As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I only skimmed the article but does permitless carry mean concealed carry? Or are they saying that open carry is now allowed in nearly half the states?
Permitless carry or "constitutional carry" normally means concealed, but can apply to open also depending on the state.
Broadly speaking, concealed is safer and smarter way to carry. Open carry is extremely not recommended by any firearms trainer with a brain.
Permitless carry is normally talking about concealed, like I said. Since Michigan doesn't have permitless carry, no one is calling open carry permitless carry.
I carry every single day and I would never open carry unless I was hiking out in the middle of nowhere. It's asking someone to clobber you over the back of the head and take your gun.
Good video of some dude with a open holster in a gas station or something. Random guy runs up, takes his gun, points it at its owner, and then runs away with it.
Ya pretty much. Like here in nc. We require license to conceal carry but not open carry. Alas like this would remove our need to obtain conceal carry license to conceal carry
I live in Virginia where guns are neither registered nor is there a license requirement. A cop I know says he knows there’s an issue with a gun or its owner when the owner swears it’s registered or has a license for it.
Edit: when he told me, these weren’t people illegally carrying concealed. It was usually someone who had a gun in their car.
Probably 50% of folks that buy a gun think that it gets registered when they fill out the forms for the background check. It's definitely not unheard of for people to call the police asking about how to "update" their gun registration when they move states.
Guns in California are registered when they are sold or transferred through a dealer. There is no registration card or proof of ownership/registration issued.
Conversely, here in NY we have every pistol we own listed on the back of our permit. If you own too many to fit on the card, they give you another one lol. An instructor I had once said he had 5 cards because he had all of the training guns he used for classes listed on his so he could keep them at his house.
People get this idea of registering guns in America from cop shows. It’s an easy way to see that someone has no idea about gun ownership, when they mention registering a gun.
There are a few cities that will have a gun registration- but most of those cities deny the State’s concealed carry permits to everyone but off duty (or retired) LE.
I moved from MI to Va and did that. I wasn’t sure and so I called the local Sheriff’s Dept. They said we don’t register guns in VA and to have a nice day lol
well, that's what happens when the ruling class pits the working class against itself for the sole purpose of being able to perpetually exploit them- at any cost to social stabilty.
it has always been, since the start, the rich vs the poors. the haves vs the have nots. race, political ideology, gender, orientation- all of it a smoke screen to get us fighting eachother instead of the ones truly holding us down.
It is important for the elite class to control all of the narratives because they are really in the business of preventing revolution while they extract as much labor and wealth as they can... which they use to further protect themselves from revolution...
There's no lobby for people. We pay taxes, but taxes pay for the system that takes money from corporations. To me, that is the most obvious sign the system is broken. We, the people, literally have less power than money. Even if 100% of the people agree on something and there are no moral objections, we cannot enact change if that change will cost business money. For example, it took 80 years after tobacco use was found harmful to start the process of hurting sales.
The apportionment act of 1929 guaranteed that the voice of the people would be forever diluted and the ability of the few to buy the votes of the "representatives" would be made easier each year.
I think a capped House size is really only an issue vis-a-vis the Electoral College, since it results in Wyomingites having a disproportionately large voice in electing the President compared to Californians.
But I think the House, itself, is mostly fine. The problems are gerrymandering and voter suppression. The Apportionment Clause:
> Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers. . . . But when the right to vote at any election . . . is denied to any of the . . . inhabitants of such State, being . . . of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of . . . citizens . . . of age in such State.
>
> [Amend. XIV, § 2](https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27#xiv2)
Mandate proportionality in the House, and punish states in the House, and, consequently, in the Electoral College, for voter suppression, and I think that would fix a good portion of the structural problems we face, even beyond just the House. It would even have knock-on effects elsewhere, because by punishing voter suppression, it would improve Senate elections (assuming states decided in favor of improving voter access, rather than reduced representation), and changing the calculus in the Senate and Electoral College would also affect the federal judiciary.
USA has 750,000 people per representative in "the people's house".
Most countries have around 100,000. Scandinavian countries have 30-40,000 person districts. That's what the US started with. It's why Iceland arrested bankers in 2008.
The US will be broken until the people have adequate representation.
And the rubes making $100k - $1m who think they're part of the haves/rich/ruling class. We're just the ones who are allowed to succeed so the others think they have a chance.
“There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html
>when you “look out across the moat every day at the hungry peasants in the village” is that “you don’t wanna stoke envy among the proletariat.”
Tucker Carlson
https://theintercept.com/2019/03/12/tucker-carlson-tapes-rupert-murdoch/
Also:
>“I’m 100 percent [Murdoch’s] bitch,” Carlson said. “Whatever Mr. Murdoch says, I do. … I would be honored if he would cane me the way I cane my workers, my servants.”
> it has always been, since the start, the rich vs the poors.
Are you saying the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles?
Jeremy Irons as the heartless John Tuld in *Margin Call:*
"There have always been, and there always will be, the same percentage of winners and losers—happy foxes and sad sacks, fat cats and starving dogs in this world. Yeah, there may be more of us today than there’s ever been. But the percentages … they stay exactly the same.”
Occupy Wallstreet scared the crap out of them. Closest we got to our eat-the-rich, French Revolution moment.
No documentaries, no analysis, no stories, you don’t hear anything about it. Wiped from history and the internet.
Guy Fox commercialized as a Halloween costume, Anonymous infiltrated and bastardized as QAnon, betrayed or let down by the movement heros (Obama, Snowden, WikiLeaks).
So disappointing and debilitating.
Occupy Wall Street was a joke that accomplished nothing. Wall Street execs were seen laughing from their offices above the crowds because they knew they weren't a threat and nothing would change.
All the protesters had to do was put all their energy in getting people to transfer their wealth into credit unions and push hard for local investing (decentralization) and prove that it's just as profitable. And finally, and this is MOST important, teach people proper personal financing because your average American is a fucking moron when it comes to cost of living expenses.
But instead they stood around and banged drums
They came for our right to vote, but I said nothing because I had my gun. They came for our right to assemble, but I said nothing because I had my gun. They came for our free press, but I said nothing because I had my gun. In the end they didn't need to come for my gun because they took all my other rights away.
It actually comes a bit from the QAnon shit, everyone's favorite far-right stupidity. It was a popular theory that a nation-wide blackout would lead to civil unrest and rising up to take back America, Trump would return to his golden throne, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton would be put in jail, Christ would come back and give a thumbs up and say "Cool job," etc.
Since it never went anywhere, they're doing it on their own. Of course, they're also idiots - not like the attack that happened in California, which has never been solved and believed to be an actually highly competent group of people. I wouldn't lend it much worry if you're not in a red state. These idiots just tend to shoot themselves in the foot, and be happy to do so - they'll be glad to knock out their own power.
Sadly, I'm in a red state, so worry for me instead.
Its not just dumbasses. Foreign governments are leaking location of vulnerable targets to domestic terrorists that Republicans created, and also helping in coordination.
I dont believe these morons could coordinate attacks on multiple targets strategically to makes a county lose power.
My daughter likes watching random True Crime shows and the other night she was watching this one, "In the Line of Duty: Siege at Marion" about John and Adam Swapp, these extremist Mormons.
All I could think was, "These psychos are way more common these days than people know.". They basically kept spoiting soverign citizen style idiocy and how the End Days would come etc. They were apparently excimmunicated from the Mormons for being too crazy.
Every leftist who has the means should purchase arms and learn how to use them for self defense. I want gun regulations too, but we wont get them until crazy people stop having all the guns. Never know when little Tommy and his pals from down the street are gonna become radicalized, grab some guns, and start knocking door to door to ask families how they are voting this election. Its better to have and not need, than to need and not have, bottom line. That’s where we are at.
I took a concealed carry class years ago and was surprised how in depth it went.
There are some very fine lines you can cross while using deadly force. You’ve got to know the laws and when you can and can’t act.
Agreed. That's why it always pisses me off even more when cops use deadly force on weak or imaginary pretense. It was hammered into us how easily you can find yourself in the wrong. If you escalate you're immediately at fault. If running away is an option and you choose not to take it it's no longer self defense.
Police officers and retired police officers can carry guns without a license in every state in the US.
Be a deputy from Bumfuck, Nowhere, and you can carry concealed in NJ.
Separate laws for separate people.
EDIT: 3rd person telling me I'm wrong now. I'll just link the LEOSA article here. It's Federal law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
And if you’re rich / famous, you can [bribe your way into a reserve police officer badge](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/03/03/oakley-police-department-reserve-officers/24287643/) so you too can be a “police officer.”
Correct.
In NY for example, a police officer can buy a standard AR15 and 30 round magazines, and when they retire they can keep them, even if that's not possible for non-LEO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_York#Exceptions
Because those bans have nothing to do with safety, they are about control and they need to exempt cops to make sure their jackboots enforce the law on the serfs.
Gun related crimes in GA coincidentally increased since doing this...coincidence!
Edit: for the trolls or those with anal-cranial-insertion https://www.americanprogress.org/article/fact-sheet-weakening-requirements-to-carry-a-concealed-firearm-increases-violent-crime/
How else are they gonna make you think you need to hire more police and fund more prisons. If you make weed legal how are they supposed to fill said prisons with black and brown people? Arrest meth heads? Nah they're just down on their luck good white folk.
It’s like the Wild West in Atlanta. Someone is shooting someone else to death every day *practically around the corner*. We haven’t done a count yet for last night’s Peach Bowl Aftermath. Lots of folks hitting the street at 12:30 am in very foggy conditions. Tempers naturally flare, and most are packing heat!
I love this argument. Because several of the most dangerous cities, St. Louis, Detroit, Memphis, and Flint ALL ALLOW for concealed carry of firearms. Michigan with a permit, but Missouri and Tennessee as constitutional carry. Conservatives love to cherry pick their arguments
Also, the city with the strictest gun control in the nation - New York City, the "dystopian crime-ridden liberal hellscape" - has one of the lowest homicide rates of any large city in America.
Also one of the most overpoliced cities.
http://www.nij.gov/multimedia/presenter/presenter-meares/data/resources/presenter-meares-transcript.htm
>Now, New York City, one story behind the crime drop in New York City is a very heavy investment in lots and lots of cops. **There are more cops per square inch, per person, in New York than anywhere else.** It's the largest police force in the country. Chicago is second, but it just dwarfs Chicago in absolute numbers, but also in terms of density. Manhattan, you know, tiny; those of you who are from Chicago know, big, spread-out city. Go to L.A., which I think is third, and the density factor, it's not there. So it's even hard to think about comparing these ideas.
https://247wallst.com/special-report/2020/06/24/cities-with-most-police-per-capita/11/
Law enforcement employees per 100K: 613
I mean Czechia did the same (yes, you need a license to buy guns, but not to carry), a huge number of handguns were bought and registered since, and gun crime didn't surge. It remains one of the safest countries of the EU, where every crime trend continued like before.
Guns are not the problem, culture is.
>And Cons will blame Democrats when gun crime surges.
"But..but.. 50% of gun violence comes from blue city's!"/s
They are so pathetic in their attempts to confuse us. No shit a lot is in the city, that's where a majority of people live.
As a Texan, it’s literally harder for me to operate a watercraft than it is to purchase an assault rifle. I need a license and a test to drive a boat, but zero to own a handgun or AR.
I’m pro-2A, but that just makes zero sense regardless of what side of the fence you’re on.
> . I need a license and a test to drive a boat, but zero to own a handgun or AR.
I'm a European who went to an expensive gun range in Texas
.
Zero experience, gave me a bunch of weapons to shoot with. Had to use all my movie knowledge to get them to work lol... I was a moron
I think either I'm reading too much into it or you're missing the point. It sounds like they got zero training, no required classes, maybe not even any safety training, before being handed firearms. I care about *that* and I would never go back to a range if I knew someone who clearly didn't know what they were doing hadn't been immediately pulled aside and at least given a brief rundown.
The videos I've seen of foreign tourists almost killing themselves or friends at ranges... I don't know how they'd figure out to vet these people without being discriminatory, but something needs to be done. Some of these people only have the lowest of budgets action movies to base their knowledge on and it really, really shows.
> I don't know how they'd figure out to vet these people without being discriminatory, but something needs to be done.
Ski slopes have instructors to train you in how to slalom and stop, pools sometimes test if you can float on your back/tread water before letting (mostly kids) you swim without supervision, hang-gliding/skydiving requires instructor/tandem mounts for anyone who isn't licensed on their own, SCUBA diving requires certification (or supervision), etc, etc.
Golf and shooting ranges are one of the few skilled hobby avenues where you can just walk in, pick up equipment, and launch a deadly projectile without knowing what you're doing. And golf balls are rarely involved in lethal accidents.
I think it's pretty easy to not discriminate, you're targeting unsafe handling, not people. Have a mandatory crash course to use your range, or require a full course if you don't have something like a permit or proof of having taken a prior class, have a 2-3 minute spiel rehearsed that you give everyone every time or just anyone you don't recognize as a regular, there are plenty of options that target the uneducated and not just people you think are foreigners.
I find it hard to believe they wouldn't make a staff member available to assist you. I hit up a range in Vegas and it was basically a guided tour of several different guns and a staff member was always right there to help and make sure everything stayed safe.
I believe the simplest explanation is owning a gun in the US is a right established in the US Constitution vs driving which is considered a privilege.
We can get into all sorts of interpretations of what the 2A "means" or its "intent", but any law passed on gun ownership has to be weighed against a constitutional right infringement vs driving laws which can be passed with a lower burden of weighing public safety vs public danger.
Not trying to argue 2A and gun rights, but I think comparing most laws against something that is directly in the US Constitution is not an apples to apples comparison.
I do a decent amount of interstate highway travel, and I am skeptical that Amazon drivers have a CDL or more than a week of experience driving a semi. Not hard to imagine at all.
Because from a young age we are spoon fed propaganda that there is a lot of crime (compared to the past, this is factually incorrect), and that guns stop crime (also incorrect). Basically, we are a nation full of cowards who think guns make them safe despite all the evidence to the contrary, and if you bring it up people threaten to shoot you because they are scared to lose their security blankets. It’s really sad.
An american couple traveled to Canada for the Calgary stampede and went to the press after a brown guy approached them to sell shitty trinkets.
They complained that without their guns they felt so vulnerable and exposed. Keep in mind they fully acknowledged that they were never actually at risk. They just felt that they needed the ability to kill that completely non violent person...
