lockman Posted May 26, 2012 at 04:28 PM Posted May 26, 2012 at 04:28 PM Everyone just remember, at some point in time, long about 1968 some of the same people/groups asking for 24 hours of training now, said then, "Oh, you just agree to this Firearm Owners Identification Card thingy and all will be well. All "gun crime" (I hate that term) will stop and we'll never ask for another gun law!" So.......how did that work out?? It never ends. Tim But Tim, all subsequent gun restricting legislation has all been "common sense" measures.
drdoom Posted May 26, 2012 at 07:10 PM Posted May 26, 2012 at 07:10 PM As long as open carry would be ok, go ahead and place the regulations on cc. If cc is the only method to carry then there should be zero hours of mandated training. What other fundamental rights protected by the constitution require such mandates and prior restraints. I'd just LOVE to see someone try to open carry (if it was legal) in the suburbs or Chicago. See how far you could go before people start wetting their pants.
GarandFan Posted May 26, 2012 at 08:53 PM Posted May 26, 2012 at 08:53 PM I'd just LOVE to see someone try to open carry (if it was legal) in the suburbs or Chicago. See how far you could go before people start wetting their pants. Typically there is rather little "wetting of pants." Folks generally just assume you're a plainclothes LEO and go about their business.
Kenny Posted May 26, 2012 at 09:43 PM Posted May 26, 2012 at 09:43 PM As long as open carry would be ok, go ahead and place the regulations on cc. If cc is the only method to carry then there should be zero hours of mandated training. What other fundamental rights protected by the constitution require such mandates and prior restraints. I'd just LOVE to see someone try to open carry (if it was legal) in the suburbs or Chicago. See how far you could go before people start wetting their pants. I know a guy that OC's all the time. He was at Wal-Mart last week & nobody said a thing!! He even talked to 2 uniformed cops that were there!!
snubjob Posted May 26, 2012 at 10:09 PM Posted May 26, 2012 at 10:09 PM Everyone just remember, at some point in time, long about 1968 some of the same people/groups asking for 24 hours of training now, said then, "Oh, you just agree to this Firearm Owners Identification Card thingy and all will be well. All "gun crime" (I hate that term) will stop and we'll never ask for another gun law!" So.......how did that work out?? It never ends. TimGood point.
GarandFan Posted May 27, 2012 at 12:13 PM Posted May 27, 2012 at 12:13 PM I know a guy that OC's all the time. He was at Wal-Mart last week & nobody said a thing!! He even talked to 2 uniformed cops that were there!! Yeah ... and I suspect he was the third uniformed cop.
oneshot Posted May 28, 2012 at 05:59 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 05:59 PM I'll do 24 hours if they give us a badge and all the legal exemptions that go along with it!
Mr. Fife Posted May 28, 2012 at 06:12 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 06:12 PM I'll do 24 hours if they give us a badge and all the legal exemptions that go along with it! Not to mention a car with a mars light and siren. Woo woo.
Drylok Posted May 28, 2012 at 06:48 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 06:48 PM The 24 hr thing is a tactic to keep as few of people from carrying as possible. It's just like trying to own a gun in DC or Chicago. Screw them they had their chance to play nice. And besides you might want to keep in mind that Chicago is going to have their ordinances which will probably include more training requirements and God knows what else, so you boys up there will have to deal with that until you get it settled in court.
mauserme Posted May 28, 2012 at 07:25 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 07:25 PM The 24 hr thing is a tactic to keep as few of people from carrying as possible. ... You're absolutely right Drylok. It would be very difficult for most people to get that much time off work for training. And think about this - 3 days of 8 hours each cannot be fit into a single weekend. No, that suggestion is only about keeping the people who most need this legislation to pass from being able to reap its benefits.
Mr. Fife Posted May 28, 2012 at 11:03 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 11:03 PM Maybe Todd can get a bill passed requiring employers to give 3 paid days to any employee needing a carry permit. Kind of like the maternity time off, only much less time.
snubjob Posted May 28, 2012 at 11:47 PM Posted May 28, 2012 at 11:47 PM The 24 hr thing is a tactic to keep as few of people from carrying as possible. ... You're absolutely right Drylok. It would be very difficult for most people to get that much time off work for training. And think about this - 3 days of 8 hours each cannot be fit into a single weekend. No, that suggestion is only about keeping the people who most need this legislation to pass from being able to reap its benefits.Not that i'm supporting this 24 hour training idea, but who are the people that you think need this legislation the most?
abolt243 Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:06 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:06 AM The 24 hr thing is a tactic to keep as few of people from carrying as possible. ... You're absolutely right Drylok. It would be very difficult for most people to get that much time off work for training. And think about this - 3 days of 8 hours each cannot be fit into a single weekend. No, that suggestion is only about keeping the people who most need this legislation to pass from being able to reap its benefits.Not that i'm supporting this 24 hour training idea, but who are the people that you think need this legislation the most? The single mom on the South side trying to raise her two kids on her own after her "man" took off. She'd like to have a way to protect herself and her tips when she rides the train home at 1:00 a.m. after getting off second shift at Denny's. AB
mauserme Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:21 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:21 AM Yes, her. And the guy dropping of newspapers at 3 AM - the nurse coming home from a late shift - the guy getting home from where ever he works in the middle of the night. In other words, all the most vulnerable people who happen to need to go to work to make a living as opposed to, say, a real estate agent who can set his or her own schedule.
