Again

[Raeven]

I agree with that, Min. Handguns are the biggest problem in this country; no nexus has been drawn between concealed carry and a deterrent to crime -- but lots of accidents have happened as a result of poorly secured guns in the homes of gun owners with children as well as other places. I'm curious to learn what guns are involved in the subject incident. In urban areas, truly, I prefer handguns in the possession of only highly trained law enforcement types, as much as possible. As for out here in rural areas, I'd grab a shotgun over a handgun any day.

[Minimalist]

I prefer handguns in the possession of only highly trained law enforcement types

Yeah....but if you read the Fucking Cops thread you'll see we don't get much of that anymore.

[Raeven]

Brian... one thing it has to do with for sure is relative population. You guys have, what, 6 million people? Maybe 7? Against our 330 million?

Less than that, closer to four and a half millions. I'm not sure what population has to do with it - you have small towns, we have small towns. You have big cities, we have big cities (well...biggish).

But our heavily armed population simply don't go round shooting one another with the same frequency that your does.

Boru

But you have mostly long guns, don't you? As I recall from my husband, handguns were strictly off limits in NZ...? Do I have that wrong?

I do think ours is a more violent culture in general, but I raised population only to the extent that incidence will be less in a lesser population. IOW, if an incident happens to one out of every 1,000 people... fewer people translates into fewer incidents, does it not?

---

I prefer handguns in the possession of only highly trained law enforcement types

Yeah....but if you read the Fucking Cops thread you'll see we don't get much of that anymore.

I suppose I should read that thread... I have a view from both sides of that aisle, so I stayed out of it.

[freedomfromforum]

As for out here in rural areas, I'd grab a shotgun over a handgun any day.

I have only had to use a gun one time in a home defense situation, and I'm glad I had my pistol. When I lived in NM I open carried my .357 Magnum and there were MANY Albuquerque residents who did likewise. Check the gun and violent crime stats there; very revealing.

[Raeven]

FFF.. I was careful to reference CCW in what I said. I think open carry is a different thing. We are an open carry state here in Oregon, though you seldom see folks engaging in it -- in the cities, anyway. And I'll allow you had different issues in NM.

[freedomfromforum]

FFF.. I was careful to reference CCW in what I said. I think open carry is a different thing. We are an open carry state here in Oregon, though you seldom see folks engaging in it -- in the cities, anyway. And I'll allow you had different issues in NM.

I currently have a Ca CCW Permit. It took me three years of fighting the courts to get them to issue the permit. They make you go through many hours of training and safety courses - NOT just anyone can get one. When I openly carried I was never harassed by thugs of any kind. Now that my sidearm is concealed, I get all kinds of loudmouths popping off with random BS (Damn Bay Area). I can still carry openly, but all that will get me now is harassed by over zealous police. And I agree with you that training should be mandatory for all gun permits, CCW or otherwise. I'd also be in support of an annual re-certification program, where ALL gun owners would be required to demonstrate safety and proficiency in order to maintain their permit.

[Raeven]

FFF.. I was careful to reference CCW in what I said. I think open carry is a different thing. We are an open carry state here in Oregon, though you seldom see folks engaging in it -- in the cities, anyway. And I'll allow you had different issues in NM.

I currently have a Ca CCW Permit. It took me three years of fighting the courts to get them to issue the permit. They make you go through many hours of training and safety courses - NOT just anyone can get one. When I openly carried I was never harassed by thugs of any kind. Now that my sidearm is concealed, I get all kinds of loudmouths popping off with random BS (Damn Bay Area). I can still carry openly, but all that will get me now is harassed by over zealous police. And I agree with you that training should be mandatory for all gun permits, CCW or otherwise. I'd also be in support of an annual re-certification program, where ALL gun owners would be required to demonstrate safety and proficiency in order to maintain their permit.

I completely agree with all of this. I have CCW for both Oregon and Utah. It was a matter of having enough boxtops. Not nearly enough training accompanied the process. I had to get that on my own, and I have more to do.

It's harder in Oregon to get your driver's license renewed than to get CCW permits.

[freedomfromforum]

I have CCW for both Oregon and Utah.

I like you.

[FlyingNarwhal]

I currently have a Ca CCW Permit. It took me three years of fighting the courts to get them to issue the permit. They make you go through many hours of training and safety courses - NOT just anyone can get one. When I openly carried I was never harassed by thugs of any kind. Now that my sidearm is concealed, I get all kinds of loudmouths popping off with random BS (Damn Bay Area). I can still carry openly, but all that will get me now is harassed by over zealous police. And I agree with you that training should be mandatory for all gun permits, CCW or otherwise. I'd also be in support of an annual re-certification program, where ALL gun owners would be required to demonstrate safety and proficiency in order to maintain their permit.

Yeah this seems really reasonable, I would be completely in favor of gun control like this.

[Chas]

Here is a refreshing change of pace....and a step in the right direction which Raeven asked about above.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/2013101...QIE00.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court won't review a decision upholding a Maryland gun law that requires residents to demonstrate a "good and substantial reason" to get a permit to carry a handgun outside their own home or business.

Maybe the assholes realize they went way too far in the Heller case and are trying to take a step back from anarchy?

Sorry, Min, but you keep committing this fallacy.

Do you really think that someone with crazy, criminal intent is concerned about a permit to carry a firearm?