Concealed handgun permits, what do DP'ers think?

I just got my first permit and aside from giving all my personal info and fingerprinting it wasn't too much hassle. No photographs were taken but they do make you sign a statement allowing them to look into everty aspect of your past.

They mention in particular your mental health which they scour your records for.

I had misgivings about going through the process, but we have no other choice if we want a license here.

I think the answer is for EVERYONE to get a permit because then it will be harder to single out anyone in particular if they go after gun owners.

I still don't even have a hand gun, but believe strongly in our right to own and without the concealed firearm permit it is too much of a hassle to buy and transport your firearms.

You haven't had the right to carry a concealed weapon in almost every state for quite some time. In almost every case, you'll need to ask for permission, making the act of carrying a concealed weapon (well, in compliance with 'the law' anyway) a PRIVILEGE.

Go ahead and beg the government for permission to carry a weapon to be prepared to defend yourself. I would if I lived in a state that required it, but I don't. At least tha its one right we haven't had taken away from us by force in VT..

I got mine for two reasons: 1) I really don't want to be convicted for felony possession of a concealed weapon and I find not being able to arm myself or even carry a weapon except by following some arcane rules unacceptable. Really you don't have 2nd amendment rights respected by the government without a permit; 2) the more that have these permits the more it sends a message that yes, Americans want 2nd amendment rights.

Yes, it does mean that they have you on a list. However, are you really safer skulking around hiding your identity or when many Americans stand in the light to exercise their rights? The Founders didn't hide. Hiding won't win a damn thing. Most of the battle is in changing minds, and when people stand in the light, that will change far more minds than skulking around. It's the criminals in government who should skulk.

I went through the class in January and purchased my first gun just last week. I too don’t want to give them any more info then I have to, however do they not already have my address and SS# from the purchase? I may already be on the first round list.
I have not yet completed the process, and don’t know if I should.
Florida

since so many want to ban guns and since lawfully you should not have to deal with the state when purchasing guns.
myself, i would find some black market firearms, knowing that its patriotic to disobey laws that violate the constitution.

get and unregistered gun and carry it anyway

I know exactly how you feel; it's that very feeling that has kept me from flying for the last 8 years.

I think it's time somebody invented a new weapon. Something that does not qualify as a "firearm" and which is not regulated by any of the existing laws.

It usually takes a while for the government to catch up.

After all, this is what caused the creation of new illicit drugs. The market for an alternative weapon could be huge.

IMissLiberty

Here is a podcast with the Iowa Carry's president debating an Iowa county sheriff on this very issue. The sheriff maintains that the citizen must provide a good enough reason before he/she will be issued a permit. The talk show host says the exact opposite...that peaceful, law-abiding citizens must feel free to exercise their God given right to defend their lives and the lives of their loved ones, both in the home AND out of the home, and should not have to give a reason to obtain this permit when applying for it.
http://mickelson.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=474403

I believe it starts at about the 4 minute mark.

Section 1. No duty to summon help or flee. Except as provided in 45-3-105, a person who is lawfully in a place or location and who is threatened with bodily injury or loss of life has no duty to retreat from a threat or summon law enforcement assistance prior to using force. The provisions of this section apply to a person offering evidence of justifiable use of force under 45-3-102, 45-3-103, or 45-3-104.

Section 2. Openly carrying weapon -- display -- exemption. (1) Any person who is not otherwise prohibited from doing so by federal or state law may openly carry a weapon and may communicate to another person the fact that the person has a weapon.

(2) If a person reasonably believes that the person or another person is threatened with bodily harm, the person may warn or threaten the use of force, including deadly force, against the aggressor, including drawing or presenting a weapon.

(3) This section does not limit the authority of the board of regents or other postsecondary institutions to regulate the carrying of weapons, as defined in 45-8-361(5)(b), on their campuses.

Section 3. Investigation of alleged offense involving claim of justifiable use of force. When an investigation is conducted by a peace officer of an incident that appears to have or is alleged to have involved justifiable use of force, the investigation must be conducted so as to disclose all evidence, including testimony concerning the alleged offense and that might support the apparent or alleged justifiable use of force.

Section 4. Section 45-3-103, MCA, is amended to read:

"45-3-103. Use of force in defense of occupied structure. (1) A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that he the person reasonably believes that such conduct the use of force is necessary to prevent or terminate such the other's unlawful entry into or attack upon an occupied structure. However, he

(2) A person justified in the use of force pursuant to subsection (1) is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if:

(1)(a) the entry is made or attempted in violent, riotous, or tumultuous manner and he the person reasonably believes that such the force is necessary to prevent an assault upon or offer of personal violence to him the person or another then in the occupied structure; or

(2)(b) he the person reasonably believes that such the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony in the occupied structure."

Section 5. Firearm not to be destroyed. If a firearm possessed by a law enforcement agency was not purchased by the agency for agency use, if it is legal for a private person to own and possess the firearm, and if the legal owner cannot be determined by the agency, the agency may not destroy the firearm and shall sell the firearm to a licensed dealer. The proceeds of the sale must be deposited in the general fund of the governmental entity of which the agency is a part.

Section 6. Landlords and tenants -- no firearm prohibition allowed. A landlord or operator of a hotel or motel may not, by contract or otherwise, prevent a tenant or a guest of a tenant from possessing on the premises a firearm that it is legal for the tenant or guest to possess. A landlord or operator of a hotel or motel may prohibit the discharge of a firearm on the premises except in self-defense.

Full Bill:

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0228.htm

If they can issue permits, they can ban weapons. That's how they banned marijuana. Concealed carry permits are no different than gun registration, one of Adolph Hitler's favorite policies.

And look at the prohibition on carrying guns in the heartland of America!

Seems like the criminal legislators have this all figured out:


http://www.opencarry.org/opencarry.html


Wasn't Texas just talking about secession?

Ron Paul's Convention Speech

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I carry every day with ^ that as my permit. I am not a criminal, nor am I a threat. Those who would attempt to infringe upon MY RIGHT are however criminals. Also, I don't even think about it, its been so long ... lol.... is like wearing socks. It's a personal choice, to be "on the legal list" , or to make use of your RIGHT.

▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼▼
▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
John F. Kennedy

I went and got my concealed carry permit in NE a few months ago. Ever since, I've been painfully aware that if they start confiscating guns, the first addresses they'll hit are those which are listed on concealed carry permits. So act accordingly, whether or not you choose to have the permit.

As Andy Grove of Intel says, "Only the paranoid survive."

You should be paranoid or as any person in their right mind at least be cautious.

The battle between freedom and tyranny is constant. The State, as an entity, always wants more power. The only way it can gain more power is by taking liberty from the individual.

Arms ownership is power and the State wants to strip you of it or at least know where to extinguish it.

If you have just the one piece I would recommend not complying.

If you are known as a local gun nut, liberty loon, or constitutional trouble maker, it would probably be a good idea to have some trash pieces to surrender when prudent and others concealed off property. The best way to lie is to tell a different truth. The best way to hide the significant is to expose the trivial.