robinp Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:59 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 12:59 AM I agree, except for your point about the real estate person that sets his/her own schedule. I recently read that crimes against real estate agents during "showings" are at an all time high. They have become a target. I regret I can't remember my source. Regardless, your point is well taken. We all should enjoy the benefits and protection which accompanies our right to carry (except in Illinois) .
mauserme Posted May 29, 2012 at 01:05 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 01:05 AM You're correct, of course, about real estate agents being prime targets right now. My answer was meant to be within the context of 24 vs 8 training hours and the greater hardship that might impose on some compared to others.
snubjob Posted May 29, 2012 at 02:05 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 02:05 AM I understand that you're pointing out that some are in riskier situations than others. But i question whether one person, or group of people, "need" concealed carry more than another group. If it is to be considered a basic right to self defense, then it's a right afforded to all. Not just some who are at more risk than others. No, i don't think anyone was implying this, but i do think we should be careful to not draw any lines as to who needs concealed carry the most.
mauserme Posted May 29, 2012 at 02:23 AM Posted May 29, 2012 at 02:23 AM I agree with you that each of us is endowed with this right in equal measure. Rights are seldom, if ever, about what one needs or wants however. In my view they are a sort of power each of us possess. The comments about "needs" is strictly in relation to the legislation. The best example I can think of quicky is a conversation I had with a retired LEO. He doesn't feel he needs this legislation at all since he can already carry, though he does believe it's every person's right.
Gray Peterson Posted May 31, 2012 at 09:42 AM Posted May 31, 2012 at 09:42 AM A 24 hour requirement would be extremely difficult for someone like myself who would travel from across the country to get training. 8 hours is doable. 24 hours is outrageous because of having to take time off of work and fly out. 8 Hours, Maximum. Even that's at the edge of acceptability. These idiots who keep floating longer training need to understand that if they don't fix the carry issue, either the 7th Circuit or SCOTUS will only require a FOID or a home state carry/possession license to carry.
Tvandermyde Posted May 31, 2012 at 01:39 PM Author Posted May 31, 2012 at 01:39 PM Yesterdayi was approached by a Chicago senator who said she cpuld vote for a carry bill if we agreed to register all our guns. I politely said no thanks. And senator, you have had the opportunity to pass a law, you have demanded to much and declined to do so. When we win, none of your concerns or consessions demanded will be taken into account. And you and the city will have less than you have now.
oneshot Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:13 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:13 PM I'll register my guns when they submit to a full battery IQ test, psychological analysis, genealogical profile and pay/benefit cut to the median income for the State of Illinois.
Drylok Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:21 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:21 PM If we didn't have a speaker who blocks our bills we could pass it with a handgun registration to get the 71 votes, then come back in January and amend the registration out when we only need 60 votes.
spec4 Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:25 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:25 PM Don't know what's with the liberal mentality of registering guns. Seems they think that will magically end crime. Do they really think gang bangers will line up to register? I'd love to have a face to face with one of these liberal dreamers, but it would be a waste of time.
RECarry Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:26 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:26 PM Registration is pointless, as I explained to my Rep and Senator last week over the drain cleaner registry they started in 2012. Who in their right mind wants their name in a database that will be treated as a dangerous persons list? Who is naive enough to believe that criminals will step up to register themselves or their firearms? The mindset of these politicians is unbelievable. I also pointed out to my elected "representatives" that the State of Illinois has proven it cannot be trusted with registries of any kind, as evidenced by Lisa Madigan's attempt to release FOID card information to the media last year. These idiots continuously need to be sued (at taxpayer expense) for trampling on our basic rights to privacy and the 2nd Amendment. Clearly the issues go beyond RTC to whether anyone in government respects the Constitution anymore.
pyre400 Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:35 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 02:35 PM Remember the FOID FOIA... I would never agree to an involuntary registration. NOTHING good can come of such a thing.
abolt243 Posted May 31, 2012 at 07:24 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 07:24 PM Funny, Phleger didn't ask to see any registration when I turned in all my guns a while back for $50 gift cards.
Lou Posted May 31, 2012 at 09:45 PM Posted May 31, 2012 at 09:45 PM Funny, Phleger didn't ask to see any registration when I turned in all my guns a while back for $50 gift cards. You only got $50? I got $75 for every gun I ever owned. I'm sure he kept a record of it because I didn't.
Sigma Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:27 PM Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:27 PM Can they track the card somehow to see if you are truthful?
Lou Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:38 PM Posted June 1, 2012 at 10:38 PM Can they track the card somehow to see if you are truthful? They say no but "they" are Chicago liberals. I know someone who used the cards to buy .22 ammo for a youth education program. He's still a free man!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.