Slashdot Mirror

And God help you if you tell them that you have a CCW and/or are carrying!

Missouri had the same thing happen. Businesses posted the required no firearms signs at about the time the law was passed. The result was that I stopped going to the Schnucks supermarket and changed pharmacies. I see the signs very rarely.

The penalty if caught only applies if you refuse to leave the premises:

Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions 1) to (17) of subsection 20 of this section by any individual who holds concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to this section shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises.

If you refuse to leave after being asked and the police are called, you will be fined $100. Second such offense in 6 months is $200 fine and suspension of permit. Third offense in 12 months is $500 fine and loss of permit for 3 years.

http://www.packing.org/state/missouri/#stateoff_li mits

#2 -- This is a good point. However, when it comes down to it, such places are still "soft targets" even if most adversaries (to date) have not targeted them as such. They still suffer the same fate. That dude who shot up Trolley Square in Salt Lake City a couple of months ago may not have speficially thought to himself, "Hmmm... I bet nobody *there* is armed. I'll go shoot up everyone!" However, the fact that nobody, save an off-duty cop, was armed made his job much easier.

If guns are legal to own, then they have absoloutely no right to fire him for buying, or intending to buy one.

This is Maryland we're talking about here. In terms of gun control laws, it might as well be Canada. In a state where the authorities are sympathetic to the RKBA, he might have a case. In Maryland, good luck even finding a lawyer who'd argue it.

Last I checked, in the US no one is depriving people of the means to defend themselves (a.k.a. "guns").

Check again. Here in Maryland, I need to provide documentation of several recent threats in order to be issued a concealed carry permit. No "documented evidence of recent threats and / or assaults, supported by police reports and / or notarized statements", no permit.

I'm all for making folks go through the proper training, checks, and procedures in order to carry, but this is fucking retarded. Basically, here in the Free State, you can't get a gun unless a crime has already been committed against you and you're already a victim. The "logic" involved here is incomprehensible.

Note that, of course, this mindless law has absolutely no affect on curbing the monstrous homocide rate in inner city Baltimore.

Actually no - 35 states issue concealed carry permits. Whether or not you agree with the idea, 70% of the union is not "a small number".

It ROCKS!

I usually carry my Kel-Tec P32, which has a Pocket Slipper Laser Aimer. Sits in the front pocket like a PCA or wallet. http://www.smartcarry.com/xsl.jpg

Guns And Laws

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

Nice, small gun

http://www.gunblast.com/KelTec_P3AT.htm and

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ga_handguns/keltec_0 92304/ Lifetime guarantee. .32 caliber, $250~ Slightly larger and more money: http://www.waltheramerica.com/firearms/ppks.cfm

Florida gun laws

http://www.packing.org/state/index.jsp/florida

If you know anyone with young children who need gun safety training http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/materials.asp

The official police academy book for gun laws in Florida http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/indexbook.shtml

The ethics of owning guns http://www.a-human-right.com/introduction.html

Florida's concealed carry permit office http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/index.htm l

FAQ http://www.guncite.com/index.html and http://gunscholar.com/

Purchase From Dealer

There is no license or permit required to purchase a firearm (rifle, shotgun or handgun) in the State of Florida. However, at the time of purchase an "instant background check" is performed by the dealer calling an 800 number that connects him to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). The FDLE operator uses the basic information about you provided by the dealer (name, address, birthdate, Social Security Number, etc.) to check the state and federal computers to determine whether or not you have a criminal record, domestic violence conviction or are subject to a restraining order. If you have a clean record, FDLE tells the dealer that you are Approved, and the sale takes place. If there is a problem with your record the dealer is told that you are Disapproved, and he may not sell you the firearm. Assuming that you are "approved", you may take a rifle or shotgun home immediately. In the case of a handgun, you must wait three days to take it out of the store, a so-called "cooling-off" period. If you are approved, the state distroys the record of the call for the instant background and the dealer keeps a written record, which is later checked by the ATF. From a dealer, the minimum age of a rifle or shotgun is 18; for a handgun it is 21. Persons holding a valid Florida Concealed Weapon License are exempt from the handgun waiting period. Persons holding a Florida Concealed Weapons License must have the Instant Background Check performed. Sale or Transfer Between Individuals

There are no formal requirements for the sale/transfer of a firearm between individuals. However, it is a crime for you to knowingly transfer a firearm to an underaged person, or to a person who you know to be otherwise disqualified (such as a person previously convicted of a felony). For private sales, the minimum age for a rifle, shotgun, or handgun is 18 and no waiting period or background check.

