Florida nears 1 million permits for concealed weapons

Comments (58)
Joeab wrote:

Not all of those holding Florida CCW licenses are Florida residents or citizens. Florida is one a a few states who issue CCW permits to out of staters. I have had one for 12 years. It is useful in 23 states which include most I frequent.

Dec 12, 2012 6:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
aberdeenvet wrote:

Thanks to George Zimmerman, Floridians have decided that guns can serve a positive purpose, and the honest ones are arming themselves. Liberals beware.

Dec 12, 2012 6:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse

” already home to more owners of such registered weapons than any other U.S. state”

Florida does not have weapons’ registration.

Dec 12, 2012 6:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse

” already home to more owners of such registered weapons than any other U.S. state”

Florida does not have weapons’ registration.

Dec 12, 2012 6:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
randall22000 wrote:

More than Texas?? No problem. Lock and load. the OK Corral is coming. florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, wherever. The Obamabots think they are going to “fundamentally transform The United States of America” a statist socialist state with them in complete control. I am here to tell y’all that it isn’t going to happen. There will be a civil war first, and we will win. We have the guns and ammo, and the guts.

Dec 12, 2012 8:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
randall22000 wrote:

More than Texas?? No problem. Lock and load. the OK Corral is coming. florida, Texas, Pennsylvania, wherever. The Obamabots think they are going to “fundamentally transform The United States of America” a statist socialist state with them in complete control. I am here to tell y’all that it isn’t going to happen. There will be a civil war first, and we will win. We have the guns and ammo, and the guts.

Dec 12, 2012 8:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JustADude wrote:

Dear Reuters,

I live in FL. We DO NOT register our firearms in FL. The Concealed Weapons Permit and registration ARE NOT the same. We do not have to have a FOID, like in IL or other strict states. Therefore the firearms legally carried by CWP holders are not registered as in other states. Please correct your opening statement to make it accurate, it is very misleading to others. The Sig-Sauer P229 Tactical I carry legally with my CWP is NOT registered because it is NOT required in FL…

Dec 12, 2012 8:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
arnoldripkin wrote:

And that doesn’t count the million+ that are armed without a permit. Only a fool would do business in a high crime area without a gun.

Dec 12, 2012 9:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse

That’s the only practical way to defend yourself against the crazies and the murderous criminals who are definitely out there. The assigned job of the police is to try to catch criminals AFTER they have committed crimes, not to prevent crimes. The US Supreme Court has ruled at least twice that the police are not constitutionally responsible for defending innocent citizens against crime. In the US, YOU are the person responsible for defending your person against crime.

Dec 12, 2012 9:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CmdrBuzz wrote:

We cling to our guns and religion. Remember that Obama, especially the guns part.

Dec 12, 2012 9:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Liberals’ universal ignorance of two striking facts of topical interest currently:

The inconvenient fact that crime has declined in ALL states that have Concealed Carry.

The inconvenient fact that employment is highest in Right to Work states, while those Union states are ALL in decline and run by the Democrat Machine.

Do you lefties not see cause and effect? Or is your lust for power and dominion over your ‘lessers’ (conservatives and Republicans) so great that you willfully blind yourself to reality?

Dec 12, 2012 9:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
davidkachel wrote:

Obviously written by a leftist. Facts simply don’t enter into it.

Dec 12, 2012 9:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
guru2u wrote:

Could it be true? More guns and less crime? And FL is a “bastion for gun owners”? Once tourists were being robbed in rent-a-cars leaving Miami airport and when caught the crooks admitted that tourists were less likely to be carrying a gun so that’s why they were targeted. If the crooks aren’t sure…….it helps protect all citizens. If you are certain no one has a gun, you can be free to rob whoever you please with a toy pistol.

Dec 12, 2012 10:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
clee14 wrote:

I hope they check to see that none of these people getting concealed weapons permits don’t belong to unions. We see how hate filled and violent they are. Always have been. Maybe we should put restrictions on Union members banning them from gun ownership because of mental instability. *S*

Dec 12, 2012 10:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
clee14 wrote:

Just how long does it take to get a post posted here?

Dec 12, 2012 10:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JoeTPlumber wrote:

“Florida nears 1 million permits for concealed weapons”and it’s still a sweaty stinkhole. The crime rate is 1.3 times the national average. New York’s crime rate is .97 times the national average. Crime continues to fall overall in most states.

Dec 12, 2012 11:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
drktampa wrote:

I always feel safe in any public place because I know (and everybody else knows) that 1 in 20 are armed. Since white males are more often CC permit holders vs. the general population, probably 1 in 10 white men (or nearly so) are armed. But I do know women who CC. I watched in amazement at the episodes of young thugs “wilding” in public places and robbing a crowded restaurant on YouTube last year as that would be highly unlikely here.

Dec 12, 2012 11:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MICHAELNOC wrote:

“permit?”…I don’t need no stinking permit…

I’m not gonna donate to my state for a stinking permit!

I’ve been carrying for decades without a permit…

If you get caught it’s a misdemeanor

Dec 12, 2012 11:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ExtremeRC wrote:

I strongly disagree with the final sentence. “The number of gun owners is up and crime is down,” Hammer said. “Criminals commit crimes, but they aren’t stupid. They don’t want to get shot.”

They may not want to get shot, but criminals are definitely STUPID.

Dec 13, 2012 12:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
RIPCalifornia wrote:

Lock n load American Patriots!

Dec 13, 2012 12:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
Zombie-Sniper wrote:

Where in The US Constitution does it say “You have to have a PERMIT and a BACKGROUND CHECK???? My States Constitution doesn’t say that either. Both say “The RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR ARMS” Not Keep and bear arms “AFTER” you APPLY and have a Background check.

Dec 13, 2012 2:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
dangood wrote:

And now for the Shoot-Out at Walmart Corral.

Dec 13, 2012 2:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
JackVigdor wrote:

During a time living in Florida, knew several people with concealed weapons permits, and all said they never had to pull their guns. It is NOT like the Wild West in Florida despite the comments of some anti gun people in this set of comments.

On the other hand, the US constitution gives the right to bear arms as a condition for having a well regulated militia. Since there is no longer any militia and no need for militia, since we have a standing army, there really is no reason, as per the bill of rights for anyone to own a gun.

Personally, I believe in private gun ownership because it represents a right free people should have. And, it amazes me how right wing kooks defend the 2nd amendment but none of the others. It amazes me how right wing fascists love the 2nd amemndment but trample on the first amendment.

Dec 13, 2012 6:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
JackVigdor wrote:

During a time living in Florida, knew several people with concealed weapons permits, and all said they never had to pull their guns. It is NOT like the Wild West in Florida despite the comments of some anti gun people in this set of comments.

On the other hand, the US constitution gives the right to bear arms as a condition for having a well regulated militia. Since there is no longer any militia and no need for militia, since we have a standing army, there really is no reason, as per the bill of rights for anyone to own a gun.

Personally, I believe in private gun ownership because it represents a right free people should have. And, it amazes me how right wing kooks defend the 2nd amendment but none of the others. It amazes me how right wing fascists love the 2nd amemndment but trample on the first amendment.

Dec 13, 2012 6:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
JackVigdor wrote:

Where citizens own guns, there actually is less violent crime. But, it amazes me how gun nuts mis interpret amendment #2 and ignore amendment #1.

Dec 13, 2012 6:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
JackVigdor wrote:

Where citizens own guns, there actually is less violent crime. But, it amazes me how gun nuts mis interpret amendment #2 and ignore amendment #1.

Dec 13, 2012 6:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
vinoflyer wrote:

Why is it the presss insists on calling the buffed out football player armed with a screwdriver Treyvon, an unarmed teenager? For those not familiar a screwdriver is every bit as lethal as a knife and often used for that purpose as it is no legally classified as a weapon.

Zimmerman is charged , not because of the facts of the case, but due to the intervention of Eric Holder’s FBI acting on behaf of their politicial interests.

Dec 13, 2012 6:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
dannysdailys wrote:

I’m curious, just why do people by guns to thwart Obama’s plan for gun control? I mean after all, the Government knows who all of you are, thanks to the quick check system. They know every bullet you buy and you think you are safe from that very same government? You’d have to have an IQ below a carrot not to see this.

Dec 13, 2012 7:11am EST  --  Report as abuse

“already home to more owners of such registered weapons”
I have no idea what this stupid statement means. Out of all the firearms I own, none are “registered”..
In Florida we have a “Concealed Weapon or Firearm License”…. not a permit. I am trained, responsible and have passed a background check to become licensed to carry a weapon. I am entitled to be armed with an edged weapon etc even in a gun free zone (and there are not many gun free zones in Fl). We also have a “Stand your Ground” law. This means you have a legal right to meet deadly force with deadly force and are under no legal obligation to try and flee. It does not mean “shoot first” no matter what the liberal media says. DO NOT believe ANYTHING the media tells you about “stand your ground”.. do the research and find out for yourself. No person I know that is licensed to carry a firearm wants to hurt anyone, but they WILL protect themselves and their loved ones if need be. I will do anything I can to avoid violence in any form, but I will not hesitate to protect myself if threatened with deadly force.
Florida also has the “castle doctrine” meaning that if you force your way into my home, I have a legal right to use deadly force against you, whether you are armed or not. The castle doctrine assumes that if you force your way into my residence, you are there to do me harm. These are just GOOD COMMON SENSE laws, designed to protect good law abiding citizens. So criminals take heed, Florida, Georgia, Texas etc are not states for you. Try Illinois, New York and California. They are more criminal friendly states.

Dec 13, 2012 7:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
JackP32 wrote:

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This includes the final state holdout, Illinois, who has been violating the second amendment for umpteen years.

Dec 13, 2012 7:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
politiconned wrote:

What would you rather face, a judge or a murderous thug, hell-bent on “getting his fair share”.
Lock and load.

Dec 13, 2012 7:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
politiconned wrote:

Someone wrote “Florida does not have a weapons registration”. Here are the “carry” facts:

Unless covered under the exceptions, it is unlawful to openly carry on or about the person any firearm, or to carry a concealed firearm on or about the person without a license.

Exceptions:

Persons having firearms at their home or place of business.

Enrolled members of clubs organized for target, skeet, or trapshooting, while at, or going to or from shooting practice.

Members of clubs organized for collecting antique or modern firearms while at or going to or from exhibitions.

Persons engaged in fishing, camping or hunting and while going to or from such activity.

Persons engaged in target shooting under safe conditions and in a safe place or while going to or from such place.

Persons who are firing weapons for target practice in a safe and secure indoor range.

Persons traveling by private conveyance if the weapon is securely encased, or in a public conveyance if the weapon is securely encased and not in the person’s manual possession.

Persons carrying a pistol unloaded and in a secure wrapper from place of purchase to their home or to a place of repair and back.

Persons engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing or dealing in firearms.

Military, law enforcement personnel and private guards while so employed.

It is lawful to possess a concealed firearm for self-defense or other lawful purposes within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use.

A firearm other than a handgun may be carried anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use.

Dec 13, 2012 7:40am EST  --  Report as abuse

Jack Vigdor,

Perhaps you should re-read the Second Amendment; The militia is NOT linked to the right of citizens to be armed. Common sense should dictate that the citizen’s must be armed prior to the formation of a militia. Secondly, find in the Constitution the clause allowing for a standing army?

Dec 13, 2012 7:46am EST  --  Report as abuse

Mr. Vigdor, the language of the 2nd Amendment is NOT conditional. It is exemplary, using ‘militia’ as an example of why the mandate exists. “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.” For another example, in the sentence, “That hunger requires the intake of food to be satisfied, the right to access to food shall not be infringed.” In your mind, once hunger is satisfied, is the right to food no longer operative?

You are also wrong in your labeling of conservatives as right wing fascists. The 2nd Amendment is the one that guarantees all the other rights. If you knew anything about history, you would understand that fascism is a left wing political phenomenon. You can begin by looking in the mirror. It begins with name-calling, Mr. Vigdor (“right wing fascists…gun nuts”). Then look at those union thugs tearing down the tent of a conservative group during the unions’ failed demonstration to intimidate the Michigan legislature into seeing things their way. Then their thugs attacking a reporter for reporting this savage act. This is an example of why unions are prima facie examples of left wing fascist behavior.

Dec 13, 2012 7:56am EST  --  Report as abuse

Mr. Vigdor, the language of the 2nd Amendment is NOT conditional. It is exemplary, using ‘militia’ as an example of why the mandate exists. “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.” For another example, in the sentence, “That hunger requires the intake of food to be satisfied, the right to access to food shall not be infringed.” In your mind, once hunger is satisfied, is the right to food no longer operative?

