You just continually prove your stupidity. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Well, I challenged you to come up with another idiotic post and you most certainly did so. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
You just continue to show your stupidity. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXJust par for the course with IB.
By the way, you STILL haven't answered my very simple question:More cut & paste repeats, non answers to anything, and photoshop pics (when all else fails) soon to follow.
Are the only handguns you have in your home simply antique handguns? I'm not asking whether or not the guns are "historic memorabilia". Simply asking if you have a gun in your home for self defense and whether you have a concealed handgun you carry on your person when outside your home. You keep saying you only have weapons from WWI and WWII, but have not answered my question.
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
You just continue to show your stupidity.What part of "open carry" means "no CHL required" do you not understand, Speedy? BTW, told your ignorant ass before I use the CHL to transport my weapons to and from the range and hunting, Speedy. It's not required, but with piss-in-their-pants fraidy-cats like you passing so many bureaucratic restrictions a CHL is advisable to avoid any issues that might arise while transporting into or through another state on the way to a hunting destination. FYI, Speedy, I have seven hand guns: one is an 18th century vintage pattern replica Tower pistol (from a kit), three (two replicas) are 19th century vintage pattern revolvers and the other three (two autos and one revolver) -- fully functional originals -- date from WWI and WWII, and all of them are "historical memorabilia", Speedy.
First, the reasons I voted for Obama for president had absolutely nothing to do with his position on gun rights. It had everything to do with the economic condition of the country at the time of the election and the fact that the Republicans, for whom I had voted for throughout my long life, had put up McCain and Palin both of whom I did not like, to put it mildly.
Second, "Open carry" and "Concealed carry" are 2 totally different rights. It's amazing how stupid you are. I have been talking TOTALLY about "concealed carry". Exactly 5 states are unrestricted, requiring no CHL. Every other of the 45 states REQUIRES a CHL in order to carry a concealed handgun. As shown below, a "shall issue" state has requirements in order to obtain a CHL, Texas is a "shall issue" state but an applicant must, at a minimum, attend a class, show competency in firing the weapon, and pass a written test in order to obtain a CHL. So MY stats are absolutely correct. Not to worry. The odds are that EVENTUALLY you will be right on some issue.
A Shall-Issue jurisdiction is one that requires a license to carry a concealed handgun, but where the granting of such licenses is subject only to meeting determinate criteria laid out in the law; the granting authority has no discretion in the awarding of the licenses, and there is no requirement of the applicant to demonstrate "good cause". The laws in a Shall-Issue jurisdiction typically state that a granting authority shall issue a license if the criteria are met, as opposed to laws in which the authority may issue a license at their discretion.
Typical license requirements include residency, minimum age, submitting fingerprints, passing a computerized instant background check (or a more comprehensive manual background check), attending a certified handgun/firearm safety class, passing a practical qualification demonstrating handgun proficiency, and paying a required fee. These requirements vary widely by jurisdiction, with some having few or none of these and others having most or all.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceal...es#Shall-Issue
By the way, you STILL haven't answered my very simple question:
Are the only handguns you have in your home simply antique handguns? I'm not asking whether or not the guns are "historic memorabilia". Simply asking if you have a gun in your home for self defense and whether you have a concealed handgun you carry on your person when outside your home. You keep saying you only have weapons from WWI and WWII, but have not answered my question.
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
By the way, using your fractured logic, when I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, Bob Dole in 1996, Bush in 1988 and 1992, Reagan in 1980 and 1984, Ford in 1976, and so on, and voted for all Republican candidates for U.S. Senator, U.S. House, and state governor, then I must have done so because I supported the pro-gun lobby.Don't you know the old adage, Speedy, "One 'aw, shit' wipes out a thousand 'attaboys'"? You voted for Odumbo; hence you supported Holder, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc., etc., etc., idiot!
Idiot. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Just par for the course with IB. Originally Posted by JCM800Whereas par for 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout is making inane, non-substantive, off-topic, stupid-ass remarks.
More cut & paste repeats, non answers to anything, and photoshop pics (when all else fails) soon to follow.How many times do you intend to cut & paste that stupid-ass question, 1-800-JCM-DATO: the lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM's soiled breechclout?
Is there anything I missed IB? Originally Posted by JCM800
By the way, using your fractured logic, when I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, Bob Dole in 1996, Bush in 1988 and 1992, Reagan in 1980 and 1984, Ford in 1976, and so on, and voted for all Republican candidates for U.S. Senator, U.S. House, and state governor, then I must have done so because I supported the pro-gun lobby.
Idiot. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
What part of "open carry" means "no CHL required" do you not understand, Speedy? BTW, told your ignorant ass before I use the CHL to transport my weapons to and from the range and hunting, Speedy. It's not required, but with piss-in-their-pants fraidy-cats like you passing so many bureaucratic restrictions a CHL is advisable to avoid any issues that might arise while transporting into or through another state on the way to a hunting destination. FYI, Speedy, I have seven hand guns: one is an 18th century vintage pattern replica Tower pistol (from a kit), three (two replicas) are 19th century vintage pattern revolvers and the other three (two autos and one revolver) -- fully functional originals -- date from WWI and WWII, and all of them are "historical memorabilia", Speedy.In the state of Texas, people can "open carry" long rifles without a CHL. So at the current time, there is absolutely no correlation between "open carry" and the requirement to obtain a CHL to carry a concealed handgun in this state.
