry weapons at all, and that declare certain places "gun free zones". I went to school at Virginia Tech and was on campus the day of the shooting, a lot of good our being a "gun free zone" did us then.
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    In simple terms: if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. (...and you'll be violating the US Constitution...)
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    gmd, Excellent point, but when dealing with the village idiot, any source of support/proof/reference from anyone right of socialist, well he immediately claims it comes from a right wing fascist and is a lie. Soooo, I no longer bother with it. For others: "After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982. And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998."
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    <"A *concealed* weapon,'on the other hand, protects *everyone*, since the bad guys don't know who's carrying and who isn't" ...which perpetuates a pattern of living in fear for which the Right-wing in this country derives much of its power.> As opposed to the *left-wing* engendered pattern of fear mongering around letting law abiding citizens exercise their Constitutional rights. The only people who have to "fear" me are those that wish to do me or mine harm.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    gmd, Unfortunately, we do have to live in fear to a certain degree. Is one thing responsible, of course not. The reasons are many. I agree with you. No need to fear me unless you intend to do harm to mine or me!
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    I see no reason to live in fear. Of anyone.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    gmd, Wonderful, but very foolish.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    Read what I said, Clubber. "Live in fear", the phrase *you* used, is not the same as occasionally feeling fear about a particular thing for a brief period of time.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    mgd, True enough, sorry. Although, these days with people that have stated they would love nothing better than to kill Americans...
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    "The original comment was about a lower 'crime rate'" ...for which there is NO evidence to support such a claim, period. ------------------------------- "You will notice that he didn't bring up his being caught in bold faces lies" Physician heal thyself, moron. "I mentioned the crime rate" ...for which, again, there is absolutely ZERO evidence for Kennesaw, GA, period end of story. -------------------------- "Just goes to show that you think all gun owners are stupid psychopathic hillbillies who need one little push to let their homicidal fantasies run wild." Who ever said that? Not I...now *that's* a strawman argument! "Once again, the law said you cannot drink in the establishment" ...and there is literally *no way to enforce that law*, since the people carrying weapons will be doing so in a *concealed* way. "I went to school at Virginia Tech and was on campus the day of the shooting" ...and that shooting would have *never happened* had VA not made it easy for someone with obvious mental issues to purchases guns, period. --------------------------------- "'After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.'" LOL...thanx so much for repeating the same nonsense that was already *refuted* by later research...what an idiot you really are old man! Let's also ignore the *mass shootings* that have occurred in & near Kennesaw, GA: [view link] And BTW, according to the Kennesaw, GA police department, they don't enforce that ordinance! LOL... -------------------------------------- "As opposed to the *left-wing* engendered pattern of fear mongering around letting law abiding citizens exercise their Constitutional rights." Who's doing that?? Look, if you want to live in fear of what the boogeyman *might* do you, then fine...own a gun, heck own a more than one gun & keep it your home for self-defense. IMHO, everyone has an inherent right (not a Constitutional one, since the 2nd Amended refers to a "well-regulated militia", which we don't need anymore) to self-defense. If you want to own guns for target shooting or hunting, then fine...but you don't have a Constitutional right to do such things. Just because one doesn't have a Constitutional right to something doesn't mean that it's necessarily wrong. Keeping guns out the hands of people that shouldn't have them isn't all that hard to do...common-sense gun laws, when applied across the board, do that very nicely. We really, really don't need to go back to Old West mentality...that doesn't serve anyone's best interest. -------------------------- "Unfortunately, we do have to live in fear to a certain degree" ...which is why you carry a gun around, moron. The reality is that I'm just as safe as you are, and I don't need to carry a gun. Keep living in fear though, and thanx (once again!) for proving my point!
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    YAWN!!!
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    <<"The original comment was about a lower 'crime rate'">> <...for which there is NO evidence to support such a claim, period.> Then why not just say that, rather than attempting to refute the claim with a statistic which is, at best, misleading? <<"Once again, the law said you cannot drink in the establishment"> <...and there is literally *no way to enforce that law*, since the people carrying weapons will be doing so in a *concealed* way.> And likewise, there was no way to enforce the previous law forbidding them entirely, since the people carrying weapons will be doing so in a *concealed* way. <LOL...thanx so much for repeating the same nonsense that was already *refuted* by later research...what an idiot you really are old man!> Then cite it, rather than making bald faced assertions without proof, a practice you decry in others. <<"As opposed to the *left-wing* engendered pattern of fear mongering around letting law abiding citizens exercise their Constitutional rights.">> <<Who's doing that??>> I hear it myself rather often. Hell, I've been the *subject* of that, just because somebody caught sight of my gun. Fortunately, I live in a state that recognizes my right to own a gun, and when I handed the officer my permit, he advised the other party to not panic. <not a Constitutional one, since the 2nd Amended refers to a "well-regulated militia", which we don't need anymore> Fortunately, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. As have many before and since the Amendments were adopted. "The plain language of the amendment, without attenuate inferences therefrom, shows that the function of the subordinate clause was not to qualify the right, but instead to show why it must be protected." -(U.S. v. Emerson, 46 F.Supp.2d 598 (N.D.Tex. 1999)) [view link] <Physician heal thyself, moron.> [view link] A tried and true tactic for one whose case is absent or weak, and wishes to distract the audience from that fact. [view link]
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    MG's most recent post has a very interesting line: "IMHO, everyone has an inherent right (not a Constitutional one, since the 2nd Amended refers to a "well-regulated militia", which we don't need anymore) to self-defense." The constitution and the declaration from which it eventually arose acknowledge that our rights (such as the right to life, including self-defense as MG notes) are indeed inherent ("inalienable"), and NOT from the government. The 2nd amendment does refer to the militia, as it advises how citizens can protect themselves, their property, and their rights... from the government. The "militia" is explicitly not part of the government, but a protector against oppression from the government. So, when MG says we don't have a constitutional right to self-defense, there is a logic that could defend such a statement, although it is surely anathema to MG...
  • R.Giskard
    •
    14 years ago
    I just think it's real simple. Say I have a simple mind but, I just think ... The More Guns There Are The More People Get Shot. I just don't think it's any more complicated than that. And yes, I think, the more guns there are, the more "bad guys" will have guns. I think you're much more likely to shoot your self or someone you know, by accident or on purpose, or your kids find your gun and shoot them selves or one of their little friends, or you, by accident or on purpose, than you ever are having to defend your self against anyone else with a gun. How often do you hear about some poor slob, lost his job or is getting a divorce, kills his kids his wife and sometimes the in laws, then himself. Dude, you feel you gotta do that start with yourself. I ALMOST never hear about some guy saving is wife and kids or anyone in a shoot out with the bad guys. Frankly, the thought of someone "packin" in a bar or anywhere doesn't make me feel more comfortable ... at all. Call me unenlightened but, I don't know this guy, I don't know why he's there, I don't know whats in his head. I don't want to have to wonder or worry about these things when I'm out tryin to have a good time, just because this guy wants to play cowboy. All I know is he can take my LIFE, every thing I have and ever will have. Take me away form my family and anyone who cares about me, just about as easily as pointing his finger at me. You're gonna KILL someone you ought to have to at least get within arms length, you ought to at LEAST have to break a sweat. And no I don't want to have to carry a "piece" on me just to have to feel more comfortable around cowboy Bob. I know a lot of guys who looove guns. more than one of them I wouldn't trust with a butter knife on some nights. Not because they're bad guys, just because they're not entirely very bright and they like to get way too drunk for their own good or anyone else's. When ever I get into this discussion with anyone I know, all I usually have to say to shut them up is "Jimmy owens a gun and its legal for him to carry it". How many of you guys know "Jimmy"??? And what if Jimmy comes packin for me some night? " Welll gosh Jimmy, juss juss leme git my gun so we can make this fair, juss a sec lemee get this thing loded first, ok". Life can be HARD. It's TOUGH some times. Some times it's REALLY tough. Shit HAPPENS to good people. People can make you MAD! REALLY MAD!!! It's WAY too easy to start spraying bullets around and the consequences far too great when there's a gun ... RIGHT THERE... I don't have any facts or statistics or studies to back up anything I think. All I think I have is a little more common sense than a lot of people.
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    ok i'm gonna chime in now, mainly to answer r.g. the reason you always hear about the poor slob that lost his job and gunned down his family is because the media loves stories like that because they sell newspapers and increase tv news ratings. there are stats that show that citizens that produce/show a gun during the early stages of a situation prevent approx 2 million crimes a year. they didn't need to have a shootout, just letting the badguy know that they had a gun usually sent the badguy scurrying away. the major media doesn't report those stats because they are among the group that want to put an end to the 2nd ammendment, funny thing is once the 2nd ammendant falls the media's fave 1st ammendment will follow and they seem to be blind to that possibility. what you don't seem to realize is if you're out in public in a fairly populous area you are among people illegally carrying concealed weapons. why do you feel safe among them but not safe among someone that has passed a background check and taken training to legally carry? you didn't know that people illegally carry? well that's what criminals do and the bullshit society that we have morphed into is full of criminals and predators that would prefer to take whatever they want as opposed to work for and buy it. it's already been stated that in most if not all places even legal carry permit holders can not carry when drinking. any that do are breaking the law. i'm curious as to why if you think jimmy is such a loose cannon why do you even associate with him or put yourself in a situation where you will be around him? or why haven't you said or done anything about that situation to change it? in a perfect peacefull world we wouldn't need to own or carry guns but last time i checked the world is not perfect or peacefull. utopia may be somewhere but i haven't run acroos it yet. when the criminals and predators start practicing "common sense" maybe us other not so common sense guys will consider an alternative.
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    i see i misspelled a word or 2, it would be nice if we had an edit feature for our comments.
  • R.Giskard
    •
    14 years ago
    We're ALL Jimmy. Under the right or wrong circumstances, under the right or wrong conditions on the right or wrong night or day we're ALL Jimmy. I know I am.
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    Good post, troop. Ironically, the same "media" that would like to see the 2nd amendment abolished don't actually care about the 1st either. Leftists generally HATE for others to offer opinions different from their own. They eschew debate and discussion, and prefer character assassination of their ideological opponents. See the "Journo-List" scandal for recent examples...
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    regarding jimmy.. sure we all have it in us, that's part of being a human and more proof that we will never reach utopia, but the ones with a moral conscious and ethical behaviour will control ourselves. i've had a carry permit for a couple years. before that i sometimes carried but always kept a gun within easy access in my vehicle for over 20 years, sometimes legally per ohio law, often illegally. i don't/didn't have that gun to throw my weight around or flash to prove i was a tough guy. it was just for a last resort situation to protect myself. there were times that i was driving under the influence or pissed but i never pulled/flashed it or threatened anyone with it in all of those years. there were a couple times where i would have been justified to do so though but i was able to control the situation through other means. that was my form of gun control.
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    and @ how.. thanks and you are right, the left's free speech ends when it disagrees withn their version of free speech.. hence the so called "fairness" doctrine that some politicians would like to pass.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    how, Real simple... Those referred to as our Founding Fathers carried. They were intelligent men that understood that just writing down amendments would mean nothing if they could not be protected. The Founders, well, they carried and knew that to protect themselves and their rights, they might have to use force. As for the militia (citizens army) part, they knew that the 2nd was NOT for any government, but for non-government individuals.
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    "Then why not just say that, rather than attempting to refute the claim with a statistic which is, at best, misleading?" We've been over & over this at length by now, and the Kennesaw, GA gun "miracle" is pure fiction, period end of story. "there was no way to enforce the previous law forbidding them entirely, since the people carrying weapons will be doing so in a *concealed* way." LOL...so much for the rule of law then eh?? I don't think so...CCW is a bad idea all around. This isn't the Old West! "Fortunately, the Supreme Court disagrees with you" ...for now. ;) ----------------------- "The 2nd amendment does refer to the militia, as it advises how citizens can protect themselves, their property, and their rights... from the government." Nonsense, militias were used to defend the populace before we had a standing army, and they are obsolete now, period. --------------------------- "I think you're much more likely to shoot your self or someone you know, by accident or on purpose, or your kids find your gun and shoot them selves or one of their little friends, or you, by accident or on purpose, than you ever are having to defend your self against anyone else with a gun" ...and studies have shown that again & again. I still say again that if someone wants to own a gun for self-defense of their own home that they should be allowed to do, but the feeling to do so mostly comes from an irrational fear of something that will likely never happen. --------------------------- "what you don't seem to realize is if you're out in public in a fairly populous area you are among people illegally carrying concealed weapons." No, you really aren't...there's that irrational fear again...ugh... "the bullshit society that we have morphed into is full of criminals and predators that would prefer to take whatever they want as opposed to work for and buy it." And there's that irrational fear on display yet again...ugh... "it's already been stated that in most if not all places even legal carry permit holders can not carry when drinking" ...and it's already been said that there's *no way to enforce that law*! ------------------------------ "Leftists generally HATE for others to offer opinions different from their own" ...in your own, highly-warped mind that is...ugh... "See the 'Journo-List' scandal" ...which is another huge load of baloney. The idea that the media "killed" the Jeremiah Wright story is ludicrous...it was all over the news at the time! The idea that the federal govt. could ever "shut down" Fox "News" is also equally ludicrous. Dream on wing-nut... ------------------------------ "it was just for a last resort situation to protect myself." It was there because you were/are afraid troop. Just admit that to yourself. I personally don't care if you acknowledge that fact here...just be honest with yourself. "there were times that i was driving under the influence or pissed but i never pulled/flashed it or threatened anyone with it in all of those years" ...which makes you lucky...nothing more, nothing less. BTW, you're proving my points very nicely... ;) "the left's free speech ends when it disagrees withn their version of free speech.. hence the so called 'fairness' doctrine that some politicians would like to pass." LOL...conservative talk radio was alive & well before Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine. Afraid of equal time for opposing views eh?? What a surprise...lol... -------------------------- "Those referred to as our Founding Fathers carried." All of them?? I doubt it, moron, but continue your ignorance anyways...you appear to revel in it...lol...
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    1st of all, maybe in utopia you aren't among illegal weapon carriers, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there. refusing to realize it doesn't make it not true. you like to quote certain crime stats but seem to ignore the other crime stats regarding street crimes etc. 2nd, oh there aren't any criminals and predators roaming the streets? my mistake, i guess it's just all of the legal carrying yahoos that i mistook for predators. i'll pay more attention next time. 3rd, true, that law can not be enforced just as 99% of all laws can not be enforced if people choose to disregard them either. the law often enters into a situation as a reaction to something that happened as opposed to a deterrant to something about to happen. well this selective quoting is just that.. selective. pick and choose a bit of this or a bit of that without considering the whole picture but i will respond to your other comments. 1. afraid? lol.. ya mon i piss my pants every day whenever i step out the door. living in an area where thugs run in packs it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. i know people that were victums of gang violence and random attacks robberies road rage etc and i have been approached by thugs looking for trouble and also road rage incidents but as i said i was able to control the situation without having to produce a gun. having a gun is for the possible time when reason, attitude, whatever fail. nothing more nothing less. 2. and exactly what point of yours did i prove by having a gun while under the influence or in a pissed mood and never brandishing it? your point that there are people that can carry and excercise self control at the same time? not your point? well that's my point. 3. if i was afraid of equal time i would support the fairness doctrine which i don't and i wouldn't take the time to respond to your comments which i did. we may not agree on issues such as this but i have no problem reading your opinion even though i may disagree with it. i do wonder though why you take part of a quote and twist it to match your point of view but if that's how you roll, fine, roll on. like i said i chimed in to respond to r.g. i'd much rather discuss my interest in strippers in other threads than get into an ongoing discussion with someone that won't change my opinion and who's opinion won't be changed by me. we can agree to disagree pretty much sums it up imo.
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    YAWN!!!!
  • SnakePlissken
    •
    14 years ago
    "Who ever said that? Not I...now *that's* a strawman argument!" That's the whole thrust of your argument, people are too volatile to be trusted with guns, and for their own good shouldn't be allowed to have them. "...and there is literally *no way to enforce that law*, since the people carrying weapons will be doing so in a *concealed* way" Actually, there is, if you're a concealed carry permit holder and you get arrested for public drunkenness or drunk driving with your gun, you lose your permit. And your logic doesn't make sense, if every form of law regarding a concealed weapon is unenforceable due to their concealed nature, what's the point of prohibiting it? If we shouldn't allow concealed carry owners to go into bars which serve drinks as long as they're not drinking, then say that this law is unenforceable, then this whole discussion is academic because concealed gun owners are either going to do what they want, or they're actually going to take guns into bars and restaurants now, which they weren't previously since they weren't allowed, showing that they are actually capable of following concealed carry guidelines. "...and that shooting would have *never happened* had VA not made it easy for someone with obvious mental issues to purchases guns, period. " That was because a magistrate in Montgomery County failed to issue a proper detention order, which would have disqualified him. And regardless, that loophole has been covered by new legislation. People like Cho Seung Hui are never going to be able to get guns in the state of Virginia ever again, and definitely not concealed carry permits.
  • how
    •
    14 years ago
    Facts bounce right off of leftists...
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    how, Facts are only what they believe in their ignorance. I at least hope it is ignorance. I'd truly hate to think people would be that stupid!
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    "1st of all, maybe in utopia you aren't among illegal weapon carriers, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not there." And once again, there's that irrational fear on display...ugh... "refusing to realize it doesn't make it not true. you like to quote certain crime stats but seem to ignore the other crime stats regarding street crimes etc" ...which have ZERO relevance to Kennesaw, GA, period end of story. "2nd, oh there aren't any criminals and predators roaming the streets?" LOL...did I ever say that?? Nope, all I said is that your own irrational fear of them is what is really guiding you. Crime rates have been pretty much falling all around the USA for many years now. Wake up! "3rd, true, that law can not be enforced just as 99% of all laws can not be enforced" There's goes that rule of law thingy again eh?? "1. afraid?" Yes, you're obviously afraid troop, and your words here prove that beyond any reasonable doubt. Look, once again, I could care less whether you are going to honest with yourself here on this issue. "living in an area where thugs run in packs" ...which isn't true at all, but there goes that irrational fear again...ugh... "i know people that were victums of gang violence and random attacks robberies road rage etc and i have been approached by thugs looking for trouble and also road rage incidents" ...which is all anonymous, anecdotal nonsense, period. "2. and exactly what point of yours did i prove by having a gun while under the influence or in a pissed mood and never brandishing it?" LOL...you are proving my points about the irrational fear that drives a lot of people on the Right in general & a lot gun owners in particular. Also, you are proving my point that we are all one bit of irrational rage away from committing a crime with a gun. It's waaaay too easy to pull the trigger at the wrong time & for the wrong reasons...that's why guns are dangerous among one's choice of weapons. Thanx again BTW... :) "3. if i was afraid of equal time i would support the fairness doctrine" No, if you weren't afraid of equal time for opposing views over our government-owned airwaves, which doesn't cover a lot of what people view & hear these days in the media, then you'd be FOR the return of the Fairness Doctrine, period. "i'd much rather discuss my interest in strippers in other threads than get into an ongoing discussion with someone that won't change my opinion and who's opinion won't be changed by me. we can agree to disagree pretty much sums it up imo." This discussion (like many political discussions on this board) isn't about changing the minds of those that choose to participate in it. It's about the many, many, many people that don't chose to respond to it. Their opinions matter too...above & beyond of bunch of people that are too close-minded to hear about the real facts here in this or any other thread. ------------------------ "That's the whole thrust of your argument, people are too volatile to be trusted with guns, and for their own good shouldn't be allowed to have them." LOL...that's waaaay far afield from: "Just goes to show that you think all gun owners are stupid psychopathic hillbillies who need one little push to let their homicidal fantasies run wild." I don't have a problem with people owning guns for a whole host of reasons, which I've stated here several times. Literally returning to the mentality of the Old West, where people carried guns in a basically lawless land is completely unnecessary in the 21st Century IMHO. "Actually, there is, if you're a concealed carry permit holder and you get arrested for public drunkenness or drunk driving with your gun, you lose your permit." LOL...yea, that *really* stops the guy from carrying a gun & drinking at the same time...not... "if every form of law regarding a concealed weapon is unenforceable due to their concealed nature, what's the point of prohibiting it?" If you can't practically enforce a law, then that law really doesn't need to exist IMO. CCWs just led us back to the Old West, period. "then this whole discussion is academic because concealed gun owners are either going to do what they want, or they're actually going to take guns into bars and restaurants now" Got any evidence of that?? "That was because a magistrate in Montgomery County failed to issue a proper detention order, which would have disqualified him." Nope...that massacre, which was the deadliest peacetime shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history (on or off a school campus), was allowed because the state of VA simply didn't feel like properly using the already-established National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)...just like many people at the federal level didn't want the NCIS strengthened. The state of VA simply didn't feel like reporting Cho's legal status to the NICS. Now, they have no choice in the matter, but 32 people had to DIE first! "that loophole has been covered by new legislation." The "loophole" should have never existed in the first place! The FACT is that it's states like VA (and their lax gun laws) that allow these kind of people to purchase guns! ------------------------ "Facts are only what they believe in their ignorance." LOL...you're projecting again old man, and you don't even know it!
  • Clubber
    •
    14 years ago
    YAWN!!!!!
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    UNFUCKINGBELIEVEABLE! ok.. back to the strippers................
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion