Wisconsin-Based USCCA President Tim Schmidt Discusses Concealed Carry Reciprocity
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- The United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA), a Wisconsin-based organization providing education, training and self-defense insurance to responsible American gun owners, will be featured on 60 Minutes for a segment with CBS News this coming Sunday, February 11, 2018.
The House has passed the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act that would allow Americans licensed to carry concealed firearms in their own states to bring those weapons legally into other states. Steve Kroft takes a look at this common-sense legislation that the U.S. Senate could pass and send to the President for his signature. His report will be broadcast on the next edition of 60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 11 at 7:00 p.m. ET/PT.
The interview, which will air across the nation, will feature expert commentary from Tim Schmidt, the Founder & President of The United States Concealed Carry Association on gun rights and legislation moving through Congress.
BACKGROUND:
The United States Concealed Carry Association has been urging lawmakers in Congress to follow through on their promise to pass national concealed carry reciprocity, which would ensure that concealed carry permits issued in one state would be considered valid in the other 49 states. U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act through S.446 last year and Congressman Richard Hudson (R-NC) did the same through the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 in H.R.446. The House bill has passed the U.S. House of Representatives. Both bills would ensure that concealed carry permits issued in one state would be respected in them all.
60 Minutes has won more Emmy Awards than any other primetime broadcast, including a special Lifetime Achievement Emmy. It has also won virtually every other broadcast journalism award, plus 15 Peabody awards for excellence in television broadcasting. 60 Minutes was created in 1968 by Don Hewitt and premiered on CBS September 24th of that year.
About the USCCA
The U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) provides education, training and self-defense insurance to responsible American gun owners. Headquartered in West Bend, WI, the USCCA is the largest and fastest-growing association whose sole focus is the responsibly armed American.
Jake, you claim victimhood and that all you wanted was to discuss ideas. Well, on numerous posts I requested that you do just that, and rebut my posts. All you ever did in reply was, yet again claim victimhood and regurgitate your tripe. You have been called a fraud because that is what you are. You piously claimed that only you are the arbiter of what is reasonable. We have on many levels explained how you are not the only voice nor our master, and pointed out the facts, logic and reason as to why we believe in our Constution… Read more »
Jake, yet another verbose post that again rails against our rights and you again play victim and fail to discuss or rebut my post. You claim you want discussion of ideas, but you don’t actually do such. You just want to rant about how you are right. You also appear to lack the ability to comprehend our rights and the four simple words that explain clearly to all who aren’t fools, “shall be infringed”. All the laws thus far have failed to prevent murder and other crimes, but one more regulation/law/concession will solve the crime problem? Address my last post… Read more »
And back in reality… while you are correct, the real world will take your guns and put you in prison for what is absolutely constitutional. Maybe after a million dollars in court costs, you can get your name clear, but still probably not your guns back. Not a risk I want to take. Pass the reciprocity as a stop gap, and keep pressure up for the restoration of our Constitutional rights in full. While we work back to that, we need steps to protect us from the leftists running several of the states we have to deal with and move… Read more »
Jake, you have yet to discuss any ideas I have presented, even when I have repeatedly requested you to do so. You repeatedly leave the same verbose bs that we have all rebutted with facts. You are free to post “ideas”, however, what part of “shall not be infringed” are you having difficulty with? Any limit, ban, compromise, concession or any other word you want to use to abrogate our rights is an infringement. No, we can’t allow our rights to be infringed upon any further. All we have done is concede and then the anti-rights people just want more… Read more »
Well folks, Team Troll has been kicked off the field and no longer allowed to play so I’m going to invoke a time honored tradition, among some, of shunning them on this post, and one one other, for future comments. I don’t know what WildBill, OldVet and others will do but I’d point out that when you deny the trolls a venue and make it an empty room, except for them, they tend to dry up and blow away like dust.
Adios guys, see you on another topic.
Oh oh, two flags on the play against Team Troll. One for untruthfulness on the field and the other for not answering direct questions. Sorry Team Troll but you’ve forfeited the game to Team Constitutional Values. See you after your coach, @JVC receives counseling.
Jake, your feigned victimhood is pathetic. The only “attacks” you suffered were differences in opinion. You chose to claim victimhood rather than rebuttal, believing your emotions rather than facts and logic would “win the day”. You have been exposed as a fraud because you have been unwilling to debate facts. You have never rebutted any of my posts, except to claim victimhood and your self-perceived supremacy over us.
What a crock of shit.. Anyone reading what I said in my posts can use COMMON SENSE and see that I was the one with differing OPINIONS of your and I have CLEARLY explained why. Don’t try changing the narrative because all the posts are available to read. You know you and your little buddies are the real trolls here.. But even worse, you are all the biggest threat to the rights we have under the 2nd Amendment. You lack of listening and debating other opinions is an extremely dangerous thing to all of us. You think YOU are right… Read more »
Molon Labe We ain’t giving up anything jake. The dems will do what dems have always done, and that’ll never change.
The best way to foil the dems plan is NOT GIVE INTO THEM. That is our ONLY recourse at this point.
otherwise we’ll lose ALL of our guns, because THAT IS THE DEMS LONG TERM PLAN.
If you want to concede go ahead, but I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
At this point, we only have that choice as you put it.. After what the President said yesterday about due process AFTER seizure and after the democrats posted the text of the law as they want it with full on semi auto everything ban, finding a middle ground is no longer possible even though I had hoped it might work to reduce the ‘pressure’ from the left on this issue. If they were able to get Trump to change that position and others.. we are going to lose. Make no mistake about it. It is becoming clear.. Somehow they are… Read more »
Jake, no, you lost all credibility many posts ago, we have not lied. You are the only one that has been the fraud and subsequently been exposed. Unlike you we believe in our rights as guaranteed by our Constitution.
Alrighty there folks, since we have a winner in the multiple choice question of who can expose the trolls we’re now moving on the the bonus round. This part isn’t a test but just for your added pleasure, because @wildbill did so well we’re giving out the fun fact if the day: Did you know that the cost of a Ghost Gunner CNC machine is around $1500? But, did you also know that you can get a few friends together, split the cost and all of you can make as many AR15’s (for your own use only) with absolutely no… Read more »
@Grundy: Ah me, just one more to deal with. So many lies, so much time. We engaged Jake, Joe and all you other trolls who wanted to toss unfacted, baseless “facts” and just plain outright lies. The problem with.most of you, especially the one calling himself Jake is that it was impossible to have a logical discussion because: 1. He avoided answering questions he didn’t want to answer and diverted to something else (a common tactic among Liberals) or 2. He gave an answer that was a complete fabrication of the truth and, when confronted with the truth, claimed he… Read more »
So you even make up shit and lie because you don’t have a true valid argument? Talk behind my back like a coward.. Take your bullshit elsewhere. It is apparent those like you should not be carrying a firearm because it is now clear you lack ANY common sense or responsibility. I am tired of asshats like you that think YOUR idea of what should be is the way it should be and that no one else should have an opinion as I do. Well fuck you. When you get OFF YOUR ASS and serve YOUR country and actually stand… Read more »
You really do not know how to read do you Vanns? Name ONE LIE I stated… Name ONE question I did not answer with MY opinion. Name ONE BASELESS fact I stated. You can’t because you do not have a VALID argument against COMMON SENSE and responsibility when it comes to those of us that support the 2nd Amendment. You and some others sit behind your keyboards and spout nothing but your moral bullshit about how the 2A is the 2A and there is no such thing as ANY kind of morals needed, required or that should have a say… Read more »
@Jake, Here is one lie: “So you even make up shit and lie because you don’t have a true valid argument?” We did not make anything up. We took valid arguments from the historic and legal record of debates about the Second Amendment. We asked a few simple questions. You refused to answer. You challenged our credibility, so we provided our credentials, but you did not reciprocate. Here is one of your baseless facts: “…Talk behind my back…” Pretty hard to talk behind your back on a website. Here is another baseless fact: “… ANY common sense…” There is no… Read more »
@Jake QOUTED “You sit there spouting your crap as all literal.. and I have said numerous times, I HIGHLY DOUBT the founding fathers intended for the 2A to sit there and never grow with society.” QOUTED Is that why the 2nd A states that :” the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” ? LOL FWIW… if we continue to delete/amend the Bill of Rights as determined by the Founding Fathers, we’ll soon end up with NO RIGHTS at all. Which is where the liberal socialist progressive marxist democrats are in a helluva hurry… Read more »
IF you had read all my posts, it would have been clear that I did not and do not advocated in ANY way removing, infringing on, or limiting anyone from their 2A rights EXCEPT for violent felons and mental nutcases. But instead of reading all the posts to see what I actually said, you jump on what a few others spout.. where they are twisting what I said to fit their own skewed sense of reality. What I have SAID and maintained this entire argument is that gun owners need to use common sense and responsibility. Once I said those… Read more »
@Jay: And yet ANOTHER troll comes out from beneath his bridge. Geez, they breed like roaches.
Vanns, yes, apparently they have found this site. It’s amusing that they even post here, since the regular posters are typically pro-USA, pro-Constitution, and pro-rights, the site itself, based on the site name and commentaries and stories posted on it are clearly pro-rights. However, they serve as useful targets to sharpen and hone our ideas on our rights. I have learned a lot from the site contents and the comments from both sides. The anti-rights posts have taught me that they have no facts, reason nor logic to their arguments against the USA, our Constitution, and our guaranteed rights protected… Read more »
@V and H, The low level paid propagandists think that they have found a gold mine of responses. Rather than jumping through hoops to produce an income for them, I am currently conducting a one man letter writing campaign to pressure my president, senators, and congressman to decline the DNC ploy of any gun control, which will, surely, divide them from their voting base.
Grundy, Jake did not want a discussion, and Vanns and WB were not the only ones posting comments rebutting him and other anti-rights people. If Jake wanted a discussion, he would have responded to my numerous posts that were rebutting his exceedingly verbose posts, and the numerous times I requested a rebuttal. He clearly only wanted everyone to agree with his anti-rights stance – we don’t. We believe in our Constitution and in our rights as guaranteed by that document on which our country is based.
Bullshit. Conversation is DIFFERING OPINIONS is one thing. Being attacked outright because my opinions don’t match yours, is not a discussion. AND THAT is the mistake you are all making and why we already have 11 states that are truly anti gun.. Because you can’t seem to get it through your thick heads that you can be and stand and act like a tough guy all you want… but liberals are doing an end around you all because you refuse to even bother looking at the ENTIRE situation. Mark my words… IF liberals ever again get the presidency, the senate,… Read more »
I put forth that the main reason we have 11 states that are anti gun, is because our government officials have allowed illegal aliens &, criminal illegal aliens from mexico , to overun our US borders to the tune of 11 million of ’em, and have allowed muslim extremists from the middle east to be shipped here totally unvetted (by obama) and have allowed socialist marxists teachers and professors to teach our young people in our schools and colleges as well as run for office in our government.. The rest are just knee jerk thinking people who cannot think logically… Read more »
You actually backed up the very argument I have been making: “we have 11 states that are anti gun” and the reason “knee jerk thinking people who cannot think logically for themselves and believe whatever they see and hear” Isn’t the irony thick here? The “knee jerk reaction” that my posts with MY opinions brought on? I don’t advocate in any way restricting or infringing on the 2A and I have made that clear. But I DO advocate DISCUSSION and ideas that might show everyone else we gun owners understand the issues and have the common sense and responsibility to… Read more »
Jay, easy access to ARs? I believe the guy did buy his firearm at an FFL and did pass the NICS background check. There are many other tools that could be even more deadly. You state that ARs are more effective at killing that vehicles? Mnay more were killed in one attack in France with a truck. Easy access to ARs in the USA, then why didn’t the man who ran over all those pedestrians in NYC use a rental truck rather than the “easy to obtain” AR? Why are over 1,600 homicides by hands, feet an fists, if ARs… Read more »
Heed–
the deadliest school murder was not arson, but an explosive. Are you talking about Bath, Michigan.?
Yes, you are correct, even though full was still legal then, the killer still didn’t use that “easy to obtain” weapon, which just proves my point.
Jake. We hear you. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to vann and Bill. They’re just trying to generate activity on the site so they can make money off the ads. And if not they are just know it all bullies without much experience. Keyboard warriors you might say!
Send your money directly to us, we take cash, PayPal, we don’t care. Then we’d all appreciate it if you trolls would just scurry back under the bridge you came from till the next tragedy when you think you can dance in the blood of the dead to score points.
@Vanns, I would feel guilty accepting gratuities from uneducated, unskilled, unemployables, that are forced to accept jobs as low level propagandists rather than having an honorable job, and doing an honest day’s work. Perhaps they could send my share to GOA, CCFKBA, or JPFO. Then scurry back!
@ W.Bill and Vanns Marshall p and Grundy must be the supervisors and they had to call them in because they were drowning in their own stupidity. Maybe just kids, huh?
And here we go, yet again 🙂
Jake, you have added nothing to the discourse on this topic, except for the same extremely verbose diatribe railing and ranting against lawful firearm owners, and crying about ring a victim.
I’ve followed this from the very beginning and I’ll make one comment only. The person calling himself Jake is a fraud, both in his service and his experience. He disgraces those who actually work to serve others and the country. For whatever it’s worth I suggest we all move on. There are far more important things to discuss.
@TennX, Avec pleasure. You are right, of course, but I must reserve prerogative to respond should Jake attempt to misrepresent the issues involved, here.
@TennX, The more I think about it, Jake must be one of the Civil Rights reduction movement… incognito.
F*** YOU. And for the record, I was retired in 2014 due to my 7th COMBAT injury, United States Navy. I served over 30+ years along with being a part time sworn deputy sheriff. I am now a 70% physical, 100% rated IU as a service connected V/A disabled Veteran. As far as I am concerned, you are nothing but a coward and a piece of s*** that probably has no clue what it takes to choose to stand up and walk the line.. You people make me sick. The fact you pounce on me because in some areas I… Read more »
@Jake, The rational argument from our perspective, that we have stated many times, is that what you suggest is an unconstitutional infringement. How odd that you have not picked up on that with so many saying it, so often. By the way what was your MOS?
@Jake, I have been following the discussions but have stayed out of commenting because you are up against W. Bill and Vanns40 both are true patriots and very concerned about losing our 2A rights. You bark up the wrong tree, maybe because you have been in the Navy so long that you do not know how to think for yourself without having to take an order. Anyway, if you think lengthy mandatory training will get anyone anyplace I agree it will. It will give the anti gunners all the fuel they need for their fire that is headed toward taking… Read more »
QOUTED F*** YOU.QOUTED
No we’re not into that homosexual sex ting jake.perhpas you should try it on yourself ?
Says the guy that asks us to give in to the dems asking for more gun control laws.
Shhhesh , give me a break………
Its true, he is the POTUS. He does this in between tweets and MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Sammy is his special assistant.
Ahhh Oldvet and Wild bill… you two and Vann share a treehouse together? You’re like simpleton children.
Make a valid argument.
Oh right, need to have half a brain between you for that.
(Evidence: almost every post you write. Which is a lot of evidence because it seems your full time job is posting on Ammoland! Losers)
Jake, in all your blather, you have yet to address my points. You state we are unwilling to discuss your points and attack you personally. That is total bs and exactly the opposite of the truth. You have been continuously attacking firearm owners and have not ever addressed my points, even though I have repeatedly brought them up to you and requested a rebuttal. You always say the same things, which have always included mandates and other unconstitutional points, to which we have repeatedly explained on many levels how your views are wrong. And here you are again with the… Read more »
OK, I guess I am missing some part of this if that is what you think… And THAT is how discussion works, you say something, i say something, we discuss it.. We don’t attack people on a personal level. How you think I am attacking people is beyond me? I never said we gun owners lack common sense or responsibility. What I said was there ARE gun owners that lack common sense and responsibility and we have all seen them. BIG difference. I have also not advocated for passing restrictive laws, rules or regulations.. Not once have I done that..… Read more »
@Jake: I have a far better idea. Why don’t you propose repealing ineffective gun laws and then and only THEN can we have a dialogue? 22,000 + laws and you want “good faith” by adding more? Nope, I want YOU to show that YOU support 2A Rights by supporting a repeal of do nothing laws. Now, you want to reply to something, reply to this, specifically. Otherwise you’re just one more antigun troll fishing for more laws the same as you’ve been doing from the beginning.
Actually I already have.. When I came home and saw what the people of this country allowed to happen while I served, passage of the so called patriot act, the demise of our country from inside out and more, being I am now home all the time I decided to fight back and have been doing just that. I AM raising the voice for real and have been out there. I carry every day just like you probably do as well.. and I make it clear I do to those I talk with, debate with and help with trying to… Read more »
Jake, you are one of the few trolls we get on this site. You have stated several times that you weren’t going to post again, but here you are once again. Belief in our Constitution isn’t extreme, being anti-rights is unconstitutional. You keep claiming that you don’t believe in government mandates, but have yet to explain how a “mandate” can be enforced other than by government. You are either stupid or deceitful. We don’t need any more controls on the 2A. There are already thousands of laws that are available that make harming and killing people illegal and have punishments… Read more »
I am responding to make TWO points to your comment.. I already said it was pointless to continues since none of you actually read or seem to understand what I said.. AND since you seem to enjoy attacking someone with a differing opinion on a personal level because you don’t like the opinion. My two points are this.. Just because someone argues against you, does not make them a troll. And second, I have already “discussed” the issues here with many posts. All the replies that came in today I read.. And nearly every one threw a personal insult at… Read more »
@Jake, You write, inside your fifteen loquacious paragraphs, “You all win. The so called “discussion” is over. If that makes you all feel better, …”. This is not about feelings. We all and you, too, should have an unqualified aversion to misinformation being spread about the content, meaning, and intent of the US Constitution and the nature of our American Civil Rights. So, if what you write about the discussion being over is true, then it is time for contemplative study, and I can recommend some reading material.
And here comes “no more laws” Jake calling for…..wait for it…..yup, more restrictions, more laws. This guy’s got more ways of calling for more laws while saying he’s not calling for more laws than a chameleon does changing colors. He must know the Violence Policy Center’s playbook by heart. If you notice the next phase is to accuse us of wanting the mentally ill and criminals to be able to have unfettered access to firearms. Accusations right out of the anti-gunners playbook.
You are too easy to read. The longer we go the more shrill they get.
You really are a fool. I have commented in numerous OTHER POSTS in this discussion, the comment about mentally ill and “VIOLENT felons”. However, it is apparent you are nothing but a troll and not even reading what was written based on your last reply.. Not only that you have yet to even answer ANY direct question I asked you. So there is no point even continuing.. You can play your word games by yourself. Everyone else knows you a fool and the fact that you lack any common sense when it comes to firearm responsibility. YOU are the danger… Read more »
@Jake, You write, “Self policing by gun owners by discussing and voting in reasonable solutions as a compromise…” How do you propose that would work? How would you get all the gun owners together to vote? How would you exclude non gun owners? Who would pay for all that?
Why not leave the choice to get firearms training up to the self vote of the individual, and he can self police himself?
This is so much fun, watching the antigun side shed all their pretense and yet still hide behind “we can find reasonable restrictions”. I absolutely love it. And when called out on it the only response they’re left with is insults; “you’re the morons, you’re the true enemies…”. I have to admit, inviting you to a one on one discussion was a horrible idea. Without this being in the public light no one would believe what has transpired here. Can we rent a public hall and do this in person with Jake, Wild Bill, Heed The Call, myself and a… Read more »
@Vanns, Oh, thank you very much. I just have an unqualified aversion to persons intentionally spreading misinformation about what the Constitution says, means, and protects. There are so many people on this site that have knowledge and experience to unmask the trolls, that the conversation is in good hands.
Jake, so you finally do admit you want government regulation and that you believe in classes of society and the return of the Jim Crow era, since you haven’t addressed nor refuted me on those points. You failed to explain who would regulate the laws that you believe we, the people, should enact to regulate the 2A. I don’t believe the “honor” system would work; therefore, it would be left to the government to regulate. Your “retention training” and safe handling that you drone on about would not have prevented the shootings you mention in your posts. So clearly you… Read more »
Can’t we all just hug it out and finally admit what I realized a while ago, Jake is a troll and most likely an anti-gun planted troll at that. This is, in my memory, the first time we’ve had the “pleasure” of his company. I do know one thing, Fredy has been enjoying the hell out of all the replies to this column.
Let’s see if “Jake” appears again.
LOL seriously, because you cannot answer MY direct comments and questions with LOGICAL answers, now you want to play games and call me a Troll? Whatever.. Go on, play your games.. I am tired of it.. I tried to have an open discussion with varying opinions and you turned in into something else. I said it before, unless all we 2A supporters start talking and listening to ALL opinions, unless we find some compromise or middle ground, WE WILL LOSE our 2A or worse, end up in an actual civil war. I have served in other countries to defend them..… Read more »
@Jake, You write, “… since you don’t believe in any kind of rules that insure mentally insane and violent criminals …” There are more than 20,000 such rules. They did not prevent the shooting. You write, “My proposal was to simply insure those carrying KNEW how to use it,…” This is not true. You advocated mandatory training. If such training is mandatory, prior to exercising a Constitutional Civil Right, that would be an infringement. It is up to the individual to decide what training to get, if any. All of the rest, residue, and remainder of your fourteen paragraphs is… Read more »
@Jake: Phew, I have NEVER seen anyone write so much crap about how they don’t want more gun laws while continuing, endlessly, to say that we (the grand and all powerful “we”) should formulate the exact rules and regulations he says we shouldn’t have! You would have made a fantastic General in charge of the circular firing squad.
You have, indeed, given more than a few of us our laugh for the week and I really believe you don’t understand the slap your head, duct tape your head, ridiculous nature of your comments.
Just read though all this. Vann, wild Bill. It’s you two that come across as fools and trolls. Really. You’re both all over this site pontificating and throwing insults because , as jake says, you can’t actually have a proper discussion or put together a logical argument. It li also pretty clear Wild bill pretty much works for Ammoland, responding to all and sundry with pompous opinions to generate activity on the site and perhaps generate more clicks on the advertising. Or you doing it free and don’t know you’re a tool for others to make money? Keep making your… Read more »
Apparently most here just want to dump on me because they do not like my opinion or just want to keep trying to twist what I am actually saying with false information. Add to that, I just saw the news about, yet another, school shooting.. One of the messages I have been trying to get you all to realize is that unless WE gun owners start taking proactive steps to defend our own 2A from being attacked, we WILL LOSE IT and stories like the one just now hitting the news, WILL BE THE CAUSE. You can bet right now,… Read more »
@Jake, You write, “Apparently most here just want to dump on me because they do not like my opinion…” No, You invite it because you just recite liberal propaganda, and your opinion is devoid of any understanding or the Constitution or the nature of Civil Rights. Still waiting on your academic credentials, by the way.
Your rants are so long that it is annoying to unravel them. If you really knew your subject, you could explain it in a three short paragraphs. Your long writing, however, is evidence of an unfocused mind.
The bad thing is, there’s not much anyone can, nor any law that can be passed, that will stop someone from killing whomever they choose. Whether by firearm, car, truck, knife, baseball bat or bomb. The fact is people who really want to kill others will do exactly that. Sad but true. this is why the 2nd A must remain untouched so as our 2nd A rights won’t be infringed (anymore than they already are) Also, the left will NEVER give up trying to take our 2nd A away. Again…Sad but true.Our best bet is to calmly talk sense ,one… Read more »
@Country Boy, Great comment but it’s a waste of time and breath. I recall an incident where a local politician was very anti gun. He was accosted one evening while out for a walk in his neighborhood by some gun toting youths. He was very lucky to get away with only minor injuries. He lost his antigun attitude damned quickly. Applied for and got a ccw and began to carry. I don’t remember but I think it was near Chicago. For most of our antigun adversary’s this kind of experience is the only thing they will ever understand. Just sayin’
Jake, you are the only one attacking anyone on a personal level by calling firearm owners all criminals, lacking “common-sense” and being unsafe with firearms. I am sure, based on that and your “vast” life experience as a LEO and military service member, that you don’t include yourself in that group of unworthiness. And you still avoid my statement about how making it onerous and costly unconstitutionally disenfranchizes group of otherwise lawful citizens, ala Jim Crow, and makes legal ownership perilous by making a good citizen a felon for unintentionally breaking a law, which does nothing to further our safety.… Read more »
I am not attacking anyone nor did I ever call anyone or all gun owners criminals or a broad statement of lacking common sense.. YET AGAIN you twist what I said to fit YOUR interpretation. I SAID, my issue and opinion is regarding THOSE LACKING COMMON SENSE and not using common sense or taking responsibility. I am speaking in general terms, not at specific people here or anywhere. The ONLY people I am specifically calling out in that regard, if you will, are those I have witnessed and seen in real life, which is how MY OPINION was formed.. because… Read more »
@Jake, Could you, please, list for me the sense that is common to all? I don’t want to have missed anything. You write, “ANYONE with my background fully knows what I am talking about.. YOU CANNOT relate to anything, whether it is combat, whether it is shooting someone or being shot, or whether you witness someone shooting themselves or another person.. And I have said more than once, I HAVE and I draw FROM that real life experience.” What… do you think that you were the only one in combat? Do you think that a little combat qualifies you as… Read more »
Jake, no, shooting at the NSA is an example of criminal behavior. None of your “common-sense” training would have prevented that. Also you have stated that we should vote on restrictions, training, whatever, which means government control/permission/regulation.
I have also repeatedly experience pained how making it onerous and expensive unconstitutionally disenfranchizes groups of citizens, reminiscent of the Jim Crow era, and makes lawful ownership perilous, an unintentional mistake turning a good person into a felon. These points you have yet to address.
@Jake And when someone uses a truck to mow down 100 people you’ll be right there demanding tougher laws on rental trucks, background checks and training. Oh wait, that’s already happened!
No need to use trucks in America. Easy access to AR s which are far more versatile and effective to kill more people
@Jake: How much easier can you make it for me than to simply quote you? “…WE should come up with and vote on reasonable rules and regulations so the government does not have to.”. BTW, did you just think these “reasonable rules and regulations” were going to be mere suggestions or did you then expect them to become law? Uh, yeah, that’s what I thought, because some well meaning people thought them up instead of the “government” well then, that’s perfectly okay! What planet did you come from? The government IS people. NO more gun laws PERIOD! Thanks for the… Read more »
You know, with all the comments I have made regarding MY opinion vs other opinions, and even with being personally insulted more than once because MY opinion does not fit with others, I have continued to discuss and debate here.. What I cannot figure out is why no one is actually reading what I am writing? I keep getting replies about how I want “government mandated” or how I want “restrictions” to be passed. NOT ONCE HAVE I EVER SAID SUCH A THING. I also keep getting replies about me having my opinion for economic gain because of certain training… Read more »
@Jake, Twenty-one paragraphs? No wonder no one reads your disjointed, illiterate rant. Rules and regulations mean nothing without government to enforce the rules and regulations that you propose, thus your argument implies government involvement. You write, “…it would be up to the PEOPLE to decide by voting. And then training would be done by those of you interested IN having business or doing that kind of training for money etc.. ” First, what you suggest is not how our constitutional republic works. Please see the US Constitution. Second, even if the PEOPLE decided by voting the result would be unenforceable… Read more »
@wildbill: It’s a throwaway account and because of what I used to do years ago (which you and a couple of other folks are aware of) I take great pains to keep my identity under wraps. Nothing comes back to me. As for people like Jake, they are false flags. They are the ones constantly parading around saying “I believe in the Second Amendment BUT……”. There are no “buts”. Consider that since 1934 we’ve had more than 22,000 gun laws passed in this country….now understand that that works out to more than 265 gun laws passed EVERY SINGLE YEAR since… Read more »
Jake: You don’t wish to debate either publicly or privately. You simply want to hold court, repeating your calls for restrictions on Rights. It matters not whether those restrictions come from the Federal Govt. or local Governments, they are restrictions and those of us who understand what freedom is and understand how many of our freedoms we’ve lost to people who think like you soundly reject your ideas and thoughts.
There, you’ve made me break my original thought of not responding further. Opinions like yours are anathema to those of us who abhor restrictions on basic, inalienable Rights.
Let me ask you one question since you keep repeating it and I never said it. What have I said that would “restrict”, place restrictions on, prevent, stop, refuse or keep ANYONE that is NOT a felon or mental patient, from owning and bearing arms? NOT ONE THING have I said that would do that. Being trained does not take away OR restrict anything. No where did I ever mandate any such thing. I said be trained and be responsible. I ALSO said it is something that WE gun owners and citizens should SELF POLICE. WE should come up with… Read more »
@Jake, Any thing that one would have to do prior to exercising a Civil Right is a restriction on and abridgment of that Civil Right.
All: I offered “Jake” an opportunity to contact me directly to discuss the facts of this, not merely opinions. He has declined. If you notice, in his replies, he cherry picks exactly what he’ll reply to and refuses to address facts that have been presented that are contrary to what he previously stated.
As a result of this and analyzing his posts, I call BS on “Jake”.
At some point arguing with stupid will only make you look like a fool. Quit while you are ahead. Jake has no interest in hearing what we say, but wants us to listen to everything he opines about.
and again with the personal attack.. The problem is YOU DO NOT HAVE A REASONABLE ARGUMENT against my opinion so now you resort to attacking me. THAT is the problem here.. Not me. I am reading everything being written.. but unlike you, I am not CHANGING what you say or ASSUMING something that was said like you are doing with me. I just wrote another open post explaining EXACTLY what my opinion is and what I have clearly said without ANY ambiguity. There is NO reason what so ever anyone should have any reason to change the words or my… Read more »
@Jake, I think that you misread his post. Only the last sentence applies to you. The reasonable argument against your opinion is that what you have expressed has all been pretty much repudiated. Only hangers on liberals and dedicated propagandists express your opinion about the Constitution and our Second Amendment Civil Rights. Yet, you have the audacity to question our credibility. You have yet to post a single university, college, class, seminar, or book from which you get your notions of what a Civil Right is or the nature of the US Constitution. To fail to challenge your flawed notions,… Read more »
I am not going to debate private.. I make my opinions public. And I stand by them.. I don’t need to do it behind the scenes in real life.
@Vann, You are pretty gutsy giving this “Jake” the ability to contact you directly. Some of these internet trolls know how to mine information. You could wind up with a brand new mortgage on the ranch or an empty savings account!
Opsec, brother, opsec.
Yea on this I agree.. which is also why I won’t make contact outside this discussion.. OpSec. Just because we disagree in argument, does not mean it needs to go outside of the forum.
@Jake, Don’t let these comments from the “holier than thou” get under your skin. It’s not worth it. I’ve had experience with them before. Many I respected at the time, now I don’t post near as much as I used to, nor do I respect any now. Just not worth getting my blood pressure worked up. They don’t respect anyone’s opinion but their own.
Oh Bill, we respect the Constitution, individual Rights and freedoms, free from government intrusion.
@Bill N, Jake is the holier than thou that claimed his combat experience makes him an expert on the US Constitution and the nature of Civil Rights. Jake questions the credibility of everyone, then can produce not a single book that he has read concerning the US Constitution or the nature of Rights. With all due respect, I think you have picked the wrong horse.
Jake, we cannot compromise with those who want to abrogate our rights. They will not stop until they revoke or make it so onerous as to essentially make legal firearm ownership illegal. Just look at the laws in CA, CT, NJ, and NY, etc., and they keep more restrictions because the infringements they already had didn’t prevent any crimes. Those laws only make legal ownership more expensive and more likely for a law-abiding citizen to unintentionally break the law. How is that good or just? And what benefit is there to society in that?
Jake, I am not angry, nor have I used any ad hominem attacks, nor did anyone else. Your not liking us standing up for our rights isn’t name calling nor personally attacking you. Your calling firearm owners irresponsible and lacking common-sense, is a personal attack.
Actually Wild Bill did, not you. Pretty much said because of MY opinion and my argument with passion, that he equated me to those that “go postal”, basically afraid for his safety based on my comments, because he disagrees with them. Just because someone has a differing opinion, the attacks on me by some are not warranted. The problem is I am being perceived as more than what I am because I am passionate and arguing my opinion without backing down. And it is also clear some people cannot stop “reading” into what I am saying.. they are literally changing… Read more »
@Jake, You state, “As I said, I very much doubt the founding fathers intended the Constitution to be literal, absolute and unflinching.” You are very much wrong. That is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended.
I am wrong? Really? PROVE IT. Where did the founding fathers say YOUR opinion and interpretation was the correct one? I see no such thing. I don’t see ANYWHERE they said it was literal. Show me one place that PROVES the Constitution is to be taken literal and I will agree I am wrong and you are right. MY opinion is that it is not literal rather a framework they expected WE the PEOPLE to work within and to allow to GROW as society changed and the country grows. The founding fathers were a hell of a lot smarter than… Read more »
@Jake, Yes, your assertions about the Constitution are wrong. The Founding Fathers were not in a position to say my opinion was right. I, after much study, formal classes, professional guidance, and examinations am in a position to say that the Founders did intend that the Constitution was to be literal, absolute, and unflinching. Please see “Processes of Constitutional Decision Making Cases and Materials. By Sanford Levinson and Paul Brest; Decision in Philadelphia, The Constitutional Convention of 1787. By Christopher Collier and James L. Collier;The Federalist (Papers) by Jacob E. Cooke; Notes of the Debates in the Federal Convention of… Read more »
@Jake, Ok, I did what you asked. Now it is your turn. Ante up or you are a liar.
Jake, you keep saying mandated by raining. Who, but the government can mandate it? Just admit you are anti-rights. No one here is stating anyone should have unrestricted access, we are against mandates. You then state you are in favor of “local” government mandates, which means you *are* in favor of mandates. We do take the 2A literally. That’s how it is written. You believe in interpreting it how you believe it should be. Do you believe the word arms in the 2A only refers to handguns? If they meant that, why didn’t they stipulate that? You lost when you… Read more »
Jake, all of us base our beliefs on our knowledge and experience, you are not special. We disagree with you because you believe our rights should be abrogated by our government, the same government that is supposed to be subservient to “we, the people”, not the other way around as you seem to believe. Your “common-sense” ideas that you continually attempt to bash us with, we have shown you common-sense reasons why your ideas are not compatible with rational thought and violate our RKBA. You are allowed your opinion as much as we are. You perceive yourself to be better… Read more »
You again have missed the entire point of what I said. I have no idea where you get the idea that I am saying the “government” should require training. I said it is my opinion that people SHOULD be trained. No where did I say that I want the government to mandate training. IF something like this were to be “mandated”, I would want it to be done and VOTED ON as a law locally BY THE PEOPLE. You keep trying to throw this “government” mandate and I never said any such thing. I fully believe WE should regulate ourselves… Read more »
Well, Jake, I read this part that you wrote, “I cannot see how you think it is common sense to allow ANYONE to freely have unrestricted access to firearms in TODAY’s society.” Your chosen words indicate that you think people are “allowed” to have firearms. That is blatantly wrong. People have a Constitutionally enumerated Civil Right to make, obtain, keep, and carry firearms. No training required. Your chosen words indicate that you think that “TODAY’S society is somehow different from previous society. That is blatantly wrong. The way the human brain functions has not changed in all of human history.… Read more »
You know, I was going to reply but then I just read YET ANOTHER STORY of a moron who went off his rocker, using a gun to shoot up a place. Just now, breaking news, some idiot opened up on the NSA facility out of the blue with his weapons. That is being responsible and using common sense. Yep, sure is. AND THIS is how we get the left and anti gun nuts off our backs.. Yep, sure is. If we gun owners don’t step up and don’t start discussing ALL OPINIONS and trying to find reasonable and common sense… Read more »
Jake, again, you are not seeing a lot of negligent discharges and related deaths, the CDC stats refute your “opinion”, and that’s a fact, on which none of your views are based. At least now you admit to calling us criminals, further showing your intolerance of not only facts, but of everyone else posting here. Yet, you demand respect because you know better than the rest of us. Thank God (said as an Atheist) that your opinion means nothing in relation to your ability to abrogate our rights. You can whine and complain, but today, tomorrow and the next, we… Read more »
@Wild Bill, I pick no horses in this race or any others any more. I simply advised him to drop it for his own mental health. lol, The advice I offered will be ignored I’m sure. I assure you, I couldn’t care less.
Jake, again, I have not used any ad hominem attacks in my replies to you. Your saying so, just as your opinions, doesn’t make it true. There are not 7 billion people in the USA. And the percentage of law-abiding citizens is greater than 90%, and since we are discussing firearm owners, and more specifically, CC holders, they are the most law-abiding group, 6 times more than LEOs, who are 10 times more so than the general public. So, no CC holders are far from those that you need worry about. Also, statistically, according to the CDC accidental firearm deaths… Read more »
@Wild Bill Your comment I am replying to: QUOTE: @Jake, none of the experience and training that you mention qualifies you to make decisions about requiring training before a citizen can exercise their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights. I have a lot more training and education than you, but I won’t one upmanship you, not because it would not fly, but rather because my training and education does not qualify me to decide what training people must have prior to exercising their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights. Finally, your arguments are hollow because you seek financial gain from the mandatory requirements that… Read more »
@Jake, BCT, AIT(Cbt Eng 12B), OCS, OBC Infantry, CBR, NBC, BTMS, OAC Infantry, C&GSC, OBC JAGC, OAC JAGC, AS, BA, JD UVA. Thirty one years, nine months, and three days USA. Too many certificates of training to even list by abbreviation. Multiple decorations too embarrassing to list even by abbreviation. And not one of these degrees or schools qualifies me to make the decision for my fellow Americans (e.g. to seek firearms training, refrain from seeking firearms training, to demand firearms training as a limitation on the Second Amendment.) or limit their Constitutional Rights. You state, on 11 Feb, “…… Read more »
Why are you throwing in a bunch of military acronyms like NBC, BCT and others, forth? That has no bearing on actual experience or training for weapon handling.. Or did you expect me to not know what you are trying to pass along and impress me with somehow? I said I actually have military AND LEO experience in real life AND have been involved directly in person in shootings and other situations IN REAL life. I was stating it as a point of fact, not as trying to impress someone. A lot of people try to argue an opinion or… Read more »
@Jake, You used your Navy experience as a basis for your opinions on the Constitution and the nature of Civil Rights, and opined that no one had more experience than you. I am merely answering your challenge, and I believe that it is your turn to anti up. Or are you just an illiterate propagandist?
As to your last sentence, you are wrong as usual. You have focused on the wrong organ.
My only question is this. Are these anti gun activist that sits in Congress and the Senate going to provide around the clock armed security or secret service agents protect myself and my family like they? I already know the answer. I am a firearms instructor. Along with teaching citizens how to maitain and fire their firearms safely, I also give instructions about laws of Arizon and Federal Laws. All students must pass a written exam and qualification. They must pass these before they are issued a certificate. These are the standards I put in Place and must be met,… Read more »
I think Tim did a bang up job of keeping the issue straight, even with the limited amount of exposure he got. That idiot woman has no clue as to what’s constitutional & what’s desire. I think the commentator made a fool of himself when he claimed that nowhere in the 2A does it say we have a right to carry concealed. Tim was quick to rebut & point out that it DOES say KEEP, without stipulation as HOW…which would be, as he pointed out…an infringement. The NY Mayor & “his” Chief of Police (appointed, I might add), are just… Read more »
Amazing how many keyboard commando tough guys have no problem criticizing someone that is ACTUALLY standing up and talking about our rights in public… vs someone hiding behind their keyboard criticizing them… I am amazed at how many seem to show this pretend outrage online yet have no balls when it comes to actually showing up at events and walking the line when REAL rallies and such are held to defend that right. Some of us actually have stood up and gone out in public defending our rights in meetings, town halls and other venues. Sadly, MOST who yell the… Read more »
Exactly
Jake, true, I am one of those few you mention. I suspect that posters here are more likely to be of like mind and action than one of the millions that don’t.
You get more flies with honey… I typically encourage rather than ridicule those that don’t. Explaining our laws and what politicians are doing to limit or revoke our rights, and how the organizations I belong to fight these bad laws, and what I am doing personally, does on occasion result in another active member. It encourages them by seeing that standing up and fighting works.
Always good to remember that, while you may get more flies with honey than with vinegar, you can get the MOST flies with a big steaming pile of BS. Our mainstream media clearly subscribes to this dictum. Nevertheless, I was pleased with how Tim did, and I thought he came off as a very reasonable guy. That’s probably why they gave him so little air time. Of course, the show was biased, everyone knew it would be. But Tim didn’t do any disservice by participating, and a lot of folks who don’t watch Fox got a look, albeit a very… Read more »
@Jake…unfortunately this is the way it is. Its alway the few doing the dirty work for all. As a parent, I was always one of a few of the parents who did the volunteering, the fundraising, the clean up, the buying…pretty much everything, and the rest of the parents who did nothing at all, were quick to take the accolades from others for a job well done.
Calling them out seems to be the only way one will get more people to share the load. Although I don’t like calling others out, I don’t like doing it all myself either.
Jake: Tell you what, if you want an honest discussion of the facts, email me at: [email protected]
@Joe, most people you see at the range are CC holders? That’s total BS, since only about 16 million people are CC holders nationwide, 32% being women. Every if your specious rant wee remotely valid, we would be seeing CC holders at the vtop of the list of criminal groups. Unfortunately for you, the exact opposite is true, CC holders are the most law-abiding group in the nation, 6 times more law-abiding than LEOs, who are *ten* times more law-abiding than the general public.
Your post is too similar to the “FA” from MA to be believeable.
Okay, all over with now and, knowing what we did going in to this, it wasn’t half bad. Hudson could have been better prepared but you can’t have everything. I’d call it zero sum gain/loss.
This is pure Monetization of a liberty, illegally turned into a privilege, then licensed and taxed for a profit.
This is one of the many faults of a Capitalistic Economy. It’s pure and unadulterated Crime.
“Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness” is a false belief that which we are all created equal, and have said unalienable equal right. Such is propaganda.
“We Are No Longer Independent”
@walter, You started out right. I liked your first sentence. But what does corrupt government have to do with capitalism? Governments are just as corrupt under communism (Soviet Union), socialism (Venezuela), and sudo-democracy (Mexico and Canada).