Don't you know the old adage, Speedy, "One 'aw, shit' wipes out a thousand 'attaboys'"? You voted for Odumbo; hence you supported Holder, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc., etc., etc., idiot!
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
Why? Why? Why? ... did you convert?In 2008 I could not bear the thought of McCain as President and, even worse, Sarah Palin being a heartbeat from the presidency. Can ANYONE here imagine Sarah Palin as President of the U.S.?
. Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
In the state of Texas, people can "open carry" long rifles without a CHL. So at the current time, there is absolutely no correlation between "open carry" and the requirement to obtain a CHL to carry a concealed handgun in this state.You're a moron, Speedy. First off, Texas is Texas, and what holds true in Texas doesn't necessarily hold true for any every other state in the union, moron. Plus, already explained that every weapon I own was "collected" because each is in some sense a piece of "historical memorabilia": not personal protection. The quote in blue suits you perfectly, Speedy, and you're embarrassed because you know it's true.
You still haven't answered my question idiot. Simple question. Yes you have stated that you use your CHL to transport your weapons. Question still is do you own a handgun for your protection and do you carry one as a concealed handgun? Answer is either "Yes" or "No".
Your second comment, highlighted in blue, shows off your total stupidity. Probably the most idiotic statement made on this forum. I believe in "A" therefore I believe in "B". Your logic is absolutely ridiculous. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
First, I'll eliminate the first 2 of your paragraphs because you are obviously too ignorant to answer questions asked and continue to rant on and on with irrelevant statements.
You are moronically prejudiced against weapons and their owners, Speedy,and you've admitted that your so-called "solutions" will not contribute to actual civic good because criminals do not and will not abide by the laws you and regulations you want to clutter the law books with; yet, you persist with your idiotic agenda to disarm responsible citizens who obey laws. Originally Posted by I B Hankering
First, I'll eliminate the first 2 of your paragraphs because you are obviously too ignorant to answer questions asked and continue to rant on and on with irrelevant statements.Your question was answered, Speedy, you're just too ignorant to understand the answer; hence, you remain a moron. The criminals will not abide by the laws you want, Speedy, and yet you pretend your laws will change criminal behavior.
But the paragraph above just continues to show how stupid you are and continue to ignore statements made by others and then go on to push your own agenda. You are simply an IDIOT. Once again, as you did with my voting for Obama, you are making a huge jump and concluding because I believe in one specific handgun control which I believe protects people from idiots like you who might be carrying a concealed handgun, that I support all gun control measures.
Once again, since you obviously have been too dense up to this point to comprehend pretty much anything:
THE ONLY LAW I HAVE SUPPORTED IN THIS THREAD IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CHL. 45 OF THE 50 STATES CURRENTLY AGREE WITH MY POSITION BY REQUIRING A CHL IN ORDER TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN, ALTHOUGH THE REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN A CHL VARY FROM STATE-TO-STATE. THE LAW IS THE LAW. AND THE LAWS WERE NOT MADE BY ME. YOU SIMPLY IGNORE THIS FACT. IN THESE 45 STATES I DON'T NEED AN AGENDA TO DISARM ANYONE. THE LAWS IN AFFECT HAVE DONE SO. FIGHT WITH THEM YOU IDIOT. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
First, I'll eliminate the first 2 of your paragraphs because you are obviously too ignorant to answer questions asked and continue to rant on and on with irrelevant statements.[/COLOR] Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXAnd you find this noteworthy why? That is who IB is. That us what he has been babbling for 11,000+ posts. Then magically he turns and says "I answered the question but the rest of the universe is too stupid to understand! "
Your question was answered, Speedy, you're just too ignorant to understand the answer; hence, you remain a moron. The criminals will not abide by the laws you want, Speedy, and yet you pretend your laws will change criminal behavior. Originally Posted by I B HankeringOnce again you are putting words in my mouth that were never stated or even implied.
And you find this noteworthy why? That is who IB is. That us what he has been babbling for 11,000+ posts. Then magically he turns and says "I answered the question but the rest of the universe is too stupid to understand! "Sometimes you just have to throw in the towel. When you've explained things 3, 4 or 5 times and the person STILL can't understand a simple question, it is best to give up and let people like yourself reach the same conclusion that you and I have -- IB is an idiot.
Now in typical fashion he will spew some nonsensical phlegm about me because I pointed out his pattern--even though it has been obvious to all sentient posters for a long time. Originally Posted by Old-T
Once again you are putting words in my mouth that were never stated or even implied.Guns are banned in Chicago, Speedy. CHLs are almost impossible to get in Chicago, Speedy. Nevertheless, at least 11 were injured in Chicago shootings this past Saturday night, Speedy. Criminals never have and never will obey your laws, Speedy.
