What is the Purpose of the Concealment Tax?

[Avatar9]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special permission to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special protection to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

Another socialist liberal dimwit way to get rid of our guns through regulation. When you know the real reason the 2nd ammendment was written you understand why they are scared.

 

[Full-Auto]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special protection to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

Do you have a link? I pay a fee for my license to the county for processing. Its good for 5 years.

 

[Avatar9]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special protection to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

Do you have a link? I pay a fee for my license to the county for processing. Its good for 5 years.

A link to what?

The fact that criminals don't obey that law? Do you know what a criminal is?

The fact that open carry and cocktail dressed don't really work together?

The fact that you have to pay for a CCW in many places? You just said yourself that there was a fee involved.

What, exactly, do you want a link to? Or is that just a canned response you fall back on when you have nothing to contribute to the discussion?

 

[NGSamson]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special protection to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

Where is that law ? I\You would think concealed would be better. I know that in some states concealed means concealed. You will actually get charges for brandishing a fire arm if some one sees it and calls the cops. Crazy.

 

[Full-Auto]

Why should someone who has the right to keep and bear arms need special protection to maintain the means to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones without advertising what they are carrying to the world? There are many reasons for concealed carry by lawful citizens, from the image an open weapon can project (especially for those with no desire to project a 'tough guy' image unnecessarily) to simple fashion (if a woman is wearing a cocktail dress, open carry is not only not feasible, but would also ruin both the look of the address and, potentially, the mood of the setting in which she is wearing it) to the simple fact that if a man knows where a woman's weapon is when attacking her, he can go immediately for the weapon from the outset, making it harder for her to effectively defend herself.

I do not see that those who are inclined toward armed robbery or other crimes are likely to obey the law regarding concealment of a weapon. If anything, using the law to discourage concealed carry (through the charging of a fee to acquire the license, effectively taxing concealment of one's weapon), and with it the carrying of arms by lawful citizens (especially women) in general, makes criminals more assured that if a weapon is not visible, it's likely not present, and making them more confident when carrying out criminal acts with their weapon.

What is the reasoning behind this tax on lawful citizens who wish to carry a means of defense without the stigma, awkwardness, image, or simple inconveniences of open carry? The only reasoning I can see is that those who push for CCP laws wish to discourage carry by women who wish to dress up for a date or those who wish to maintain the means of self-defense without advertising the fact or projecting a different image into the world (eg: a man in a business suit in a formal setting who does not wish the open presence of the firearm to become potential distracting from the matter at hand or unduly influence the mood or setting). If there is any reasoning behind these laws other than the desire to discourage the carrying of weapons by lawful citizens in general, please, explain it to me.

Do you have a link? I pay a fee for my license to the county for processing. Its good for 5 years.

A link to what?

The fact that criminals don't obey that law? Do you know what a criminal is?

The fact that open carry and cocktail dressed don't really work together?

The fact that you have to pay for a CCW in many places? You just said yourself that there was a fee involved.

What, exactly, do you want a link to? Or is that just a canned response you fall back on when you have nothing to contribute to the discussion?

We are an open carry state, If I want the privilege of concealed carry I pay for the background check and processing.

Your argument is that any fee is a tax. Is that correct?

 

[Avatar9]

We are an open carry state, If I want the privilege of concealed carry I pay for the background check and processing.

Why? Why should a woman who already has the right to possess and bear arms need special permission- and to pay a 'fee'- to keep that means of self-defense with her when she goes out wearing a nice dress? What reason, other than to discourage women from being armed and able to defend themselves when they want to wear something nice on a date, is there for these laws to exist?

 

[Kevinthedog]

red tape is costly! But creates government jobs! expect them to always to get bigger...thus worse!

 

[Full-Auto]

We are an open carry state, If I want the privilege of concealed carry I pay for the background check and processing.

