Interesting Conversation With A Friend Re: Permitless Carry

[Smoke]

I originally posted this in the 2A sub forum but I have been told it's outside of the scope of that forum so I reposted here

I ran into a buddy of mine at church this morning and I mentioned that Kansas has introduced legislation that would do away with the handgun permit system in their state.

My friend looks at me and says “Oh that ain’t good” and I asked him “why?”

Him: “Well that means anyone can carry a gun legally”

Me:“No it doesn’t, if you can’t legally own a gun you can’t legally carry it. That won’t change”

Him: “Well criminals don’t pay attention to that anyway.”

Me: And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

I got “the Look.”

Then I said to him “you’re a police officer, if you pull someone over and they aren’t legal to own a gun and they’re carrying one you arrest them right?” (We had already stipulated that any time he pulls someone over he runs them for wants, warrants and priors)

Then he says “Well if know one has to have a permit how would I know they were carrying a gun?”

Me: “How do you know now?”

Him “Well, I don’t.”

Me: “Me: And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

Then I started to say that in his shoes I’d ask everyone I stopped if they had a gun on them. He then said “There’s really no point, the only people that will tell you the truth are the law abiding and the criminals who don’t.”

To which I replied “And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

Then something came up and he had to leave but he walked up to me after church and said I thought about what you said all during service and you’re right permits only effect the law abiding and we shouldn’t have to get one.

I was very surprised because before service he was dead set that Kansas (and by extension Colorado if it ever happens here) going permitless was a bad thing.

 

[Old cop]

Good for you, you held up your end well and changed his mind. Some cops don't like the idea that they are no longer the only ones who can carry, don't ask me why.

 

[Protected One]

I originally posted this in the 2A sub forum but I have been told it's outside of the scope of that forum so I reposted here

I ran into a buddy of mine at church this morning and I mentioned that Kansas has introduced legislation that would do away with the handgun permit system in their state.

My friend looks at me and says “Oh that ain’t good” and I asked him “why?”

Him: “Well that means anyone can carry a gun legally”

Me:“No it doesn’t, if you can’t legally own a gun you can’t legally carry it. That won’t change”

Him: “Well criminals don’t pay attention to that anyway.”

Me: And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

I got “the Look.”

Then I said to him “you’re a police officer, if you pull someone over and they aren’t legal to own a gun and they’re carrying one you arrest them right?” (We had already stipulated that any time he pulls someone over he runs them for wants, warrants and priors)

Then he says “Well if know one has to have a permit how would I know they were carrying a gun?”

Me: “How do you know now?”

Him “Well, I don’t.”

Me: “Me: And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

Then I started to say that in his shoes I’d ask everyone I stopped if they had a gun on them. He then said “There’s really no point, the only people that will tell you the truth are the law abiding and the criminals who don’t.”

To which I replied “And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?”

Then something came up and he had to leave but he walked up to me after church and said I thought about what you said all during service and you’re right permits only effect the law abiding and we shouldn’t have to get one.

I was very surprised because before service he was dead set that Kansas (and by extension Colorado if it ever happens here) going permitless was a bad thing.

Good job! We have another convert!

 

[g8rb8]

Generally accurate numbers, logic, and truth don't seem to change many people's minds but once in awhile a couple of neurons connect and, viola, someone has a "eureka" moment.
John

 

[Rangerpat]

Most people that don't like guns, already have their minds made up and don't want to be confused by the true facts of responsible firearm ownership.
Good for you explaining the true facts and helping your buddy work through his convoluted logic.

 

[Frizzman]

Wow...Persuasion based on logic actually had some effect? That seems to be unusual. Both you and the other person deserve some credit for that. Calm, rational discussion is usually absent in any debate regarding anything these days, particularly regarding firearms.

 

[Jaysq]

Good job with sound logic.

 

[JohnSW]

Here, to get a permit to carry:

"Basic training must include:

(1) instruction in the fundamentals of pistol use;

(2) successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise; and

(3) instruction in the fundamental legal aspects of pistol possession, carry, and use, including self-defense and the restrictions on the use of deadly force."

Allowing people who don't know anything about gun safety, can't hit a target, and don't know anything about deadly force law, to walk around in public with a loaded gun is a bad idea.

 

[Rogue Wizard]

I like the response you repeatedly gave him..."To which I replied “And requiring me to have permit changes that how exactly?” . I imagine the look on his face was --->

 

[Mr Pokeyman]

Here, to get a permit to carry:

"Basic training must include:

(1) instruction in the fundamentals of pistol use;

(2) successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise; and

(3) instruction in the fundamental legal aspects of pistol possession, carry, and use, including self-defense and the restrictions on the use of deadly force."