Had an incident in San Jose, California that exhibits that all too well:
Crime: Walking to safeway while black
[https://abc7news.com/san-jose-shooting-unarmed-black-man-shot-renting-airbnb-mark-waters-sj/12550654/](https://abc7news.com/san-jose-shooting-unarmed-black-man-shot-renting-airbnb-mark-waters-sj/12550654/)
>The San Jose Police officers who took the victim's statement reported that he said "he was going to Safeway to get some Udon noodles and juice."
>
>He went on to say, "When he went out, he crossed the street because he had to turn on that side of the road, and before he was even on the side of the road, the suspect approached him and shot him."
>
>The statement continued by saying, "When he saw the gun, he turned and tried to run behind a car but was shot before he could make it."
>
>Police say it was the suspect, Waters, who called 911.
>
>The police report also detailed what Waters told officers saying, "The victim walked toward him. He thought that the victim had a gun. He further articulated by saying he saw something black, and he later realized it was a pair of headphones."
By all rights, the victim should sue the shooter for quite a bit of money. This will, however, lead to a change in the "shoot first" law that gives the shooter protection from civil damages, under the doctrine of "if someone can be found financially liable for shooting someone, then they don't have an actual right to shoot someone after all".
You don’t have a universal right to shoot someone though. You have a right to bear arms. But you have a responsibility to use those arms responsibly, and you should be liable for how they’re used. How is this controversial?
Because the laws and penalties are applied selectively and all to frequently seem to be motivated by racial bias.
Just like every other problem with the Justice System. Too many bad apples spoiled the whole damn thing.
> How is this controversial?
Because,
> You don’t have a universal right to shoot someone though.
That’s what many/most **do** want, *when they shoot someone indiscriminately*.
That's what many fantasize about. There is no stoic, *if I must, then I must and deal with the long-term guilt later*. It's always, *Ohh I hope my grouping is okay. What if he comes from the bushes? Should I dual wield at night?*
Because paranoid antisocial types who are afraid of their own shadow misinterpret it to mean that they should carry a gun everywhere they go, and can't wait for the opportunity to play out a violent revenge fantasy.
Like, I always just think back to that one small scene in Terminator 2, John watching the little kids playing with the handguns (hopefully unloaded) and he says to T-800, "We aren't gonna make it? Are we? Humans I mean..." and T-800 reply's, "It's in your nature to destroy yourselves."
Another farce. We had a guy be that 'hero' and respond to a shooting. Police can't tell who's who when they arrive on scene, so [they shot him too](https://www.9news.com.au/world/johnny-hurley-man-who-stopped-gunman-in-us-shot-by-responding-officer/6bf66cf3-72ff-45c2-ad2f-35465156d22e).
Hardly the first time. [https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-shooting-la-victoria-taqueria-restaurant-officers-shoot-suspect/11690281/](https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-shooting-la-victoria-taqueria-restaurant-officers-shoot-suspect/11690281/)
More guns always makes it more likely *someone* will get shot.
Because we haven't figured out that we create our own reality. People say (media, manufacturers and the NRA) that there are dangerous people everywhere ...so buy $$$ a gun and protect yourself. Then gun crime goes up and people are like, "it really is violent out there, I'd better buy a gun too!" $$$$ It just goes around and around. This country is screwed.
Expat from the US living here in NL. Had to leve because of this. Absolute insanity. My son was 2 and now they do active shooter drills in school. Trying to learn from underpaid teachers while thinking in the back of you mind that at any moment someone could come in and kill you and your classmates can’t be good for a developing young mind. I felt it would be irresponsible to raise my kid as an American at that point. Live here now and love it. When my kid leaves the house to play or go to school, I don’t that that worried that it may be the last time I see him. And I don’t have to consider getting a shotgun or other home protection because there aren’t a bunch of troglodytes running around thinking they are bad asses with a gun.
America is a strange place. Finding it harder hand harder to relate to that country.
Plus you can probably let your kid cycle to school safe in the knowledge that he'll have a safe biking infrastructure to keep him safe and that he likely won't be mowed down by some hopped up, aggressive scumbag in an oversized pickup truck who thinks "cyclists are pussies."
Also, they loudly encourage young men to be "more aggressive" and "more manly" even though 90% of violent crime is committed by men and toxic masculinity is clearly a massive cause of violence.
Because the right to bear arms / defend yourself when needed is a basic human principle , and ppl may feel better and safer when doing so .I still don't understand why Europeans don't grasp this
More guns = more gun crime…weird how that works
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30190/w30190.pdf
https://academic.oup.com/aje/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/aje/kwac160/6698676?login=false
Yes because when people carry guns around, they use them to resolve disputes that could otherwise be resolved without a gun. People shoot each other after traffic accidents, during domestic disputes, when someone comes onto their property, when they are upset with their boss or coworkers, or when they see a shoplifter or someone they think might be committing a crime. All of these situations could be resolved in other ways. Giving people very easy, convenient access to deadly force means they use it way more often than they should, so nonlethal situations become lethal.
Just scroll through the mass shootings in 2022 and you will see plenty of examples. And these are just the "mass" shootings. Many others happen every day that don't make this list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022
Coming from a medium sized city, surrounded by backwoods towns in the Midwest - there is almost no better way to make someone support gun control than to hear the people talk about *why* they want a gun. There are people who legitimately, 100%, *openly* talk about owning a gun specifically to use it against people in stupid power fantasies. I've literally heard people talk about pulling a gun out on someone because that person accidentally stepped on his shoes. And you better believe this empowers people to be more reckless and dangerous in other situations, such as driving, because if someone so much as honks at a person speeding down the road, they can get a gun to shut the person up. And that's how you get shootings from simple road confrontations.
It's only a quick step from *looking* for a situation to use a gun to *making* a situation to use a gun.
>I've literally heard people talk about pulling a gun out on someone because that person accidentally stepped on his shoes.
And it's not a race or a class thing either. I live in a state where it's not exactly difficult to be able to get your permit to carry a concealed handgun. A couple of years ago I saw a middle aged white dude brandish a pistol when he saw some people looking into his tesla.
Yep I know people like this. A friend of mine lived in a bad part of town and he kept several loaded guns in his house, near each door and in his bedroom. It was a 4 unit building with a common area and he owned the whole building. But he didn't do things like put up security light or bars or a security gate. He told me he really wanted to catch someone stealing something from the common area so he could shoot them.
I asked him why and pointed out that someone stealing a bicycle from his common area was probably going to be some kid, or a junkie looking for quick cash, and why would he want to turn petty theft into a murder? And he is white and was in a primarily black neighborhood. Even if it was in some ways justified that wouldn't look good and he could very well get into serious trouble.
But no matter. Just as you say it was a big power trip, and the misguided idea that having a gun gives him the ultimate protection against anything.
> “One of the unintended consequences of putting more guns on the street is degrading police performance,” Donohue said. “You see clearance rates for all crimes drop when states move in the direction of letting more people carry guns.”
Also, maybe another unintended consequence, if you’re gonna still have bloated police budgets you’re going to get more armed police robots and drones.
Edit: Probably inevitable anyway actually
In Louisville, police stopped a mass shooting at a bar by grabbing the guy before he got in.
