Posted on 03/10/2003 2:51:45 PM PST by jdege
It is unfortunate to see our sheriffs and police chiefs miss an opportunity to make an impact like they did with the upcoming permit to carry bill. Since this bill has a very good chance to pass, it would seem the people who make police department policies would offer constructive criticism to ensure the bill has the public's and patrol officers' safety in mind. Instead, the peace officers try to save their dictatorial power in issuing permits. They missed an opportunity for a few simple guidelines for these citizens to follow while in possession of a handgun.
As a police officer, it would be nice to make a traffic stop and see on my computer "Driver has permit to carry handgun," and that when I approached the car, the person would be required to disclose both that he or she held a permit and whether they had a gun on hand. Even if the person is carrying a handgun, I would feel a little better knowing he or she took a required safety course.
People ask if I am for or against guns. I answer, "Both." I don't think a fully automatic AK-47 is a deer-hunting rifle; it is an assault rifle made for one thing: to kill. On the other hand, I believe everyone has the right to carry a handgun to protect themselves and their loved ones.
This issue in not black-and-white; it needs a little give-and- take, and I am sorry that the sheriffs and police chiefs who are there to enforce the law and protect the public were too selfish to see the big picture.
MICHAEL FORD
Mankato
Of course, if he'd read the bill, he'd know that whether an individual holds a permit will show up on the computer in every squad car.
People ask if I am for or against guns. I answer, "Both." I don't think a fully automatic AK-47 is a deer-hunting rifle; it is an assault rifle made for one thing: to kill. On the other hand, I believe everyone has the right to carry a handgun to protect themselves and their loved ones.
Full auto requires a Class III permit. If youre full-auto deer hunting youre just a jackass and surely not very "sporting". Handgun hunting is a growing trend. What do you care about what firearms I own anyway?
Unfortunately, our Republican-controlled legislature has other fish to fry, since the Vil(e)sack will be staying in the governor's mansion for another four years.
You Minnesotans must be awfully happy about your bill. We Iowans can only dream about replacing our asinine county sheriffs "may-issue" policy with anything remotely like it.
Nonsense. You just need to get organized.
Even Wisconsin is making progress on their shall-issue bill.
Why are the majoritiy of Iowans agaisnt self-defense? Why do you vote for politicians who are against ccw? I thought Iowa was a conservative state?
How do you guys handle the "armed to the terror of the public" pychotics?
I have very rarely been a public place where people were openly and casually armed-grocery stories, parking lots, restaurants, theatres.
And how do you define "open carry"? If you slip a windbreaker over your holster are you now illegally concealed?
Thanks for any help.
Best regards,
There aren't too many times when I see people out carrying openly, but in VA there are either 140,000 or 170,000 (I can't remember which) concealed weapons permits issued, so odds are if you are in a large group someone is armed. The people I do know that openly carry are even much more responsible gun owners than the average person that carries concealed. One guy I know that open carries is an instructor and the other is a dealer. They are both VERY responsible and anyone that sees them in public with a .45 on their side should feel safer knowing they are around.
I did go to a Henrico Board of Supervisors meeting a few weeks ago about being able to carry openly in county parks (you can already openly carry in state parks) and there were 5-10 people that were openly carrying a handgun (and a number more that were concealed). The ordinance passed by a vote of 4-1.
There are certain restrictions on places where you can carry concealed. I don't believe you can carry concealed in a restaurant that serves alcohol. There are also some places that have banned weapons. For example, after the supervisors meeting a group of people went to Buffalo Wild Wings, but were told that the policy had changed and that handguns were not permitted.
Don't quote me on this, but I believe that if you have a coat or jacket over your gun then you are concealed and must have a permit. To be considered open it must be openly visible and not hidden in any manner.
A good site about concealed weapons laws for each state is www.packing.org.
Sorry for the long winded reply. Take Care!
Unfortunately, it was not sarcasm. The reality is in many areas the "right" to open carry is severely eroded for any number of reasons. In many non-rural areas the legendary pickup truck gun rack remains empty because
A. the displayed rifle might be stolen (for it's intrinsic value, not it's monetary worth.)
B. It is a mayhem magnet for the social commentary activists (You are scaring the women and horses-more accurately the liberals and horses)
Oddly, one propelling cause is the concealed movement that sprang up in the nineties. (If you must carry that thing at least keep it out of sight so you don't scare the women and horses).
There is now a push to make ALL carry concealed carry and consequently lower the overall population of individuals who may be in possession of a firearm at any given time.
Alternating between flattery and ostracism the CCH movement has become a wedge between various groups of 2nd Amendment supporters as in:
A. What's the matter? Can't qualify for a concealed carry permit?
B. Look at me! By accepting the premise I am guilty until proven innocent and jumping through as many flaming hoops as the bureaucracy can erect I have been declared an adult for a limited time and in certain areas until they elect to revoke my "priviledge".
I work on 2nd Amendment issues in my neck of the woods and I am familiar with the various statistics you quoted.
On one hand the CCH movement has been very beneficial in demonstrating the fallacy of the argument that America would automatically and immediately become a war zone.
On the other hand a right that is restricted for frivolous reasons quickly becomes a burdensome priviledge, not a Constitutionally protected mandate.
Thus my questions.
Best regards,
Never heard that one before!
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.