Inspired by Atreus: The Next Gun thread starts now, with this map:

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
irishScott

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Rtc.gif


Not that us pro-gun people should get complacent, but it looks like things are generally heading in the right direction. :)
 
irishScott

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Moved

Fern
Super Moderator

wrong forum, meant p&n. Please switch
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JulesMaximus

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,572
971
126
Right to carry in California? BWAHAHAHA!!!

If you carry around here you can expect to get hassled by the cops at the very least. You can expect to be arrested at the very worst.
 
GasX

GasX

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
29,033
6
81
JulesMaximus said:
Right to carry in California? BWAHAHAHA!!!

If you carry around here you can expect to get hassled by the cops at the very least. You can expect to be arrested at the very worst.
Click to expand...

I believe you can open carry an unloaded gun.
 
D

DisgruntledVirus

Lifer
Dec 26, 2007
11,782
2
76
Personally, I think a federal CCW law would be beneficial. Non of the reciprocity bs, everywhere has the same laws then (well they all have the same baseline at least).
 
M

Minjin

Platinum Member
Jan 18, 2003
2,208
1
81
Interesting graphic. All in all, I think gun rights are starting to come back. I didn't realize we had come so far. A graphic like that but for castle doctrine would be interesting. That's one thing we're working on here in PA.

If I were to complain about anything it would be the need for background checks every time. I fully understand the need and I support it. I just find it annoying because it really puts a damper on buying and selling guns as your interest changes. Guns in general hold their value, which means that it doesn't cost all that much to get into. Buy a decent gun used and in a few years when you grow tired of it, you can generally sell it for the same cost. You can't say that about tech items or many hobbies. The problem is that the background check at FFLs costs $25 on the low end and up to $75 on the upper end. If you're buying or selling a $1000 gun, it's not that big of a deal. But when you are transferring cheap guns or even $60 AR15 lower receivers, it's a real pain. So, if I were to complain about anything, it's that the process isn't cheaper. It only costs the FFLs two dollars. Other than that, I'd say we're doing good.
 
Pegun

Pegun

Golden Member
Jan 18, 2004
1,334
0
71
Definitely moving in the right direction. I'm still really disappointed that 3 votes prevented an all states carry law from passing.
 
S

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Iowa just turned into a shall issue state a few days ago. Signed into law. There has been really strong efforts to restore freedom and a basic right in most states over the last 15-20 years.
 
Kirby

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Minjin said:
Interesting graphic. All in all, I think gun rights are starting to come back. I didn't realize we had come so far. A graphic like that but for castle doctrine would be interesting. That's one thing we're working on here in PA.

If I were to complain about anything it would be the need for background checks every time. I fully understand the need and I support it. I just find it annoying because it really puts a damper on buying and selling guns as your interest changes. Guns in general hold their value, which means that it doesn't cost all that much to get into. Buy a decent gun used and in a few years when you grow tired of it, you can generally sell it for the same cost. You can't say that about tech items or many hobbies. The problem is that the background check at FFLs costs $25 on the low end and up to $75 on the upper end. If you're buying or selling a $1000 gun, it's not that big of a deal. But when you are transferring cheap guns or even $60 AR15 lower receivers, it's a real pain. So, if I were to complain about anything, it's that the process isn't cheaper. It only costs the FFLs two dollars. Other than that, I'd say we're doing good.
Click to expand...

no background check required for private sale in my state. :cool: guns get shuffled through my family pretty often.
 
M

Minjin

Platinum Member
Jan 18, 2003
2,208
1
81
Pegun said:
Definitely moving in the right direction. I'm still really disappointed that 3 votes prevented an all states carry law from passing.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about on the federal level? I don't have a problem with states being the ones to decide things. That's the whole point of the system, IMHO. Let each state decide on issues that are relevant to that area and collection of people. If you don't like it, it is easy to rally against it IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT, and if that fails, leave the state for another state. People keep wanting to homogenize the states but I don't think that is what was originally intended nor do I think it would be a good thing. I like that every state has it's own character as long as they stay withing the bounds of the constitution. And since the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to the states except for what has been pigeonholed by the Supreme Court into the 14th, they have a right to restrict gun use and ownership.

