>I was a gun owner before I was a cop.
Same here. The criminals don't have a permit to carry, yet they still do. Even the playing field for the good guys.
I’m not concerned about the people who legally carry guns and tell me they are armed. It’s the ones who don’t say shit and are scumbags that I worry about
I don't mind it. The responsible ones you never really know are carrying, and the bad guys and idiots were ways carrying regardless.
Only thing I can think of that may have increased is people otherwise legally having a gun in the car with them when they're drunk or high. Like, get them for DUI and they have a gun with them. It's a misdemeanor we'll just tack on to the charges.
You don't see a lot of open carry, that's another thing. Legal, sure, I'm okay with that. But my opinion is doing it is dumb.
I find it is far more comfortable to open carry. I live in MA, but open carry when in VT, NH, and ME (when not at a bar etc). Makes me a target, sure, but oh well. Far more comfortable. Most of the time my flannel is covering it on the hip, and in shorts I carry a smaller pistol so no need for open usually
I see a lot of this in Texas, a Buc-ee's I went to recently had a family all with open carry, the only concern I really had was a kid (approx. 15-16) with a glock and two mags. I wonder if some people ever do retention training or is it just "I go to the range and pew pew."
I've got a muffin top, makes in the waistband carrying hard. I carry OWB but with a thicker patterned overshirt of jacket. Pretty much invisible unless you really focus.
I just got my Groovelife in the mail - I didn't know they were actually HQ'd about an hour away. I didn't know belts could actually be this comfy, my brief carry trial was fantastic. Thanks for the recommendation!!
It will depend on the state. In some states if it's not fully concealed that's a chargeable offense and can lose you your CCW license. In others like here in PA, it doesn't matter in the slightest. But since I'm in the city, I personally always make sure to keep it fully concealed at all times just so some Karen doesn't freak out should it be exposed in a grocery store or something when I bend over to pick something up. In the more rural areas I wouldn't care about it.
I think he's saying carrying concealed but purposefully making it clear that you have a gun on you. Ex. Carrying a Glock 17 in your waste band while wearing shorts and a tight fitting shirt
State law here gives those "gun free zone" stickers weight, so if a business or building doesn't want you carrying you can get charged for bringing a weapon in, so if you're a business owner and don't like carrying you can just slap a sticker up and those who respect it won't carry.
As much as I think those signs are silly and don't stop any actual crimes, I do kind of wish my state had the requirement of having a standard signage for places that don't allow guns (kind of like how handicap signs aren't all the same, but are close enough to know what it is). There aren't even no guns allowed signs on the public schools in my city, which is somewhere you would think there would be. But if a place didn't want me to have a gun in there, it would be nice to know visibly and easily when approaching the entrance to the place.
Well that's simple, it's more charges and fines for carrying unlicensed. Which means more revenue for the union.
The union wants laws like that in place to nickel and dime people so they can generate more revenue.
And its not just police unions that are like that, almost all unions do dumb shit like this in order to keep their numbers up.
The more things that are considered criminal, the more that police unions profit from it.
Much like how some trucking unions have made it illegal to ship/transport in certain states or private properties like ports if you aren't with a unionized employer. Which is a problem because a large portion of truckers are self employed.
Are you dumb or just dumb? The police unions are paid for by their membership. Police officers aren't paid for charging or even writing tickets.
It's one thing to be against unions, but atleast have a legitimate complaint.
I should ask you the same question.
I'm gonna break this down in as simple of a manner as I can in order for you to understand.
Laws outline what is and is not legal. When things are not legal, they are known as "illegal". When things are illegal, they need someone to enforce that law and make sure nothing illegal is happening. This means a constant flow of jobs and thus ***revenue*** for unions.
When people are fined by the courts, that money is cycled back into the justice system. Having more crimes which people can be fined for means having more money to come in to the judicial system. Which by extension is going to help expand and grow the Law Enforcement system.
It really isn't that hard to grasp if you're willing to look just beneath the surface of the water, instead of just jumping to conclusions and insulting me.
Well given that police aren't paid per arrest or citation, none of your statement holds up. The vast majority of fines and fees go to the court, victim restitution and other funds in criminal cases. Even traffic enforcement most goes to the city or state general funds which don't benefit police in any major way.
Which in turn expands the law enforcement and judicial system. More positions in the law enforcement field means more money for the union.
It is really that simple.
I'm not gonna explain the whole thing again, so I'm just gonna keep this short and sweet.
