The evil of the handgun permitting process

More than two decades ago, Tennessee passed a "shall-issue" handgun carry law, requiring the Tennessee Department of Safety to issue a handgun carry permit to any citizen who takes the required training, has a clean record, is mentally competent, and has enough money to pay for the privilege.

Source: Jeff Dege, used with permission

As the animated graphic shows, states have continually enacted laws, that have gone variously from no issue to may issue to shall issue. And some have moved all the way to Constitutional Carry! The legislatures and governors of these states have been recognizing that the typical crime does not occur when the police are nearby. Most crimes occur outside the home. Police most often can only clean up after the crime, take a report and start looking for the perpetrator.

While the permitting process in Tennessee and other states has certainly improved the situation for citizens, they still place an undue burden on the peaceful citizen, but not on the criminal.

In Vermont, it is lawful to carry a firearm openly or concealed provided the firearm is not carried with the intent or avowed purpose of injuring a fellow man. No permit is needed. Thus, in Vermont, citizens are not required to get a permit to carry a firearm. The State of Vermont has long recognized the right of its good citizens to defend themselves while away from home without the need of a permit.

In 2014, Tennessee joined most of the surrounding states, and does do not require a permit to carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle, but still requires a permit if one is to carry a handgun on or about the person. 

No Leland, no!

Today, we learn from the Firearms Policy Coalition that the Town of Leland, NC, has banned "dangerous weapons"

RESTRICTIONS ON POSSESSION, TRANSPORATION, AND TRANSFER OF DANGEROUS WEAPONS AND SUBSTANCES 

Effective at 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 12, 2018, the transportation or possession, or the sale or purchase of dangerous weapons or substances, while off one’s own premises, is prohibited. This prohibition and restriction does not apply to lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition.

We've been through this before. Officials in their officialdom (often while surrounded by tax-paid armed security) attempt to disarm the citizenry. You must evacuate, lowly resident, and you must abrogate your Constitutional Rights while doing so.

And the good city fathers expect law officers to be able to discern between lawfully and unlawfully possessed firearms or ammunition.

Just no!

Federal funding for guns in schools - why not?

Last night, August 23, Jason Chaffetz guest hosted The Ingraham Angle on Fox News. He had a segment about the proposal to provide Federal funding to arm school staff.

Chaffetz's guests were Igor Volsky of an organization known as Guns Down, and Laura Carno, founder of FASTER Colorado.

FASTER stands for Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response.
FASTER training enables teachers, administrators and other school employees to stop school violence quickly and administer medical aid immediately. FASTER is not intended as a replacement for Police and EMTs. Instead, it enables on-site personnel to save lives through prompt action.

 HERE is the link to their debate.

WP Clip Art

The problem having no armed security, or even SRO's here and there, is time. As correctly stated by a Federal judge and the Michigan Attorney General (in a case involving guns in a home with foster children), criminals don't call ahead for an appointment. Neither do school invaders.

Volsky's stance was that the police should be called. That attitude brings us back to the time problem. Chaffetz brought up his coach in high school, mentioned his credentials, and asked what about him having a gun (in school). Volsky begrudgingly agreed that with such proper training, it would be OK (to arm some school staff).

Well Duh!

That's what FASTER is all about.

Carno gave a well-reasoned argument for the FASTER program. Well done!

. . . Volsky also commented that he wanted to reduce the number of guns in the United States.

Not gonna happen!

Consider this. Recent published estimates place the number of guns in private American citizens' hands at somewhere around four hundred million. That is approaching half a billion. . . .and considering that prior to the Nazi inspired Gun Control Act of 1968, there were no government records kept, there just might be a few more!

Just suppose Volsky and company could get a law passed reducing the number of legal guns to absolute 0, who is going door-to door to collect?

What do you think?