Special County Requirements

In accordance with a Constitutional Revision passed by the voters in November of 1998, any County within Flor

In well over half the United States, you can get a permit to legally carry a gun concealed. Thirty-five of the fifty. (see here for a list) Shall issue means unless they have some reason NOT to grant the permit (retardation, felony conviction, mental illness), the state shall issue it.

Shockingly enough! Chicago and DC, two cities that absolutely ban this practice, are always the top two on the list of murders in the US. You are not even legally allowed to own a hand gun in either place.

So yeah, if you want to carry a gun, and you're not crazy, mentally retarded, or a violent felon -- I say it is nobody else's goddamned business. Just don't carry it while drinking, and please remember the gun safety rules:

1. Always treat a gun as though it is loaded.

2. Do not point a gun at something you don't want dead or destroyed.

3. Finger OFF the trigger unless you are fully prepared to fire.

4. Be sure of your target -- what it is, what's in front of it, and what's behind it.

Guns, in and of themselves, are inanimate objects with deadly consequences. I'm not saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people" because that's not true. The bullet is the part that kills. ;)

In some states, owners of private property are allowed the choice of whether to forbid CCW holders from carrying in their buildings. This is done by posting signs on the entrance.

Thing is, in such areas, businesses that post suffer a higher crime rate than those that don't. The reason can be very simple. How many criminals are going to view the signs as anything other than 'Come on in, We're Unarmed, so we can't shoot back!'?

10 Stores that posted are robbed
New York residents place 'No guns in this House' signs, suffered robbery/burglury spree. Oh, and during a police strike in Albuquerque, armed citizens patrolled during police strike and felonies dropped sharply.
Criminals don't seem to mind No-Gun signs in Ohio
Lengthy article Texas's CCW laws, includes posting

A good reference for CCW and other gun laws in the USA
A collection of interesting statistics

Even if they could detect firearms, which I doubt, why would it matter? Nevada has extremely lax firearms regulations. I have never seen a hotel that had a posted policy against firearms; in fact I'm not even sure they can. Your hotel room is considered your residence and you have an inviolable right to have any kind of gun you like there.

-ccm

    Another excellent resource is http://packing.org

Personal:
Lawfully owned handgun and license to carry (http://www.packing.org/state/louisiana/) - there are some bad critters down there, and I'm not even talking about the two-legged bad-un's (which may also be a consideration).

Two pair sturdy broken-in workboots. High-Waders.

Heavy work pants, long-sleeve shirts, LOTS of dry socks.

Cot/Sleeping bag/etc.

GLOVES - 1 pair each, heavy leather and insulated rubber (at a min.) (Bring extra for locals in need if you can).

GROUP:

Appropriate Vehicle(s) "Pinzgauer", Unimog, "PTO Winch", "Amphibious", are *good* words in this context, as is "Diesel". "Zodiac" and "Airboat" are other words to conjure with. Ebay is our friend.

Chainsaws.

Gasoline. Chain Saw sharpening gear. Heavy brush cutters. LOTS of 2-3' crow bars...maybe 7-8 great big ones (the 6' "let's get serious about this" sort). Machetes - remember, they never run out of fuel. Cross cut saws, similarly, aren't real fuel-hogs.

Sleeper Vehicles. Old school buses convert quickly & nicely...again, see e-bay for cheap rides and sleeping quarters...can also be filled with supplies and converted to nappy-time space as supplies are off-loaded.

Tarps. Tents.