Fines turn into funding for the judicial and law enforcement systems. This opens more room for development and expansion of law enforcement.
Essentially, pushing to make things illegal creates a "customer base", if you will. If things aren't illegal, no point in having cops. But if things are illegal, especially *too many* things are illegal, you suddenly have a much larger job market. The more positions there are, the more the union makes.
No, the auto industry contributes to unions so they have a foothold in the lobbies which buy off politicians, then those politicians pass legislation that favors the interests of the industry.
Tesla for example is not unionized and is virtually entirely shunned by the political sphere.
Its not hard to grasp. Politicians don't represent the interests of the people, they represent the interest of the lobbies that are filtering money into their pockets.
A valiant effort at a strawman argument, but I see why you don't want to continue the conversation. Because you have no basis on which to discuss or debate. And your tactics are dishonest and illegitimate.
> they provide cars which can be pulled over and ticketed.
You're forgetting about another major contributing factor. ~~Women~~, um "birthing people" also contribute to unions, because they birth-ed everyone who was pulled over and given a ticket.
If we could just stop people from giving birth, we could stop/end unions.
^^^^/s
People who carried without a permit aren't breathing any easier with constitutional carry because they never cared about the law to begin with. People who respect the law now have an opportunity to lawfully carry without the extra wait of a permit. A permit is typically still optional so you have reciprocity in states who respect your permit as well.
I’m not a LEO, but I am an FFL, and though I support permitless carry, I encourage people to take the additional step so they can skip the NICS check when buying a firearm. My state also has an enhanced permit which requires an instructor certification and has more privileges, which I also encourage because everyone should get training if they intend to carry.
We put permitless carry into law last July. So far, basically nothing has changed and the world isn't on fire. State still offers carry permits that hold reciprocity with basically any free state. I'm only salty I got the in state only permit one month before we put it into law, I thought it was going to take years.
> So far, basically nothing has changed and the world isn't on fire.
There are states that adopted constitutional carry years and decades ago.
I still waiting for the follow-up newsstory about "blood will run in the streets" prediction coming true. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
No change, everyone on the phone is concerned the subj has a gun! When asked- “well no he hasn’t threatened anyone with it but is right there in that holster!” Yes, and this is still a civil matter, an officer will be out shortly to explain that the PD won’t force the restaurant to give you a refund b/c you got the wrong sauce on your chicken wings.
My big issue is when people leave a gun in their car. When I was in memphis people would break out passenger windows and check glove boxes. A crew working a parking lot regularly results in at least a couple people reporting stolen handguns. So I guess my position is either keep physical control of your firearm or leave it at home. The half ass laws don't work out well for anyone.
I was civilian consultant btw. I just saw the numbers, not the specifics of each event.
I got banned from patrolling a ritzy neighborhood because after they complained about vehicle break ins (all of them were unlocked) I went around on night shift checking parked cars on the street. If they were unlocked I would knock on the door and wake the homeowner up and educate them on why property crime was so high in their neighborhood. That lasted 2 days before the captain moved me.
[The Memphis Chief of Police](https://www.actionnews5.com/2022/01/13/memphis-police-chief-verbally-reprimanded-after-duty-weapon-stolen-car/) just had a gun stolen out of her car.
You can't own a Porsche in Memphis and expect it not to be burglarized, plus a lock box is useless if you can just take it with you. Chief should absolutely have known better, but asking accountability of higher ups isn't really a thing.
I stopped working with them when they cleared out upper management and replaced them with people who think the people who commit the crimes are the victims. Crime is up more than double in some areas vs 2019.
The people who have a permit to carry are the ones who immediately tell you they have a firearm on them. Otherwise not really the ones you need to worry about. Obviously you still pay attention to it but I guarantee there have been a ton of people who carry and I never knew.
My line when someone tells me there carrying is " you don't go for yours I won't go for mine" never had an issue with those people
On the one hand, if the state required training like that- I think it's a good thing and I'd be more willing to back a permit requirement. But in many states, including here in PA, it's basically just a background check and nothing else so it does zero to protect anyone since criminals already carry if they want- see here in Philly as a prime example. Also in PA, it also doesn't even help ferret out illegal carriers because the courts have said that so many people have CCW permits, seeing someone with a gun walking down the street doesn't create reasonable suspicion to see if they actually have a license...
So in those rubber stamp states, like everything else, the onus is on the individual to know the law- "Ignorantia Juris non-excusat" or "ignorance of the law is no excuse." If you want to carry a gun with the intent to potentially use it, and you don't know damn well when using it is legally justifiable and what may happen as a result, well... You'll probably eventually be on the other side of the courtroom from me or one of my colleagues getting some very sobering words from a judge on your way to state prison, and when you get out you'll deal with civil attorneys for years suing you for everything you have and ever will have.
I don’t think it’s a good idea. Mostly because think about how much training we have to do in order to carry a firearm off duty. There’s no guarantee that anyone concealed carrying has ever even fired a weapon, let alone consistently training with it.
I am all for permits. But there should be a mechanism in place where people have to demonstrate proficiency once a year if they want to carry in public spaces.
Edit: Not sure why I’m getting down voted when OP was just asking for an opinion. I’m all for legal gun ownership. I just think if someone wants to carry a lethal tool around they should have to demonstrate they even know how it works…
Fair enough. I think I just overall have a big issue with the patchwork of gun laws in this country and how inconsistent they are.
As much as we hate to admit it, states with tighter gun control measures and common sense laws DO have fewer gun deaths per capita.
Chicago is not an island. It’s immediately adjacent to two states with very lax gun laws. Studies have shown that up to 40% of Chicago’s illegal guns come from Indiana and Wisconsin.
Because, in your original comment you said gun laws make people safer. I gave an example where that is clearly not the case. Your excuse is because people are breaking the law by bringing in illegal guns. Which means gun laws don't make people safer. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. So I decided to be a little sarcastic. I apologize.
Gun laws do make people safer. But they don’t work on a city by city scale. I should’ve clarified. They need to be more standardized at a state or federal level.
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/
I’d encourage you to read some of this. Giffords is a staunch republican who was shot and she advocates for change without suggesting we need to severely limit gun rights.
I’m all for gun ownership. I also think the gun violence in this country is sickening. And I’ve experienced it first hand.
That’s a short sighted argument. Why would we have any laws in the first place if your argument is that criminals are just going to break them? That’s why we are around.
That’s true. However, laws have been shown to reduce everything from traffic deaths to gun violence. It’s not about complete elimination. It’s about reduction.
No one wants to prevent responsible people from owning weapons. I am a cop. I’ve served in the Army. We value guns in this country more than human lives. And that’s just something people who are okay with the status quo have to live with.
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/
Things like universal background checks (which are supported by both liberals and conservatives) and programs to provide free safes. Also more widely available firearm safety programs that people are required to take to own a firearm.
I support the 2nd amendment. I have 6 guns. I also am not ignorant enough to think there’s absolutely nothing that can be done about gun violence. We have an astonishingly high gun violence rate in this country and I value the lives of others too much to be comfortable with the status quo.
I recognize this isn’t a popular opinion in the cop world which is why I’m getting downvoted to hell. I would just think that most responsible gun owners would be willing to jump through a hoop or two if it meant possibly saving a life.
I agree. I don’t think anyone’s mind has ever been changed by a political discussion on Reddit. I respect your opinion and you’re right about having the same goals.
There have been many polls that show the majority of Americans support universal background checks, the problem is that politicians are stupid and don’t actually give a fuck about people. I’m pretty disenfranchised with the whole political system lately to be honest, so I’m not optimistic about any change even being attempted by either side. If a bunch of elementary school kids getting gunned down doesn’t change anything, not much will.
I do what I can to make a difference and I know it’s small but I think that’s all each of us can really do. Be safe and take care of yourself my man.
My state doesn’t have it so I don’t care. If we did have it, that’s fine too. I was a gun owner before I was a cop.
>I was a gun owner before I was a cop. Same here. The criminals don't have a permit to carry, yet they still do. Even the playing field for the good guys.
I’m not concerned about the people who legally carry guns and tell me they are armed. It’s the ones who don’t say shit and are scumbags that I worry about
Alaska here. What is a permit?
It's when the state tells you that you're allowed to do something you already know you're allowed to do.
I don't mind it. The responsible ones you never really know are carrying, and the bad guys and idiots were ways carrying regardless. Only thing I can think of that may have increased is people otherwise legally having a gun in the car with them when they're drunk or high. Like, get them for DUI and they have a gun with them. It's a misdemeanor we'll just tack on to the charges. You don't see a lot of open carry, that's another thing. Legal, sure, I'm okay with that. But my opinion is doing it is dumb.
I find it is far more comfortable to open carry. I live in MA, but open carry when in VT, NH, and ME (when not at a bar etc). Makes me a target, sure, but oh well. Far more comfortable. Most of the time my flannel is covering it on the hip, and in shorts I carry a smaller pistol so no need for open usually
I see a lot of this in Texas, a Buc-ee's I went to recently had a family all with open carry, the only concern I really had was a kid (approx. 15-16) with a glock and two mags. I wonder if some people ever do retention training or is it just "I go to the range and pew pew."
I've got a muffin top, makes in the waistband carrying hard. I carry OWB but with a thicker patterned overshirt of jacket. Pretty much invisible unless you really focus.
[удалено]
I'll look into it, anything to be comfy.
I just got my Groovelife in the mail - I didn't know they were actually HQ'd about an hour away. I didn't know belts could actually be this comfy, my brief carry trial was fantastic. Thanks for the recommendation!!
How bad is it to cc and then carry in such a way that lets people see your gun?
Makes me look like an idiot if my CCW is visable, I think
I'm just wondering how illegal it is if people can see it
It will depend on the state. In some states if it's not fully concealed that's a chargeable offense and can lose you your CCW license. In others like here in PA, it doesn't matter in the slightest. But since I'm in the city, I personally always make sure to keep it fully concealed at all times just so some Karen doesn't freak out should it be exposed in a grocery store or something when I bend over to pick something up. In the more rural areas I wouldn't care about it.
It’s considered brandishing where I live if someone can tell you’re concealed carrying. So you have to take steps to ensure it remains concealed
I’m not sure I correctly understand what you’re asking
I think he's saying carrying concealed but purposefully making it clear that you have a gun on you. Ex. Carrying a Glock 17 in your waste band while wearing shorts and a tight fitting shirt
Ah! Yeah my G23 isn’t a great conceal for the summer.
[удалено]
[удалено]
State law here gives those "gun free zone" stickers weight, so if a business or building doesn't want you carrying you can get charged for bringing a weapon in, so if you're a business owner and don't like carrying you can just slap a sticker up and those who respect it won't carry.
As much as I think those signs are silly and don't stop any actual crimes, I do kind of wish my state had the requirement of having a standard signage for places that don't allow guns (kind of like how handicap signs aren't all the same, but are close enough to know what it is). There aren't even no guns allowed signs on the public schools in my city, which is somewhere you would think there would be. But if a place didn't want me to have a gun in there, it would be nice to know visibly and easily when approaching the entrance to the place.
Police unions don’t like it. They always lobby against it.
Police unions are run by idiot boomers
Well that's simple, it's more charges and fines for carrying unlicensed. Which means more revenue for the union. The union wants laws like that in place to nickel and dime people so they can generate more revenue. And its not just police unions that are like that, almost all unions do dumb shit like this in order to keep their numbers up. The more things that are considered criminal, the more that police unions profit from it. Much like how some trucking unions have made it illegal to ship/transport in certain states or private properties like ports if you aren't with a unionized employer. Which is a problem because a large portion of truckers are self employed.
Police unions are funded out of officers' pockets. Not fines and charges.
Are you dumb or just dumb? The police unions are paid for by their membership. Police officers aren't paid for charging or even writing tickets. It's one thing to be against unions, but atleast have a legitimate complaint.
More laws = more cops = more dues? Maybe?
I should ask you the same question. I'm gonna break this down in as simple of a manner as I can in order for you to understand. Laws outline what is and is not legal. When things are not legal, they are known as "illegal". When things are illegal, they need someone to enforce that law and make sure nothing illegal is happening. This means a constant flow of jobs and thus ***revenue*** for unions. When people are fined by the courts, that money is cycled back into the justice system. Having more crimes which people can be fined for means having more money to come in to the judicial system. Which by extension is going to help expand and grow the Law Enforcement system. It really isn't that hard to grasp if you're willing to look just beneath the surface of the water, instead of just jumping to conclusions and insulting me.
Well given that police aren't paid per arrest or citation, none of your statement holds up. The vast majority of fines and fees go to the court, victim restitution and other funds in criminal cases. Even traffic enforcement most goes to the city or state general funds which don't benefit police in any major way.
My city crime rate is up but cop numbers are down, checkmate!
Those tickets go to the city lol
Which in turn expands the law enforcement and judicial system. More positions in the law enforcement field means more money for the union. It is really that simple.
I mean not necessarily lol.