You will not find even ONE place in this thread, or any other thread, where I've said that a law requiring a CHL will change criminal behavior. Never said it would. Fact is, I don't believe I've EVER stated in ANY thread that ANY law will change criminal behavior. I challenge you once again to back up your lies. Criminals will carry concealed handguns whether or not there is a law in a state requiring. What a CHL requirement will do is help applicants understand how to use their handgun and when it should be used. SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU!!
You at times have accused me of being scared of untrained people with handguns. You bet your ass I am. Over 10,000 people are killed each year in the U.S. by firearms, mostly by handguns. Usually over 400,000 non-fatal firearm incidents. Certainly only a handful of these crimes are committed by people with a CHL. I want people legally carrying to have a minimum of training with their handgun and understand when and when not it is right to use it. Again, SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU? Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
And you find this noteworthy why? That is who IB is. That us what he has been babbling for 11,000+ posts. Then magically he turns and says "I answered the question but the rest of the universe is too stupid to understand! "What's noteworthy, Old-Twerp, is how your ignorant-ass chooses to ignore the number of posts made by your lib-retarded consorts while ignorantly trying to make a straw man issue out of the number of posts.
Now in typical fashion he will spew some nonsensical phlegm about me because I pointed out his pattern--even though it has been obvious to all sentient posters for a long time. Originally Posted by Old-T
Sometimes you just have to throw in the towel. When you've explained things 3, 4 or 5 times and the person STILL can't understand a simple question, it is best to give up and let people like yourself reach the same conclusion that you and I have -- IB is an idiot.Whereas you, Speedy, ignorantly fail to understand answers. You ignorantly demand more laws and restrictions, Speedy, while you conceded that criminals don't obey laws and restrictions. So you're the idiot, Speedy.
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Guns are banned in Chicago, Speedy. CHLs are almost impossible to get in Chicago, Speedy. Nevertheless, at least 11 were injured in Chicago shootings this past Saturday night, Speedy. Criminals never have and never will obey your laws, Speedy.So you CAN"T find any statement I've made, past or present, which supports your statement that I said any gun control law will change criminal behavior. LIAR. You just continue to throw out irrelevant statements, now about Chicago. What does that have to do with a discussion on CHLs? YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
Whereas you, Speedy, ignorantly fail to understand answers. You ignorantly demand more laws and restrictions, Speedy, while you conceded that criminals don't obey laws and restrictions. So you're the idiot, Speedy. Originally Posted by I B Hankering
So you CAN"T find any statement I've made, past or present, which supports your statement that I said any gun control law will change criminal behavior. LIAR. You just continue to throw out irrelevant statements, now about Chicago. What does that have to do with a discussion on CHLs? YOU ARE AN IDIOT.You're a liar, Speedy! You've already endorsed the very restrictive gun control measures in New York and New Jersey, and you're on record for allowing more restrictive laws where the existing laws don't meet with your ignorant approval, Speedy:
And once again in your second paragraph, you are a LIAR. I'll ask again -- what additional laws and restrictions on handguns or other firearms have I demanded. YOU ARE ONCE AGAIN TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN OTHER PEOPLE'S MOUTHS TO SUPPORT YOUR CONCLUSIONS.
But you have restored faith in me. I have thought that achieving perfection in just about anything meaningful was virtually impossible. But congratulations -- you have shown yourself to be a PERFECT IDIOT. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
I support concealed carry, but only when the person has a license to do so. Very simple reasoning -- I want to make sure that any person carrying a concealed handgun has at least a basic skill in handling the handgun and has a basic understanding of under what conditions that handgun should be used. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXMeanwhile Speedy, you leave it up in the air as to "who" determines "what" basic understanding "means", and you are on the record as insisting such laws be put in place where they do not exist.
I disagree 100% with Wyoming not requiring CHLs to those who want to carry concealed handguns. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Are you able to read at all??? Here is my original statement:
"The attorney general of Wyoming should worry about his own pitiful state and not worry about New Jersey. I support concealed carry, but only when the person has a license to do so. Very simple reasoning -- I want to make sure that any person carrying a concealed handgun has at least a basic skill in handling the handgun and has a basic understanding of under what conditions that handgun should be used. That person is NOT, in any way, responsible for protecting ME. "
What I disagreed with in this statement, allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns without a CHL, is almost word-for-word what I disagreed with in my last statement.
I do agree with your last statement though. States are fairly free to pass laws concerning gun control as long as they don't violate the 2nd Amendment, as determined by the court system. Wyoming does not require a CHL for its eligible citizens to carry a concealed handgun. Just one of thousands of reasons why I am happy I don't live in Wyoming.
My prediction -- this lawsuit will get squashed just as the lawsuit brought against New York was. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Wyoming’s attorney general ... is afraid that if the N.J. law is left standing, somehow the citizens of Wyoming will learn about it and want greater gun restrictions. Total BS. The Wyoming AG is an idiot. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX