Nathan Barton asked what I thought of a new article at Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, “Chasing Constitutional Carry,” by By Alan Korwin.
Here it is, with both barrels…
You will hear scare tactics about blood-in-the-streets when you raise the issue, …
This, of course, mistakes the motive of the nay sayers pretty completely. While many individuals have swallowed these lies, none of the anti gun organizations (or politicians) are that naive. They all know perfectly well the end result of mundanes carrying guns… the reduction in their own income, perks and influence. There isn’t a single gun control group in the world that actually gives a fig for safety or the lives of ordinary people. Their only desire is for control.
Therefore, the only way this can be addressed at all is through individuals communicating with individuals… to demonstrate the truth of self ownership and self responsibility. Limiting the discussion to guns alone or to CC alone defeats the whole purpose.
I mean… little girls selling lemonade on the street corner are considered a radical danger to public health, and you’re advocating that the government “allow” everyone to carry a gun – concealed or otherwise – without any regulation (aside from that whole “prohibited person” thing, I suspect)?
[Re: legislators and law enforcement]
This is a position they are not usually accustomed to being in, and even if they are, it can motivate them to start to deal. If you had reached out your hand in a good faith effort, and they slapped it away, that’s a talking point, and will work in your favor. It could even take the edge off and make them marginally friendly.
Again, this assumes that anyone in any government body is truly interested in truth and justice, rather than their own privilege, perks and power. Oh, there are a few here and there, but so far they have been fairly ineffective. (How many years has Ron Paul been in the house?)
The run of the mill legislators bend to significant pressure… for a while, but there is always a serious undertow present to restore any little specks of power they are forced to give up. There seem to be some serious efforts in the WY legislature, for instance, to reinstate the cc “permit” – and they’ll make us fight that fight a hundred times. There is simply no rational way to stop them as long as people give them any power.
If you’re an independent grass roots person or group, you certainly want the NRA on your team as well.
Oh sure… Not. The NRA is only too happy to do whatever is necessary to continue their own perks, prerogatives and power as well. They’ve supported and even engineered far too much “gun control” to be trusted. Just read what David Codrea has written about the NRA and how irrelevant it is for those truly looking for voting guidance based on the NRA rating vs. a legislator’s actual track record. And that’s just for “gun control” voting, not their record on liberty in general, of course. Look at what JPFO itself has to say about the NRA.
Possession of private property, especially constitutionally protected property like arms, should be permit free, without fees or expiration dates.
The “constitution” does not confer any rights and has never protected them.
Guns are no different than chopsticks or aircraft. If it belongs to me, I should use it as I see fit as long as I don’t intentionally or negligently harm an innocent with it.
Be prepared to have many people who you’d think are “on your side” come out against *Constitutional Carry*, particularly from the ranks of instructors and training schools.
Interestingly enough, as an instructor myself, I talk to a LOT of instructors and have not found this to be true. I’m sure some are that way, but I don’t think it’s as big a problem as this indicates. Most of them are certainly adamant that every gun owner NEEDS training of some kind, but that doesn’t automatically translate to government control of it. I would imagine that those who are “professionals” and make their whole living with government mandated training might object… but I don’t think they represent the majority of trainers either.
The stark reality is that, from a purely statistical standpoint, there is no evidence that shows that training results in a safer society.
I’d have to say that this is an misleading statement. We need to be careful that we are not seen as advocating gun ownership with no thought to proper operation and safety norms.
There is no evidence that government mandated training makes a difference, I’ll grant, but I’ve not talked to many gun owners who think nobody ever needs any training of any kind…
Now this doesn’t mean that you or anyone else should be anti-training. Instructors everywhere encourage everyone to be trained and competent, regardless of government forcing you to do so.
Exactly. But “competent” is in the eye of the beholder. The real question is still intentional or negligent harm to innocents… not certificates and hours/rounds spent on a range to satisfy someone – ANYONE – else. The key is personal responsibility for the consequences of our actions and choices, and full accountability/restitution to those we actually harm.
I don’t think a high school diploma should be issued without at least one full credit in marksmanship. We have a statute in Arizona that provides for that as an elective,
Oh yes… let’s let government teach kids to shoot. <facepalm>
What you should oppose, and what you should focus on, is the bad idea of one-size-fits-all government training mandates. And government licensing a fundamental right, which has been uniformly rejected by the courts in other areas — like for voting, or religion, or speech.
Indeed… and as soon as we hand the federal government the power to dictate this… how long do you think it would take for them to twist it around and deny everyone’s rights everywhere? Why would we trust them with this?
The free market can, and should, decide. Freedom to Carry laws do this.
This is an oxymoron statement, I think. The free market can decide… period. “Laws” do nothing to promote a free market.
And don’t be surprised when gun-rights activists themselves tend to balk, at least initially, to the idea of being free enough to bear arms without government oversight.
How does a federal “law” give anyone the freedom to bear arms without government oversight? This is what I simply can’t get past.
When the federal government totally repeals each and every “law” that limits, prohibits, and regulates private activity, choices and business… then we might have something to work with. But does anyone truly believe that the same government that prosecutes the “war on drugs,” the war on raw milk, etc… and the insane BATFE “laws,” rules, etc. on guns across the board, is suddenly going to stand down regarding concealed carry?
In what universe?
Fighting back with Constitutional Carry laws helps people see the light.
How does that work? “Constitutional Carry,” all by itself, would somehow get people to understand self ownership and personal responsibility? That’s the only “light” I can see making any real difference.
The hypocrisy – as the same government actually continued to destroy lives and businesses over everything else – would certainly be of historic proportion, but I’m not sure a lot of people would understand the real problem… if they even noticed.
Pressing for Constitutional Carry will force the next president to deal with the public from the people’s perspective, and that’s a good thing, no matter who wins the White House.
This is a pipe dream. True gun rights cannot be exercised in a vacuum… it is not possible as long as the same government controls everything else… and reaches ever for more control.
The real answer? Stop empowering the government, at any level, to dictate your life, rights or responsibilities.
Not no rules… no rulers and no slaves.
I carry a Gun – Get over it
By Susan Callaway
But, in the end, I live and therefore I am. I don’t need any other person’s permission to live or defend myself. I don’t need anyone’s vetting of my intentions or sanity, nor approval for the self defense tool I choose or how I carry it.
I don’t NEED to explain myself. I don’t NEED any reasons at all.