Arizona's concealed-weapon law takes effect

[slim 1,528]

why thank you captain obvious, from a special interest group that is nearly broke.

People who live 5 miles from their neighbors are very seldom victimized in crimes that would require being armed to repel. It's exactly the folks who live in urban areas that need to be armed.

The Brady campaign has always insisted that more guns = more crime, and that's never been the case. Ever. They lose again.

It's wild wild west all over again. In this tough time, this sort of tough man rules and regulations are going to become more and more prevalent. With the rate at which Americans are becoming illiterate and undereducated coupled with lots of gun on everyone, someday America will become United State of Congo. AK47 for everyone.

We can only hope everyone gets an AK-47. The difference is in Congo not everyone can get one. Here in the U.S., everyone can.

The victims here are those of us who have never, ever held a gun or needed a gun. Soon we'll be infested with those who have gone. They'll be able to shoot anyone they want to protect their whores, drugs, etc. Meanwhile, we'll give our blood for their fancies.

You're obviously not familiar with violent crime. The largest group of "victims" is those you've named above, the illiterate and undereducted and more often than not, they're criminals.

But don't worry. 100 years after we have shed the blood for these gun freaks' entertainment, they'll enact monuments for us. And everything will be all right.

Have you been talking to Mr. Rourke and Tattoo? Because I swear you're on fantasy island!

One would think that as we become more and more civilised, we'd need less and less firearms. But that's not true. Or maybe we're not becoming more civilised but more warmongering.

Firearms are the only thing that guarantee civilization in the modern world.

No there is going to be peace and harmony. Something clearly reflected by the US having some of the highest crime rates in the developed world.

The UK has a higher crime rate than the US. They don't have guns though so how could that be possible?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Armed against the government?

I'm sure some 21 year old, thinking about getting drunk and laid is going to do real well against a military team in a fully laden blackhawk with his concealed carry popgun.

Typical idealistic hyperbole from Paul. He's like the Anti-Steve (sorry Steve)

[slim 1,528]

I'm sure some 21 year old, thinking about getting drunk and laid is going to do real well against a military team in a fully laden blackhawk with his concealed carry popgun.

I'm sure a military team in a fully laden blackhawk is going to come after a 21 year old thinking about getting drunk and laid.

[HAL 9000 96]

Well I for one can't wait for CCW here in Chicago.

My permit is going in soon. Then I can listen to my rap music down on Cottage Grove while packing some real heat.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Gun rights have nothing to do with being more civilized. Gun rights are so the people can be armed against the government. Many seem to forget this.

That is a very naive and partisan interpretation of it.

Edited July 29, 2010 by Rob & Mel

[HAL 9000 96]

Or just paranoid. That speaks volumes to the idea of having real mental testing before gun ownership is allowed.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sure a military team in a fully laden blackhawk is going to come after a 21 year old thinking about getting drunk and laid.

Substitute anyone with a concealed carry license. You'll be outgunned by the military everytime.

Taking arms against the government has nothing to do with concealed carry laws.

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

I'm sure a military team in a fully laden blackhawk is going to come after a 21 year old thinking about getting drunk and laid.

probably because there's gonna be a tax on that!

[HAL 9000 96]

Substitute anyone with a concealed carry license. You'll be outgunned by the military everytime.

Taking arms against the government has nothing to do with concealed carry laws.

Wrong. Because it won't be only one paranoid freak- it will be many. Just like during those paintball scenarios. You know what I'm talking about.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The UK has a higher crime rate than the US. They don't have guns though so how could that be possible?

I call BS on this statement.

[natty bumppo 297]

probably because there's gonna be a tax on that!

a sin tax?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

If people wanted to overthrow the US government, they would avoid targeting the military. In fact they would avoid targeting the government.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I call BS on this statement.

You can shut him up with evidence. Been down this route with Slim. He believes his statement is one ot fact and that no evidence is required.

[slim 1,528]

Well I for one can't wait for CCW here in Chicago.

My permit is going in soon. Then I can listen to my rap music down on Cottage Grove while packing some real heat.

What are your laws for carrying AK-47s and shotties and that sort of thing?

Are you guys still banned from owning "assault weapons" and high-cap mags, etc.? Can you possess in your home and/or car? How about open carry?

I know this is all relatively new, but I would assume as long as you have a valid FOID card you could have an AK in your trunk or shotty slung over your shoulder. F'k CCW, a 12ga. pump is packing real heat!

That is a very naive and partisan interpretation of it.

Or a literal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

Substitute anyone with a concealed carry license. You'll be outgunned by the military everytime.

Taking arms against the government has nothing to do with concealed carry laws.

Why would the military ever "come to get someone" with a CCW?

Your second statement is starting to look like coherent thought. Way to go! You're getting this whole posting with facts thing down!

I call BS on this statement.

Look it up.

If people wanted to overthrow the US government, they would avoid targeting the military. In fact they would avoid targeting the government.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

You don't fight the government by fighting the government. You fight it by changing the will of the people.

You can shut him up with evidence. Been down this route with Slim. He believes his statement is one ot fact and that no evidence is required.

Sure, you can shut me up with evidence. However, I require you to post your own evidence. When I post fact, I don't worry about posting links to evidence because I could care less whether you believe me or not - it's a fact.

If you post evidence I'll not only shut up, I'll actually say I'm wrong!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So the idea of needing a gun to overthrow a tyrannical government, would not involve some sort of armed confrontation with the military?

How does a government become tyrannical without the support of the military?

yeah yeah yeah Slim. Fact fact fact.

Rubbish.