Trivia Test: Gun Laws

[nomb]

Let me preface this by stating that my own thoughts on the issue are complicated, mostly by the fact that I think the wrong people are gun owners.

By that I mean - I've met a number of irresponsible or wannabe Rambo gun owners that make me more than uncomfortable. (I was in a unit with a 2 hour standby to unsupported combat. My cooks were a classic example, a few carried Rambo knives, personal handguns and garrotes in a bid for bad-ass certification by props & proximity.)

I also know many far-left liberal's of various Jewish denominations who have told me that because of their family's personal history they will never, under any circumstance, not own a firearm. I've found these gun owners to be quite responsible and clear-eyed. They also do not as a rule purchase or own weapons whose first purpose is hunting.

Myself, I did not own a private weapon before the service and did not afterwards. This has more to do with the fact that I live the majority of time in Europe, am an urbanite, and have never hunted.

Someday perhaps I'll actually form a firm opinion on where I stand on the gun debate.


OK, on to the test:


#1 Which state has the most lenient gun laws?

Hint: This state allows 18 and over to carry a concealed weapon without any permit, form or application of any kind - whether a resident or not. In an airport, a bar and most everywhere, concealed and loaded. When stopped by the police - no notice of a loaded weapon on your person is required.

#2 Which nation in the news right now sells Silencers of any kind, over the counter without permit to anyone?

[jpak]

1. IBTL

yup

[SteveM]

13. "IBTL:" I Bite The Lizard? nt

[TheWraith]

2. I know the answers to both of these, but I'd like to not spoil things just yet.

And I'd encourage anyone else particularly knowledgeable to consider not spoiling the "reveal" either.

[TheWraith]

3. Seriously, nobody wants to try this? Come on folks, it's fun. :)

[DevonRex]

4. Recusing myself. Unfair advantage due to past employment. Nt

[NightWatcher]

5. re: #1, Are you sure it's 18 and not 21 to own and carry concealed?

[nomb]

8. I double checked before I posted, I actually thought it was 16. n/t

[nomb]

9. Actually, it is 16 year olds that can carry a loaded gun without a permit.

[PavePusher]

16. Umm, I don't think that's right.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/vermont.pdf

[RandomKoolzip]

6. #3: Which forum will this post be moved to?

[petronius]

7. I'll put my guesses in white:

Is it: Vermont, Norway? (Highlight to read)

[nomb]

10. .

y. But I would have loved to do the white out trick. Too cool.

[petronius]

11. It's the font tag:

[font color=white]Type a bunch of text...[/font]

[nomb]

12. For me, the answers point to supporting regulation as, when & where appropriate.

That a liberal, well educated state like Vermont can function safely allowing those 16 and above to carry a loaded handgun concealed anywhere, including bars - while not even being required to inform a police officer when stopped - simply points towards cultural differences.

If the good people of Texas, Oklahoma or Wyoming thought they could safely have the same laws as Vermont, no doubt they would. They quite obviously do not feel that they can.

Therefore guns should be, as they are, regulated when & where appropriate.

That much seems obvious.

[SteveM]

14. "When and where appropriate" I disagree...

But I appreciate your discussing this. Putting into the hands of government (state or national) the power to decide such an amorphous notion is ripe with abuse potential. I do leave it up to the states to govern as they see fit, as long as they do not run afoul of the 14th Amendment's "equal protection clause" which is the case with New York City's Sullivan Laws. These laws are "may issue" and depend heavily on such notions as "when & where appropriate," and which heavily favor celebrities, politicians, sports figures, etc. These folks' lives are no more threatened than a poor citizen living in a crime-ridden neighborhood, and are probably less so.

That said, if Texas wants to have rather high standards for concealed-carry, and Vermont chooses not to have such, then so be it. I don't think it is semantics to say there is a different "standard" for "shall issue" (wherein one passes a BG test, written test, and range test and a state consequently shall cause a license to issue) and the "may issue" standard which is, IMO, about the same as "when & where appropriate."

[PavePusher]

15. Well, except that the laws can change, and do so frequently.

Several more states will almost certainly go Constitutional Carry in the next decade. Sometimes institutional momentum takes a while to redirect.

Your implication is that people in Vermont are more trustworthy than those in other states... and having lived in Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Texas and Utah, as well as several overseas locations, I can pretty much say that this geographical bias is groundless (pun intended).

[gejohnston]

17. easy

edit to wait to see how others answer. Changed font to white

1-Vermont
2-Norway

Extra credit: If not for the "in the news" qualifier, the list would also be Finland, France, New Zealand.