OT: CCW Permits

[XtremeJibber2001]

Myabe this could go in the general forum, but oh well.

I was looking through the laws, restrictions, and policies behind gun handling in PA and found this surprising...

"PA CCW LIMITS
May police limit carrying concealed handguns? No

State law forces police chiefs and state sheriffs to give concealed carry permits (CCW) to anyone who can buy a handgun, allowing them to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public (known as �shall issue�). Police may not even require safety training in the legal or safe use of weapons for CCW applicants. State law allows residents of some other states to carry concealed weapons in this state without informing local police. "

I'm surprised this is the policy in PA.

[Dr. NO]

Myabe this could go in the general forum, but oh well.

I was looking through the laws, restrictions, and policies behind gun handling in PA and found this surprising...

"PA CCW LIMITS
May police limit carrying concealed handguns? No

State law forces police chiefs and state sheriffs to give concealed carry permits (CCW) to anyone who can buy a handgun, allowing them to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public (known as �shall issue�). Police may not even require safety training in the legal or safe use of weapons for CCW applicants. State law allows residents of some other states to carry concealed weapons in this state without informing local police. "

I'm surprised this is the policy in PA.

There is a reason for something like this. In some areas, especially in New York State, police and law offices would simply refuse to hand out any CCW permit. People had to go to court to force them to provide the permits as allowed by state law. As for the extent fo this, no training etc., I think that is a bit foolish.

[XtremeJibber2001]

Myabe this could go in the general forum, but oh well.

I was looking through the laws, restrictions, and policies behind gun handling in PA and found this surprising...

"PA CCW LIMITS
May police limit carrying concealed handguns? No

State law forces police chiefs and state sheriffs to give concealed carry permits (CCW) to anyone who can buy a handgun, allowing them to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public (known as �shall issue�). Police may not even require safety training in the legal or safe use of weapons for CCW applicants. State law allows residents of some other states to carry concealed weapons in this state without informing local police. "

I'm surprised this is the policy in PA.

There is a reason for something like this. In some areas, especially in New York State, police and law offices would simply refuse to hand out any CCW permit. People had to go to court to force them to provide the permits as allowed by state law. As for the extent fo this, no training etc., I think that is a bit foolish.

I agree. The lack of training seems foolish. Upon looking into it more fully, you must provide a reason you need to carry a weapon. Although, I wonder just how liberal they with the reasons they allow. I should submit a stupid reason and see what happens, because obviously I have no need to carry a CW

[Cityskier]

When you look into the mentality of the scary fcuks who make up the NRA this isn't really all that surprising.

NRA seeks gun pledge, upset weapons confiscated after Katrina
By John Hartzell
Associated Press
MILWAUKEE - Alarmed by the way authorities confiscated guns in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, the National Rifle Association called on all police chiefs and mayors Thursday to sign a pledge they will never forcibly disarm law-abiding citizens.

"Mayors and police chiefs have already sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States in their oaths of office. So signing this pledge should be just as effortless," said Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president, a day before the 4 million-member group opens its annual convention in Milwaukee.

The nation's most powerful gun lobbying group also said it would support state and federal legislation making it a crime to forcibly disarm law-abiding citizens.

"We need this legislation because Katrina blew a hole in the Constitution that will continue to hemorrhage until we stop it," said Chris W. Cox, an NRA lobbyist.

After Katrina hit New Orleans, police and soldiers confiscated guns from some evacuees and removed them from homes. Police said they took only guns that had been stolen or found in abandoned homes.

In April, officials began returning some of the weapons after being sued by the NRA and other groups that claimed the confiscations took away people's means of protection amid the lawlessness that broke out in the storm's aftermath.

A spokeswoman for the New Orleans Police Department said the agency's superintendent, Warren Riley, was not available for comment Thursday on the NRA's campaign. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin's office referred calls for comment to the Police Department.

Peter Hamm, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the nation doesn't need the NRA's campaign.

"This is a non-problem in America, and for the NRA to be waving their arms and screaming that the people are about to have their firearms taken away, it's sheer nonsense," he said.

Jim Couri, a spokesman for the National Association of Chiefs of Police, said his organization is opposed to gun confiscations.

A recent poll of its members showed that 92.4 percent of them supported allowing law-abiding citizens to obtain a firearm for sporting use or self-defense, he said.

In Milwaukee, Deputy Police Chief Brian O'Keefe said his department does not have the time or the resources to go after law-abiding citizens with firearms.

"The rhetoric to say we are going to disarm law-abiding citizens is a little over the top," he said.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said rather than sign the NRA's pledge, he would rather meet with the group's officials to talk about preventing gun violence.

LaPierre said when Katrina hit, having a firearm provided some comfort to Gulf Coast residents.

"Katrina became the proving ground for what law-abiding citizens and others have always imagined: that government bureaucrats would throw the Bill of Rights out the window and declare freedom to be whatever they say it is," he said.

