p kirkes
VIP Member
We in America have the right to be armed. However, how we are armed and where or even when we can be armed is so circumscribed as to make the population ineffective in protecting itself and the community.
For example, we cannot legally carry concealed weapons unless an elaborate set of conditions, fees and training are met. That has the effect of deterring citizens from arming themselves.
The cost of weapons and ammo is too expensive for many. Another deterrent.
The laws of the states concerning weapon possession, ownership and concealed carry are not uniform. One can be legal in state ' A' and illegal in an adjacent state. Another deterrent.
Many just don't want a weapon.
What I am saying is that it is the terrorists or violent criminal element that have no lack of weapons, ammo or the will to use them against a helpless population that is, for all practical purposes, unarmed.
We recently see where Mexican drug armies overrun entire cities with no resistance from the population, because they are not only unarmed but indoctrinated into putting their safety into the hands of the law. Same in the US, to a lesser degree. It's evident the "Law" cannot protect them, it is not proactive it is reactive.
What I propose in the USA is:
1.Every adult get firearms training as you would auto driving school at a fair price .
2.Obtaining a permit concealed or not should not be any more difficult that obtaining a drivers license.
3. Arms and ammo should be available at any store that is willing to sell them, like car parts.
4. Schools must have armed resource officers and Teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons.
5. Criminals that use violence are banned from owning/possessing a weapon (gun, knife, sword, spear and so on). Non violent criminals retain their 2nd Amendment right.
6. Gun laws between states should be more uniform and not restrictive to owning and carrying a weapon.
7. A culture of defending your community, people and property, should be encouraged.
Why do we, the general populace, have to duck. Why cannot the criminal element know that when they attempt to use a weapon they will likely be shot or killed.
Of course the counterargument is that people aren't as responsible in driving their cars as they should be so what makes me think they will be anymore so with a weapon.
Accidents will happen and innocent people will be killed or hurt.
More weapons will be stolen by people who would not normally qualify.
I'm reminded of the riots in Los Angeles a few decades ago where the criminal element took over and looted, pillaged and harmed the populace in a major portion of the city.
Not one law abiding citizen rose up to defend their neighbors except the Koreans. They pulled out their weapons, manned the roof tops and drove off the usurpers. They were cheered but the law said they were wrong. That's what I'm talking about.
It comes down to balance I guess. Balance our need for security against, safety of the populace and the threat.
We cannot counter the threat with just words, when it's too late. We need weapons too and the training and the will to protect our persons and community.
Regards.
For example, we cannot legally carry concealed weapons unless an elaborate set of conditions, fees and training are met. That has the effect of deterring citizens from arming themselves.
The cost of weapons and ammo is too expensive for many. Another deterrent.
The laws of the states concerning weapon possession, ownership and concealed carry are not uniform. One can be legal in state ' A' and illegal in an adjacent state. Another deterrent.
Many just don't want a weapon.
What I am saying is that it is the terrorists or violent criminal element that have no lack of weapons, ammo or the will to use them against a helpless population that is, for all practical purposes, unarmed.
We recently see where Mexican drug armies overrun entire cities with no resistance from the population, because they are not only unarmed but indoctrinated into putting their safety into the hands of the law. Same in the US, to a lesser degree. It's evident the "Law" cannot protect them, it is not proactive it is reactive.
What I propose in the USA is:
1.Every adult get firearms training as you would auto driving school at a fair price .
2.Obtaining a permit concealed or not should not be any more difficult that obtaining a drivers license.
3. Arms and ammo should be available at any store that is willing to sell them, like car parts.
4. Schools must have armed resource officers and Teachers should be allowed to carry concealed weapons.
5. Criminals that use violence are banned from owning/possessing a weapon (gun, knife, sword, spear and so on). Non violent criminals retain their 2nd Amendment right.
6. Gun laws between states should be more uniform and not restrictive to owning and carrying a weapon.
7. A culture of defending your community, people and property, should be encouraged.
Why do we, the general populace, have to duck. Why cannot the criminal element know that when they attempt to use a weapon they will likely be shot or killed.
Of course the counterargument is that people aren't as responsible in driving their cars as they should be so what makes me think they will be anymore so with a weapon.
Accidents will happen and innocent people will be killed or hurt.
More weapons will be stolen by people who would not normally qualify.
I'm reminded of the riots in Los Angeles a few decades ago where the criminal element took over and looted, pillaged and harmed the populace in a major portion of the city.
Not one law abiding citizen rose up to defend their neighbors except the Koreans. They pulled out their weapons, manned the roof tops and drove off the usurpers. They were cheered but the law said they were wrong. That's what I'm talking about.
It comes down to balance I guess. Balance our need for security against, safety of the populace and the threat.
We cannot counter the threat with just words, when it's too late. We need weapons too and the training and the will to protect our persons and community.
Regards.