You are also wrong in your labeling of conservatives as right wing fascists. The 2nd Amendment is the one that guarantees all the other rights. If you knew anything about history, you would understand that fascism is a left wing political phenomenon. You can begin by looking in the mirror. It begins with name-calling, Mr. Vigdor (“right wing fascists…gun nuts”). Then look at those union thugs tearing down the tent of a conservative group during the unions’ failed demonstration to intimidate the Michigan legislature into seeing things their way. Then their thugs attacking a reporter for reporting this savage act. This is an example of why unions are prima facie examples of left wing fascist behavior.

Dec 13, 2012 7:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
mec1 wrote:

It’s time for the politically motivated prosecutors to apologize to Zimmerman and compensate him for wrongful prosecution. The assault media can chip in too.

Dec 13, 2012 8:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
ra44mr2 wrote:

Jack Vigdor you are half a moron. At NO POINT ANYWHERE have i seen conservatives against the 1st amendment, if ANYTHING the left is against the first amendment because of how they attack anyone that doesnt kowtow to their beliefs THEY are the ones that try to stifle speech they dont agree with. Look at the fairness doctrine they keep pushing how many democrats have hailed the idea of a fairness doctrine, how many times is a conservative called racist for simply disagreeing with the policies of the president? I would love to see Col Allen West as president but for some reason because i freaking HATE almost every policy Obama puts forth and think he is a scumbag i am lumped in as a racist. (DESPITE, i might add, being in a interracial marriage.)

Dec 13, 2012 9:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
Silverking wrote:

Instead of using the description, “unarmed teenager, Trayvon Martin,” the description should have read, “unarmed thug, Trayvon Martin.” They should also post his contemporary photo rather than his little boy photo that they dug up.

Dec 13, 2012 10:01am EST  --  Report as abuse
Silverking wrote:

Please note: only non-violent people go through all the hassle to legally obtain concealed carry licenses. The criminal thugs just thumb their noses at the law and do what they feel like with total disdain for following regulations.

Dec 13, 2012 10:04am EST  --  Report as abuse
Cogs wrote:

We also think King Obama and his Democrats have already demonstrated thet they will use any means to get what they want. They are no different than all the despots and dictators who came before them. King Obama just puts-on a better façade; but he’s cut from the same cloth as all the rest.

Dec 13, 2012 10:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

Silverking, personally I do not classify a teenager walking back to his temporary home carrying skittles and a drink a ‘thug’. But since people in this thread seem to be mentioning their Constitutional rights, you do have the right the be an idiot (and most likely borderline or full borne racist).

@people like ‘Cogs’ or ‘randall2000′ and others like them, you are the EXACT type of people that should not be carrying guns because you are clearly one of two things (or both); delusional and/or anger issues. Referring to our President as ‘King Obama’ or believing that ‘The Obamabots think they are going to “fundamentally transform The United States of America” a statist socialist state with them in complete control. I am here to tell y’all that it isn’t going to happen. There will be a civil war first, and we will win. We have the guns and ammo, and the guts.’ is not even close to being supported by reality.

Thank you for showing us reasonable people exactly why we need more strict gun control in this country, people like you all should not be allowed to have a weapon, you are only a step or two away from the guy in Wisconsin and other crazies judging by these types of comments.

Dec 13, 2012 10:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
tingleleg wrote:

Don’t forget though: Florida went for Obama twice in the election. All the gubment has to do is threaten to withhold your Obamacare once it’s implemented and a lot of tough talk will go out the window and people will beg the gubment to take their guns.

Dec 13, 2012 10:42am EST  --  Report as abuse

USAPragmatist, I’m sure you call that union thug who sucker punched a TV newsman at the Michigan labor demonstration after helping tear down the tent of a conservative group a peaceful victim of right wing oppression.

He is a thug – just like Trevon was. As soon as they become violent, their fists become weapons, no different in fact than a gun. It is irrelevant that one carried Skittles or the other wore a union windbreaker and was protesting for ‘workers’ rights’ (whatever that means). It is how they handle their aggression that classifies them as thugs.

As for the ‘obamabots’ fear of “fundamentally transform(ing) The United States of America” those are your idol obama’s own words! And his deeds by definition define the tenets of Socialism

Dec 13, 2012 11:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Jersey_Prophet, if you really think that ‘And his(Obama) deeds by definition define the tenets of Socialism’, you are just like the others I mentioned, look up the definition of Socialism, then look up any policy proposal by Obama, you will not find a match between the two.

With respect to the guy who punched the TV reporter, personally have not seen tape so do not know exact situation, but for argument sake let us say it is like you characterize it. I abhor violence in any way, it should be avoided at all costs until absolutely necessary and their are people that have anger issues on both sides of the argument. But I do not see how that has ANYTHING to do with the issue of the ‘gun culture’ society and all the ramifications of it.

With respect to Trevon Martin, he was not the aggressor in the situation, at least from the facts i have seen come out, Zimmerman was, so i do not see how he is a ‘thug’. But two points, neither of us truly knows all the facts, that is for the jury to decide (but no one can bring back Trevon and he would not be dead now if Zimmerman did not have a gun) and the fact if he was a ‘thug’ or no , like your other ‘straw man’ argument of using the guy that punched a tv reporter, has no bearing at all on the conversation of our ‘gun culture’ society and all the ramifications of it.

Because of these points you, like many other right wingers today, are not able to have reasonable, objective conversations about this, and other, issues facing our country, but I am willing to try, are you?

Dec 13, 2012 12:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse

USA Pragmatist, I am willing to have a “reasonable conversation.” I am fully aware of what defines Socialism. Don’t get technical about Socialism. I will not waste time parsing words. As for policies implemented by this regime, when government takes an increasing slice of the pie of GNP, seeks to redistribute money gained from tax revenues taken from earners to redistribute to those who do not earn it; a government which sees no problem in intervening in the free market, penalizing those whose economic behavior is inimical to the government’s ideals and rewarding others for behavior complementary with those ideals, a government which rewrote the rules for equity holders in one of America’s largest corporations, cheating investors and rewarding unions with an unearned stake in the company’s asset base, a government which uses regulations to achieve the same outcome of behavior as that with which they deploy rules of taxation, you have Socialism.

By your definition of ‘aggression’ a cop who approaches a suspect is guilty of aggression merely asking the suspect why he is casing a house, never mind that the suspect attacked the officer, beat his head to a pulp and went for his gun. And, if Zimmerman didn’t have a gun, it’s true Martin would not be dead. Zimmerman would! No jury will convict Zimmerman. The prosecutor knows she has no case. She will likely dismiss the charges if she can find a way out to save face and her reputation.

We don’t have a “gun culture.” That’s utopian talk and you, in the interest of “reasonable, objective” discourse, should eschew this sort of — what did you call it — straw man rhetoric. We have a culture in which we have the right to own guns. Until the day arrives that the right to deploy force is possessed only by the government, we will maintain a modicum of freedom in this country. You should hope that day never comes.

Dec 13, 2012 1:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@Pragmatist said: “I challenge you to point out one SPECIFIC policy that Obama has proposed that fits this definition.”

I am not one of those people who goes around calling Obama a commie or any such hyperbole…but you must recognize that many of his policies do in fact trend in this direction; a few quick examples:

1) Obamacare – mandating all citizens participate and pay into the communal healthcare system

2) Obama’s proposed tax increase on the wealthy because they have more than their “fair share” of resources and suggesting the government would do better to distribute those resources to the community

3) Mandating equal pay upon the sole issue of sex when a plethora of factors go into determining adequate compensation. That the government should determine salaries in any capacity is by nature a function of central planning/control.

While true socialist policies would take these initiatives to the extreme, you can see that his tendency and logic leads him very much to believe in vesting the power and control of capital, production and the like in government (which is supposedly representative of the “community”).

Contrast that against Romney or someone of his ilks tendency to leave such control and power to be determined by market forces and you can see where such comments come from. At the very least I’d submit that you are wasting your time with this argument because you’re only arguing the degree of socialism inherent in his policies and philosophy; you certainly can’t dispute that Obama clearly believes in a larger role of government, in every facet, than does say a libertarians point of view.

Dec 13, 2012 3:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse

The production of capital? Try the printing of currency backed by nothing but thin air, at the will of a tax-cheat Socialist named Bernanke. Land? How about the de facto ownership of land by the restrictions on its use by an evermore rogue regulatory behemoth, and taking of land by eminent domain for favored users profit, let alone ownership of huge tracts called national parks? Means of production? Try Government Motors for starters. And coming soon, the entire socialization of our health care system, 1/6th of the entire GNP.

Do you call Switzerland a “gun culture?” I doubt it, although every household is mandated by law to own a gun. By the way, in using the phrase “gun culture,” you are using inflammatory, pejorative rhetoric every bit as suggestive as “regime.” Remember “…clinging to their bibles and guns”?

I have no idea what your concept of updating the 2nd Amendment might be, but I suspect you are of the notion that the Bill of Rigthts should be interpreted according to whatever the whim of the moment might be. If this is your idea of ‘law,’ then you are ripe for the picking by every would-be despot.

Incidentally, you are using false choices in asking if I want to live in a tax-free, lawless society. Leaving aside that the current regime (and I use that term precisely to show my contempt for its lawlessness) is far more lawless than any in my memory, and uses taxation to buy votes and penalize success, I would be happy to live in a lawful society where taxation is just and equal, as is the application of its laws. Perhaps your concept of law is harmonious with that crook, Holder and your notion of taxation is consistent with his handmaiden in corruption, obama. If so, you are living in your Utopia now.

Taxes are necessary, but not for the purpose of redistribution of income and vote-buying. As a Libertarian, the uses to which I would agree that taxes should rightfully be put are very limited and specific.

Dec 13, 2012 3:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

for some reason reuters would not accept this post, let’s try again….

@Jersey_Prophet, first off with respect to the Martin/Zimmerman incident, if Zimmerman was indeed a Cop, totally different situation, but he was not. As i have said before neither you nor I is privvy to all the facts, let the jury decide, but characterizing Martin as a ‘thug’ is not true.

Socialism (from dictonary.com)….

so·cial·ism [soh-shuh-liz-uh m] Show IPA

noun

1.

a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

2.

procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

3.

(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

I realize you said you will not ‘waste time parsing words’, but this is very important. You and others are making accusations that simply are not true. I challenge you to point out one SPECIFIC policy that Obama has proposed that fits this definition.

You will notice that I put gun culture in quotes when I use it, because I realize the connotations it may make in some minds, and I could not think of a better way to put it, maybe I should have said the prevalence of guns in American society or something like that. If you want to live in a society where there is no taxation or no rule of law, feel free to move to a country that has that, you are free to renounce your American citizenship. But we live in a country that does have taxation and rule of law. Lastly by referring to the Administration as a ‘regime’, you are simply inflaming the conversation and it makes your possibly valid points fall on deaf ears of a reasonable person. Because that person would probably conclude that you are simply one of those that is simply ‘making noise’ instead of trying to figure out how to solve our issues.

Lastly, if you think a few assault weapons and other random firearms are going to stop a modern military, you are sorely mistaken. I suppose you are going to start claiming that you should have a ‘right’ to purchase M1 tanks or F-22 fighter jets? As I have said before 2nd amendment was written in time of muskets and single shot ‘pistols’, it needs to be updated to fit modern times.

Dec 13, 2012 3:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
windycityron wrote:

“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.” YES. And a Militia, then and now, is composed of ‘the people’ who gather during times of necessity . . . elect their leaders . . . and serve to protect their State and fellow citizens from all enemy’s foreign and domestic. That’s why people should be armed and ready to answer the call to join – or lead – a Militia. It’s what made America great . . . and will keep her great and free.

Dec 13, 2012 5:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Pragmatist, your post appeared for long enough for me to respond, which I did just above your resubmission.

I will add, you are wrong if you think a citizenry possessing only hand weapons cannot defeat a modern army. #1 Emperor Hirohito of Japan had stated the reason he would never invade a ‘defenseless’ US after sinking its Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor was the impossibility of overcoming an armed populace. #2, The Soviets – then a superpower military – were defeated in Afghanistan by a populace using primitive weaponry. #3, the US itself tired of trying to defeat a militarily outclassed Viet Cong force who had no air power, but knew how to demoralize a nation’s will to fight. The US military will never follow a command to attack the homeland under orders of a rogue president, and if some storm troopers loyal to him and armed with over a billion rounds of ammo (as obama has armed Homeland Security, FBI, Secret Service and the ATF) would try to fight house to house here, they had better realize they would be wiped out by sheer numbers of citizens who simply want to be left to live their lives free of despotism.

Sorry if my use of the word “regime” for the current group occupying the seat of power in this nation sounds like “noise” to you. Someday, you will realize from where the real noise is coming. I hope the epiphany won’t come too late for you and the many over whom the wool has been pulled by a resourceful clever and tenacious band of prevaricating opportunists.

Dec 13, 2012 5:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DavidGolani11 wrote:

I suggest all black people in Florida purchase a handgun and get their Concealed-Carry license. There are too many crazy white people walking around in Florida.

Dec 13, 2012 5:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SCMark wrote:

JackVigdor: The fact that we have a standing army does not make obsolete the need for a militia. Do you not believe that the possibility at least exists that a power-hungry government could, at some point, turn on its people in an effort to implement totalitarian rule? And if that did happen, do you not believe that standing army would not then be an agent of said government? Not all potential enemies live outside our borders. I’ll take my chances being able to at least try to defend myself if need be, thank you.

Dec 13, 2012 6:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Jersey_Prophet, I will make this short and simple, using your justification of calling the Obama Administration a ‘regime’, would you do the same thing with the previous Administration? Just curious as to how you look at things.

Dec 13, 2012 6:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@jersey_Prophet, sigh could not help myself, but here is a slightly longer post about how I would ‘rewrite’ the 2nd Amendment, just more of an outline of a few points…..

1. Assault weapons that can shoot more then 30 rounds a minute or can be converted to auto, banned/REAL reason to posses.
2. Pistols/hand guns BANNED or REAL hard to get.
3. Shotguns/bolt action rifles and similar, unlimited possession. Maybe could even convince me no waiting period/background check.
4. Real hard to get or real reason to posses means something like a year long waiting period, accompanied by a substantial fee that help to pay for a VERY intrusive/thorough background check.

Something like that would be a good start in my honest opinion.

Dec 13, 2012 6:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse

No, the Bush had a Presidency. There is a difference between haplessness in such misfortunes as 9/11, then fecklessness in failing to overcome Democrat juggernauts like Medicare prescription expansion, Dodd-Frank, and Bernanke holding the US hostage to an ill-informed TARP scheme on one hand, and, on the other, a willful Alinsky-inspired campaign to defrock the Constitution, socialize medicine and commerce, appoint unaccountable czars to create chaos, and in general, create a campaign to destroy all for which this nation stands.

George W Bush had more respect for this country and its institutions in his little finger than the entire obama regime has in toto. Yes, THIS is a regime. George Bush had a Presidency.

Dec 13, 2012 7:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Pragmatist, you cannot “rewrite” the Bill of Rights. Wishful thinking. You can only amend the Constitution. And that is no walk in the park!

Handguns are now allowed to be carried concealed in many states. In each of those states, the crime rate has declined. There is no argument that criminals use a simple success calculation in contemplating a crime. When it becomes clear to them that the risk outweighs the reward, they go where the targets are softer.

Your intentions are good but the real problem is self-responsibility. I am troubled by peremptory regulation. I am an advocate for severe and non-revokable justice for anyone who uses a weapon in the commission of a crime. Lock them up and throw away the key.

Dec 13, 2012 7:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gigimoderate wrote:

For those men obsessed with guns, there’s a study that states you are under-endowed! A study by a Psychiatrist Tanay finds if you have a obcession with guns, you need to enhance or repair a damaged self image, you are Narcissistic, passive aggressive, and insecure!
Something you will never readily admit to……

Dec 13, 2012 9:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse

For those of your women obsessed with finding obsessions where there are none, there’s a study by Psychiatrist Zigmund Zufrieden showing conclusively that you are frigid, neurotic and infected with terminal Penisneid. Among the most bizarre symptoms of this psychosis is the inability to spell “obsession.”

Unless treatment is administered quickly, this disease progresses to the stage where the infected patient indulges in meaningless online rants.

Perhaps you, Gigimoderate, might be needing to see the Docktor?

Dec 13, 2012 10:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.