The right to personally protect person and property is foundational to our American heritage. It doesn't take great understanding to figure out that there are not enough law enforcement officers to protect everyone. In view of man's history there will always be those who do violence to others for various reasons. Why can't liberals see that unarmed citizens are as much a threat to a criminal than sheep are to wolves.

It is time that the rulers of the People's Republic of Maryland wake up and allow law abiding citizens to carry what they need to live in peace and safety. Do whatever is necessary to ensure that the right people are armed, because as you read this the wrong ones already are and they love your naive but stupid idea that guns kill.

Hey partisan ranger, welcome.

I don't think we've ever tackled the right to carry discussion on this board. So this should be interesting. But, please stick around for the responses.

Personally, I'm for any right to carry legislation. Texas has it, Florida has it, Virginia has it, West Virginia (I think) has it.

Maryland is so dam afraid of arming its citizens it's almost like our legislators want to protect the violent criminals.

With certain caveats, I say arm away! Make us a right to carry state. But, alas with our legislature, it'll never happen.

Just found out that one of the "kids" hanging around the street by my apartment was previously sent away for beating up his grandfather.

I want a gun again.

I agree with Yoss, it would be good policy, but with the liberal legislature loaded with city folks from Balt. and Mont. counties, etc. it'll sadly never happen. MD will continue to be in the minority of states where getting a concealed carry permit is almost impossible. Sad but true.

I'd 100% support the right to carry, but then I'd pray few people exercised it. I strongly support the second amendment, but I don't own a gun and I don't like having them around. Weird, I know, but IMO the big problem is figuring out who really is one of the RIGHT people who ought to carry. Too many folks lose control of their emotions far too easily - just look at how so many of them drive these days - I'd really rather they weren't all carrying deadly weapons.

I agree. I own several guns but it would be way to hard to tell who could and couldn't carry responsibly. It would put a dent in the crime rate. I wonder how the murder rate and accidental discharge rates would be affected?

unfortunately, one can provide statistics to support both sides of the argument.

The NRA (whom I don't trust as far as I can throw Charlton Heston) would have you believe that crime rates drop drastically when right to carry is implemented. They will also tell you that there is no such thing as an accidental discharge.

On the other hand, there are the anti-carry organizations that would have you believe that right to carry has absolutely no effect on the crime rate, and young children are killed in unbelieveable numbers by mis-handling of firearms.

You pretty much have to draw your own conclusions after doing your own research. But it ultimately boils down to whose side you want to believe.

The pro-carries will side more with the NRA, the anti-carries will side more with those appropriate organizations.

Personally, I believe that if the criminal has no idea who carries, in a pro-carry state, then they will be less apt to commit personal crimes of violence. But by the same token, perhaps crimes against senior citizens and young women would increase because they would be less likely, in the criminal's mind, to carry.

I think that most states that have implemented right to carry, have never gone back to anti-carry. But that's just my supposition.

By the way, if you think MD is bad regarding anti-carry, ya' need to check out New Jersey's anti-carry laws. Or even NY City, or Wash, DC.

A clear majority of states have RTC now. None I know of have reverted from RTC to non-RTC. Every year more states join RTC states, and/or increase acceptance of neighboring states' RTC permits. Would they do this if RTC caused crime problems, accident problems?

Many people said FL would turn into a "wild-west" with shootings over parking spots, minor slights, etc. when RTC was passed, but it did not happen. Some politicians and others seem not to trust the "average Joe" to carry, but statistics show it ain't no problem, and reduces the overall crime rate. "More Guns Less Crime" -- a book by Prof. John Lott has tons of stats, from the states' own crime stats and FBI Uniform Crime Reports, to back up these claims.

Yoss, NRA usually uses stats fromt he FBI, justice dept, and the states to support their position. I feel w/o the NRA, private gun ownership would by now be almost impossible in the USA. And even you probably could not own a personal shootin' iron.

BTW -- we all know what crime is like in these bastions of liberalism...

Hey, I agree Snoop, the NRA has done a great deal to promote firearm safety, RTC and a bunch of other good stuff related to firearm use and ownership.

Without them, we certainly wouldn't be where we are today, in guarding our 2nd amendment rights.

It's just that I feel, sometimes they go a little overboard in supporting their cause.

I agree. My instructor for my gun safety course is in a wheelchair. I feel sorry for any criminal who thinks he doesn't carry! This recent article talks about he decline in crime since concealed carry started. Violent crime in Oklahoma has fallen by 18 percent

RTC states: Right to Carry States

It is almost impossible to get a concealed permit in Maryland and they do not reciprocate with any states.

I have a friend who accidentally discharged his handgun into his kitchen floor... he was handling it while drunk.

That said, I am a firm believer in the right to bear arms. All the criminals are carrrying guns. Why the hell shouldn't I be allowed to carry one, too?

For now I the only thing I get to carry is pepper spray. Woo Hoo. Like that's gonne stop a crazed madman intent on ravishing my body.

Where did you see this, Yoss?

I don't trust the NRA as far as I can throw Charlton Heston, his cold dead fingers, AND the horse he rode in on all together. Nor do I think for one second that the RTC will reduce the overall crime rate. However, having said that, I do support an individual's right to carry and in fact I possess a non-resident CCW permit that is recognized in 10 states. I doubt that MD will ever be a RTC state though. I was hoping that some politician would have brought it up back during the sniper drama but unfortunately we missed a golden opportunity.

I can see that from your posts, Idiot.

Anyway...

Why do you "not trust the NRA"?

Why do you not think RTC affects the crime rate?

That's okay. They don't trust you either.

Because they spend too much of their time, effort, and money trying to influence the government, because they are very good at it, and because even though the general public has benefited from some of their efforts, I believe their main concern is for the gun maufacturers.



I just think that a person who wants to commit a crime is going to, they'll just change their tactics. I also believe that the death penalty doesn't deter crime, but I'm strongly in favor of it.

I've been told that I was on their "black list" but I don't believe the source of that anymore than I believe the NRA. I've never tried to find out if such a list actually exists but if it does I'm sure that it includes the names of some great americans so I figure I'm in good company.

I probably have more guns than most people on the list.

I want to be on the black list too!How do I get on it!

Just like I have signs on the fence warning about the dogs,I also have a sign that states that theres an armed american citizen here and that theres absolutely nothing inside worth dying for.
I've had a state trooper and a couple of county officers say that they like the sign.

Hey,it's fair warning.And I will use my shot gun.I'm not a wimpy female.How do they say it on the streets?"I'll bust a cap on your *ss".(?)

Wonder if everyone was allowed to carry if we would turn into a more polite society?*sigh* guess it's just a dream.

That's awesome WVD! You're my hero!

Bust a cap? Hah. WVD your shotgun is far more dangerous to a perp than most of the iron they carry. They might wax poetic about their "nines" but within the ranges that most confrontations take place that scattergun is far, far more dangerous and deadly. Good show.

Idiot -- the "blacklist" you refer to is a list of companies that support anti-gun organizations. Many organizations of all types have such a list that they publish so their members can decide if they want to patronize those companies or not. So what?

Gun manufacturers make up a very, very small part of the over 3 million members in the NRA who are overwhelmingly just "average Joes and Janes" who support the cause. But the NRA does fight hard against governments who try to sue gun manufacturers out of existence by trying to blame Smith & Wesson or Winchester because some slimebag loser who is already breaking several felony laws kills someone while trying to steal drug money. Many cities ahev tried, and every case I know of has been thrown out of court, yet the liberal cities keep trying -- trying to do through frivolous lawsuits what they cannot do in the legislatures. Who are the idiots in that case?

I've always maintained that a shotgun is a rural wife's best friend.
Takes care of all sorts and manner of critters.

If they all talked like you, Ms. "bust a cap in your *ss", I would guess not.

Dragonlady is using a shotgun to protect herself from critters at the Prom? What's this about?

just remember it.

word up

4.3 million members do.



Ummmm, they're standing up for our rights. If the government had their way, no law abiding citizen would even be able to have a gun, let alone concealed carry. They provide gun safety education and youth programs and train Law Enforcement Firearm Instructors as well as from the military. The government is trying to ruin the gun manufacturers to prevent law abiding citizens from even being able to purchase guns.

Well, folks, I'm glad we have response and reaction to my post. I have a couple more thoughts to what y'all have said to add to the "verbal volley"
1. Regarding the fear of those who may be emotionallly unfit to carry a gun. Who gives the criminals a test to determine stability? Is it not possible that those who apply for a handgun permit be subject to a background check, and if there is a good reason from one's record not to issue, deny the request? I wonder how many emotionally unstable persons are issued driver's licenses every year.

2. Regarding the statement that women and the aged would be at greater risk because they would not carry. Does that mean that those who carry would not assist in the protection of others, only themselves? Don't think so. And by the way, you would be surprised at how many women WOULD carry and outshoot many men. NO, I'm not a registered NOW member

3. Have y'all seen the recent law passed in Florida (Castle Law) that allows a citizen to use deadly force against an intruder or molester. YOU GO FLORIDA!

4. Y'all need to stop saying that it is impossible in the PROM to have right to carry laws passed. That's exactly the posture the liberal eggheads that run this state want you to take. Please leave footprints, not buttprints, in the sand.

5. If you don't like the NRA, have you looked at Gunowner's of America? Let's not shoot (pardon the pun) those in the trenches WITH us.

PR,

I was beginning to think you were a hit and run poster.

Regarding your 3rd point -- the Castle Law. Yes, it is good policy, but FL is only something like the 26th state to have such a law. It is not as new as the media lead us to believe.

4. I have pestered my MD representatives enough to know they support fewer gun laws, but I have little influence over the city folks' reps.

5. Agreed, there are otsa good gun rights orgs besides the NRA, but the NRA is the most powerful. There are even the "Pink Pistols" -- if memory serves either a gay or transvestite gun-rights group.

Pink Pistols
"Pick on someone your own caliber."

Neat.

Speaking of emotionally unstable people carrying guns...

Do you have some proof of that or is it just a conspiracy theory?

Liberals aren't the only ones who have them you know.

I knew there must be a perfectly good reason for it.

I'll consider myself lucky that I haven't been "patronized" by one of those average Joes or Janes yet.

I wouldn't worry too much about those frivolous lawsuits, they're always going to lose. This country has made up its mind on guns. We have them, we like them, and we aren't giving them up.

I don't even want to get involved in the discussion about right to carry.

BUT, I sure would like somebody to explain..... I saw the headline in the paper about Protection in PROM, and a picture of a couple who went to the prom in outfits made out of duct tape. I thought it was weird, but I didn't read past the caption under the picture.

How does people making outfits out of duct tape relate to concealed weapons permits? I obviously missed something very important.....

What do you mean by your "patronized" comment? Please explain.

Frivolous lawsuits in this day and age scare me for 2 reasons. One, they still cost lotsa money to defend, so that means it will cost me more for the affected products and taxes for the stupid governments that push them. I don't want the cost of my guns and ammo or taxes going up any more than necessary.

Two, way too often stupid judges and juries give awards to plaintiffs who have no business winning. The Stella Awards clearly shows this as well as a read-through of the news. Personal responsibility is slowly going by the wayside.

I thought that was just for the girl to get money for college? Something about she was looking for scholarship money that wasn't acquired in a traditional way and that some company or person would give a couple thousand bucks toward college costs for the couple that went to their prom dressed in entirely duct taped outfits.

Looks like I have caused some confusion via my acronym PROM. It has nothing to do with a high school dance. It is short for People's Republic of Maryland. Sorry, folks.
Before I go I would like to add the following point.
Right to carry discussions seem to gravitate only to the one point of protection of person and property. But the ONE thing that needs to be emphasized to lawmakers and representatives is the fact that the ability for the citizens of the U.S. to keep and bear arms is a right granted in the law of the land-the Constitution. Our ancestors had a realistic view of human nature and knew that some men can only understand force to be kept in check. What think ye?

PR -- No offense, but I think you should not have started a new thread for this post. It fits under the existing PROM thread.

Agreed. Any mod want to merge it?

Merged.

One example..... Smith & Wesson struck a deal with the feds. They agreed to implement safety devices and strict retail guidelines for its handguns, and in exchange, the government pledged to drop the company from any pending lawsuits against gun makers.

Many dealers will now not sell any more S&M guns and one distributor dropped S&M. Not available; can't be purchased.

I can't recall at this moment (I'll look later), but there are also certain gun manufactures that can not sell in certain states.

I believe this S&W deal is now dead as they have new owners with more sense. When it happened I was in the market for a .44 and was gonna get a 629 but instead went for a Ruger. I would not buy from S&W because they caved.

S&W has been manufacturing crap for several years now anyhow. Their semi-autos had more problems than any handgun made.

Just my typical mindless drivel.

But here's something you may be interested in. This is an article from about a year ago about anti-gun legislation in PA that the NRA did not oppose.

A little searching will probably produce an article with more info, I just happened to remember this website.

I haven't had any problems with any of my S&W.

I had a S&W 4006 (.40 cal) and hated it. I often had the magazine drop out of it while shooting and the de-cock lever popped off twice. It was also heavy enough to use a boat anchor/door stop. Sold it and picked up a Glock.

Sounds like you just had a lemon; what year was it? True they are heavy, but it does has less recoil than the Glock, but the Glock does fit better in your hand.

I carry a Glock, and love it's simplicity. No decocking levers, no safetys, no single action. It's light, it's flat, it's just an overall good weapon.

Now, I think my favorite is my Beretta model 92. But it is slightly heavier than the Glock, and it has all those things above that the Glock doesn't have. But I can get a faster sight picture with the Beretta than the Glock.

Now if I could just figure out how to conceal an Israeli Arms 50 cal. Desert Eagle...

Sounds like just a plain piece of sh*t. Maybe that's why they were trying to make a deal with the government.

I like a heavy gun. My Ruger .30 caliber carbine weighs 44 ounces (not loaded) but it has almost no recoil. I could shoot it all day long, and practically have. I didn't buy it new but I can tell you that it's never mis-fired or jammed since I've owned it.

It's not very easy to conceal though.