Register | Login
United States Coast Guard Forums and Information
The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,yacht,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States Coast Guard. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,travel,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion The World's Premiere Source for United States. Information and resources about the USCG, rules, regulations, policy, pay, jobs, forms, pay, locations, and more. auxiliary,faq,facts,manuals,boating rules,boating regulations,boating safety,inflatable boats, scuba diving,boating magazines,boats,boat talk,boaters,boats for sale,boating information,survey,cruising,cruiser,sea,ocean,tide,current,weather,marine,ships,inflatables,fishing,fisherman,cutter,boat navigation,wind,chart,navigator,powerboat,sailboat,sailing,opinion
Unconstitutional?
Last Post 15 Mar 2016 06:06 AM by Old Guard2. 34 Replies.
Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Author Messages
TheLurker22User is Offline
Basic Member
Basic Member
Send Private Message
Posts:223
TheLurker22

--
03 Jan 2012 10:12 PM
    On one hand, he should have done his due diligence and confirmed CC laws in whatever state he's traveling to, from and through before taking his gun. That is taught during your CC course and something everyone should be aware of.

    On the other hand, with the 2nd amendment, aren't laws like this one in NY (and the ones in DC or Chicago) unconstitutional? Or is it a legal loophole where you're still allowed to own guns but just aren't allowed to carry them?

    Here's the link: http://offgridsurvival.com/concealc...onnewyork/

    Feel free to share your thoughts on the subject.
    GearsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Moderator
    Moderator
    Send Private Message
    Posts:6878
    Gears

    --
    03 Jan 2012 11:18 PM
    Here's one way to look at it (this is purely hypothetical, and does not reflect official or unofficial policy): The COMDT passes policy that each CG cutter will carry 2 widgets on board at all times. By definition, the CO of each cutter is bound to carry two fully operational widgets onboard his/her cutter. So, in order to ensure compliance at all times some of the COs decide to carry 3 widgets to ensure they are always in compliance with current policy.The moral of the story? The COMDT sets policy, but COs can amend the policy to make it more strict, but never less strict.

    It looks like the states have the same agenda. The Fed Gov't provides for the right to bear arms. The States are bound by the Constitution to recognize that right, but they can set their own terms on their own gun laws. Does that make sense?
    “I’m not in this world to live up to your expectations and you’re not in this world to live up to mine.” ― Bruce Lee
    MasterGuns2077User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:425
    MasterGuns2077

    --
    04 Jan 2012 12:07 AM
    One can easily read that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" clearly states that in no way should any government entity, state or otherwise, make it difficult for an American to bear arms. It is a right, not a privilege. Privileges can be constrained or removed. Rights remain, no matter what. In this way, one can claim that the "right" to vote, is actually a privilege afforded those who do not become felons. A right, however, is like your right to worship the lamp on your desk, to say "the government sucks". No one, under any circumstances, can circumvent your right to worship Lamp, or to say "the government sucks."
    Iif one reads the language of the Constitution literally, owing a weapon is a RIGHT, not privilege afforded at the governments behest. Therefore, all gun laws are unconstitutional as, by their very existence, they make gun ownership a PRIVILEGE rather than a RIGHT.
    In this manner one can say that you have more of a right to own a gun than you do to own a car (the right to keep and operate transport shall not be infringed?).
    NOT saying these are my views. They aren't (mine are rather nuanced), I don't think anyone who is honest with themselves thinks directly along these lines, as it's a pretty black and white interpretation. I'm just trying to provide the proverbial "yin" to the above "yang" in this debate.
    Your passion for what you do will set you free.
    Old Guard2User is Offline
    Moderator / Trusted Member
    Forum Supreme!
    Forum Supreme!
    Send Private Message
    Posts:14249
    Old Guard2

    --
    04 Jan 2012 06:53 AM
    I have the RIGHT to be in the military, I'm a US Citizen, when I was of age, I was healthy, strong, independent, sound mind & body. But not everyone gets accepted and it is a privilege to serve. So the right to carry a weapon can be monitored and in some cases, be it by person or by location, you lose the right to have a weapon. Ignorance of the law does not make someone correct, just ignorant.
    Sector NY, Staten Island
    TheLurker22User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:223
    TheLurker22

    --
    05 Jan 2012 09:35 PM
    I guess this is all coming down to the right to have a complete arsenal in your basement or in your house but it's a privilege to be able to carry it with you when you go grocery shopping or anywhere else. Then, states can make it more restrictive on how many "widgets" you are required when you're on their turf (yes, it was perfectly understandable Gears and I liked the analogy).
    GandlerUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:220
    Gandler

    --
    29 Jan 2012 07:56 PM

    Posted By Old Guard2 on 04 Jan 2012 07:53 AM
    I have the RIGHT to be in the military, I'm a US Citizen, when I was of age, I was healthy, strong, independent, sound mind & body. But not everyone gets accepted and it is a privilege to serve. So the right to carry a weapon can be monitored and in some cases, be it by person or by location, you lose the right to have a weapon. Ignorance of the law does not make someone correct, just ignorant.

    unless state laws violate the constitution. Like many do. Some states legalize marijuana despite the fact that it directly contradicts federal law. So state laws often break the law.

    I am not a gun activist and I don't really care about being able to carry around a gun, and probably never would even if it was legal (in my state, getting a carry permit for non LEOs is close to impossible <unless you are an armored car driver since they have a "justifiable need">, it would probably be easier to get a letter from the president like Elivs did than petition the state courts in NJ).
    Old Guard2User is Offline
    Moderator / Trusted Member
    Forum Supreme!
    Forum Supreme!
    Send Private Message
    Posts:14249
    Old Guard2

    --
    29 Jan 2012 09:27 PM
    I was born & raised in NJ. I am very well aware of the laws in the state. I also wouldn't assume that because I have a concealed carry in my current state that it gives me the right to carry it into NJ and go anywhere I wanted with it. I'm not ignorant of the laws concerning weapons in the state of NJ or NY for that matter. So if I left Wisconsin, my gun would stay here, where it belongs. Again, ignorance of the law does not make someone correct or relieve them of responsibility, it just makes them ignorant.
    Sector NY, Staten Island
    MasterGuns2077User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:425
    MasterGuns2077

    --
    29 Jan 2012 10:19 PM
    Your drivers license is good in every state, no matter who issues it. I don't see how a CC permit should be any different. I know the law says differently, I just disagree with the logic. I personally see cars as far more dangerous than firearms. Then again, I ride a motorcycle. Every car is out to get me.
    Your passion for what you do will set you free.
    GandlerUser is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:220
    Gandler

    --
    01 Feb 2012 02:22 PM

    Posted By MasterGuns2077 on 29 Jan 2012 11:19 PM
    Your drivers license is good in every state, no matter who issues it. I don't see how a CC permit should be any different. I know the law says differently, I just disagree with the logic. I personally see cars as far more dangerous than firearms. Then again, I ride a motorcycle. Every car is out to get me.

    I agree. But I don't agree with CC permits. I think there should be carry permits and if you have one you should be able to carry however you like (concealed or open). I don't get the point of how concealed carry is any different than open carry?

    But I think state laws often defy logic. And in some cases they defy federal law (which is illegal, but many states get away with it).
    JbalascsakUser is Offline
    New Member
    New Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:56
    Jbalascsak

    --
    05 Feb 2012 03:27 PM
    This is specifically why the house passed HR822. A little more food for thought

    http://www.usacarry.com/national-co...ses-house/

    I think that it is ridiculous for a veteran to be thrown in jail after obviously trying to do the right thing. He wouldn't of tryed to check in his weapon if he knew he was doing something wrong. I am PRO HR822. As of now I also hold a PA CC permit. Concealed carry law is an EXTREMELY confusing problem in this country. I think that a National Concealed carry law will simplify all these crazy laws, Even though Illinois and Washington DC(Murder Capital Of the World) wont be added. Funny how states with the most crime wont allow law abiding citizens to exercise their RIGHT to protect themselves. Do you really think criminals care about these laws? They love knowing they don't have to worry about any of the good people having a gun! Old Guard you are correct about not knowing your specific laws. But truthfully tell me how many times you have had to go online and research or call your local municipality just to find out silly questions like, where you can carry. Times you cant,no fire zones, times you need to check it in, Open carry law. ECT. Its our responsibility to know are laws but lets not make them impossible to understand!

