…Our version of the Castle Doctrine, passed the second reading yesterday, and a hearty well done goes out to the State legislators who supported it. I know I’m supposed to be scared and all should it pass a third reading today and also clear the State Senate, but I ain’t. Here’s why:
1) I like the idea of ridding ourselves of concealed carry permits, and if I understand it correctly, this bill does that. Taking steps to protect oneself is not, in my opinion, any business of any government.
2) Consequences. I’d really like most people to think twice about who may or may not be armed, and who may or may not be competent in handling those arms.
3) If somebody breaks into my house, they will be met with a firearm, whether this bill passes or not. If, in my judgment, my family is in danger, that firearm will be used, again, whether this bill passes or not. If this bill does pass, though, I won’t have to prove myself to a bureaucrat later on who wasn’t in the room to begin with. This is a fundamental issue of liberty: what level of trust does any government “grant” to those who consent to be governed?
This last leads me to why I’m not scared. As misanthropic as I am, I really haven’t seen our streets filled with blood after the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban. The “Wild West” just didn’t happen (and as I recall many thought that it would). I suppose the question, like so many others, comes down to this: Do you trust people or not? If you do, you shouldn’t have anything to worry about. If you don’t (I don’t), fine, but don’t burden my liberty with your mistrust.
Comments 8
You nailed it on the head with your question: “Do you trust people or not?”
Leftists, liberals, progressives, what ever they want to be called theses days, DON’T trust people. Not only with their given rights (2nd amendment, as here) but they don’t trust people enough to use their money justly. They would rather have “wealth” doled out by the government than charitably handed out.
Posted 10 Feb 2009 at 1:04 pm ¶Very well said.
Posted 12 Feb 2009 at 1:55 pm ¶point 1: “cop is minutes away when seconds count.”
point 2. If you carried in the open, while it would make some people unconfortable, do you think it would also make a more polite society?
point 3. that threatning moment in time, whether in your house, for a soldier in Afganistan, or a blackwater operator in Iraq, needs to have the benifit given to those protecting themselves, the United States and loved ones.
Thanks guys. We’ll be watching the Senate and the Gov. closely on this one.
Posted 14 Feb 2009 at 10:11 pm ¶Doug,
Agreed on all points.
Posted 17 Feb 2009 at 10:24 am ¶Hey Shaneman, thanks for stopping by….which reminds me of a post I need to do…
Posted 17 Feb 2009 at 3:31 pm ¶I am a woman and I carry. I carry because I believe i need to protect myself or my children, and property at any given time. I value my right to bear arms to no end. If needed, I will use what i have - they can’t take that from me. I think the passing of HB 228 would help deter criminals and give the law abiding citizens further rights that we deserve. Law enforcement shouldn’t be concerned in my opinion, it would actually make their job easier with less crime. We are law abiding, not criminals. We should have the right to protect our life, family, home etc., without worrying about a permit. I really hope this bill passes. If there are other websites i should visit to show my support, please share them. I feel so strongly about this, I think other states should stand up for themselves. I don’t like the idea of being controlled by the government either. Big government - i think the states need to take their state back! Liberals are trying to ruin “the people” with their socialist tactics. We pay taxes, shouldn’t we be in control and have the say so? It isn’t happening. Beating a dead horse with what we already know…..sorry.
Posted 07 Mar 2009 at 5:42 pm ¶I am in support of this bill. As a 125 Lb woman I carry a handgun for self defense. It is the only tool that equals me with a 250 Lb would be rapist. If I am attacked and I LAWFULLY defend myself, I should not have to prove that I am innocent. It should be the other way around. This law would not hamper the police. They are going to investigate anyway, and if one acted wrongly they will be punished. As far as the part eliminating the need for permits in cities, I am going to continue to renew mine as an option. I like the reciprocity when I travel to Idaho. I would prefer to see the restriction removed on concealed carry in restaurants that sell beer, banks and public gatherings. It is a pain to have to switch from concealed carry to open carry to be able to have the ability to protect myself in such places. When I carry I do not drink. The law should read that it is illegal to consume alcohol while carrying.
Posted 12 Mar 2009 at 2:46 am ¶Thanks for the comments and the support, ladies. As for where else to go to voice that support, might I suggest hitting up our State Senators, as that is where the fight is next. I plan to follow this one all the way to the end, so when there’s news, I’ll hope to get to it in as timely a fashion as possible. Unfortunately, I didn’t get that done responding to your comments, and for that I do apologize, but thanks again for stopping by.
Posted 13 Mar 2009 at 11:29 am ¶Post a Comment