Why? Why should a woman who already has the right to possess and bear arms need special permission- and to pay a 'fee'- to keep that means of self-defense with her when she goes out wearing a nice dress? What reason, other than to discourage women from being armed and able to defend themselves when they want to wear something nice on a date, is there for these laws to exist?

That is up to your individual state constitution. I live in a shall issue state. The fee is one of the many ways government charges for services. We dont have an income tax, so the ten bucks a year makes up for it.

 

[percysunshine]

Shoot first, ask questions later.

 

[Avatar9]

That is up to your individual state constitution.

You're babbling about something irrelevant. Why should this law exist?

I live in a shall issue state. The fee is one of the many ways government charges for services. We dont have an income tax, so the ten bucks a year makes up for it.

What services? Printing out the permit? You still can't tell me why she should be required to get one in the first place.

Should we require permits to cross the street while wearing black socks, next, while you're making up new taxes on behaviors? How 'bout a permit to use BBQ sauce on the grill instead of applying it after? And a permit to carry water in a plastic bottle instead of a water bladder?

Shoot first, ask questions later.

That's nice. doesn't address the subject hand or contribute to the discussion in any way, but I suppose it bumps your post count.

 

[percysunshine]

That is up to your individual state constitution.

You're babbling about something irrelevant. Why should this law exist?

I live in a shall issue state. The fee is one of the many ways government charges for services. We dont have an income tax, so the ten bucks a year makes up for it.

What services? Printing out the permit? You still can't tell me why she should be required to get one in the first place.

Should we require permits to cross the street while wearing black socks, next, while you're making up new taxes on behaviors? How 'bout a permit to use BBQ sauce on the grill instead of applying it after? And a permit to carry water in a plastic bottle instead of a water bladder?

Shoot first, ask questions later.

That's nice. doesn't address the subject hand or contribute to the discussion in any way, but I suppose it bumps your post count.

What was the subject hand again?

 

[Full-Auto]

That is up to your individual state constitution.

You're babbling about something irrelevant. Why should this law exist?

I live in a shall issue state. The fee is one of the many ways government charges for services. We dont have an income tax, so the ten bucks a year makes up for it.

What services? Printing out the permit? You still can't tell me why she should be required to get one in the first place.

Should we require permits to cross the street while wearing black socks, next, while you're making up new taxes on behaviors? How 'bout a permit to use BBQ sauce on the grill instead of applying it after? And a permit to carry water in a plastic bottle instead of a water bladder?

Shoot first, ask questions later.

That's nice. doesn't address the subject hand or contribute to the discussion in any way, but I suppose it bumps your post count.

You are the one babbling. I would prefer, I not pay anything. I am not going to argue states rights vs federal rights. It is too obvious you dont understand them anyway.

You have a simple minded argument and you wont be taken off the path.

 

[WillowTree]

The best arguement I have against open carry, especially for a woman is the ability of someone to snatch it and use it against her.

 

[percysunshine]

The best arguement I have against open carry, especially for a woman is the ability of someone to snatch it and use it against her.

Why should society discriminate against women?

Some of the best shots in the world are women.

 

[The T]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_QjEL0uUgo]TEXAS MONTHLY TALKS - TED NUGENT - YouTube[/ame]

 

[NGSamson]

The best arguement I have against open carry, especially for a woman is the ability of someone to snatch it and use it against her.

Why should society discriminate against women?

Some of the best shots in the world are women.

There are options for woman to carry concealed while wearing a nice dress.Many use a hand bag of some sort. It doesn't help with the issue of the gun being snatched, only a decent holster will make that almost impossible.

 

[Avatar9]

I am not going to argue states rights vs federal rights

Good, because it has nothing to do with what we're discussing. I hope you'll also abstain from discussing you itchy feet for the same reason.

Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion at hand?

There are options for woman to carry concealed while wearing a nice dress.

Some states require she pay a Concealment Tax and get special permission to do so. The question is whether any of the anti-gun freaks can actually justify such laws, especially in light of the clear facts that criminals ignore them anyway and it merely discourages these law-abiding women (among others) from carrying.