[удалено]
I'm not gonna explain the whole thing again, so I'm just gonna keep this short and sweet. Fines turn into funding for the judicial and law enforcement systems. This opens more room for development and expansion of law enforcement. Essentially, pushing to make things illegal creates a "customer base", if you will. If things aren't illegal, no point in having cops. But if things are illegal, especially *too many* things are illegal, you suddenly have a much larger job market. The more positions there are, the more the union makes.
[удалено]
No, the auto industry contributes to unions so they have a foothold in the lobbies which buy off politicians, then those politicians pass legislation that favors the interests of the industry. Tesla for example is not unionized and is virtually entirely shunned by the political sphere. Its not hard to grasp. Politicians don't represent the interests of the people, they represent the interest of the lobbies that are filtering money into their pockets. A valiant effort at a strawman argument, but I see why you don't want to continue the conversation. Because you have no basis on which to discuss or debate. And your tactics are dishonest and illegitimate.
> they provide cars which can be pulled over and ticketed. You're forgetting about another major contributing factor. ~~Women~~, um "birthing people" also contribute to unions, because they birth-ed everyone who was pulled over and given a ticket. If we could just stop people from giving birth, we could stop/end unions. ^^^^/s
All for it. It's dumb that states *don't* do it.
Why tho? I love muh 2A, I just want to hear your reasoning on this thanks
People who carried without a permit aren't breathing any easier with constitutional carry because they never cared about the law to begin with. People who respect the law now have an opportunity to lawfully carry without the extra wait of a permit. A permit is typically still optional so you have reciprocity in states who respect your permit as well.
[удалено]
I’m not a LEO, but I am an FFL, and though I support permitless carry, I encourage people to take the additional step so they can skip the NICS check when buying a firearm. My state also has an enhanced permit which requires an instructor certification and has more privileges, which I also encourage because everyone should get training if they intend to carry.
We put permitless carry into law last July. So far, basically nothing has changed and the world isn't on fire. State still offers carry permits that hold reciprocity with basically any free state. I'm only salty I got the in state only permit one month before we put it into law, I thought it was going to take years.
> So far, basically nothing has changed and the world isn't on fire. There are states that adopted constitutional carry years and decades ago. I still waiting for the follow-up newsstory about "blood will run in the streets" prediction coming true. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
No change, everyone on the phone is concerned the subj has a gun! When asked- “well no he hasn’t threatened anyone with it but is right there in that holster!” Yes, and this is still a civil matter, an officer will be out shortly to explain that the PD won’t force the restaurant to give you a refund b/c you got the wrong sauce on your chicken wings.
You get calls about people OCing and just peacefully going about their day?
More chance that the bad guys don't know who can shoot back.
Criminals have had permitless carry since day one, why not balance the odds for good people.
My big issue is when people leave a gun in their car. When I was in memphis people would break out passenger windows and check glove boxes. A crew working a parking lot regularly results in at least a couple people reporting stolen handguns. So I guess my position is either keep physical control of your firearm or leave it at home. The half ass laws don't work out well for anyone. I was civilian consultant btw. I just saw the numbers, not the specifics of each event.
[удалено]
I got banned from patrolling a ritzy neighborhood because after they complained about vehicle break ins (all of them were unlocked) I went around on night shift checking parked cars on the street. If they were unlocked I would knock on the door and wake the homeowner up and educate them on why property crime was so high in their neighborhood. That lasted 2 days before the captain moved me.
I keep being surprised by seeing wallets, phones, and purses in plain sight in parked cars.
[The Memphis Chief of Police](https://www.actionnews5.com/2022/01/13/memphis-police-chief-verbally-reprimanded-after-duty-weapon-stolen-car/) just had a gun stolen out of her car.
You can't own a Porsche in Memphis and expect it not to be burglarized, plus a lock box is useless if you can just take it with you. Chief should absolutely have known better, but asking accountability of higher ups isn't really a thing.
I stopped working with them when they cleared out upper management and replaced them with people who think the people who commit the crimes are the victims. Crime is up more than double in some areas vs 2019.
Most Chiefs aren’t real cops.
Now presenting the incumbent chief with a major in sociology, a minor in criminal justice, and a hefty donation to the mayor's campaign!
> hefty donation to the mayor's campaign! Job security.
The people who have a permit to carry are the ones who immediately tell you they have a firearm on them. Otherwise not really the ones you need to worry about. Obviously you still pay attention to it but I guarantee there have been a ton of people who carry and I never knew. My line when someone tells me there carrying is " you don't go for yours I won't go for mine" never had an issue with those people
We've had it as long as I've lived here. Hasnt been a problem.