"When the Second Amendment is only as good as your mayor or police chief says it is, the NRA must take action."

[Bubba]

When you look into the mentality of the scary fcuks who make up the NRA this isn't really all that surprising.

Generalizing a bit?

[XtremeJibber2001]

No doubt there are some scary people in the NRA, but I agree with the NRA on this one. No soldier or law enforcement official has the right to remove my gun from my house if I bought it legally, have a permit, and I carry/transport/use the gun in a legal manner.

[yeti]

While I completely agree with the 2nd Amendment in principle, in practice way too many idiots choose to exersize their rights in this regard - the end result being a spectacular or tragic story in the press.

The men who write the Constitution made the fatal mistake of assuming that the people bearing arms were as smart and responsible as they were. Huge, huge mistake.

[Cityskier]

When you look into the mentality of the scary fcuks who make up the NRA this isn't really all that surprising.

Generalizing a bit?

Probably not as much as you think I am but that is open for debate.

[BigKahuna13]

While I completely agree with the 2nd Amendment in principle, in practice way too many idiots choose to exersize their rights in this regard - the end result being a spectacular or tragic story in the press.

The men who write the Constitution made the fatal mistake of assuming that the people bearing arms were as smart and responsible as they were. Huge, huge mistake.

They made the same mistake with the vote.

[Bubba]

When you look into the mentality of the scary fcuks who make up the NRA this isn't really all that surprising.

Generalizing a bit?

Probably not as much as you think I am but that is open for debate.

Their problem, if it is a problem, is that they look at any perceived "infringement" on their understanding of the 2nd Amendment as a slippery slope, therefore they refuse to compromise on any aspect of gun control. This includes, among other things, bullets designed to penetrate bullet proof vests where most people feel it would be reasonable to ban these bullets.

We have similar thinking on some issues on the left - abortion rights, for example, where most people believe some limitations are reasonable, yet most abortion rights groups believe in the same slippery slope.

BTW, I personally think the NRA leadership is often nuts in the way they portray their issues.

[Cityskier]

When you look into the mentality of the scary fcuks who make up the NRA this isn't really all that surprising.

Generalizing a bit?

Probably not as much as you think I am but that is open for debate.

Their problem, if it is a problem, is that they look at any perceived "infringement" on their understanding of the 2nd Amendment as a slippery slope, therefore they refuse to compromise on any aspect of gun control. This includes, among other things, bullets designed to penetrate bullet proof vests where most people feel it would be reasonable to ban these bullets.

We have similar thinking on some issues on the left - abortion rights, for example, where most people believe some limitations are reasonable, yet most abortion rights groups believe in the same slippery slope.

BTW, I personally think the NRA leadership is often nuts in the way they portray their issues.

I agree that my anti-NRA bias has more to do with their marketing than their mission. I don't believe that armor-penetrating bullets should be on the street and I don't think that it's a god-given right to have an automatic assault rifle in your closet. I just think that there are some reasonable limits that should be imposed but sadly I don't get to define reasonable!

[XtremeJibber2001]

I don't think that it's a god-given right to have an automatic assault rifle in your closet. I just think that there are some reasonable limits that should be imposed but sadly I don't get to define reasonable!

I have a legal firearm in my closet. Does law enforcement have the right to come into my house and take that firearm away from me because the state is in a 'state of disaster'

[Bubba]

I don't think that it's a god-given right to have an automatic assault rifle in your closet. I just think that there are some reasonable limits that should be imposed but sadly I don't get to define reasonable!

I have a legal firearm in my closet. Does law enforcement have the right to come into my house and take that firearm away from me because the state is in a 'state of disaster'

I don't think Cityskier was arguing that point.

[XtremeJibber2001]

I don't think that it's a god-given right to have an automatic assault rifle in your closet. I just think that there are some reasonable limits that should be imposed but sadly I don't get to define reasonable!

I have a legal firearm in my closet. Does law enforcement have the right to come into my house and take that firearm away from me because the state is in a 'state of disaster'

I don't think Cityskier was arguing that point.

Probably not, but I have an inkling he's not a big fan of the 2nd amendment. Could be wrong though!

[Bubba]

I don't think that it's a god-given right to have an automatic assault rifle in your closet. I just think that there are some reasonable limits that should be imposed but sadly I don't get to define reasonable!

I have a legal firearm in my closet. Does law enforcement have the right to come into my house and take that firearm away from me because the state is in a 'state of disaster'

I don't think Cityskier was arguing that point.

Probably not, but I have an inkling he's not a big fan of the 2nd amendment. Could be wrong though!

Generalizing a bit?

Just because someone doesn't think we have the right to carry assault weapons or have armor piercing bullets doesn't mean that same person doesn't believe we have a right to own guns.