Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

(400) Mayors against (Senator) Thune (concealed weapons) amendment

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 03:40 PM
Original message
(400) Mayors against (Senator) Thune (concealed weapons) amendment
Source: MSNBC

From NBC’s Pete Williams

A group representing more than 400 U.S. mayors is urging Congress to defeat a measure -- one that could come to a vote today in the U.S. Senate -- that would require states granting concealed weapons permits to honor permits issued by any other state.

Whether concealed weapons laws reduce crime is a hotly contested issue, but Sen. John Thune, the South Dakota Republican who proposed the measure, says the laws are effective.

"Since criminals are unable to tell who is and who is not carrying a firearm just by looking at a potential victim,” he said, “they are less likely to commit crimes when they fear that they may come in direct contact with an individual who is armed.”

He added, "Minorities and women tend to be the ones with the most to gain from being allowed to protect themselves.”

All states but two, Illinois and Wisconsin, grant licenses to carry concealed weapons, but the standards vary greatly. Some states, for example, require applicants to take gun safety programs and pass written tests. Others refuse permits to anyone with misdemeanor gun convictions.

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/07/20/2002278.aspx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. Must have a lot of crime up there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politicalboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. So Senator Thune
If I get married in Ca will your state of South Dakota recognize my marriage? Or since I have a prescription for Med Marijuana will you honor my prescription. The answer is NO!. But guns sure why not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Right now, there are cases working their way through the courts
that are indeed based on the FF&C clause of the Constitution, that most likely will allow same-sex marriages to be transportable across state lines.

It's kind of hard to ask for one thing, without being willing to grant the other, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Good point, the same logic applies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #5
22. If my driver's license is good enough to let me travel across state lines with it
then why are none of my other licenses?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. republicans=building a less safe world
by making money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloomington-lib Donating Member (513 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why is it that the pubs preach smaller federal govt and more
local and state power and turn around and say this shit. I don't need the answer, I already know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Maybe because is a Constituional right.
When bigots in the southern states were infringing on the voting rights of some of their citizens, the Feds stepped in with the Voting Rights Act.

Given the gun rights infringing laws in NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, California, etc, its clearly time for a Gun Rights Act that would prevent the anti gun bigots from infringing on gun rights
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Concealed carry is NOT a constitutional right
and the permits are granted locally- and are often based on local records. Interesting though that you would use loaded language like "bigotry."

Tells me that you don't have much grasp of the issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Like a drivers lisc. or marriage cert.
my DL should work in any state in the union. Same with my CCW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. I do it with specific intent
The term "anti gun bigot" is quite correct. Admittedly it is is also provocative and some shades of hyperbole. I use it quite intentionally to shame those who would deny rights to others. If it were people with irrational fears of minority voters, we would have no qualms about using the term bigot. Substitute minority voting for guns and you still have bigotry.

Calling people bigots annoys them but it also makes them consider what they are doing. Gun control in the US started as racist and classist. Laws were written by the whites and the rich to deny blacks in the rural south and the poor in the northern cities access to firearms. That continues today. Places like NYC where the rich can get a pistol permit but a working poor mother can not. The restrictions on the importation of smaller caliber/low cost weapons makes it even harder for the poor (who are mostly minorities) to afford a primary means of self defense.

If it takes strong language and a little hyperbole to get others to face their irrational behavior, so be it. Not sure how any progressive or liberal would consider restricting the rights of others to be a good thing, but some clearly do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. "If it takes strong language and a little hyperbole to get others to face their irrational behavior"
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 08:44 PM by depakid
On this we agree- on your understanding of the issues involved- we may not.

Might be interesting to have some more tête-à-têt, respectfully on this and other issues.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. I stand by the right of Self-Defense...
Everything else is just flowery language to unnecessarily justify what is clearly a natural right.

In short, I agree with you, even though I don't own a firearm and haven't for years. Doesn't mean I won't in the future, when my boys are adults and I no longer have to worry about them getting snoopy while visiting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
S_B_Jackson Donating Member (564 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #10
24. Agreed, it is not a constitutional right...
however you are incorrect in your claim that most permits are issued locally. In the 30+ "shall-issue" states, CCW permits are issued by state agencies (State Police or AG's offices usually), only in the 7 or 8 states that adhere to "may-issue" permitting standards are local authories allowed to apply arbitrary standards to whom they do or do not grant permits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
23. Probably the same reason you see an outpouring of support for "states' rights" from the left
Edited on Tue Jul-21-09 09:01 AM by slackmaster
When the subject is something they disagree with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pasto76 Donating Member (835 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. The shooting at the new life church in colo springs indicates this is bullshit
with all of the self professed 2nd amendment enthusiasts and hundreds of folks leaving that chuech, not one of them had a concealed weapon on them. The shooter managed to get inside of the building before he was shot by an off duty, properly armed, professional security guard.

You can carry guns all you want if you abide by the laws, just dont pretend that you are actually deterring anything.

SGT PASTO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Professional security guard...thats a contradiction in terms
Its takes practically nothing to be a rent-a-cop.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. But sometimes they are actually police officers...
The security firms that provide untrained minimum wage guards are the reason for the poor reputation of the business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Many departments will not allow that kind of moonlighting due to the poor reputation of the industry
And the difficulty in separating police duties from security duties.

A while back I disarmed an idiot LPO who was violating the law by threatening me with a can of pepper spray. His boss (a retired cop) later thanked me for not bringing in the police and fired him on the spot. It was typical of what I see in the rent-a-cop and LPO industries. There is no need to sully the professional cops (who have enough issues of their own) with that kind of behaviors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
19. A VOLUNTEER security guard, actually...
But thanks for playing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #7
21. Churches are often No-Carry zones...
And anyone who was going to shoot one up might well already know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
12. His reasoning is idiotic...
If I wanted to assault someone who I thought might be carrying a weapon, I would come up behind them and whack them on the head. with enough stealth they would have no opportunity to draw their weapon. If I were feeling particularly vicious, I would shoot them from behind. As I am often told by my gun toting friends, the police are never there when you need them, so I would be long gone by the time the sound of gunfire brought them to the scene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Just be really sure you do it right
or you may end up on a slab. With enough stealth is the key to if you are eating cornflakes tomorrow or being pumped full of formalin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
17. This will attract anti-gun beetles in force.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
25. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Dr. Strange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
26. Who put this list together?
Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson is listed, but he supports the bill.
http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm?Id=87572
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC