I said nothing about “crimes,” or “breaking them,” (whatever that means.)
**Trunk **said that that he saw no reason to obey a law that he believed to be pointless. He did not say “some laws.” His statement was unqualified. Using an example, I asked him if he extended that belief to others. He has not chosen to reply.
I am sorry if my point was not obvious to you. Here it is. If people are free to ignore whatever laws they choose, there is no point in having laws at all, as they would be unenforceable.
Ah, I can just picture the book title. Gums, Germs and Steel, a Beginners Guide to Dentistry.
:smack:
It’s not a “choice” if I’m not at a computer.
You’ve extended the argument to property crime, and personal crime. Clearly different issues.
Let’s rephrase this a different way.
I’d like to know who the people are who you all think WANT to carry guns around but are restrained by their lack of a permit?
It’s like many other gun laws. . .the dude who is going to go through the hassle (however minor it might be) is exactly the dude who I don’t care if he has a permit to carry. He’s resposible, ipso facto.
But some of you are acting like “Joe the responsible gun owner carrying with a permit on Tuesday” is someone superior to “Joe the responsible gun owner who was carrying the same gun without a permit on Monday.”
The permit does not convey magical status to the permit-bearer. Again, unless you’re some dude who thinks – as Lib sort of phrased it – that the law is bigger than a man.
(if I used ipso facto wrong, whatever)
Do you or do you not stand by this statement? : You’re not going to convince me that we need to abide by laws that we think are pointless just because they exist.
Obeying the law itself does not convey any sort of “magical status” as you put it, but it is an example of the person behaving responsibly. Your attitude of “I’m not going to get a permit because it is a hassle” is an indication of a lazy and irresponsible behavior on your part.
Stupid law of gravity.
Do you really want to pick one quote out of my post and make me defend it removed from the context of the whole post?
I’m tossing it in with prostitution, seatbelts, marijuana, gambling. . .not murder, theft and vandalism.
And you somehow believe that “lazy and irresponsible” towards some city code which I deem I can safely disobey automatically implies “lazy and irresponsible” with firearms.
It’s like saying that the fact that I run that stop sign near work means that I shouldn’t be handed a small child.
Pretty much yeah. Shows that you have a lazy and irresponsible attitude. Case makes itself.
Maybe not that far, but you probably shouldn’t be driving with one.
If you’re a fan of circular logic, it does.
If the loop fits…
As I said, it seems plausible that if you have a lazy, irresponsible attitude towards some things (weapons and apparently traffic laws) that that same attitude would carry itself into other areas such as responsible weapon handling.
The same attitude carries into your debating if you think that simply handwaving away something as an informal fallacy is better than actually addressing the issue at hand. Why should you as a person be allowed to ignore a law simply because obeying it is kind of a pain?
I’m not “allowed” to. I’m just willing to assume the risk considering I’ve made it this far in my life without ever having been searched by a cop.
You guys are forgetting that I was just asking a question in that thread. **Gabe[b/] put me on the defensive by starting this thread, but I wasn’t really asserting anything.
It just seems to me that if you think you need to be carrying a concealed weapon, either
-
You shouldn’t be going where you’re going, but if you MUST. . .
-
The lack of a permit shouldn’t stop you. “Gee, I really think I might need my gun tonight, but dang it all. . .I just haven’t filled out the proper paperwork.”
I was referring to states within the United States having to honor the concealed carry licenses of other states for visitors as they do driver’s licenses. Not other countries. National as in across the United States.
I suppose the reason my immediate reaction is ‘Why shouldn’t they?’ is that I don’t see any reason why there should be extreme requirements to obtaining a concealed carry license. Considering how easy it is to get a license to operate a 2,000 pound steel death machine on public roads, and how many more people are killed by licensed drivers than licensed handgun carriers every year, why should there be a requirement to justify carrying a handgun? An objective test at the firing range and a written test covering laws regarding carry? Fine by me. Fingerprinting, exorbitant fees, the need to get recommended by a chief of police, etc… not so fine.
Maybe I really don’t understand your argument. Lemme see if I can paraphrase.
1.) Obtaining a permit for CC does not grant anything (besides legal status) to a carrier. (I.e. there is no inherent skill set or mind set that comes with the permit.)
2.) Therefore, should one feel the need for CC, one does not need to obtain a CC permit, if one is willing to accept the extra jail that would come with the use of the weapon.
3.) You assume that the chances of jail time are pretty much limited to what would happen if the gun were used by also assuming that the chances of jail time due to being searched by a random stop are so minimal that you conclude that they are insignificant.
My problem with your logic with the above is that, if you [general you] are in a position (possibly repeatedly) where you feel that you need a gun (and will thus carry), it is an incredibly poor risk-reward analysis to say that obtaining a license is a waste of time. Think of it as an insurance policy: a couple of hours of work could avoid several years of hassle or jail time. And if you’re carrying, you must have an expectation of needing to use - thus you must be assuming that you will, at some point, have to explain to a judge / jury just why you thought you shouldn’t have to get a permit.
You may still be responsible in your use of the gun (practice, restraint, avoiding conflict when you don’t need to, etc.), but I would seriously doubt your rational state / reasoning abilities if I were told that you are carrying with no license, but could legally and easily obtain one. I would also tend to assume that you are not able to obtain one for some unknown purpose. (As in, you’re lying to me when they say you could get one - i.e. you’ve been disqualified from having a CC permit for some reason.) [/general you]
I just don’t see how you [Trunk] can be willing to accept the extra jail time that would come with the use of an illegal CCW.
Well, that’s all it is. . .JustAnotherGeek.
You’d need to evaluate
-
The hassle
-
The risk of ever getting caught
-
The consequences of what a judge/jury is going to do to you if you really use your gun in a justified way without a permit.
I’m of the opinion that two rational people could differ on that. Others seem to be of the opinion that any variation from the letter of the law automatically excludes you from being a responsible firearms handler.
Just seems odd to me that gun owners flip out over every bit of legislation, but for some reason are adamantly defending the one that makes the least amount of sense to me. You basically have a law that ensures that the most responsible gun owners are the ones who have the hardest time carrying one around in public.
You own any combat knives?
Ah… 'k, that’s the crux. Your definition of “hardest time carrying [a gun] around in public” is limited to merely the act of carrying. We are also adding in the expected results if you are caught, and assuming that you will be caught, if you have reason to carry. (I.e., when you use it.)
If you don’t think that it is likely that you will get caught (i.e that you will not need to use it), then that begs the question of why you are carrying it in the first place.
Also, the permit does give one thing: it enables you to prove that you are not in the class of people (felons, declared mental unable to use a gun) who cannot obtain a license.
Also, at least in this country, gun owners have had to prove to the rest of population that they are responsible people. Many people believe that someone (other than a cop) carrying is somehow irresponsible. Many of these same people (enough to vote in politicians who agree with them) believe that the right to carry a gun should be much more limited than it currently is. By having a system that checks a person’s history and prohibits people with undesirable histories from getting a gun, and following the system, it is a strong argument that gun-carriers are responsible people. Most of the folks in this thread are upset that people following your line of reasoning are “proof” that gun-control laws should be more strict (in the eyes of the stricter-gun-control crowd). I.e. having and following some minor, momentarily inconvenient law stops the creation of more inconvenient laws down the road.
Personally, I do agree with the majority of the folks in this thread. I think it is highly irresponsible of a person to decide to carry illegally, when they could easily obtain a license. I may only be irresponsible of them in terms of their own time down the road, but it is not a great logical leap to think that they may be irresponsible in other areas. In the original thread, Tranquilis made the excellent point about how much time you should spend practicing in order to be an effective weapon user. It does not seem like an unreasonable assumption to conclude that someone who thinks that getting a license is a waste of time (let’s say 5 hours every 5 years, FtSoA) will also consider proper amounts of training (let’s say 100 hours per year, FtSoA) an even larger waste of time.
Lastly, please consider the mindset of a large portion of gun -owners/carriers. They are able to dedicate all those hours to making sure they are doing something the right way. A lot of these guys believe that the only effective gun carrier is a highly trained gun owner (and rightfully so, IMNSHO). Someone willing to put 100 hours/year into training is going to think that an extra hour / year to make things easier in the long run is well worth it.
Trunk, you are being an irresponsible gun owner, by not following all proper laws.
You are being a lazy one because, apparently, following them is too inconvenient for you.
This is probably a bad thing, and reflects badly on your personal integrity.
You make things harder for responsible gun owners.
That works out to just a little less than two hours per week. Or, roughly one visit to the range per week. Quite reasonable, IMO.
But wait… All these (licensed) people roaming the streets with insufficient training and little understanding of the law are still safe to be around. They aren’t shooting people reaching for pop cans, or emptying mags into shady looking cars that are driving away. The people that care enough about the law to get a permit, while some of them may be macho posers, are demonstrably law-abiding citizens.
Now, people that’ll shove a gat down the front of their pants without worrying about getting a permit are a different story.
There are two types of gun owners in this world - those who have had an accidental discharge, and those who haven’t had one yet. Those of us who have, and follow Coopers rules, the result is that we lose 10 points in competition. Those who don’t follow those rules kill people.
Four little rules, takes just a few minutes to memorize, doesn’t cost a dime. Preparing someone for actual combat? Thousands of dollars, hundreds of hours, and dozens of days with a sore hand (never buy a fancy new grip right before a class).
I guess my point is that, while I have spent the money and time, if we require that of everyone then very few will do it. They’ll adopt Trunk’s attitude and then go out there with a gun and no training or knowledge. They’ll try to cover up what they did and impede an investigation because they’re scared, they’ll buy off the black market, they’ll do everything wrong (except survive) because the bar has been raised so high that the people who need it can’t get it.
I’m not, however, entirely sure that this was my point at the beginning. But that’s my point right now. And I’ll stick with it, right up until I change it.