Carrying firearms in a truck

Man if that's not the truth I don't know what is!

 

Plenty of people use handguns for hunting. Sure, they are revolvers, not semi-autos, but they still do.

As for the Virginia Tech shooting, don't expect me to believe that if handguns were illegal that type of thing wouldn't happen. Do you think that just because something is restricted it can't be obtained. Take a look at illegal narcotics. Enforcing a ban is just a waste of tax payer money.

I don't know all of the laws involving carrying a firearm in a commercial vehicle but I do know one thing, it's my life on the line and I will defend it.

 

What do you mean I use a .50 caliber Desert Eagle to deer hunt.

 

Thank u OuterSpaceHillbilly, I also have hunted with Desert Eagles. I also use a .22 pistol to hunt rabbits and squirrel. I have also used a Thompson Arms pistol shotgun (yes, it is a pistol shotgun, look it up if you doubt me, it can use either .45 cowboy OR .410 shotgun shell) for squirrel. I also have another pistol shotgun called The Judge made by Taurus.

Also, Bandit24...
You are entitled to your opinion, as we all are, and your thoughts and opinions are always welcomed by me.

First, not chastising you here and nothing negative meant by this, but, you do not understand the 2nd Amendment if you think it pertains to hunting.

"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."

Sorry, NOTHING about hunting.

Next, if I may please state my opinion as far as VA Tech is concerned.

My argument is this. IF college students were permitted to exercise their God given instinctive right of self defense and their man-made 2nd Amendment right of self defense, and carry legal concealed weapons on campus, then the murdering b**tard would not have had the opportunity to walk around as an Active Shooter. These morons who believe gun free zones are safe havens do not understand that they are creating a target rich environment of defenseless citizens for killers to walk around freely and shoot whomever they want to, as they desire to.

Ask a Police Officer what their job is. Most Officers will tell you it is to pick up the pieces and investigate after the action has occurred. Most Officers will also tell you they do NOT have the duty to protect an individual. Their job is to protect the community as a whole. It is THE INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS duty to protect oneself and their loved ones.

If you doubt me, feel free to look up the following court cases at your leisure. I can give you many more court cases to support my statement above.

Warren v. District of Columbia

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services

Riss v. City of New York

Keane v. City of Chicago

Morgan v. District of Columbia

Calogrides v. City of Mobile

McKee v. City of Rockwall, Texas

Thurman v. City of Torrington


To clarify - I am in no way trying to say Police are worthless or bad. I have great respect for these underpaid, under appreciated Heroes. Professor Don B. Kates, Jr. explains it better than I ever could. The following is taken from,

Guns, Murders, and the Constitution (Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1990).

Professor Don B. Kates, Jr., eminent civil rights lawyer and criminologist, states:
Even if all 500,000 American police officers were assigned to patrol, they could not protect 240 million citizens from upwards of 10 million criminals who enjoy the luxury of deciding when and where to strike. But we have nothing like 500,000 patrol officers; to determine how many police are actually available for any one shift, we must divide the 500,000 by four (three shifts per day, plus officers who have days off, are on sick leave, etc.). The resulting number must be cut in half to account for officers assigned to investigations, juvenile, records, laboratory, traffic, etc., rather than patrol.

EDUCATE YOURSELF - JOIN THE N.R.A.

Thanx fer reading !!

 

Exactly. I don't know where people get that the 2nd is about hunting. I guess that they need to educate themselves about the Constitution and our history.

 

There actually is no law that states you cannot carry a firearm in a CMV. However individual State laws do control how you may transport a firearm in or thru their specific state, and some states seriously handicap or do not allow transportation. I have a post (on Page 98 Post # 977) that gives some info about a few troublesome states and also lets ya know where to get more info to assist you in not getting into trouble.

I commend you on taking a stand on self protection.

 

All you have to do is wait and the Supreme Court will address the issue in Jan of next year. There has been so much speculation about rights and rights taken away that news concerning current events seem to go un-noticed.
The Supreme Court:
1)- Over-turned a D.C ban on handguns
2)- Will hear, and overturn, a Chicago ban.
3)- Has included the 2nd amendment rights on the docket this term.
New Your City had already seen the handwriting on the wall and instituted possession with permit and training.
We have a liberal government but it is faced with a conservative court. When should conservatism stand up the strongest but when liberalism threatens.
Guys and gals why do you think we have not already had Obamacare stuffed down our throats. The House and Senate have a clear and overwhelming majority simply because the American people wanted change. The liberals see this as a time to proclaim a mandate but forgot one important thing. The will of the America people.
I like a balance between liberalism and conservatism. Too conservative and the courts would still be wearing white wigs and speaking in a strange tongue. Too liberal and this country would be called United America with only a federal government.
I seem to have articulation problems trying to convince people that a balance will ensure the survival of this great nation. The voters in this country get angry at one form of government and try to completely replace it. We end up with a jumping out of the frying pan into the fire senerio.
It seems to work best for "we the people" when the House and Senate are split. It seems best for us when they are fighting each or so to speak.
It also seems best when conservative leaning Supreme Court justices are in power. This does mean that at the right times in life a republican president has to be in office.
I do find it ironic that so many people that claim they can read can not comprehend.
The 2nd Amendment reads;
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.
Does this mean only to hunt? Is there minute stipulations that can be placed on this? No handguns today, only shotguns tomorrow.
Here is something the most scholarly and the most unlearned can understand;
Author and history professor Gary Wills at Northwestern University has written,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second..._Constitution#cite_note-isbn0-684-87026-6-106

"Issues concerning handguns" :
The shooters at Columbine had 2 handguns and two shotguns. There was a rifle but I don't recall anything about it. They also had 99 IED's. How would handgun laws have prevented this? They would have just carried more shotgun bullets and carried the rifle.
Will banning handguns work? In 1995 there were approximately 223 million firearms in the U.S.
8 firearms produced every minute and 3 handguns produced every minute.
(Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime, 7/95, from ATF data)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/more/facts.html
That would mean that in 1995 there were approximately 83,625,000 handguns. In 14 years since, with a 40 hour work week, that would mean the number is somewhere around an additional 62,899,200, or 146,524,200 total handguns. How many of these are in the hands of criminals?
With extreme handgun bans in the U.S. how many would be turned in? How many would not? How many would criminals have?
There are laws concerning securing weapons. Criminals exploit the known and obvious. A little casing and a criminal would know how long it would take to retrieve a rifle or shotgun from a locked gun cabinet.
A handgun(even with a trigger lock) is by far the best weapon of self-defense in a home.

 

I don't know how some people develop their theories and beliefs. All I know, is I have 6 or so hand guns, and I have not shot anybody with any of them so far. Why should they be taken away from me? I stand firmly behind my opinion that the need in this country is NOT for more gun control, but for more responsible citizens.

 

So what about paintball guns? I like my guns and all but I don't want to kill anyone. I'd much rather ping some ####### in the head 5 or 6 times with paintballs. Those suckers sting. Then there are various weapons similar to paintball guns that fire capsaicin ammo. I'd personally like a combination of marking and irritant ammo. I could tell the cops to just look for the screaming orange guy. That would be much more entertaining.

 

Shoot ME with that capsaicin! My old arthritic joints need it!