Allowing people who don't know anything about gun safety, can't hit a target, and don't know anything about deadly force law, to walk around in public with a loaded gun is a bad idea.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

You lost me at 'Colorado is an extension of Kansas?'

 

[GerSan69]

"Kansas (and by extension Colorado if it ever happens here)" is not the same as "Colorado is an extension of Kansas". He's inferring that one could predict the results in Colorado from the results in Kansas, which is true.

 

[Smoke]

Allowing people who don't know anything about gun safety, can't hit a target, and don't know anything about deadly force law, to walk around in public with a loaded gun is a bad idea.

Given that several states currently allow their residents to carry a firearm with no permit what so ever and several more states issue permits with no training requirement what so ever.

I sure you can cite statistical evidence that these states have a higher instance of firearms related accidents that states that have strict training requirements.

We'll wait.

 

[FTG-05]

Given that several states currently allow their residents to carry a firearm with no permit what so ever and several more states issue permits with no training requirement what so ever.

I sure you can cite statistical evidence that these states have a higher instance of firearms related accidents that states that have strict training requirements.

We'll wait.

And wait. And wait. And wait.

 

[BrewsterII]

Here, to get a permit to carry:

"Basic training must include:

(1) instruction in the fundamentals of pistol use;

(2) successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise; and

(3) instruction in the fundamental legal aspects of pistol possession, carry, and use, including self-defense and the restrictions on the use of deadly force."

Allowing people who don't know anything about gun safety, can't hit a target, and don't know anything about deadly force law, to walk around in public with a loaded gun is a bad idea.

I understand what you are saying BUT, in Arizona its been working well now .......... FOREVER! Its a law biding citizens right!

 

[FTG-05]

Here, to get a permit to carry:

"Basic training must include:

(1) instruction in the fundamentals of pistol use;

(2) successful completion of an actual shooting qualification exercise; and

(3) instruction in the fundamental legal aspects of pistol possession, carry, and use, including self-defense and the restrictions on the use of deadly force."

Allowing people who don't know anything about gun safety, can't hit a target, and don't know anything about deadly force law, to walk around in public with a loaded gun is a bad idea.

I totally agree with this. Look how bad it is in Vermont, what with all the accidental shootings and killings and babies being shot and .... oh wait.

 

[shawn mccarver]

I certainly feel for officers who must confront, often several times per shift, persons who may have evil intent, or who may have just committed a heinous crime, and who think the simple traffic stop is about to lead to life in prison, resulting in a surprise ambush or execution of the officer.

That said, honest and law abiding gun owners are not the problem, and they pose no danger to an officer who encounters them.

As to the issue of permits, there is a better system: If you can legally own, you can legally carry concealed.

The only "database" therefore, is the database of people who are NOT legal to purchase (we already have that), and therefore not legal to possess or carry, open or not. Thus, when run on the computer by a police officer, and the computer comes back with a "NO" because the person is in the "criminal" database, then an arrest is made for being in possession of a fire arm. Simple as that. No gun owner need have to apply for anything. Let the inconvenience be on the criminal.

I have heard it expressed that permits allow an organized system of reciprocity for those who wish to carry concealed in another state. The simple answer for this is that if you are legal in your home state, you are legal everywhere - period. Even if your home state does not have the same onerous training requirements. There ought to be a law.

I dislike using driver licenses as an example as driving is not in the Bill of Rights as is the right to keep and bear arms, however, State A does not reject a driver with a license from State B, and State A does not inquire into how many hours of training State B requires before a driver can take the driver's examination. An unsafe driver is far more dangerous than a lawful person carrying a concealed weapon.

For my part, I feel far safer at a shooting match at our local gun club where everyone is armed than I do in any part of any big city, except perhaps in the police station of that big city - oh wait - everyone is armed there (well, almost everyone).

 

[John R]

Good for you, you held up your end well and changed his mind. Some cops don't like the idea that they are no longer the only ones who can carry, don't ask me why.

I think the cops that don't like common people to carry just don't like guns, or they feel that they lost a perk only for themselves.

Me personally, I think all people that are able to carry should.

The old saying when seconds count, the police are only minutes away is very true.

 

[suckersrus]

The idea of needing a permit to exercise a constitutional right has always bothered me.

In many states we are required to disclose to LE if we are armed under a permit or we will be breaking the law.
In the states that do not require disclosure LE will know if we have a permit as soon as they call in our ID info.

Yet felons, who are forbidden by law to carry a gun, are protected by the 5th amendment under the self-incrimination section.



The permit program smells like a "if we can't register the gun, we can at least register the owners!" scam.

We are so smart we cheerfully line up and then pay the fees!

 

[Smoke]

I totally agree with this. Look how bad it is in Vermont, what with all the accidental shootings and killings and babies being shot and .... oh wait.

I see what you did there