Change my mind

[avg guy]

I am interested in starting some thought provoking debates, and invite anyone to start their own. Yes I am using Steven Crowders term. Anyone starting their own and any other I will start, should have the title of "Change my mind-(insert topic here). Lets see where this can go. Lets not get nasty but try to use facts!

To start I will make the statement; Change my mind - We should be aloud to conceal carry.

To keep it short, a license to do so would need to be issued after a course taken and a couple of years of practice of black badge events.
For those who do not know what "black badge events" means; When you have a black badge you are certified to practice police combat shooting, ipsc shooting (fast accurate shooting on specific targets, sometimes slightly blocked with no shoot zones) etc.

Thoughts?

 

[oldjones]

I am interested in starting some thought provoking debates, and invite anyone to start their own. Yes I am using Steven Crowders term. Anyone starting their own and any other I will start, should have the title of "Change my mind-(insert topic here). Lets see where this can go. Lets not get nasty but try to use facts!

To start I will make the statement; Change my mind - We should be aloud to conceal carry.

To keep it short, a license to do so would need to be issued after a course taken and a couple of years of practice of black badge events.
For those who do not know what "black badge events" means; When you have a black badge you are certified to practice police combat shooting, ipsc shooting (fast accurate shooting on specific targets, sometimes slightly blocked with no shoot zones) etc.

Thoughts?

Sounds good. However, only full-sized rifles and shotguns should be permitted concealed since there is no useful purpose served by ordinary citizens carrying hidden deadly weapons. The last thing any rational person wants is someone suddenly surprising the rest of us with a gun. And no one responsible would ever do that unless they fully intended, and were prepared to use it. On those other people. But if you want to conceal your gun — long gun — on your body, on the way to the range, deer-stand or duck-blind (and if you have have the license etc.) by all means.

Anyone tasked and trusted with carrying a handgun intended to enforce public safety, should be carrying it openly, with distinctive clothing to alert the public. And with all the licensing and training you describe. The number of warranted security officers with a real need to operate undercover is minuscule. Anyone else carrying concealed is an unknown and deadly danger to society. Exactly the sort of thing we invented governments to prevent and protect us from.

Establish that anyone 'needs' handguns, hidden or otherwise, then it'll be useful to debate how permissive the carrying regulations should be. Meantime I'm content they're Restricted Weapons.

 

[Jasmine Raine]

No thanks. I have a hard enough time with cops and crooks having guns. I don't need my ex or some of my neighbours having a gun. They may seem innocent enough but behind closed doors, they are not and the last thing they should be having is a way to kill someone.

 

[avg guy]

"Anyone tasked and trusted with carrying a handgun intended to enforce public safety, should be carrying it openly, with distinctive clothing to alert the public."

I think this is a good point. My mind is partially changed.

"...the last thing they should be having is a way to kill someone."

Unfortunately if some one has the intent to do harm, they will do so with or without a firearm.

 

[Ceiling Cat]

I am weapons trained for over 25 years, I regularly shoot at gun ranges and follow all current laws regarding long guns and pistols. I agree with current laws and do not think there should be any changes, the laws should even be tighter. I do not agree with concealed carry for Canada for private citizens. The vast majority of gun owners that hunt and go to the shooting range are law abiding citizens. The vast majority of gun crime are done by criminals with illegal unregistered guns.

Even with the current tough gun laws in Canada there have been shootings with legally obtained firearms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawson_College_shooting

 

[hamermill]

Op you must belong to an interesting club. Black badge holders at the clubs I belong to allows me to shoot at Black Badge and PPC events, and being IDPA certify allows me to shoot in a conceal carry manner. In fact I had to be IPDA certified before I could shoot at those events. But hey every club is different.

To all you anti gun people more people are killed by doctors. More people are killed by motor vehicle collisions.

Banning guns will not take guns out of the hands of criminals. They broke the law the get them.

TPS recently had a buy back for guns; law abiding citizens who turned them in were laughing all the way to the bank because they handed in worthless pieces.

Troll responded to - flame away

 

[JaimeWolf]

Op you must belong to an interesting club. Black badge holders at the clubs I belong to allows me to shoot at Black Badge and PPC events, and being IDPA certify allows me to shoot in a conceal carry manner. In fact I had to be IPDA certified before I could shoot at those events. But hey every club is different.

To all you anti gun people more people are killed by doctors. More people are killed by motor vehicle collisions.

Banning guns will not take guns out of the hands of criminals. They broke the law the get them.

TPS recently had a buy back for guns; law abiding citizens who turned them in were laughing all the way to the bank because they handed in worthless pieces.

Troll responded to - flame away

By this logic there should be no license or permit required for law-abiding citizens to own and carry firearms... like in Bernie Sanders' home state

 

[Robert Mugabe]

I am interested in starting some thought provoking debates, and invite anyone to start their own. Yes I am using Steven Crowders term. Anyone starting their own and any other I will start, should have the title of "Change my mind-(insert topic here). Lets see where this can go. Lets not get nasty but try to use facts!

To start I will make the statement; Change my mind - We should be aloud to conceal carry.

To keep it short, a license to do so would need to be issued after a course taken and a couple of years of practice of black badge events.
For those who do not know what "black badge events" means; When you have a black badge you are certified to practice police combat shooting, ipsc shooting (fast accurate shooting on specific targets, sometimes slightly blocked with no shoot zones) etc.

Thoughts?

why don't you simply move south of the border?sounds like that would be your spiritual home.

 

[avg guy]

why don't you simply move south of the border?sounds like that would be your spiritual home.

South of the border is not as free gun totting as you make it sound. In fact there are many states that have much more strict gun laws than we do here, but their violent crime rates (with guns) are very much higher than here. I started this thread to provoke debate and thoughts, not to ask someone to move away from their home because they have a different view on a topic and is willing to discuss it.

Oldjones made a point if carrying was aloud, it should be identifiable on that person. I like that point. Our service people do it, as do armed security (think brinks trucks) and when a citizen is carrying a large knife like a bowie knife (currently aloud here) it has to be in a holster and visible.

Hammermill is correct in saying "Banning guns will not take guns out of the hands of criminals." It is an unfortunate truth. If banning guns here is a guarantee that the bad guys will not ever have them, I would give up fire firearms and give up the sport.

I may be showing my age here a little, but when I was a kid, I would talk to some neighbors who were seniors at the time and they would talk about how a side arm would be worn in Toronto and the violent crime was nothing to what it was today. Or at least what it was decades ago when this conversation was had. It is worse present today. Side arms were more a fashion statement at the time I was told.

 

[Robert Mugabe]

South of the border is not as free gun totting as you make it sound. In fact there are many states that have much more strict gun laws than we do here, but their violent crime rates (with guns) are very much higher than here. I started this thread to provoke debate and thoughts, not to ask someone to move away from their home because they have a different view on a topic and is willing to discuss it.

Oldjones made a point if carrying was aloud, it should be identifiable on that person. I like that point. Our service people do it, as do armed security (think brinks trucks) and when a citizen is carrying a large knife like a bowie knife (currently aloud here) it has to be in a holster and visible.

Hammermill is correct in saying "Banning guns will not take guns out of the hands of criminals." It is an unfortunate truth. If banning guns here is a guarantee that the bad guys will not ever have them, I would give up fire firearms and give up the sport.

I may be showing my age here a little, but when I was a kid, I would talk to some neighbors who were seniors at the time and they would talk about how a side arm would be worn in Toronto and the violent crime was nothing to what it was today. Or at least what it was decades ago when this conversation was had. It is worse present today. Side arms were more a fashion statement at the time I was told.

Not sure what golden decade you are talking about. other than one in your wistful old west imagination. I was around back in the 70s and pistol packin wasn't a thing. Didn't ride the subway or street car and notice suspicious bulges under people's coats. Didn't actually see any hostered bowie knives on Yonge Street either. Banning guns has never been tried here. much less in the U.S.The idea that common inept civilians deserve guns is the biggest scam going. We don't deserve guns. Back in the day, in the U.K. criminals didn't traditionally use guns, because it would automatically get you triple the sentence if you got caught. Cops didn't use guns because it was a kind of gentlemen's agreement that they wouldn't be used, if neither side had them. The fact that mass shootings are pretty much a weekly occurrence in the gun loving States, and the only solution offered is to have more guns for the good guys kind of illustrates the problem.What the fuck does anyone need a holstered bowie knife for anyway?

 

[avg guy]

"Not sure what golden decade you are talking about."
Sorry I wasn't clear with the timeline. I was told stories of the turn of the century from 1800's to the 1900's, not the 60', 70's or up.

"The idea that common inept civilians deserve guns is the biggest scam going." - The idea that anyone and everyone deserves or has a "right" to carry is not what I said. I would think (at least hope) the individual would need to have training and pass practical courses before having a permit to carry. No where did I mention that anyone and everyone should have the right to carry.

" Back in the day, in the U.K. criminals didn't traditionally use guns, because it would automatically get you triple the sentence if you got caught." - Has this changed, other than cops started to carry? (Sincere question)

Last thought from me on this thread.
If you were having a meal in a restaurant and some one comes in starting to shoot the place up; would you rather be helpless hoping to be unnoticed while taking cover, or would you rather have a tool of defense (fire arm) to do something and hopefully saving some lives? If not you because you are not comfortable with fire arms but some one.?.
I would chose the latter, which is no surprise. I know a lot of people would state that they would rather take cover....until you are found in that situation. The police are almost never on site when horrible things go down. The damage that can happen until they arrive can be enormous. Why is it wrong for citizens to assist when they can, until our men and women in blue make it to the scene?

 

[Grimnul]

So here’s my thing, and I’ve brought this up before: ordinary citizens, even if they’re trained to use a gun, are not soldiers or policemen. They may be able to hit targets on a range, but imagine a crime is actually happening and they need to be able to use their gun. In a one on one situation, maybe, but imagine a mass shooting. It’s dark, you don’t know where the shooter is, people are running around, screaming, dying, you have tunnel vision from adrenaline... and you’re gonna pull out your gun and stop the shooter? No, you’re going to shit your pants, draw your gun, shoot maybe in the sort of general direction you think the shooter might be, possibly hit innocent people in the chaos, and be a hindrance when the police show up because now there are two shooters instead on one, and they don’t necessarily know who’s the “good guy” and who’s the bad guy.

Real life is not a movie. You are not Bruce Willis. Leave the hero stuff to the professionals, you’ll just make things worse.

 

[Timbit]

Yup, because private citizens having guns is such a good idea (sarcasm, in case you didn't know). Look at the States - how many gun deaths per capita vs. the rest of the world. Nope, not a good idea. People with guns kill people. Simple. As for the very specious argument that more people are killed by doctors than die by gun, what difference does that make? Using that logic, then doctors should stop trying to help people because some patients may die. How does your comment even fit in to this conversation? - talk about a red herring. And if you really were interested in facts, you'd probably know that suicide and other gun-related deaths (accidents, etc.) are under-reported vis-a-vis "shooting deaths". God knows how many deaths in the US are attributable to gun violence.

Keep guns where they belong - in the US of A.

Timbit