Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 1361775" data-attributes="member: 14668">I would say that my attitude is the rule among those who have gone to the time, trouble, expense, background checks and training that are required to get a concealed carry permit.Carrying concealed brings with it a greater need for training an accountability than merely owning a gun, so I don&#039;t have a problem with the idea of requiring those who wish to do so to obtain a license on a &quot;shall issue&quot; basis.What I do have a problem with...is those licenses being issued solely at the whim of unaccountable, anti-gun bureaucrats and politicians, or worse yet being denied altogether with no recourse or due process.Statistically, far more people die in traffic accidents than thru guns, yet drivers licenses are &quot;shall issue&quot; in all 50 states and reciprocal in all 50 states and we never hear anyone screaming and hollering about waiting periods or additional restrictions on drivers licenses or car purchases.The fact of the matter is that as far as concealed handgun permits go, the worst fears of the anti-gun crown...blood in the streets and gunfights on every corner....simply have not materialized. Licensed carriers are not the problem and this has been proven in 36 states now over the last 20+ years.There is simply no rational basis for granting a carry permit to a trained, law-abiding person in Oregon while denying one to a trained and law-abiding person who lives in Chicago or Washington DC.I have an Oregon drivers license which is perfectly valid and allows me to freely drive a car in Chicago or Washington DC and no one questions or disputes that this should be the case. Why should a gun license be any different?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="soberups, post: 1361775, member: 14668"] I would say that my attitude[B] is[/B] the rule among those who have gone to the time, trouble, expense, background checks and training that are required to get a concealed carry permit. Carrying concealed brings with it a greater need for training an accountability than merely owning a gun, so I don't have a problem with the idea of requiring those who wish to do so to obtain a license on a "shall issue" basis. What I [B]do[/B] have a problem with...is those licenses being issued solely at the whim of unaccountable, anti-gun bureaucrats and politicians, or worse yet being denied altogether with no recourse or due process. Statistically, [B]far[/B] more people die in traffic accidents than thru guns, yet drivers licenses are "shall issue" in all 50 states and reciprocal in all 50 states and we never hear anyone screaming and hollering about waiting periods or additional restrictions on drivers licenses or car purchases. The fact of the matter is that as far as concealed handgun permits go, the worst fears of the anti-gun crown...blood in the streets and gunfights on every corner....simply have not materialized. Licensed carriers are [B]not[/B] the problem and this has been [B]proven[/B] in 36 states now over the last 20+ years. There is simply no rational basis for granting a carry permit to a trained, law-abiding person in Oregon while denying one to a trained and law-abiding person who lives in Chicago or Washington DC. I have an Oregon [I]drivers[/I] license which is perfectly valid and allows me to freely drive a car in Chicago or Washington DC and no one questions or disputes that this should be the case. Why should a gun license be any different? [/QUOTE]

Verification