Posted on 01/10/2011 1:42:00 AM PST by goldstategop
Arizona gun laws were relaxed further in 2010 when Gov. Jan Brewer (R) signed a National Rifle Association-backed bill repealing a state law requiring gun owners to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. State law now permits anyone 21 or older and legally qualified to own a firearm to carry the weapon without a concealed-to-carry permit.
Brewer's predecessor, Janet Napolitano, now secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, had previously vetoed attempts to toss out the concealed-carry permit law.
The new law won praise from gun groups.
"This is a major victory for gun owners in Arizona," Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA's political arm in Washington, said at the time. "The NRA is also grateful . . . for this measure making Arizona the third state in the nation behind Vermont and Alaska to offer its residents a constitutional carry option."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
How would society differentiate this guy, based on what was officially known about him before the incident, from others who get caught with a joint and end up in court?
I don't know the answer, but until we find it we're going to have have this happening all over the country. The only thing that makes this incident stand out is the identity of some of the victims. Every locale has examples of people going off the deep end and killing someone several times a year.
Good idea you have about "what-if", I think I'll adopt it for my own circumstances too. Thanks.
He had a record, but I haven’t seen that he had a conviction anywhere.
No permit is required for carrying a gun in Arizona. If you want a permit, then Arizona shall issue you one, unless you fail to meet certain qualifications. They include:
“3. Is not under indictment for and has not been convicted in any jurisdiction of a felony unless that conviction has been expunged, set aside or vacated or the applicant’s rights have been restored and the applicant is currently not a prohibited possessor under state or federal law.
4. Does not suffer from mental illness and has not been adjudicated mentally incompetent or committed to a mental institution.”
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/03112.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS
As a news photographer I spend a lot of time in my car and read a lot about real life situations where someone might be tempted to draw a weapon.
The other day I was first in line in a left-turn lane when a car came up the far outside lane and pulled over in front of, to block, the car in the lane next to me. It was apparent from the actions of the blocking driver that she was mad, really mad, at someone in the blocked car. I thought uh oh, what's she got in mind. She got out of the car and went up to the passenger side front seat of the blocked car and proceeded to raise hell with a young lady in the blocked car. I was relieved when she got out of her car and wasn't carrying anything, like a purse or especially a gun! They shouted back and forth at each other for the duration of the red light then she got back in her car and left.
I had made up my mind that I was not going to get involved, even if she displayed a weapon. I carry mine for protection and I feel as long as I reserve it's display or use for that I'm OK. The last thing I want is for the cops to show up and find two of us with guns!
Another time I was at a traffic light when an argument broke out between a person in the median and someone standing on the corner. The median person stormed across and made some very threatening moves toward the person on the corner. The corner person promptly reached into the back of a pickup truck he was standing by and came out with a four or five foot 2x4 and started swinging it at the median guy. This is a case where I wouldn't dream of displaying or using my weapon. I did however pick up my camera and take some neat pictures of the confrontation.
Truth is when push comes to shove each situation will be different and what goes for one could be totally out of place for another.
We don’t use purchase permits here as in NC and some other states. They DO still issue CCW permits because there is reciprocity with other states so people wanting to carry in other states would be SOL if they couldn’t still get a permit.
When we first moved to NC in 2003, I got a purchase permit while waiting for my CCW permit to be approved.
I thin that many are missing the point. CCW or not, does ANYONE think that a law or lacking a CCW permtui would have caused this nutjob to NOT carry and shoot this Congresswoman and those around her?
Law, permit or whatever, does ANYONE think he would have recognized ANY kind of restriction?
Let’s get real here and focus on the real issue.
This guy, so far, appears to have been a nutjob who didn’t recognize any limits on his ability or capacity to shoot and kill someone.
Isn’t it against the law to shoot at or try and kill someone? Isn’t that enough? What does having or not having a flippin’ permit or not have to do with it?
I think that many are missing the point. CCW or not, does ANYONE think that a law or lacking a CCW permtui would have caused this nutjob to NOT carry and shoot this Congresswoman and those around her?
Law, permit or whatever, does ANYONE think he would have recognized ANY kind of restriction?
Let’s get real here and focus on the real issue.
This guy, so far, appears to have been a nutjob who didn’t recognize any limits on his ability or capacity to shoot and kill someone.
Isn’t it against the law to shoot at or try and kill someone? Isn’t that enough? What does having or not having a flippin’ permit or not have to do with it?
The question for any of these gun control types is
how would you frame a law that would keep someone bent on committing murder from obtaining a weapon while not affecting those who have no such intent?
They don’t really care a hoot about the latter, but it’s good to expose them.
(so... you’re not really about preventing murder so much as you are about making sure the law abiding can’t defend themselves)
Sorry I took so long to reply. I keep trying to understand your point in the context of the larger discussion on this thread. In the case of Arizona, a legally armed citizen was nearby when the terrorist killed and wounded a lot of people. The legally armed citizen had no idea, when he entered the Walgreens Store to buy cigarettes, that he could have made a difference and saved a bunch of lives if he’d followed his first instinct to go see what the crowd was gathered about. I would hope that I would be close by with my legally held firearm should some terrorist attempt to take the lives or wound innocents. I would hope that, and think I would, have the courage to use my legally held firearm to protect innocent lives regardless of whether a dipshit like that sheriff down there were to arrest me in concequence. It appears that you would chose your own personal safety over protecting others and that’s your right......I guess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.