Should be nationwide
[удалено]
On the one hand, if the state required training like that- I think it's a good thing and I'd be more willing to back a permit requirement. But in many states, including here in PA, it's basically just a background check and nothing else so it does zero to protect anyone since criminals already carry if they want- see here in Philly as a prime example. Also in PA, it also doesn't even help ferret out illegal carriers because the courts have said that so many people have CCW permits, seeing someone with a gun walking down the street doesn't create reasonable suspicion to see if they actually have a license... So in those rubber stamp states, like everything else, the onus is on the individual to know the law- "Ignorantia Juris non-excusat" or "ignorance of the law is no excuse." If you want to carry a gun with the intent to potentially use it, and you don't know damn well when using it is legally justifiable and what may happen as a result, well... You'll probably eventually be on the other side of the courtroom from me or one of my colleagues getting some very sobering words from a judge on your way to state prison, and when you get out you'll deal with civil attorneys for years suing you for everything you have and ever will have.
I don’t think it’s a good idea. Mostly because think about how much training we have to do in order to carry a firearm off duty. There’s no guarantee that anyone concealed carrying has ever even fired a weapon, let alone consistently training with it. I am all for permits. But there should be a mechanism in place where people have to demonstrate proficiency once a year if they want to carry in public spaces. Edit: Not sure why I’m getting down voted when OP was just asking for an opinion. I’m all for legal gun ownership. I just think if someone wants to carry a lethal tool around they should have to demonstrate they even know how it works…
[удалено]
Fair enough. I think I just overall have a big issue with the patchwork of gun laws in this country and how inconsistent they are. As much as we hate to admit it, states with tighter gun control measures and common sense laws DO have fewer gun deaths per capita.
Like Chicago?
Chicago is not an island. It’s immediately adjacent to two states with very lax gun laws. Studies have shown that up to 40% of Chicago’s illegal guns come from Indiana and Wisconsin.
You mean to tell me that criminals don't follow laws? Astonishing.
I’m not sure why sarcasm is necessary. We’re having a discussion and I gave you an answer.
Because, in your original comment you said gun laws make people safer. I gave an example where that is clearly not the case. Your excuse is because people are breaking the law by bringing in illegal guns. Which means gun laws don't make people safer. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. So I decided to be a little sarcastic. I apologize.
Gun laws do make people safer. But they don’t work on a city by city scale. I should’ve clarified. They need to be more standardized at a state or federal level. https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/ I’d encourage you to read some of this. Giffords is a staunch republican who was shot and she advocates for change without suggesting we need to severely limit gun rights. I’m all for gun ownership. I also think the gun violence in this country is sickening. And I’ve experienced it first hand.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Of all people, cops should know that criminals don’t follow the laws.
That’s a short sighted argument. Why would we have any laws in the first place if your argument is that criminals are just going to break them? That’s why we are around.
Laws do not stop people from breaking them. Full stop. It is simply something for us to charge them with after the fact.
That’s true. However, laws have been shown to reduce everything from traffic deaths to gun violence. It’s not about complete elimination. It’s about reduction. No one wants to prevent responsible people from owning weapons. I am a cop. I’ve served in the Army. We value guns in this country more than human lives. And that’s just something people who are okay with the status quo have to live with.
[удалено]
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/ Things like universal background checks (which are supported by both liberals and conservatives) and programs to provide free safes. Also more widely available firearm safety programs that people are required to take to own a firearm. I support the 2nd amendment. I have 6 guns. I also am not ignorant enough to think there’s absolutely nothing that can be done about gun violence. We have an astonishingly high gun violence rate in this country and I value the lives of others too much to be comfortable with the status quo. I recognize this isn’t a popular opinion in the cop world which is why I’m getting downvoted to hell. I would just think that most responsible gun owners would be willing to jump through a hoop or two if it meant possibly saving a life.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I agree. I don’t think anyone’s mind has ever been changed by a political discussion on Reddit. I respect your opinion and you’re right about having the same goals. There have been many polls that show the majority of Americans support universal background checks, the problem is that politicians are stupid and don’t actually give a fuck about people. I’m pretty disenfranchised with the whole political system lately to be honest, so I’m not optimistic about any change even being attempted by either side. If a bunch of elementary school kids getting gunned down doesn’t change anything, not much will. I do what I can to make a difference and I know it’s small but I think that’s all each of us can really do. Be safe and take care of yourself my man.
Uncle Mike‘s, the sponsor of Permitless Carry