    BTW. Master of Guns thank you for your Right vs. your Privilege post. I never thought of it like that. Your also very right about it being a black and white theory but how far should the constitution take us?...hmmm things to think about

    Myspace Stuff "Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race."
    MasterGuns2077User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:425
    MasterGuns2077

    --
    05 Feb 2012 09:24 PM
    On the one hand, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it. I believe that heartily.
    On the other hand, Criminal Intent is an important factor in this case and this veterans intent was obviously anything BUT criminal.
    Your passion for what you do will set you free.
    Old Guard2User is Offline
    Moderator / Trusted Member
    Forum Supreme!
    Forum Supreme!
    Send Private Message
    Posts:14249
    Old Guard2

    --
    06 Feb 2012 05:33 AM
    I lived in Alaska. I hunted. I knew people that shot moose, bear, caribou one day out of season or a sex out of season, caught the wrong species of fish and didn't even know it was a white king not a silver. You are right, in most cases there was NOTHING criminal about it. People thought the hunt season ended on Saturday at midnight, it ended at midnight but it was actually Friday night into Saturday, not Saturday into Sunday. They saw antlers and shot and the width (I don't remember the numbers anymore) is supopsed to be 12", this moose was only 11". Again, nothing criminal, BUT the state seizes the meat, issues a ticket (very steep fines for that sort of thing in Alaska) and can seize multiple other pieces of property including guns, vehicles, boats, planes, ATV's and depending upon the laws can even include jail time. Once again nothing criminal just ignorance. Ignorance is no excuse!

    You know why I will never be arrested for carrying my gun in a place I'm not supposed to carry it? First it doesn't leave the state where the permit has been obtained and I have checked the laws. I don't need to check them again.
    Sector NY, Staten Island
    Active Prior ServiceUser is Offline
    New Member
    New Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:28
    Active Prior Service

    --
    23 Apr 2012 06:47 AM
    Personally, I think that certain felons should have certian rights taken away. For example, if someone is convicted of first degree murder, I don't care about their right to own a gun no more. They took away someone's right to live, so their rights mean **** to me.

    Certain guns I thing should be heavy regulated. For example, AK 47s (now we are talking civilian here not military keep that in mind), for what reason (other than gun collecting) would someone have need for an AK 47? Certain guns should have certain restrictions. If someone owns an AK 47 and claims that it is a self defense weapon, I am throwing up the BS flag on that one.

    Besides that....it is the responsibility of the individual to know the gun laws of each state. Just like they are held accountable for the traffic laws in each state, so too do they need to know the laws of each state when it comes to guns. And personally, the right to bare arms is just that...the right to own a gun. There is a reason why certain ammendments are broad...it allows for the States (as long as they do not impose on the rights) to add to the ammendments the way they see fit. It is called the Balance of Power...and the government was formed like that so no part of the government could be too powerful. This is the reason why New York has the conceiled weapon law. Have they made it illegal to own a gun? No...so technically they are not imposing on the 2nd ammendment. They have just made it illegal to have a concealed one
    on your person...

    That being said...I think the felony is a little harsh...misdemanor maybe for the concealed part...or maybe a warning if first offense.
    GearsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Moderator
    Moderator
    Send Private Message
    Posts:6878
    Gears

    --
    23 Apr 2012 10:08 AM
    if someone is convicted of first degree murder, I don't care about their right to own a gun no more.


    It's a Federal law felons can't own a firearm. It's the reason felons can't enlist (amongst other things) they can't carry a weapon.

    Fugitives from justice
    Illegal aliens
    Unlawful users of certain drugs
    Those committed to a mental institution
    Those convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment for more than one year (which generally covers felonies)
    Those convicted of crimes of domestic violence

    Certain guns I thing should be heavy regulated. For example, AK 4


    They are heavily regulated. It's been awhile since I've been a Boarding Officer, but for controlled firearms (automatic weapons, explosives, etc, there's a long list). Any person in possession of one has to have a certain ATF form. If the person wants to move the weapon (say keep it on their boat) another ATF form is required. If they didn't have it we were authorized to detain the person and have the weapon seized. The downside.. the Regs only work on honest people. What do criminals care about the regs?
    “I’m not in this world to live up to your expectations and you’re not in this world to live up to mine.” ― Bruce Lee
    BellsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3448
    Bells

    --
    23 Apr 2012 04:14 PM
    Im from Chicago, trust me, with a city that populated to the point on public transportation is so packed that you can't move, i wouldn't want a gun on me because Id be afraid of it getting lifted and used against me. I agree with IL not letting anyone conceal and with Chicago's complete gun ban. Theres no reason why we need guns there. Gangs have a no drive-by rule right now, and getting mugged is just part of living in the city. If your that afraid then carry a bunch of knives and don"t be stupid walking around by yourself at night. People choose criminal means to live because they feel like they can't be achieve "the american dream" by legitimate means. And don't even tell me that people choose their own destiny and crap, if you aren't from Chicago and don't know its history then you can't pass judgement. To get an idea google Daley vs Daley or read "Boss". Crime and poverty is literally Cook County's fault, and giving people a legitimate way to buy and carry guns would make the city worse not better. Putting buisnesses, grocery stores and investing money into the south and west sides will solve your crime problem, not more guns.

    Take what you like and leave the rest behind.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    23 Apr 2012 04:46 PM

    Posted By Bells on 23 Apr 2012 05:14 PM
    Im from Chicago, trust me, with a city that populated to the point on public transportation is so packed that you can't move, i wouldn't want a gun on me because Id be afraid of it getting lifted and used against me. I agree with IL not letting anyone conceal and with Chicago's complete gun ban. Theres no reason why we need guns there. Gangs have a no drive-by rule right now, and getting mugged is just part of living in the city. If your that afraid then carry a bunch of knives and don"t be stupid walking around by yourself at night. People choose criminal means to live because they feel like they can't be achieve "the american dream" by legitimate means. And don't even tell me that people choose their own destiny and crap, if you aren't from Chicago and don't know its history then you can't pass judgement. To get an idea google Daley vs Daley or read "Boss". Crime and poverty is literally Cook County's fault, and giving people a legitimate way to buy and carry guns would make the city worse not better. Putting buisnesses, grocery stores and investing money into the south and west sides will solve your crime problem, not more guns.




    http://www.examiner.com/article/saf...er-il-case

    I'm a huge gun rights advocate, and a big fan of the Constitution that I swore to defend (as civilian LEO, and future Enlisted Military). The 2nd amd, contrary to what people would like you to believe, was written to arm citizens against a tyrannical government; NOT for hunting, punching paper, and being tacti-cool. I carry a gun off duty, as well as extra magazines. You'd never know. Get a decent IWB holster (Crossbreed, Comp-Tac) and it's super secure. I can wear a T-Shirt, and you won't see my BG380. The problem is that the 2nd amd has never been applied to the states via 14th amd, so States are free to restrict the 2nd amd to rediculous degrees. Right to keep and BEAR arms is what it says. I look at it like free speech. I may not like what you have to say, but you have a protected right to say it. You may not like honest law abiding people carrying guns, but they do everyday around you, and you'll never know it. There needs to be national reciprocity. I love how liberals want to take equal protection, and commerce clauses to shove healthcare up everyone's rear, but don't want a Constitutional AMENDMENT to apply equally to all states...

