NC's new proposed gun law

[Griever]

http://www.charlottestories.com/north-carolinas-new-gun-rights-amendment-bill-hb1148-allow-concealed-weapons-without-permits/

Quote:Gun rights advocates in North Carolina are now pushing for a new law that would allow people to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. The new “Gun Rights Amendment” bill or HB 1148 is about to be voted on in the NC House.
The current law requires that anyone who wants to carry a handgun under their clothes or in a purse, you have to get a concealed carry permit.
To get a permit now requires eight hours of training in addition to a gun range test, then comes a federal, state, and local background check, fingerprints, and a 6 month waiting period.
If HB 1148 passes, all those requirements will go away.
The North Carolina House moved forward with the “Gun Rights Amendment” bill about forty-eight hours after the mass shooting at an Orlando gay nightclub, the North Carolina House moved forward with the “Gun Rights Amendment” bill.
At this point it’s not clear when the bill will be voted on, but if you’d like to see it pass or shot down, you can contact your represtative and let them know how they should vote.

[Au165]

Yep, less training is always a good idea when carrying a deadly weapon.

[Benton]

They're also lowering the driving age to 12 and getting rid of the need for a license.

[Interceptor]

This country is going deeper and deeper into the crapper.

[BigPapaKain]

Oh come the **** on.

[SteelCitySouth]

(06-23-2016, 10:32 AM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Oh come the **** on.

This exact same bill is close to making it through the SC legislature as well.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

This is the result of the toxic atmosphere created by partisan politics on both sides. Dems want to turn every shooting into a referendum on the 2nd amendment and Reps snap back just as strongly with things like this. Hillary went so far as to say we should "look into" the solution that Australia used, not mentioning that this would clearly violate the US Constitution that she has previously sworn to defend. That one quote is getting a lot of traction on the pro 2A side, hence responses like this.

[Rotobeast]

I have no problem with the idea of their current method of obtaining a permit.
I think 6 months may be about twice as long as you should have to wait, but doable.

[Au165]

Probably should be it's own thread, but I often wonder if an amendment 250 years old about the right to have a gun fits in the world we live in today.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-23-2016, 11:47 AM)Au165 Wrote: Probably should be it's own thread, but I often wonder if an amendment 250 years old about the right to have a gun fits in the world we live in today.

Yes, it does fit. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to overthrow the government if and when necessary. The Founding Fathers knew all too well about the corrupting influence of power and authority and wanted to make sure that American citizens had the means to effectively fight back.

[Rotobeast]

(06-23-2016, 11:50 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Yes, it does fit. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to overthrow the government if and when necessary. The Founding Fathers knew all too well about the corrupting influence of power and authority and wanted to make sure that American citizens had the means to effectively fight back.

Yuuuuupp.
Has there been any other time in history where we had more Federal oversight ?
Furthermore the welfare system has helped create an entitled populace that if they do not get what they think they deserve, they will go out and take it.
This is a rampant attitude in the deteriorating small town I live in.
Public housing everywhere and crime has increased ten-fold.
My 2nd amendment right is pretty important here.

[GMDino]

(06-23-2016, 11:50 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Yes, it does fit. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to overthrow the government if and when necessary. The Founding Fathers knew all too well about the corrupting influence of power and authority and wanted to make sure that American citizens had the means to effectively fight back.

Are you sure?

Could it have been to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to uphold the government in the face of foreign attack?

[GodFather]

(06-23-2016, 11:50 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Yes, it does fit. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to overthrow the government if and when necessary. The Founding Fathers knew all too well about the corrupting influence of power and authority and wanted to make sure that American citizens had the means to effectively fight back.

Thats the dumbest thing in the world, maybe back when this was written it seemed sensible, but if you wanted to overthrow the government they would drop a drone missile on your home before you even had time to take your gun out of a cabinet. 

When it comes to this subject of guns, the term common sense is nowhere to be found.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-23-2016, 12:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: Are you sure?

Could it have been to make sure the citizenry had the tools necessary to uphold the government in the face of foreign attack?

Well, that too.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-23-2016, 12:06 PM)GodFather Wrote: Thats the dumbest thing in the world, maybe back when this was written it seemed sensible, but if you wanted to overthrow the government they would drop a drone missile on your home before you even had time to take your gun out of a cabinet. 

The American Revolutionary War and the Vietnam War would disagree with you (to name just a couple).

[GMDino]

(06-23-2016, 12:17 PM)PhilHos Wrote: The American Revolutionary War and the Vietnam War would disagree with you (to name just a couple).

They had drones in the Revolutionary war?

[Griever]

(06-23-2016, 12:36 PM)GMDino Wrote: They had drones in the Revolutionary war?

where do you think the wright brothers got their ideas from?

[Millhouse]

(06-23-2016, 11:47 AM)Au165 Wrote: Probably should be it's own thread, but I often wonder if an amendment 250 years old about the right to have a gun fits in the world we live in today.

Thing is the right to bear arms is far more dangerous than the founders ever predicted.

[BmorePat87]

This is the equivalent of liberals pushing for full term abortions.

Why is the response always to go more extreme?

[Rotobeast]

(06-23-2016, 01:38 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is the equivalent of liberals pushing for full term abortions.

Why is the response always to go more extreme?

It's how everything seems to work, when negotiating (also legal system).
You always ask for more than what you want, so the compromise ends up being what you wanted in the first place.
I know... it's a colossal waste of our tax money and I agree.