The rest of what you wrote, you can believe as you like.
Wow. So many “you shouldn’t do it”, “they’ll make you look like a fool” and other negative comments. WRONG. They didn’t invite you…or me…or Sally…they invited Tim. So, Tim gets to speak for us. We should support him in this. Thanks, Tim. Kudos on having the stones to go and talk on camera with uber liberals. We know they don’t support you or us or the second amendment. But if the voice of the people is silenced on the matter, everyone will think we go quietly to the slaughter. They need to be reminded WE, who believe and support the… Read more »
I’m one of those guys with lots of credentials and training, either take my word for it or don’t. But to say that I have never seen someone with a CCW do something stupid and dangerous would be untrue. In fact, as an RSO at my local range, I see that almost all the people who are shooting have a CCW and they are the people doing the stupid and dangerous things. In the state I live in a person who is not prohibited can go on line, pay $20, take a 15 question multiple choice test, which he/she can… Read more »
There’s so much BS in your posting, I’m just not going to take the time to debunk all of it. I’ll just point out that you don’t charge to exercise a Right. If we did you’d be paying a fortune for that little rant of yours that was chock full of untruths and misinformation.
You know it’s funny.. because I too see a bunch of yahoo’s carry firearms that should not be. I am amazed every day how many people I see who I could simply walk up and yank their firearm out of their holster before they had a clue, especially those carrying on their back hip. I think mandatory weapon retention training should be part of the regiment. Some of you try to use the ‘militia’ excuse as your right.. well guess what? EVEN THE MILITIA during the revolutionary war was trained by the actual military before ever going into a battle… Read more »
Yup, exercising a Right is a horrible thing to do. We should all do what just makes everyone feel “comfortable” and safe. Every time I hear someone mention “mandatory training” for firearms I’m reminded of what happened in Rhode Island, a few decades ago, when a police chief said “anyone who wants to own a gun should have mandatory training”. Of course everyone agreed, gee, that’s only reasonable. Then they made it so tough that not even his own officers could pass the final test. So, Jake, who the hell are you to tell someone how to carry a gun?… Read more »
Really? You want to go there? Ok, since you seem to think you have more experience and training and stated yours, here is mine: United States Navy Service Connected Disabled Veteran, 7 major injuries all service connected. Retired (with my Combat K9 in 2014 at 100%). Additionally throughout my 30+ year career, I had a second career as a fully sworn Deputy Sheriff where I worked 2-3 patrol shifts for whatever county department covered the military base I was stationed WHEN back in CONUS for longer then 6 months. I also certified as a trainer (military and now civilian) and… Read more »
@Jake, none of the experience and training that you mention qualifies you to make decisions about requiring training before a citizen can exercise their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
I have a lot more training and education than you, but I won’t one upmanship you, not because it would not fly, but rather because my training and education does not qualify me to decide what training people must have prior to exercising their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
Finally, your arguments are hollow because you seek financial gain from the mandatory requirements that you advocate.
Jake, the issue with government mandated training is that it will be used to limit who gets to have the RKBA. Let’s say you will be required to take a one day class that costs “only” $75. For some people that’s a lot of money. Some states require much more training for CC, and it can cost several hundred dollars. Some states also have a system that requires a permit to purchase a firearm and ammunition that also costs several hundred dollars. That further limits by fiscal restraint who will be able to exercise that right. Now look at MA… Read more »
I agree with you about the ‘catch 22’ when it comes to training.. and also agree, having it controlled by the government is not something I would be inclined to agree with either.. My point was that somewhere, however, there has to be a middle ground.. perhaps simply a requirement that you get trained, get a legit certificate that you submit when you apply for the CCW. I see that as NO different then when I have to submit my military documents for my military license plates or for other benefits. With firearms, the government does not have to do… Read more »
@Jake, You are aware, of course, that driving a car or putting a car on the roadway is a privilege, but keeping and bearing a firearm is a Constitutionally enshrined Civil Right. Therefore the several levels of government can require training and fees for driving that those same governments can not require for keeping and bearing a firearm. If a person commits a tort with their firearm, even negligently, unintentionally, or unknowingly, then that person is liable. Having a Constitutional Civil Right will not protect the tortfeasor. It would be nice if people would seek training, the best training, and… Read more »
Jake, when one is CC, there is no issue with someone grabbing your firearm, it should not be seen. If it’s seen, it isn’t CC. Open carry, which this story isn’t about, harbors your issue on weapon retention.
I know of no one that carries CC that has not had any firearms training in excess of the government’s requirement. The training requirement isn’t enough to be able to knowledgeably and safely CC. The initial training is just that, a first step. One is never “fully trained”, only just more so.
Jake: I don’t believe you’re ever going to change your mindset on this but you really do need to get your facts straight. “As we all know crime is increasing more and more…”. No, actually, according to the FBI uniform crime reports, violent crime has been DECREASING for more than a decade while private firearms ownership has been steadily increasing. Your anecdotal reports of people accidentally shooting themselves is meaningless when compared to firearms ownership of more than 100 million and concealed carry permits exceeding 16 million. Police shooting themselves exceed that of civilians, so what? It happens and you… Read more »
To be honest, I don’t trust the FBI or DOJ myself so I have no idea if that is true or not.. It sure ‘seems’ to be the opposite however.. I don’t know about you, but I see and hear about a lot more crime these days then I did even 10 years ago.. As for my “anecdotal” evidence about people accidentally shooting themselves. How is factual information “anecdotal”? I never said anything about it being some huge number or that changing something or mandating training would bring some kind of “number” down.. Never even eluded to that.. What I… Read more »
@Jake, This string is so long that I am not sure that I will get my reply to you in the right place. I have been reviewing your writings and I have noticed something quite fascinating about them. There are several points in your posts which match the talking points of the anti-gun Bloomberg/Violence Policy Center crowd: 1. you claim Concealed Carry Permit (CCP) holders do not receive enough training; 2. you claim to have personally witnessed people shooting themselves through carelessness; 3. you claim that no “reasonable” person should object to background checks; 4. you claim that “some form… Read more »
Jake: You need to get a serious grip and step back. As Instructors and people who fight for people’s Rights we all want to see folks get training but we NEVER want to require or force them to get it in order to exercise that Right. End of discussion on my part, have a nice day.
@jake…your Mo is coming back to me now. We had a similar discussion on one of the gun forums regarding whether or not a certain optic was used on military prescribed weapons or not…I also recall you had the same tone in your arguement then as you do now…a know it all with no receptivity to others thoughts or opinions on the matter at hand.
