It’s amazing to me how some fervently “pro-gun” types do not appear to understand that five laws can do the same as one.
It all amounts to a de facto gun ban, because if you can’t carry through all these areas, you can’t carry if any of these areas happen to be along your route — which means you might as well leave it at home.
Loading...
That is the area off limits to FFLs, not concealed carry.
Loading...
What’s the difference? In both cases, the government has wedged licensure between the citizen and his rights, and in both cases, the government is using revocation of licenses (or refusal to issue) to disarm “law-abiding” citizens.
Loading...
It would force dealers out away from population centers, though the antis represent a majority of those opposed to “suburban sprawl”. It wouldn’t necessarily be the same dealers of course—some would go bankrupt, and then others would pop up outside the forbidden zones to take advantage of the opportunity niche. If the latter are banned, then the criminal element will move in and take advantage of the lucrative, government-enforced monopoly.
The fact that dealers will be farther from population centers means more automobile travel (antis also tend to be the CO2 police types)(I said “tend”– don’t get your panties in a bind).
When relocating the dealers does nothing to affect gun ownership rates (which is guaranteed) the antis will then shake their fingers of blame at “gun trafficking” and so on.
This is nothing but gun-owner harassment, and as such it will be supported by significant numbers of Obama-ites in much the same way that KKK members supported separate drinking fountains and whites-only restaurants. Antis don’t want to be “forced” to live near “those people” (members of the “gun culture”).
Notice also that when government gets control of a domain (a school, park, etc.) the freedom is pumped out of it like water from a swamp.
I can’t tell you how many peole have told me they’re going ahead and getting that EBR they’ve been think about, because the next election could change things against them. I believe I’ve heard it every day for weeks now. Ask any gun dealer who was around during the Clinton years– they’ll tell you that the Clintons were the best gun salespeople they ever had.
The next election could see the demise of some dealers, but it could be very positive for the others.
It’s amazing to me how some fervently “pro-gun” types do not appear to understand that five laws can do the same as one.
It all amounts to a de facto gun ban, because if you can’t carry through all these areas, you can’t carry if any of these areas happen to be along your route — which means you might as well leave it at home.
That is the area off limits to FFLs, not concealed carry.
What’s the difference? In both cases, the government has wedged licensure between the citizen and his rights, and in both cases, the government is using revocation of licenses (or refusal to issue) to disarm “law-abiding” citizens.
It would force dealers out away from population centers, though the antis represent a majority of those opposed to “suburban sprawl”. It wouldn’t necessarily be the same dealers of course—some would go bankrupt, and then others would pop up outside the forbidden zones to take advantage of the opportunity niche. If the latter are banned, then the criminal element will move in and take advantage of the lucrative, government-enforced monopoly.
The fact that dealers will be farther from population centers means more automobile travel (antis also tend to be the CO2 police types)(I said “tend”– don’t get your panties in a bind).
When relocating the dealers does nothing to affect gun ownership rates (which is guaranteed) the antis will then shake their fingers of blame at “gun trafficking” and so on.
This is nothing but gun-owner harassment, and as such it will be supported by significant numbers of Obama-ites in much the same way that KKK members supported separate drinking fountains and whites-only restaurants. Antis don’t want to be “forced” to live near “those people” (members of the “gun culture”).
Notice also that when government gets control of a domain (a school, park, etc.) the freedom is pumped out of it like water from a swamp.
I can’t tell you how many peole have told me they’re going ahead and getting that EBR they’ve been think about, because the next election could change things against them. I believe I’ve heard it every day for weeks now. Ask any gun dealer who was around during the Clinton years– they’ll tell you that the Clintons were the best gun salespeople they ever had.
The next election could see the demise of some dealers, but it could be very positive for the others.