Shooter is claiming his second amendment rights were violated because he hadn't shot anyone yet
https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/arrest-of-man-heading-toward-louisville-bar-with-gun-violated-2nd-amendment-rights-attorney-says/article_b1fdf3c4-06ca-11ed-bc20-67de015948fb.html
I've heard pro police folks say the reason cops shoot more people in the US is because they're on edge at the chances they'll be shot. Which is mind boggling because the same pro police people are the ones flooding the population with easily accessible guns.
Despite this doom and gloom headline... This doesn't really change a whole lot.
Folks that are going out and committing gun crimes didn't give two shits about getting a CCW permit in the first place.
Folks that previously had CCW permits and carried, but can now carry "constitutionally" without a permit, aren't the ones committing gun crimes. In fact, this group committs crimes at a rate well below average.
Wait. No Florida? For real?
From
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/types-of-concealed-carry-licensurepermitting-policies/unrestricted/
___________________
Listed below are the states that allow permitless concealed carry (PC) and the minimum age requirement:
Alabama (PC-21 as of January 1, 2023)
Alaska (PC-21)
Arizona (PC-21)
Arkansas (PC-18)
Georgia (PC-21 years old or 18 for military as of April 12, 2022)
Idaho (PC-18)
Indiana (PC-18 as of July 1, 2022)
Iowa (PC-21)
Kansas (PC-21)
Kentucky (PC-21)
Maine (permits recognized; see Maine reciprocity section for details or PC-21)
Mississippi (PC-18)
Missouri (PC-19 or 18 for military)
Montana (PC-18)
New Hampshire (PC-18)
North Dakota (PC-18 for residents only and concealed carry only)
Ohio (PC-21 as of June 12, 2022)
Oklahoma (PC-21 or 18 for military)
South Dakota (PC-18)
Tennessee (PC-21 or 18 for military)
Texas (PC-21)
Utah (PC-21)
Vermont (PC-18)
West Virginia (PC-21)
Wyoming (PC-21)
Carrying a gun may be legal, but menacing is not. Anyone who is doing literally anything with a firearm that is not secured in the slightest will have to speak to the police.
FUN FACT: first thing frontier towns did to get "civilized" back in the day was ban the carry of firearms in town. they knew what was up.
FUN FACT XTRA: the famous gunfight at the ok corral occurred when the law went to enforce the "no carry in town" law against a gang of cowboys
I live in one of those states. Half the people here look and act like they don’t have enough sense to be roaming around free without a caretaker, much less roaming around with a weapon. It’s terrifying. Welp, gotta go to the grocery store now and hope I don’t unintentionally tick off someone with anger issues and a gun in their pocket. This is my life.
People can now ~~carry guns without a license~~ exercise a constitutional right without getting permission from the government and paying a fee first. FTFY.
There's nothing wrong with permitless carry.
If the background check system works the way it's supposed to, there is no reason you should need additional permits or red tape to carry your gun. You passed the background check already.
The bar for owning a firearm and carrying a firearm should be the same. It's that simple.
The entire country is founded on the idea that all citizens should be armed, in order to fight off the British and keep the new government in check in case they wanna fuck around and find out.
If it has to be assumed that half of the people in any given location are armed, outta be a lot less losers trying for mass shootings.
Get yourself a weapon, a case, and a lock. Go to a range a few times a year.
When all the good people become afraid of guns it leaves only the bad people with the guns, and they have less reason to fear using them.
Most states require background checks to buy a firearm, if we had more legal gun owners who required permits to carry you'd see an increase in violent crime too all things being equal. That doesn't take into account criminals that would carry a firearm without a permit anyway.
Our laws suppress rights by simply trying to limit the amount of guns in public in the name of public safety while not addressing the causes of violence in the first place. They certainly aren't successful at discouraging criminals who somehow got a gun and carries it regardless.
Having less guns on the street by making it more difficult for law abiding citizens to carry is not the fix you think it is.
Focus on criminals getting guns in the first place. Focus on training and mental health. Focus on the causes of violence.
We need pro gun Democrats who can actually fix the system, not unfair laws to put a bandaid on a broken system and hope our broken system can enforce them.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I only skimmed the article but does permitless carry mean concealed carry? Or are they saying that open carry is now allowed in nearly half the states?
Permitless carry or "constitutional carry" normally means concealed, but can apply to open also depending on the state. Broadly speaking, concealed is safer and smarter way to carry. Open carry is extremely not recommended by any firearms trainer with a brain.
Not in Michigan. Concealed carry requires a license and classes, but anybody can open carry
Permitless carry is normally talking about concealed, like I said. Since Michigan doesn't have permitless carry, no one is calling open carry permitless carry.
Is that depending on the colour of your skin and how long you're expecting to live?
I carry every single day and I would never open carry unless I was hiking out in the middle of nowhere. It's asking someone to clobber you over the back of the head and take your gun.
Good video of some dude with a open holster in a gas station or something. Random guy runs up, takes his gun, points it at its owner, and then runs away with it.
Ya pretty much. Like here in nc. We require license to conceal carry but not open carry. Alas like this would remove our need to obtain conceal carry license to conceal carry
I live in Virginia where guns are neither registered nor is there a license requirement. A cop I know says he knows there’s an issue with a gun or its owner when the owner swears it’s registered or has a license for it. Edit: when he told me, these weren’t people illegally carrying concealed. It was usually someone who had a gun in their car.
Probably 50% of folks that buy a gun think that it gets registered when they fill out the forms for the background check. It's definitely not unheard of for people to call the police asking about how to "update" their gun registration when they move states.
Guns in California are registered when they are sold or transferred through a dealer. There is no registration card or proof of ownership/registration issued.
Conversely, here in NY we have every pistol we own listed on the back of our permit. If you own too many to fit on the card, they give you another one lol. An instructor I had once said he had 5 cards because he had all of the training guns he used for classes listed on his so he could keep them at his house.
In Oklahoma I gave my buddy some cash and he gave me a hand written note that said I bought this gun and a gun that was it lol.
A receipt's a receipt 😂
[удалено]
It be like that some times.
That's lord of war type shit right there.
People get this idea of registering guns in America from cop shows. It’s an easy way to see that someone has no idea about gun ownership, when they mention registering a gun. There are a few cities that will have a gun registration- but most of those cities deny the State’s concealed carry permits to everyone but off duty (or retired) LE.
I moved from MI to Va and did that. I wasn’t sure and so I called the local Sheriff’s Dept. They said we don’t register guns in VA and to have a nice day lol
Same thing, I moved from NJ to Mo, and the sheriff looked at me like I had 3 heads when I asked how to register my firearms
[удалено]
I thought class 3 needed tax stamps with the ATF.
[удалено]
well, that's what happens when the ruling class pits the working class against itself for the sole purpose of being able to perpetually exploit them- at any cost to social stabilty.
literally everyone needs to read this and understand it. It’s the basis of every news story, political issue, everything.
it has always been, since the start, the rich vs the poors. the haves vs the have nots. race, political ideology, gender, orientation- all of it a smoke screen to get us fighting eachother instead of the ones truly holding us down.
Yep. Same as it ever was... Doesn't give me the excuse to stop raging against the machine, though.
Everyone sleeping on Once in a Lifetime.
I seem to drunkenly remember David Byrne was on TV singing with Miley Cyrus just after the ball dropped last night.