Chill out…
and again, MY opinion. Just because some people don’t like MY opinion, does not make it right or wrong.. I have been arguing my opinion with why and reasons for thinking it is reasonable and a positive thing. Just because something is a right, does not mean it is infallible or that reasonable common sense cannot be applied to that right. Taking something absolutely literal is not being responsible yet yours, and some others, seem to think that just because it is a right you can do or be or act in any manner you want without repercussions. Again, for… Read more »
@Jake…and all opinions are to be regarded with the same merit, unless there is a disqualifying action or information which would impact said opinion. Everyone has an opinion…but its how you convey that opinion which determines whether or not someone is going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Right? I do feel the Right to Bear Arms is absolute. I also feel that right bears a lot of responsibility. And with that responsibility, comes everything one should need to do or know to exercise that right, responsibly and with common sense. Responsibility to me conveys having common sense.… Read more »
Jake, you may believe your restrictions are “common-sense”, but so does every other anti-rights person. You are stating that those with firearms lack “common-sense” and are irresponsible. Then you are upset that we are disagreeing with. That is your lack of common-sense and is irresponsible of you to state such, if you truly are a firearm owner. Or is it that, like Pelosi and others, such as Giffords, that believe only they should have the RKBA and the rest of us, as in your words are not responsible enough. However, statistics prove the exact opposite of what you are arguing,… Read more »
@Jake, You write, “Just because something is a right, does not mean it is infallible or that reasonable common sense cannot be applied to that right.” You are quite wrong. The nature of a Right is that it is inviolable and it can not be changed by government nor the opinion of an individual or even a majority of people.
@Joe, I hope that you will learn to live with the fact that as US citizens, we have rights. We have the Constitutional Civil Right to keep and bear. We also have the Civil Right to get educated a lot, or a little, or none at all. Driving is a privilege, subject to requirements that can not be placed on Constitutional Civil Rights. Nor does your desire to make money selling classes change that situation. Oh, and you have so many ideas crammed together in one paragraph that it is almost as if you have chosen to only learn a… Read more »
And I have seen Federal Law enforcement leave an AR 15 on the bench with a round in the chamber and a mag in and insist the weapon is cold because the safety is on. I don’t need an RSO or NRA instructor. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t mention them and I think the guys who wrote that would agree with me as well.
@jh45gun Bob, Yep, even with training, some people make really stupid mistakes. And yes, there are many foolish people carrying that should not be. That, however, is the nature of Civil Rights, including the Civil Right to decide to get educated, to practice, and to think things out in advance.
The tyrants are those that believe they are uniquely qualified to decide for us. First, in theory, then in actual fact. That is how we got a group of people in the FBI and Main Justice picking a POTUS for us.
@Joe.. Vanns40 hit the nail on the head so ill not delve into it further except by saying, i dont want YOU to carry because YOU are tooting your horn about your credentials & that makes me feel like you think that you’re impervious to being wrong. You’re not. Who gives you the right to determine who is deserving of the right to carry? Your credentials? Where did you get them? Who gave them theirs…& the one(s) that gave them theirs…& so on & so forth? Most people have common sense. Most know they’re not born with the knowledge of… Read more »
This will NOT be an interview to advance concealed carry legislation – this will be an interview to attempt to advance the idea of MANDATORY GUN OWNER SELF DEFENSE INSURANCE!
Happy to know you were there ahead of time and have seen it already. Please reply with a transcript so we can reply to CBS ahead of the broadcast.
@ft: You are either a troll or you’ve been living under a rock for a very long time. There is not a single State that issues a Concealed Carry Permit without the applicant first having to go through a background check. Of the more than 16,000,000 Concealed Permit holders they have a better history of NON-CRIMINAL history than police officers. Now, your response please!
ft, your objection to the reciprocity is misplaced. This proposed law does not allow anyone that isn’t allowed to carry, carry. Also, just like all other reciprocity agreements between states currently, one must abide by the laws of that state. It’s the same with driving laws. States have many differences for which a driver with a license from another state still must abide by the laws of the state in which he/she is driving in. Statistically, CC holders are, by far, the most law-abiding – 6 times more so than LEOs who are 10 times more law-abiding than the general… Read more »
I have a slight problem with this law allowing people from other states to enter the state I live in with their concealed firearms. I live in Ma. and have learned to adapt and work within the laws layed down. I have had years of firearms training as a FA Instructor in LE but I still have to obey the laws myself. I have had the safety course. I have had background checks. I have to have my guns secured IF I am not carrying it or using it. I cannot have a gun permit if I have a arrest… Read more »
The indoctrination runs deep in this one!
@BC, Yep, it reminds me of the saying:“Which is better—to be ruled by one tyrant 3,000 miles away or by 3,000 tyrants one mile away?”—Mather Byles
@ft, So you think that you are superior some how to the people of other states and particularly East Oshgosh (sic)?
WB, of course he is. No “FA” trainer nor LEO has ever broken the law nor ever had an ND. Oh, wait, LEOs are statistically 6 times more likely to commit crimes than CC holders and the Internet is filled with videos of their NDs literally shooting themselves in the foot, leg, shooting off their fingers, etc.
Unfortunately LEOs don’t typically practice nearly as often as the rest of us. Nor are they typically held personally liable in shootings, their governments pay for their defenses, unlike the rest of us.
@Heed, Yes, and combine that with his being a Massachusetts bigot, and we can see that ft and the other superior people of the North East think that they know what is best for the rest of us.
It also never ceases to amaze me how a group of LEOs have a suspect cornered and the perp makes a wrong move. Then all of the officers present empty their weapons in his or her direction and don’t hit what they were aiming at. So much for qualifications.
I too have been a resident of MA and CT where the gun laws are a horror story. So when someone from MA says I have to be willing to obey stupid state laws i know it is almost impossible for the individual, like myself, to fight city hall, but these state’s public officials are violating our Constitution, violating their oath of office, and violating the laws they swore to protect. . I moved out of MA and CT and will never go back. I hope someday the people of these states will remove the traitors of the Constitution who… Read more »
You are completely ignorant of the laws of the land. Yes they get to enter your state but they still have to follow your state laws on where they can go. I have never run across a hothead with a CC permit, they are the other guy who is calm and not looking for a fight. You are either ignorant or a fool or possible both…
The first four words of your second paragraph was all I needed. I don’t know why, but y’all are freaking wicked nutcases.
@ft, If the guy from east Oshgosh (or Vermont where there is no permit) comes into your state AND COMMITS A CRIME WITH HIS GUN, then he will suffer the legal consequences.
However, if he comes into your state and commits no crime…why do you have a problem whether he has a gun or not? Your fears are unfounded.
In the words of Bob Newhart, playing a psychiatrist treating someone with totally irrational fear: JUST STOP IT.
@ Paul As the fellow from Vermont I and three other friends visit FT’s state perhaps twice a year,to compete in matches. Out of the three only two can go armed as they are LEO’s. However the other two have non resident permits that are honored in 32 other states but not ft’s state All of us when we travel to that state have are match arms locked up in a security vault in the RV and have to have valid match paper work that said match is NRA certified.The RV is diesel and has fuel capacity so as not… Read more »
I will take that ‘bet’… I will raise your “pepper spray” with my .9mm Beretta in a fight…..
As a long time member of USCCA, I like both Tim and the organization. I trust Tim to be honest and make a good showing, as he believes he has. However, I also distrust CBS and don’t think they will “play fair” and air the interview without politically motivated, anti-gun bias. On the other hand, I agree with Tim that we “people of the gun” need to do what we can to bring our message and our POV to a wider audience. It is not necessarily foolish to make this effort to do that. Look at how how the network… Read more »
Wait and see, assumptions mean nothing. Might just surprise you, Tim is no dummy.