    I take it very personal when the government tells me how and what I can do to ensure my safety while out and about with my family. I have a 3, 5, and 8 year old. If something really bad happens while we're out, I have no ability to retreat. I can't pick them up and run. I don't go places that are bad. I taught personal safety classes for a long time, and truly believe that the mind is the greatest weapon. I just back up that weapon with .380 +p JHP's

    Laws and regulations don't apply to criminals... because I've seen crazy low sentances for people convicted of Firearms offenses. All gun restriction laws only apply to Law Abiding Citizens.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    23 Apr 2012 05:00 PM
    AND... not to throw any gas on the fire here... but think about where most gun bans are in place? Urban areas. Urban areas that tend to be disportionaly minority. Many scholars (much smarter than me) make a very rational argument that gun bans are actually racist, due to the fact that they prevent law abiding citizens from having the ability to protect themselves in high crime areas.
    BellsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3448
    Bells

    --
    23 Apr 2012 08:33 PM
    You are entitled to your opinion, I AM a law abiding citizen and actually an enlisted member of the military. If you would have read what I posted then you would know that the south and west sides of Chicago are the worst areas, which I am arguing does not need guns. I grew up with guns in the household, my roomates had an AK 47 in our apt in Chicago illegally, most of my friends have guns, and I think that in most cases, yes lawabiding people should be able to carry or have them in the household. But in the case of Chicago, they just don't need it.

    And this has been debated time and time again, and your right criminals are the ones having the guns while law abiding citizens in Chicago can't, but the point is, fix the crime problem. Stop segregating the south and west sides from county contracts with the city for work, where its only given to hispanic and white populated companies residing in the north side and finaincial district, because they vote for the democratic machine. Invest in the other areas, bring the crime down then give them guns, not give them guns to kill the crime problem.

    Actual wording of the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted however you want it:

    Amendment II

    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.
    Take what you like and leave the rest behind.
    BellsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3448
    Bells

    --
    23 Apr 2012 08:36 PM
    and for future reference I would recommend not commenting me or putting me in a category of "you people", you dont know me, where I come from, or what I am. I can literaly be your boss if you get through bootcamp.
    Take what you like and leave the rest behind.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    23 Apr 2012 08:47 PM
    So law abiding residents of the worst sections of Chicago have to put their personal safety and security in the hands of a city that has a pretty broken police department? Again, I ask why poor people (generally speaking) have less right to self defense than those that live outside of city limits?



    BellsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3448
    Bells

    --
    23 Apr 2012 09:41 PM
    Its not the police department....their police department is actually one of the most respectable ones I've been around... they pretty much target felony crime and let the stupid stuff go because it'll clog up the systems . Its the city itself and the city council, the mayors of the past 50 years... thats why I am saying read the readings. Its the whole social system that is unique to Chicago and probably similar to other cities. And im arguing that putting guns legally in Chicago would worsen the problem... if I get into it any more without you reading those readings then Im gunna write a book, so either read them and then we can talk about it or just drop it. Chicago is one of those exceptions, it has its reasons for banning guns. Texas' residents carry guns like its their job, and there penal system is huge, but that works for them, it wont work for IL. Unless you change the whole social system, not just a part of it.

    This argument is only for Chicago not for the rest of the country. Each area is unique to what works for them based on history, does Chicago need to get overhauled? yes, but putting more guns on the streets isnt going to solve its problem, change the society and then maybe it can work.It would be like trying to build levys that arent rated for the weather that an area expiriences. They aren't going to forever prevent the flooding, it'll eventually be worse. Overhaul the actual problem and it'll get better, which means corruption, discrimination, segregation, displacement....
    Take what you like and leave the rest behind.
    weppropUser is Offline
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3969
    wepprop

    --
    23 Apr 2012 09:41 PM
    Actually, y'all miss the point that the Supreme Court decides which 'rights' are provided by the Constitution and which laws are or are not constitutional. For us to have a conversation about whether something is or is not constitutional is even less useful than arguing about the BCS.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    23 Apr 2012 09:53 PM

    Posted By wepprop on 23 Apr 2012 10:41 PM
    Actually, y'all miss the point that the Supreme Court decides which 'rights' are provided by the Constitution and which laws are or are not constitutional. For us to have a conversation about whether something is or is not constitutional is even less useful than arguing about the BCS.


    I agree. Here's their take on it.

    http://m.upi.com/m/story/UPI-18071277761369/
    TheLurker22User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:223
    TheLurker22

    --
    27 Apr 2012 01:59 PM
    I'm surprised no one has brought up the fact that places with the strictest gun laws/restrictions have the highest rates of violent crime. Gun laws DO NOTHING to criminals....in Chicago or anywhere else. Chicago is not unique as a big city anymore than NY is unique or San Francisco or any other big city. Will crime be higher because it's a big city? Yes. Will crime also be even higher because of gun bans/restrictions? All evidence points to yes.

    In fact, in other places where they relaxed gun restrictions, they saw a huge drop in violent crime. If I had time at work, I would look up all the numbers and statistics. Looks like you'll either have to wait until I get home or look up the information yourself.
    ejhcougarUser is Offline
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:562
    ejhcougar

    --
    27 Apr 2012 02:50 PM
    A litte more food for thought, I think that if the severity of punishments rose with crimes that we would have less crime. For example, and this is a harsh example, if someone commits a murder and is convicted in court, shoot them. No death row, no imprisonment, nothing like that, a bullet and kill them. Think of the amount of money that would save! Also, after a few things such as this, people will be less likely to get caught. Similar to the Saudis, if someone gets caught stealing, cut off their hand. Sure, this is an extreme view, and some innocent people will get the brunt of a false conviction, but I can guarantee that statistically crime would drop. Would this mean it wasn't happening or would this just mean they are sneakier?

    The right to bear arms is a right. Because its general, you don't have a right to put a .45 in your waistband, but you do have a right to own it and fire it when appropriate. I live in an open carry state. If the weapon is in view, you are fine. Our crime rate is ridiculously low, but that also has to do with population density. However, if you give people the opportunity to protect themselves, the opportunity for a crime against them to occur will drop. Of course the possibility of some idiot shooting themselves in the leg at a club does go up...

    As a general rule as well, threatening a future coworker is not a good practice as it only leads to animosity in the work place, and I will leave it at that.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    27 Apr 2012 03:01 PM
    Just an internet misunderstanding. Everything is cool! Writing in forums eliminates a majority of non-verbal communication, so things come out sideways. It's all good.

    I don't want this thread to get derailed, it's a good discussion.
    ejhcougarUser is Offline
    Advanced Member
    Advanced Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:562
    ejhcougar

    --
    27 Apr 2012 08:52 PM
    Very true, tone, body language, etc. is all lost through media conversations, good to know all is well.
    BellsUser is Offline
    Trusted Member
    Veteran Member
    Veteran Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:3448
    Bells

    --
    28 Apr 2012 07:54 AM
    ughh. read the references I posted. Chicago has a gun ban for a reason, and if you are so inclined, find me your statistics so that I have something to show my old Chicago Professors that they are full of crap. My only arguement is that Chicago as a social system needs to be overhauled for their crime rate to drop, not give them guns for their crime rate to drop. There is no way to prove a direct correlation in gun laws and crime rate.

    To say guns laws do nothing for criminals is a little far fetched. Say a law abiding citizen sells their legitimate gun to a gang member with a clean record. Then that gang member brings the gun to the city. With the gun ban, the city has a basis to confiscate it on any grounds.

    Just my opinion. Its lots of people, with paper thin walls, and I was fine without a gun, as at the time,a young 19-22 year old living by myself.

    Top Violent crime cities in 2010 with pop over 250000:


    Boom, Chicago was the 17th highest in manslaughter/murder in 2010. 11th in Robbery, 26th in aggravated assault, 38th in property crime, 42nd in Burglary.

    hmmmm. weird, thats not even percentage, thats actual instances regardless of pop size. What are those other cities' problems if they can protect themselves with their legitimate guns. Shouldn't Chicago and DC be the highest?

    Im playing devils advocate but what do you have to say to that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...crime_rate
    Take what you like and leave the rest behind.
    srf13User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:108
    srf13

    --
    28 Apr 2012 03:06 PM
    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/...r-and.html

    Some interesting reading if you're into numbers...

    You want to know the thing that really fries my A**?

    It's the idea that legal gun ownership isn't good enough for citizens (The people that the Bill of Rights Protect), but guns are good enough for Politicians and their personal security teams. Even after they are out of office, but have enough money to pay people armed to the teeth to stand guard. Are they better than the people they are supposed to serve? Are they 'more equal' than us?

    Check out THIS article if you want to see how equal the mayor was compared to the citizens he served:

    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2011/05/daley-asks-for-five-round-clock-armed.html

    TheLurker22User is Offline
    Basic Member
    Basic Member
    Send Private Message
    Posts:223
    TheLurker22

    --
    02 May 2012 01:09 PM

    Posted By Bells on 28 Apr 2012 08:54 AM
    ughh. read the references I posted. Chicago has a gun ban for a reason, and if you are so inclined, find me your statistics so that I have something to show my old Chicago Professors that they are full of crap. My only arguement is that Chicago as a social system needs to be overhauled for their crime rate to drop, not give them guns for their crime rate to drop. There is no way to prove a direct correlation in gun laws and crime rate.

    To say guns laws do nothing for criminals is a little far fetched. Say a law abiding citizen sells their legitimate gun to a gang member with a clean record. Then that gang member brings the gun to the city. With the gun ban, the city has a basis to confiscate it on any grounds.

    Just my opinion. Its lots of people, with paper thin walls, and I was fine without a gun, as at the time,a young 19-22 year old living by myself.

    Top Violent crime cities in 2010 with pop over 250000:


    Boom, Chicago was the 17th highest in manslaughter/murder in 2010. 11th in Robbery, 26th in aggravated assault, 38th in property crime, 42nd in Burglary.

    hmmmm. weird, thats not even percentage, thats actual instances regardless of pop size. What are those other cities' problems if they can protect themselves with their legitimate guns. Shouldn't Chicago and DC be the highest?

    Im playing devils advocate but what do you have to say to that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...crime_rate



    Well, to start, try citing another source other than wikipedia as they still have issues with accuracy. I did a quick google search of "gun laws increase crime" and came up with just a few off the top of my head. Numerous studies have shown that relaxing gun laws and implementing conceal carry permits lowers violent crime dramatically (and this includes high population areas like Miami).

    Here are the links I could find in a 1 minute search:

    http://hawaiiccw.com/gun-myths/conc...ase-crime/

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/28/gun-crime-continues-to-decrease-despite-increase-in-gun-ownership/

    http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/129269/strict_gun_laws_lead_to

    http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3224.html

    "If you make it easier, less risky, to become a criminal, then more people will become criminals. More criminals require more victims to support them, which means more crime. More crime results in the government calling for more gun control, which takes away more people's ability to defend themselves, which lowers the risks and costs of becoming a criminal, and you have not a symbiotic relationship, but a vicious cycle. But to what end?"

    Chicago is not as unique as you would like to believe. The proof is in the statistics.
    You are not authorized to post a reply.
    Page 1 of 212 > >>


    Active Forums 4.3



    Military clothing, gear, insignia, baseball caps and other quality items at SoldierCity


    Disclaimer

    This web site is a privately-owned and has not been underwritten or supported by the United States Coast Guard. 
    The views and opinions posted by members do not reflect the views and opinions of the United States Coast Guard.
    This is an informational site. Welcome aboard!

    Copyright 2010 by USCG.ORG
    United States Coast Guard Forums and Information  |  Terms Of Use  |  Privacy Statement