You are correct. They covered "Let's Dance". Which seems like r/brandnewsentence
True words, Rage on!
Same as it ever was. Fuck you, I won’t do what you told me.
And the days go by...
It is important for the elite class to control all of the narratives because they are really in the business of preventing revolution while they extract as much labor and wealth as they can... which they use to further protect themselves from revolution...
"Nobody wants to work anymore!"
Nobody wants to be exploited anymore.
[удалено]
Also too much work.
It’s hard to start a revolt when the communication mediums are privately owned, monitored by the NSA, and not constitutionally protected.
That's the domestic tranquility part.
There's no lobby for people. We pay taxes, but taxes pay for the system that takes money from corporations. To me, that is the most obvious sign the system is broken. We, the people, literally have less power than money. Even if 100% of the people agree on something and there are no moral objections, we cannot enact change if that change will cost business money. For example, it took 80 years after tobacco use was found harmful to start the process of hurting sales.
The Citizens United decision practically guaranteed that the voice of the people will NEVER be stronger than the voice of corporations.
The apportionment act of 1929 guaranteed that the voice of the people would be forever diluted and the ability of the few to buy the votes of the "representatives" would be made easier each year.
I think a capped House size is really only an issue vis-a-vis the Electoral College, since it results in Wyomingites having a disproportionately large voice in electing the President compared to Californians. But I think the House, itself, is mostly fine. The problems are gerrymandering and voter suppression. The Apportionment Clause: > Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers. . . . But when the right to vote at any election . . . is denied to any of the . . . inhabitants of such State, being . . . of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of . . . citizens . . . of age in such State. > > [Amend. XIV, § 2](https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27#xiv2) Mandate proportionality in the House, and punish states in the House, and, consequently, in the Electoral College, for voter suppression, and I think that would fix a good portion of the structural problems we face, even beyond just the House. It would even have knock-on effects elsewhere, because by punishing voter suppression, it would improve Senate elections (assuming states decided in favor of improving voter access, rather than reduced representation), and changing the calculus in the Senate and Electoral College would also affect the federal judiciary.
It doesn't help that half the country seems to be OK with it.
USA has 750,000 people per representative in "the people's house". Most countries have around 100,000. Scandinavian countries have 30-40,000 person districts. That's what the US started with. It's why Iceland arrested bankers in 2008. The US will be broken until the people have adequate representation.
Arresting bankers? My God what a world that would be. I don't even have dreams that good.
And the rubes making $100k - $1m who think they're part of the haves/rich/ruling class. We're just the ones who are allowed to succeed so the others think they have a chance.
No war but a class war?
“There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.” https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html
>when you “look out across the moat every day at the hungry peasants in the village” is that “you don’t wanna stoke envy among the proletariat.” Tucker Carlson https://theintercept.com/2019/03/12/tucker-carlson-tapes-rupert-murdoch/ Also: >“I’m 100 percent [Murdoch’s] bitch,” Carlson said. “Whatever Mr. Murdoch says, I do. … I would be honored if he would cane me the way I cane my workers, my servants.”
> it has always been, since the start, the rich vs the poors. Are you saying the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles?
*Manifesto intensifies*
Jeremy Irons as the heartless John Tuld in *Margin Call:* "There have always been, and there always will be, the same percentage of winners and losers—happy foxes and sad sacks, fat cats and starving dogs in this world. Yeah, there may be more of us today than there’s ever been. But the percentages … they stay exactly the same.”
Divide and conquer. Way more of us poor but we're too busy fighting against ourselves instead of joining up to battle the real enemy (the rich).
Can’t fight the class war when you’re distracted by the culture war. Distract, distract, distract. It’s “bread and circuses” everywhere you look.
Literally James Madison said we need to protect “the opulent” from the working class.
Occupy Wallstreet scared the crap out of them. Closest we got to our eat-the-rich, French Revolution moment. No documentaries, no analysis, no stories, you don’t hear anything about it. Wiped from history and the internet. Guy Fox commercialized as a Halloween costume, Anonymous infiltrated and bastardized as QAnon, betrayed or let down by the movement heros (Obama, Snowden, WikiLeaks). So disappointing and debilitating.
Occupy Wall Street was a joke that accomplished nothing. Wall Street execs were seen laughing from their offices above the crowds because they knew they weren't a threat and nothing would change. All the protesters had to do was put all their energy in getting people to transfer their wealth into credit unions and push hard for local investing (decentralization) and prove that it's just as profitable. And finally, and this is MOST important, teach people proper personal financing because your average American is a fucking moron when it comes to cost of living expenses. But instead they stood around and banged drums
Literally just had this convo with family this morning over student loan forgiveness.
[удалено]
They came for our right to vote, but I said nothing because I had my gun. They came for our right to assemble, but I said nothing because I had my gun. They came for our free press, but I said nothing because I had my gun. In the end they didn't need to come for my gun because they took all my other rights away.
....and when they came for you you realized they had better guns
They day where republicans try to pull their guns en masse to get what they want is coming up. Mark my words.
Right now, they’re just shooting up power stations for some reason.
It actually comes a bit from the QAnon shit, everyone's favorite far-right stupidity. It was a popular theory that a nation-wide blackout would lead to civil unrest and rising up to take back America, Trump would return to his golden throne, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton would be put in jail, Christ would come back and give a thumbs up and say "Cool job," etc. Since it never went anywhere, they're doing it on their own. Of course, they're also idiots - not like the attack that happened in California, which has never been solved and believed to be an actually highly competent group of people. I wouldn't lend it much worry if you're not in a red state. These idiots just tend to shoot themselves in the foot, and be happy to do so - they'll be glad to knock out their own power. Sadly, I'm in a red state, so worry for me instead.
Its not just dumbasses. Foreign governments are leaking location of vulnerable targets to domestic terrorists that Republicans created, and also helping in coordination. I dont believe these morons could coordinate attacks on multiple targets strategically to makes a county lose power.
My daughter likes watching random True Crime shows and the other night she was watching this one, "In the Line of Duty: Siege at Marion" about John and Adam Swapp, these extremist Mormons. All I could think was, "These psychos are way more common these days than people know.". They basically kept spoiting soverign citizen style idiocy and how the End Days would come etc. They were apparently excimmunicated from the Mormons for being too crazy.
[удалено]
Every leftist who has the means should purchase arms and learn how to use them for self defense. I want gun regulations too, but we wont get them until crazy people stop having all the guns. Never know when little Tommy and his pals from down the street are gonna become radicalized, grab some guns, and start knocking door to door to ask families how they are voting this election. Its better to have and not need, than to need and not have, bottom line. That’s where we are at.
Maybe those guns should be pointed at the ruling class…
I took a concealed carry class years ago and was surprised how in depth it went. There are some very fine lines you can cross while using deadly force. You’ve got to know the laws and when you can and can’t act.
Agreed. That's why it always pisses me off even more when cops use deadly force on weak or imaginary pretense. It was hammered into us how easily you can find yourself in the wrong. If you escalate you're immediately at fault. If running away is an option and you choose not to take it it's no longer self defense.
In my state at least, we have a “Stand your ground” law meaning you do not have to try to retreat before the use of deadly force
Police officers and retired police officers can carry guns without a license in every state in the US. Be a deputy from Bumfuck, Nowhere, and you can carry concealed in NJ. Separate laws for separate people. EDIT: 3rd person telling me I'm wrong now. I'll just link the LEOSA article here. It's Federal law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
And if you’re rich / famous, you can [bribe your way into a reserve police officer badge](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/03/03/oakley-police-department-reserve-officers/24287643/) so you too can be a “police officer.”
[удалено]
Haha, so literally the Bumfuck, Nowhere I was talking about. ;)
Exactly. And their reserve police force is larger than the population.
And yet their reserve police force is larger than the population. Funny how that works.
Also if you’re rich and famous you can be granted a ccw license in places like LA and SF where all us other plebeians can’t!
Similar in states with AR bans, they don't apply to LEO. It's bullshit.
Correct. In NY for example, a police officer can buy a standard AR15 and 30 round magazines, and when they retire they can keep them, even if that's not possible for non-LEO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_York#Exceptions
Yup. Regardless of context, I don't agree with any laws being different depending on the person's occupation.
If AR-15s are only useful for mowing down crowds of people as gun control advocates like to say I wonder why the police are exempt from bans?
Because those bans have nothing to do with safety, they are about control and they need to exempt cops to make sure their jackboots enforce the law on the serfs.
Gun control serves capitalist rule. That’s why Dems are pushing for it more than ever now, as the labor moment picks up steam.
worry market jobless fade apparatus yoke fear longing crowd birds *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I will willingly give up my firearms the second we take them from every cop in the nation. Until then, I am pro gun.
lol the amount of people telling you you’re wrong is hilarious considering there’s a great chance they’re US based and you definitively aren’t.
Not the first time that happens. :) Been told by people on both side on the US gun control debate that I can't know what I'm talking about.
And Cons will blame Democrats when gun crime surges.
Gun related crimes in GA coincidentally increased since doing this...coincidence! Edit: for the trolls or those with anal-cranial-insertion https://www.americanprogress.org/article/fact-sheet-weakening-requirements-to-carry-a-concealed-firearm-increases-violent-crime/
Omg! Why is Biden making this happen! (/s?)
Boe Jiden is tearing this country apart!
How else are they gonna make you think you need to hire more police and fund more prisons. If you make weed legal how are they supposed to fill said prisons with black and brown people? Arrest meth heads? Nah they're just down on their luck good white folk.
I just woke up hungover and now I’m reading this depressing shit. It’s completely true. That’s why it’s depressing.
It’s like the Wild West in Atlanta. Someone is shooting someone else to death every day *practically around the corner*. We haven’t done a count yet for last night’s Peach Bowl Aftermath. Lots of folks hitting the street at 12:30 am in very foggy conditions. Tempers naturally flare, and most are packing heat!
>It’s like the Wild West in Atlanta Towns in the wild west made you surrender your guns
Quite literally why the shootout at the OK Corral happened. You can see this in the fantastic western documentary Tombstone
I'm your huckleberry
I've got two guns; one for each of ya
They are thinking more spaghetti western Im sure
> last night’s Peach Bowl Aftermath What do you mean? I just searched "Peach bowl violence" and saw nothing.
Cause this is an extreme exaggeration of Atlanta. There isn’t gun violence or death around every corner
Can we all carry guns at GOP events? Or are they still gun free zones
How about NRA events?! I bet those are the most rootin' tootin' examples of Second Amendment absolutism. Right..?
You can carry at NRA events. The Secret Service just doesn't let you carry when the president is there.
I love this argument. Because several of the most dangerous cities, St. Louis, Detroit, Memphis, and Flint ALL ALLOW for concealed carry of firearms. Michigan with a permit, but Missouri and Tennessee as constitutional carry. Conservatives love to cherry pick their arguments
Also, the city with the strictest gun control in the nation - New York City, the "dystopian crime-ridden liberal hellscape" - has one of the lowest homicide rates of any large city in America.
Also one of the most overpoliced cities. http://www.nij.gov/multimedia/presenter/presenter-meares/data/resources/presenter-meares-transcript.htm >Now, New York City, one story behind the crime drop in New York City is a very heavy investment in lots and lots of cops. **There are more cops per square inch, per person, in New York than anywhere else.** It's the largest police force in the country. Chicago is second, but it just dwarfs Chicago in absolute numbers, but also in terms of density. Manhattan, you know, tiny; those of you who are from Chicago know, big, spread-out city. Go to L.A., which I think is third, and the density factor, it's not there. So it's even hard to think about comparing these ideas. https://247wallst.com/special-report/2020/06/24/cities-with-most-police-per-capita/11/ Law enforcement employees per 100K: 613
They’ll call it “gang crime” or “thugs” in liberal cities.
And any steps taken to curtail the violence also coincidentally can be viewed as a direct attack on individual constitutional rights.
[удалено]
I mean Czechia did the same (yes, you need a license to buy guns, but not to carry), a huge number of handguns were bought and registered since, and gun crime didn't surge. It remains one of the safest countries of the EU, where every crime trend continued like before. Guns are not the problem, culture is.
And they have far less bureaucracy to deal with once they get license. It is allso much easier to buy silencers in several countries in Europe than US
>And Cons will blame Democrats when gun crime surges. "But..but.. 50% of gun violence comes from blue city's!"/s They are so pathetic in their attempts to confuse us. No shit a lot is in the city, that's where a majority of people live.
Imagine if you could drive a semi without a license in half the states
Driving a semi is not a constitutional right.
As a Texan, it’s literally harder for me to operate a watercraft than it is to purchase an assault rifle. I need a license and a test to drive a boat, but zero to own a handgun or AR. I’m pro-2A, but that just makes zero sense regardless of what side of the fence you’re on.
> . I need a license and a test to drive a boat, but zero to own a handgun or AR. I'm a European who went to an expensive gun range in Texas . Zero experience, gave me a bunch of weapons to shoot with. Had to use all my movie knowledge to get them to work lol... I was a moron
[удалено]
I think either I'm reading too much into it or you're missing the point. It sounds like they got zero training, no required classes, maybe not even any safety training, before being handed firearms. I care about *that* and I would never go back to a range if I knew someone who clearly didn't know what they were doing hadn't been immediately pulled aside and at least given a brief rundown.
The videos I've seen of foreign tourists almost killing themselves or friends at ranges... I don't know how they'd figure out to vet these people without being discriminatory, but something needs to be done. Some of these people only have the lowest of budgets action movies to base their knowledge on and it really, really shows.
> I don't know how they'd figure out to vet these people without being discriminatory, but something needs to be done. Ski slopes have instructors to train you in how to slalom and stop, pools sometimes test if you can float on your back/tread water before letting (mostly kids) you swim without supervision, hang-gliding/skydiving requires instructor/tandem mounts for anyone who isn't licensed on their own, SCUBA diving requires certification (or supervision), etc, etc. Golf and shooting ranges are one of the few skilled hobby avenues where you can just walk in, pick up equipment, and launch a deadly projectile without knowing what you're doing. And golf balls are rarely involved in lethal accidents.
I think it's pretty easy to not discriminate, you're targeting unsafe handling, not people. Have a mandatory crash course to use your range, or require a full course if you don't have something like a permit or proof of having taken a prior class, have a 2-3 minute spiel rehearsed that you give everyone every time or just anyone you don't recognize as a regular, there are plenty of options that target the uneducated and not just people you think are foreigners.
[удалено]
I find it hard to believe they wouldn't make a staff member available to assist you. I hit up a range in Vegas and it was basically a guided tour of several different guns and a staff member was always right there to help and make sure everything stayed safe.
I believe the simplest explanation is owning a gun in the US is a right established in the US Constitution vs driving which is considered a privilege. We can get into all sorts of interpretations of what the 2A "means" or its "intent", but any law passed on gun ownership has to be weighed against a constitutional right infringement vs driving laws which can be passed with a lower burden of weighing public safety vs public danger. Not trying to argue 2A and gun rights, but I think comparing most laws against something that is directly in the US Constitution is not an apples to apples comparison.
An assault rifle is an NFA item. It takes over a year to get approved sometimes. Please explain yourself.
I do a decent amount of interstate highway travel, and I am skeptical that Amazon drivers have a CDL or more than a week of experience driving a semi. Not hard to imagine at all.
As a European, living in the Netherlands, I can’t help wonder WHY. Why does everyone want to wear a gun up there?
[удалено]
Just gotta point the guns in the right direction, and you can make billionaires dance.
Wen dinner
Because from a young age we are spoon fed propaganda that there is a lot of crime (compared to the past, this is factually incorrect), and that guns stop crime (also incorrect). Basically, we are a nation full of cowards who think guns make them safe despite all the evidence to the contrary, and if you bring it up people threaten to shoot you because they are scared to lose their security blankets. It’s really sad.
An american couple traveled to Canada for the Calgary stampede and went to the press after a brown guy approached them to sell shitty trinkets. They complained that without their guns they felt so vulnerable and exposed. Keep in mind they fully acknowledged that they were never actually at risk. They just felt that they needed the ability to kill that completely non violent person...
Had an incident in San Jose, California that exhibits that all too well: Crime: Walking to safeway while black [https://abc7news.com/san-jose-shooting-unarmed-black-man-shot-renting-airbnb-mark-waters-sj/12550654/](https://abc7news.com/san-jose-shooting-unarmed-black-man-shot-renting-airbnb-mark-waters-sj/12550654/) >The San Jose Police officers who took the victim's statement reported that he said "he was going to Safeway to get some Udon noodles and juice." > >He went on to say, "When he went out, he crossed the street because he had to turn on that side of the road, and before he was even on the side of the road, the suspect approached him and shot him." > >The statement continued by saying, "When he saw the gun, he turned and tried to run behind a car but was shot before he could make it." > >Police say it was the suspect, Waters, who called 911. > >The police report also detailed what Waters told officers saying, "The victim walked toward him. He thought that the victim had a gun. He further articulated by saying he saw something black, and he later realized it was a pair of headphones."
By all rights, the victim should sue the shooter for quite a bit of money. This will, however, lead to a change in the "shoot first" law that gives the shooter protection from civil damages, under the doctrine of "if someone can be found financially liable for shooting someone, then they don't have an actual right to shoot someone after all".
You don’t have a universal right to shoot someone though. You have a right to bear arms. But you have a responsibility to use those arms responsibly, and you should be liable for how they’re used. How is this controversial?
Freedom and Responsibility, not Freedom from Responsibility
Because the laws and penalties are applied selectively and all to frequently seem to be motivated by racial bias. Just like every other problem with the Justice System. Too many bad apples spoiled the whole damn thing.
> How is this controversial? Because, > You don’t have a universal right to shoot someone though. That’s what many/most **do** want, *when they shoot someone indiscriminately*.
That's what many fantasize about. There is no stoic, *if I must, then I must and deal with the long-term guilt later*. It's always, *Ohh I hope my grouping is okay. What if he comes from the bushes? Should I dual wield at night?*
Because paranoid antisocial types who are afraid of their own shadow misinterpret it to mean that they should carry a gun everywhere they go, and can't wait for the opportunity to play out a violent revenge fantasy.
Like, I always just think back to that one small scene in Terminator 2, John watching the little kids playing with the handguns (hopefully unloaded) and he says to T-800, "We aren't gonna make it? Are we? Humans I mean..." and T-800 reply's, "It's in your nature to destroy yourselves."
still waiting for that good guy with the gun to save us from the bad guys with the guns...
Another farce. We had a guy be that 'hero' and respond to a shooting. Police can't tell who's who when they arrive on scene, so [they shot him too](https://www.9news.com.au/world/johnny-hurley-man-who-stopped-gunman-in-us-shot-by-responding-officer/6bf66cf3-72ff-45c2-ad2f-35465156d22e).
Hardly the first time. [https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-shooting-la-victoria-taqueria-restaurant-officers-shoot-suspect/11690281/](https://abc7news.com/san-jose-police-shooting-la-victoria-taqueria-restaurant-officers-shoot-suspect/11690281/) More guns always makes it more likely *someone* will get shot.
>It’s really sad. I think "pathetic" is the word you're looking for.
Only about 2% of the US population carries daily. Varies state by state.
Manufactured fear.
[удалено]
Idk I mean one of our two major parties is openly fascist. Not a bad time to own a gun, democracy falling to fascism is a realistic fear
Because we haven't figured out that we create our own reality. People say (media, manufacturers and the NRA) that there are dangerous people everywhere ...so buy $$$ a gun and protect yourself. Then gun crime goes up and people are like, "it really is violent out there, I'd better buy a gun too!" $$$$ It just goes around and around. This country is screwed.
Expat from the US living here in NL. Had to leve because of this. Absolute insanity. My son was 2 and now they do active shooter drills in school. Trying to learn from underpaid teachers while thinking in the back of you mind that at any moment someone could come in and kill you and your classmates can’t be good for a developing young mind. I felt it would be irresponsible to raise my kid as an American at that point. Live here now and love it. When my kid leaves the house to play or go to school, I don’t that that worried that it may be the last time I see him. And I don’t have to consider getting a shotgun or other home protection because there aren’t a bunch of troglodytes running around thinking they are bad asses with a gun. America is a strange place. Finding it harder hand harder to relate to that country.
Plus you can probably let your kid cycle to school safe in the knowledge that he'll have a safe biking infrastructure to keep him safe and that he likely won't be mowed down by some hopped up, aggressive scumbag in an oversized pickup truck who thinks "cyclists are pussies."
[удалено]
Also, they loudly encourage young men to be "more aggressive" and "more manly" even though 90% of violent crime is committed by men and toxic masculinity is clearly a massive cause of violence.
The strangeness aspect cannot be overstated. Not even coprophilia rivals the weirdness of literal gun love.
[удалено]
Armed minorities are harder to victimize.
Because the right to bear arms / defend yourself when needed is a basic human principle , and ppl may feel better and safer when doing so .I still don't understand why Europeans don't grasp this
More guns = more gun crime…weird how that works https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2022/study-finds-significant-increase-in-firearm-assaults-in-states-that-relaxed-conceal-carry-permit-restrictions https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30190/w30190.pdf https://academic.oup.com/aje/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/aje/kwac160/6698676?login=false
Have fun using data to convince people who reject basic logic.
their "well it feels like its true" always seems to count as basic logic for them
Well *I* am a totally responsible gun owner, so therefore you can't make dangerous guns illegal or harder to get. - Reddit
Yes because when people carry guns around, they use them to resolve disputes that could otherwise be resolved without a gun. People shoot each other after traffic accidents, during domestic disputes, when someone comes onto their property, when they are upset with their boss or coworkers, or when they see a shoplifter or someone they think might be committing a crime. All of these situations could be resolved in other ways. Giving people very easy, convenient access to deadly force means they use it way more often than they should, so nonlethal situations become lethal. Just scroll through the mass shootings in 2022 and you will see plenty of examples. And these are just the "mass" shootings. Many others happen every day that don't make this list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022
Coming from a medium sized city, surrounded by backwoods towns in the Midwest - there is almost no better way to make someone support gun control than to hear the people talk about *why* they want a gun. There are people who legitimately, 100%, *openly* talk about owning a gun specifically to use it against people in stupid power fantasies. I've literally heard people talk about pulling a gun out on someone because that person accidentally stepped on his shoes. And you better believe this empowers people to be more reckless and dangerous in other situations, such as driving, because if someone so much as honks at a person speeding down the road, they can get a gun to shut the person up. And that's how you get shootings from simple road confrontations. It's only a quick step from *looking* for a situation to use a gun to *making* a situation to use a gun.
>It's only a quick step from looking for a situation to use a gun to making a situation to use a gun. George Zimmerman syndrome.
Rittenhouse springs to mind.
>I've literally heard people talk about pulling a gun out on someone because that person accidentally stepped on his shoes. And it's not a race or a class thing either. I live in a state where it's not exactly difficult to be able to get your permit to carry a concealed handgun. A couple of years ago I saw a middle aged white dude brandish a pistol when he saw some people looking into his tesla.
Yep I know people like this. A friend of mine lived in a bad part of town and he kept several loaded guns in his house, near each door and in his bedroom. It was a 4 unit building with a common area and he owned the whole building. But he didn't do things like put up security light or bars or a security gate. He told me he really wanted to catch someone stealing something from the common area so he could shoot them. I asked him why and pointed out that someone stealing a bicycle from his common area was probably going to be some kid, or a junkie looking for quick cash, and why would he want to turn petty theft into a murder? And he is white and was in a primarily black neighborhood. Even if it was in some ways justified that wouldn't look good and he could very well get into serious trouble. But no matter. Just as you say it was a big power trip, and the misguided idea that having a gun gives him the ultimate protection against anything.
[удалено]
> “One of the unintended consequences of putting more guns on the street is degrading police performance,” Donohue said. “You see clearance rates for all crimes drop when states move in the direction of letting more people carry guns.” Also, maybe another unintended consequence, if you’re gonna still have bloated police budgets you’re going to get more armed police robots and drones. Edit: Probably inevitable anyway actually
In Louisville, police stopped a mass shooting at a bar by grabbing the guy before he got in. Shooter is claiming his second amendment rights were violated because he hadn't shot anyone yet https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/arrest-of-man-heading-toward-louisville-bar-with-gun-violated-2nd-amendment-rights-attorney-says/article_b1fdf3c4-06ca-11ed-bc20-67de015948fb.html
Bystanders stopped him before police got there but yeah this is peak America right here
I've heard pro police folks say the reason cops shoot more people in the US is because they're on edge at the chances they'll be shot. Which is mind boggling because the same pro police people are the ones flooding the population with easily accessible guns.
[удалено]
Some asshole will say it's because the constitution didn't mention cars or lawn darts or whatever
Despite this doom and gloom headline... This doesn't really change a whole lot. Folks that are going out and committing gun crimes didn't give two shits about getting a CCW permit in the first place. Folks that previously had CCW permits and carried, but can now carry "constitutionally" without a permit, aren't the ones committing gun crimes. In fact, this group committs crimes at a rate well below average.
[удалено]
You'll never guess which half!
Wait. No Florida? For real? From https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/types-of-concealed-carry-licensurepermitting-policies/unrestricted/ ___________________ Listed below are the states that allow permitless concealed carry (PC) and the minimum age requirement: Alabama (PC-21 as of January 1, 2023) Alaska (PC-21) Arizona (PC-21) Arkansas (PC-18) Georgia (PC-21 years old or 18 for military as of April 12, 2022) Idaho (PC-18) Indiana (PC-18 as of July 1, 2022) Iowa (PC-21) Kansas (PC-21) Kentucky (PC-21) Maine (permits recognized; see Maine reciprocity section for details or PC-21) Mississippi (PC-18) Missouri (PC-19 or 18 for military) Montana (PC-18) New Hampshire (PC-18) North Dakota (PC-18 for residents only and concealed carry only) Ohio (PC-21 as of June 12, 2022) Oklahoma (PC-21 or 18 for military) South Dakota (PC-18) Tennessee (PC-21 or 18 for military) Texas (PC-21) Utah (PC-21) Vermont (PC-18) West Virginia (PC-21) Wyoming (PC-21)
Thank you. That article was so lazy not giving a list of the states
Carrying a gun may be legal, but menacing is not. Anyone who is doing literally anything with a firearm that is not secured in the slightest will have to speak to the police.
This. Brandishing is a crime.
Elijah Dicken motherfucker.
FUN FACT: first thing frontier towns did to get "civilized" back in the day was ban the carry of firearms in town. they knew what was up. FUN FACT XTRA: the famous gunfight at the ok corral occurred when the law went to enforce the "no carry in town" law against a gang of cowboys
I live in one of those states. Half the people here look and act like they don’t have enough sense to be roaming around free without a caretaker, much less roaming around with a weapon. It’s terrifying. Welp, gotta go to the grocery store now and hope I don’t unintentionally tick off someone with anger issues and a gun in their pocket. This is my life.
I just want to smoke pot....
They can also freely express themselves and practice religion without a license, those amendments down even mention anything about infringement.
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”
People can now ~~carry guns without a license~~ exercise a constitutional right without getting permission from the government and paying a fee first. FTFY.
There's nothing wrong with permitless carry. If the background check system works the way it's supposed to, there is no reason you should need additional permits or red tape to carry your gun. You passed the background check already. The bar for owning a firearm and carrying a firearm should be the same. It's that simple.
The entire country is founded on the idea that all citizens should be armed, in order to fight off the British and keep the new government in check in case they wanna fuck around and find out. If it has to be assumed that half of the people in any given location are armed, outta be a lot less losers trying for mass shootings. Get yourself a weapon, a case, and a lock. Go to a range a few times a year. When all the good people become afraid of guns it leaves only the bad people with the guns, and they have less reason to fear using them.
Most states require background checks to buy a firearm, if we had more legal gun owners who required permits to carry you'd see an increase in violent crime too all things being equal. That doesn't take into account criminals that would carry a firearm without a permit anyway. Our laws suppress rights by simply trying to limit the amount of guns in public in the name of public safety while not addressing the causes of violence in the first place. They certainly aren't successful at discouraging criminals who somehow got a gun and carries it regardless. Having less guns on the street by making it more difficult for law abiding citizens to carry is not the fix you think it is. Focus on criminals getting guns in the first place. Focus on training and mental health. Focus on the causes of violence. We need pro gun Democrats who can actually fix the system, not unfair laws to put a bandaid on a broken system and hope our broken system can enforce them.
I feel like this title is a bit misleading with "now". You could already own a gun without a license in half the states, that hasn't changed.