At least one person with a legitimate badge or similar mojo for "liason with ninnies". Should always ride in lead vehicle when entering/leaving area.

Well-defined and achievable mission. Signed contract w/ local business may prove useful.

Sufficient Water/Food for mission duration. Don't be a burden.

Step One: Go to http://packing.org/ and check the laws in your state. Find out if your destination honors a permit from your state.

Step Two: Apply for a handgun carry permit according to the laws of your state. Hopefully you're in a state where it'll be quick. In a lot of places it's 1-3 months, so look out.

Step Three: While you wait for that permit, do some research on handguns. Can't go wrong with a Glock, and they're cheap compared to lots of their alternatives. Get something in 9mm or .40. Get a cheap holster that holds the gun close to your body so you can wear an untucked shirt and not show off your gun. Get 200 rounds of full metal jacket and get to the range. Get 100 rounds of hollow points and make sure to fire a dozen through your gun so you know it's reliable.

Step Four: Get your permit and try not to tell anyone that you carry a weapon now. Be safe down there and try to stay out of situations that would call for using that thing. Live your life and help people.

Now that our side is dominant and impleneting it's policies (mostly rolling back socialism in favor of classical liberalism) it is now the Democratic party yelling STOP! in an attempt to preserve their gains.

Towards classical liberalism? Really?

Since when is a $1.2 TRILLION Medicare spending bill (passed by Dubya) something that a smaller government would do?

The idea that Bush is any fiscal conservative at all is a bunch of cracksmokery.

You clearly don't read enough of the Cato Institute which called him a "Progressive President" or The Economist magazine or Reason magazine where Bush's spending record is concerned. Oh, and Bush's "lean budget" this year? It's "like being the slimmest sumo wrestler in the ring."

Soaring yearly budget deficits approaching 5% of yearly GDP are not the work of any "classical liberal"; those deficits -- as the great (and *real* classical liberal) economist Milton Friedman once wrote of deficits decades ago -- are nothing more than a tax increase on future generations. 90% steel tarriffs (ruled illegal by the WTO) are certainly not the work of any free-trading classical liberal (although to his credit, CAFTA is admittedly a nice step).

The very notion that President Bush is returning us to a more classical liberal -- a.k.a. moderate libertarian -- society is almost completely intellectually-bankrupt, whether we are discussing economics (as we are in this thread) or social policy.

We've hit Bush's economic leg, and find he hasn't one to stand on. Clearly Bush has little in the way of classical liberal leanings there (his Social Security reform aside, although even there, his plan will effectively discredit the value of private investment by greatly restricting the basket of investments into which people may invest). What about his classical liberal views on social policy?

He doesn't have a leg to stand on there either.

The real classical liberals would not have attacked a foreign nation unprovoked (Iraq), although they certainly would've fought back against the 9/11 attackers (i.e., we would have gone to Afghanistan, as we actually did). Classical liberals believe in the value of privacy; Bush does not. Classical liberals (usually) support private gun ownership; Bush supported the Assault Weapons Ban even though even the anti-gun Violence Policy Center's own leader said the AWB was of little value (the re-enactment of the AWB thankfully died in Congress, no thanks to Bush). The classical liberals of today -- like Milton Friedman -- support the legalization, or at least decriminalization of illegal drugs; Bush, like any conservative, opposes it (thanks to Ronald Reagan's promotion of the so-failed-even-some-Republicans-admit-it-now "war on drugs").

As a final nail in his socially non-classical liberal policy: on free speech, classical liberals love freedom of speech -- they wrote the First Amendment after all! We would allow full, free, and unrestricted speech on our airwaves (with exceptions perhaps only for very-specific, very limited national security instances, e.g. disallowing the announcement of the procedures and launch codes for any of our nuclear missiles, though

Some thoughts on your thoughts

As another responder pointed out, most of the security rules are regarding the airport, not the airline. you *can* run an airline where people are allowed to carry guns, you just can't use the normal federally regulated airport, because guns are illegal there.

Of course the thought of voluntarily getting into a pressurized metal tube at high altitudes with a bunch of knowingly armed and self-righteous people tends to make people think of other airlines. and therefore a commercially bad move. same with stripped naked. ugly would go looking for pretty, who would know better than to show up there.

federal mandates on planes allow the airlines to discriminate (against people carrying guns, people on the do-not-fly list. for example) federal mandates allow the locking of the cockpit door, it was the pilots union that demanded it. If you congregate in the front of a plane, you are not breaking a federal law, you are breaking an airline rule.

BUT, that said, let's have a little word about federal regulations/mandates/laws and how they differ.

federal laws, mandates and regulations are slightly different things. worth checking on. remember the "real-id" act is a *mandate*, there is no requirement for the states to follow this *mandate* simply that the federal government will not recognize that state's ID as legit. they're not "forcing" the states to comply, (those of you who have had credit trouble might recognize this argument.)

federal safety *regulations*, (OSHA for example) are not there to protect you from something. they are there to make sure there is a well defined line between "my fault" and "your fault" that's all. If I did not wear a hard hat on a constructions site, I would be in violation of OSHA regulations, would I be arrested for it? no. the company I worked for would insist I wore one, because if I wore one they would not be liable in the case of my injury. Federal regulations about airports and airlines are the same. do this and you won't be liable for this kind of problem. If you don't follow these rules, so be it. on your own head be it. It is not against the law just to carry a gun on a plane. But, if the airline allows it, and something goes wrong, (anything, it not even be directly tied to the fact that you have a gun) the airline would be liable for everything. they did not conform to the rules. If the airline follows every rule, and something still goes wrong, they can say "not our fault!" and walk away.

----I have conferred with someone here, and I may be mistaken about the status of guns on planes being actual law, but I suspect there are conditions. also, the illegality of guns on planes has to do with interstate commerce laws, oddly enough... so if someone could substantiate this, I will happily retract the bits of the above diatribe that apply to guns.)----

rules about guns, knive, nailclippers, mean that already the popular misreading of the 2nd amendment doesn't apply, (and a bit of the 4th) and rules about making silly jokes mean that the 1st doesn't apply either. "no gathering at the front of the cabin" rule, that's the 1st again, so, does the constitution apply?

here are a few links that come up if you google (FAA regulations guns)
http://www.fletc.gov/artesia/travel.htm
http://www.akdart.com/gun1.html
http://www.packing.org/airlines
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel092601.sh tml
http://forums.officer.com/forums/archive/index.php /t-12995.html
and of course,
http://www.nationallampoon.com/nlbs/santa/xmas/faa .asp

It varies from state to state. In my state of Virginia, you don't need a permit or pass any test to own a handgun or open carry. However, to carry concealed, you must obtain a permit which requires proof that you've passed a basic handgun safety course, as well as a criminal background check. Proceedures for obtaining a conceal carry permit vary by city.

For more info, check out http://www.packing.org./

I logged out to post this, because I am an Anonymous Coward.

The Federal Aviation Administration does have a policy against traveling without ID. But it is not a secret law. It is not even a federal law. It is just a policy based on a memo by someone at the FAA. The 3 branches of government do not feel the need to correct the FAA, because so few people complain. CFRs are trumped-up administrative rules. Only USCs are laws, and there are no USCs requiring passengers to have photo IDs for domestic flights.

I know a little about governments and IDs.

The FAA policy reminds me of Florida Fish And Wildlife posting (everywhere) that it is illegal to carry a concealed gun in state parks. But the state attorney states that Fish And Wildlife has no statutory authority over guns and anyone with a conceal carry permit may carry in state parks.

I've had a similar problem with Walmart sporting goods managers telling me that it is against county law to sell ammo after 9 PM. It is not. It is just their store policy, but they want to use the excuse that it is a law.

The problem is not with the Federal government. The problem is with the general public. We need to have more people like John Gilmore. At a basic level, we're imposing this dictatorship on ourselves.

Perhaps we should start a petition to have the movie 1984 played on a TV network. Might wake up the sleeping public. Another step would be to have the Constitution and, at least, the first 10 Amendments printed on the back of our paper currency, not mystic, cryptic Masonic symbols.

But the US is hardly becoming a dictatorship. I consider this graphic as evidence of the health of our freedoms.
Got to love a government that trusts you to take a gun into a bank.
http://www.packing.org/state/index.jsp/all+united+ states

The reason that I voted for Bush/Republicans in 2004 is because Bush agrees the Second Amendment protects our individual right to own and carry guns.
http://www.nraila.org/images/Ashcroft.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm

I fail to see how an administration that supports the right to own weapons that can overthrow a government is the bogeyman of tyranny. For those that don't think that civilians with their "puny" guns could take down a hypothetical American dictatorship, consider that there are more than 240 million guns owned by 85 million civilians in the US.

The 2nd Amendment is the most liberal and radical law in history. http://www1.law.ucla.edu/~volokh/radical.htm

To really understand the tone of the 1st and 2nd, one should read the preamble to the 10 amendments. (Usually not taught in government schools, so most have never heard of it) "The conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."

The first phrase of the 2nd is a declarative. It was the style of writing legal documents in the late 1700's to include a preamble. The preamble states a purpose, not a limitation on the language in these government charters. The phrase "well regulated" means well-trained and well-equipped, in proper working order. Ex: "a well regulated clock." "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."

Interestingly, the Militia Act of 1792 was law until 1903 (updated by 10 USC). The Militia Act of 1792 stated "That each and every free able-bodied white ma

Carried "cocked and locked", much better than some sort of Rover.

http://packing.org/ for more info.

I find that most *adults* also fail to realize what the 2nd amendment actually states. I believe all amendments carry equally the same amount of weight and it's a damn shame that people don't really take ALL of them too heart, not just one or two of them.

http://www.packing.org/ has some really useful info on the 2nd amendment.

I'm quite liberal and I'm also a gun aficiando. Do you have any idea how many guns I have within 30 feet of me right now? LOL. Being a liberal and being a gun aficionado and defender of the 2a are not mutually exclusive. Conservatives do not have a monopoly on gun-lovers. Unfortunately I find all too often people who are quite passionate about one topic such as gun control or abortion suffer from some form of short-sighted dementia that prevents them from being able to comprehend any other major issue and balance their thoughts accordingly. I read Packing.org every so often. That site is a large collection of discussion boards related primarily to the issue of concealed carry of weapons and state that do or do not issue CCW permits. A lot of support for legislation brews there. It never ceases to amaze me how well the majority of the discussion board contributers on Packing.org can block out everything happening in this country or around the world that doesn't directly pertain to their guns or their gun rights. They picked one issue and made that their loan deciding factor for the elections. I know many people on those discussion boards personally and I'm always amazed when they unwittingly display their impenetrable mental block to anything outside of their little realm. The exact same thing can be said about those against abortion and a woman's right to choose. Up goes the mental block and out goes any ability to listen to any other side of the discussion. Rationality can not exist in that mental state. It's this inability to see the whole picture (or the forest through the trees as one might say) that truely frightens me.

You final question is an interesting one. I wish we had the answer to that question and all questions that may or may not lead up to your final question. Unfortunately we don't have the benefit of hindsight. We do however have minds of our own. We posess the ability to think and rationalize. Fortunately for us individuals can think much faster than any bureaucracy. We just have to make sure we aren't wearing blinders when some important happens, lest we miss it and make the wrong decision on incomplete information.

Kudos. Hey, I'm curious about something. Since you live in a state (OR) with a shall-issue CCW law, do you utilize it? I'm in one of the 4 states that still doesn't have any form of the law on the books.

BTW, I forgot to ask, since you have a compact firearm and given the fact that they are usually purchased for a specific reason, do you live in a state with a shall-issue or may-issue CCW law? If so, do you utilize it? It's likely you do live in such a state given the fact that all but 4 states have laws to that effect. I'm wondering how many fellow /.ers utilize those laws.

I think I'd really enjoy working at the PARC. I love exercising my brain and thinking of new things. The only down side is that it's in California. I'm not willing to become a homosexual Socialist for any job, and I won't live in a state that puts the rights of illegal immigrants and criminasl at or above the rights of regular citizens, just because someone thinks that the ``majority'' could stand to be knocked down a peg. That's not a real Democracy or Republic.

I'll enjoy seeing California busted up into North California and South California. It's really already divided that way anyway. How many times do you hear the term ``SoCal'' and think of some farmer up in North California who isn't able to shoot predators after his animals because of the way the rich Socialists packed into the SoCal cities spend their money?

New York State requires a license for simple possession as well as for concealed carry. The Court Of Appeals ruled that restrictions on carry licenses, while administrative in nature, are allowable. Premise licenses as well as carry licenses restricted for sporting purposes are near shall issue, although difficult to obtain in certain counties (and the City of New York). Unrestricted carry licenses are easy to obtain or near impossible, depending on which county you apply in.

The National Rifle Association's online store already carries X-Treme Accuracy Shooting, a sniper training game. "If you like guns, you will love this game." For sex and gun freaks, they have Kill It and Grill It, with a cover showing women in sexy tops carrying big guns. For those who like to shoot while drinking, or drink while shooting, there's the NRA hip flask. So the NRA's already pushing violence, sex, and booze. They make GTA look like small-timers.

And, of course, one of the best selling games of all time continues to be Deer Hunter, now with "ultra realistic environments", "accurate animal behavior" and "addictive gameplay".

So if you're in the game industry and getting flak from "family" groups, give them a tour of the gun nut world and see what they have to say about that.

Secondly, there is the invasion of privacy. I really could care less if anyone read all my email or searched my computer. There's nothing incriminating.

Ahh, correction bub. There's nothing incriminating, yet. They'll think of something. If you're reading Al-Jazeera, for example, then perhaps you're conspiring with terrorists. Or perhaps they don't particularily like some radio show you've downloaded and are sharing on a p2p app. Or perhaps you have "subversive" tendancies because you read "subversive" web content, such as slashdot?

First, you pass the privacy laws so you can spy on everyone, then you begin persecuting the most extreme first, then begin persecuting the less and less extreme while justifying it more and more. Perhaps it's in my interest to see violent drug merchants and suicide bombers go to prison, but it certainly isn't in my interest to see protestors go to jail, or coworkers. But those protestors are just as bad as the drug cartel or mafia, because of some likeness I have yet to hear of.

How do I know it's going this way? Started with islamic militants, moved onto US citizens with ties to said islamic militants, then moved to drug merchants and prostitutes, and now we've got wiretaps on people who go to and organize peaceful protests and the police ontop of buildings taking pictures of said protestors. Next stage seems to be shutting down websites such as indymedia's, among others, confiscating our weapons, with probably a crapton of voting fraud and probably rioting to go with it. But that last part is just my prediction.

North Dakota looks kinda cool!

I like North Dakota. I drove through it once. :)

This very thing is a critical premise behind the effectiveness of the concealed carry of firearms which is legal in all but . Studies based on interviews with convicted felons both in and out of prison have shown that criminals are more concerned with encountering an armed civilian than they are encounting an on-duty police officer. That fear of trying to rob the wrong person (an armed person) keeps the crime rate in shall-issue states noticeably lower than what their average should be. My state, Kansas, had the 32 highest population in 2000 and yet ranked the 19th highest total crime index (TCI or crime rate) in the country. That's right, little old Kansas. Land of Oz, wheatfields, large flat plains, and cattle ranchers. And we have a crime rate significantly above average per populus. Those numbers are hard to beat.

You don't have to own and carry a firearm in a state that does issue concealed carry permits. You do however benefit from those that do utilize their permits whether you realize it or not. The criminal doesn't know if you are one of the citizens licensed to defend themselves effectively or not. (unless your home town newspaper editor and sheriff thinks they'll rock the boat by publishing the names of all licensed citizens in their area; this has happened before).

It's more of the typical crap Phill Kline (our AG) tries to pull off. I swear he's the Ashcroft of Kansas. Kline tends to pull a lot of this kind of crap. While I agree that it's pretty shitty of the RIAA to give out the misc crap it can't pay people to take, I do think it's definitely censorship to keep libraries from archiving it. If they want to either a) verify a person's age before listening to said material or b) have the child's parents sign a consent form to permit their child to listen to said material then I'd approve of that tactic. I do not however think that an adult should be kept from listening to something a library archives no matter what Phill thinks is profane. What is it about state's in the damned bible belt. First our state's Board of Education elects to omit evolution from our state's curriculum Then Kline gets off on a censorship rant. What's next? No Sunday liquor sales? Oh wait... We don't honor the separation of church and state in Kansas. No uniform Sunday liquor sale laws in Kansas. Oh, and our lovely governess also vetoed our most recent attempt at getting concealed carry legalized in Kansas. Kansas is one of 4 states (out of 50 in case you didn't already know) that doesn't permit concealed carry. 46 states do permit concealed carry. I swear, this state has issues. This writeup was pretty good.

The exceptions seem to be the most heavily populated areas. Chicago, New york and the like.

New York State has relatively easily obtained "may issue" CHL, except in New York City and the surrounding counties where for some reason only celebrities and other rich white people can obtain a permit.

For all your CHL questions, see http://www.packing.org/

Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Packing for Concealed Carry (CCW)

see this for US gun laws...

Take a few examples - murders, and violent crime. Each is per 100,000 citizens for the year 2002. "Violent crime" is defined as murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

[States with relaxed concealed carry laws]:
Florida: 5.5, 770.2
Texas: 6.0, 578.6
Virginia 5.3, 291.4
Washington 3.0, 345.4

[most strict gun laws in the nation - impossible or nearly impossible for lawful citizens to get a permit]:
District of Columbia: 46.2, 1632.9
Illinois: 7.5, 620.7
Maryland: 9.4, 769.8

Yeah yeah I know there's lies, damn lies, and statistics. Read my references below and draw your own conclusions. There are other states with far lower crime rates, but they usually have tiny populations spread out over large areas (ex: Alaska, North Dakota). I tried to keep to states with at least some decent size metropolitan areas.

I used to live in D.C. and those numbers *feel* accurate in certain parts of town.

References, since someone always wants them in these discussions:

Concealed carry laws for each state

FBI Uniform Crime reports

Enjoy :)

CCW laws typically require a written and field (range) test so its not like you have a bunch of untrained idiots running around armed to the teeth.

Bzzzt. In states (like California) where the State Governments don't want armed populations but can't outright stop them, they'll throw up roadblocks in the CCW process so that more permits can be stopped. In California and in NYC, you must demonstrate that you need a firearm before you can own one. In Washington D.C., you can own one, but it must either be locked or disassembled to be legal. You can't carry it around at all.

In Vermont, you don't need a permit to carry a concealed firearm. Dig this site to find out more, unless you're using Symantec's program, in which case you'll have to figure out for yourself how to look it up.

Carrying concealed is allowed in select states in the United States, provided an individual goes through a licensing process that is renewed every few years. Very irritating that we have to ask the Leviathan Government permission to defend ourselves, but a minor nit compared with some of the grosser violations of our freedoms that are more important to roll back.

You can get 150 rounds of .50 BMG tracers sent to your house for $199 from right here, they're not any more restricted in most of the USA than any other ammo. I don't know why you would think they would be more of a problem to check on a plane than any other ammo. For info on firearms and ammo in checked baggage look here.

See also Packing.org for concealed carry (CCW) laws in the US, state-by-state.

Get her a nice carry weapon and the courses on how to use it. Once she's passed the course, depending on the state laws, a concealed carry permit would complement it off nicely.

Of course this assumes that she's sane, not prone to outbursts of temper, is responsible, and has vast respect for human life. Otherwise this would be the worst possible thing to give her.

I don't think that's a solution. As a law abiding citizen I'd only carry a gun if I was going to kill someone, all my friends have the same belief.

I misplace my cellular phone all the time, if I carried a gun I'd probably ending up misplacing that a lot too. I don't wake up in the morning expecting to kill someone, even in self-defence, hence I never carry weapons.

When someone robs you, it tends to happen at an inconvenient time. If I had a lethal weapon built into my brain or something then maybe I'd use it at that time, but then when I go to a bar, get totally drunk and shoot someone as a joke, I mean that's not something I want to do. I cannot guarantee that I won't do that when I'm drunk, I don't think anyone can and thus guns are bad.

If I walked into a bar and even suspected anyone in there who might be drunk might have a gun even for self-defence, I'd walk straight out and go to another bar.

The difficult choice is what do do when having a couple of drinks with dinner...

Obligatory URL's Geeks with Guns and Packing.org

For info on concealed carry laws, you should check out Packing.org. Here's the Vermont-specific section.

For info on concealed carry laws, you should check out Packing.org. Here's the Vermont-specific section.

In some states and counties one can openly carry a loaded firearm. In addition there is always the option of a concealed carry permit in 31 states. Sure interstate traveling can be a bear and there are a lot of nitpicking rules pushed by anti-gun zealots but it can be done.

For those seriously considering carrying a sidearm in Nevada, I'd highly suggest checking out www.packing.org for information about obtaining a permit to legally carry. Stay safe. Damiano

Many people have suggested that there was a failure in airport security which allowed the terrorists to get onboard the plane... this is not necessarily the case. It appears at this point that the terrorists used knives and "box cutters" to take over the planes. If under 4 inches the knives would have easily (and legally) passed the checkpoints without question. As small as box cutters are (essentially razor blades with handles), they would also be considered fine for flight by security checkpoints. In this case, there *was* no failure in airport security.

As for longer blades, I found an interesting discussion on airport knife policies, and the ease of sneaking knives longer than 4" here.

If a person wishes to have a weapon onboard an airplane, there are any number of legal or undetectable ways to carry on, construct, or even fake one. No number of regulations can prevent this... there can only be adequate security measures onboard the plane to deal with such problems.

~Giddeon

I am starting to think that gun supporters just MAKE UP THE STATS AS THEY GO ALONG.

Funny, that's what we say about you anti-freedom people.

Give us a bit of proof, eh guys?

I don't have proof, but here are statistics. That page claims to summarize official FBI data into a human-readable format.

A highlight:

"Since adopting CCW (1987), Florida's homicide rate has fallen 21% while the U.S. rate has risen 12%. From start-up 10/1/87 - 2/28/94 (over 6 years) Florida issued 204,108 permits; only 17 (0.008%) were revoked because permittees later committed crimes (not necessarily violent) in which guns were present (not necessarily used)."

You can slice and dice the statistics any way you want to, looking for support of a particular opinion, but you can't get around one thing: Florida's easy access to concealed weapons just hasn't turned the state into an Old West bloodbath. Heck, in Vermont you don't even need a permit: stick a gun in your pants and walk around if you like. Can't find the stats, but Vermont sure isn't known for its crime rate, at least as far as I know.

Now this will really drive you nuts: 31 states have "shall-issue CCW laws. Thirty-one. That's most of them. And many of those states joined the club in the last few years. Like it or not, the trend is towards more personal freedom in this regard.

Ultimately, statistics don't matter. You guys would still want all the guns gone even if there were unimpeachable studies showing their benefits... and we gun nuts would want to keep them even if it was revealed that guns walked around by themselves at night and shot people. It's a deep philosophical difference rooted in concepts of self-reliance and style of government, and number's ain't gonna do nuthin' but give us something to put in posts like this one.

Oh, by the way, nyah nyah, you guys suck, cold dead hands, I'm carrying a gun right now, etc.

• TRS-80 & Tandy Color Computer Homepage
• Concealed Carry (CCW) Database: Home
• The Weather Channel - Cedar Rapids, IA (52404)