Of course, if the Supreme Court pigeonholes the 2nd amendment in, that will really change things.
 
nick1985

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Living in IL FTL, altough the retarded handhun ban in Chicago is about to get overturned by the SCOTUS. Great news.

Also, our future governor Bill Brady said he wants CCW here in IL. More great news.
 
SphinxnihpS

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
You have a legal right to carry arm open or concealed in every state in the country.

The whole map should be green.
 
SphinxnihpS

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
Minjin said:
Are you talking about on the federal level? I don't have a problem with states being the ones to decide things. That's the whole point of the system, IMHO. Let each state decide on issues that are relevant to that area and collection of people. If you don't like it, it is easy to rally against it IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT, and if that fails, leave the state for another state. People keep wanting to homogenize the states but I don't think that is what was originally intended nor do I think it would be a good thing. I like that every state has it's own character as long as they stay withing the bounds of the constitution. And since the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to the states except for what has been pigeonholed by the Supreme Court into the 14th, they have a right to restrict gun use and ownership.

Of course, if the Supreme Court pigeonholes the 2nd amendment in, that will really change things.
Click to expand...

You are correct except for the things which are guaranteed in every state by the US Constitution, 2nd of which is the freedom to keep and bear arms.
 
nick1985

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Minjin said:
Are you talking about on the federal level? I don't have a problem with states being the ones to decide things. That's the whole point of the system, IMHO. Let each state decide on issues that are relevant to that area and collection of people. If you don't like it, it is easy to rally against it IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT, and if that fails, leave the state for another state. People keep wanting to homogenize the states but I don't think that is what was originally intended nor do I think it would be a good thing. I like that every state has it's own character as long as they stay withing the bounds of the constitution. And since the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to the states except for what has been pigeonholed by the Supreme Court into the 14th, they have a right to restrict gun use and ownership.

Of course, if the Supreme Court pigeonholes the 2nd amendment in, that will really change things.
Click to expand...

huh?

Federal Law > State Law.


Shall not be infringed.
 
K

Kelvrick

Lifer
Feb 14, 2001
18,422
5
81
There is constantly a fight for 2a in California. I'm guessing the same in Indiana and New York as well.

McDonald is going to be a ruling with huge implications once it comes out. Hopefully it comes out on the same side Heller did.
 
KB

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,406
389
126
I am glad to see states are coming to our side. And can you believe it, crime is going down, not up. The idea that the country will become like the wild west is absolutely debunked.
Damn MD is still stuck in May (Will Not) Issue.
 
M

Minjin

Platinum Member
Jan 18, 2003
2,208
1
81
phoenix79 said:
um... hate to say it but that graphic is wrong. I know for fact that Alabama is a may-issue state. Has been as far back as I know.

http://law.onecle.com/alabama/criminal-code/13A-11-75.html
Click to expand...
Did you check the URL on the graphic?

http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php

"When I first created this image, the NRA had listed Alabama and Connecticut as shall-issue, and Iowa as may-issue. This can be verified on the Wayback Machine. In 2004, they began listing all three of these states as "fair may-issue". With respect to Alabama and Connecticut, the issue seems to be that these states have laws that can be read as being may-issue, but they are enforced as if they were shall-issue. Making them defacto shall-issue states. Iowa, on the other hand, grants discretion to the sheriffs, and while some sheriffs are fair, some are not. A few simply don't issue, period. So on this, the NRA is simply wrong."

I didn't make the graphic so I don't know how correct or incorrect he is.
 
SonicIce

SonicIce

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
4,771
0
76
What exactly do these mean: unrestricted, shall issue, may issue, and no issue?
edit: nvm
 
Last edited:
phoenix79

phoenix79

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2000
1,598
0
0
I know that these days Jefferson county (Birmingham) and Montgomery county are not necessarily guaranteed granters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom