The exact reason you should be able to carry your gun on public transportation and in public

[Aim1]

Besides the fact that there aren't enough cops to protect you in public, public transportation is public, not private and you should be able to carry your gun there.



NY states that you can't carry in sensitive areas like subways and public transportation......this is exactly why you need to be able to carry there.


Citizens can't legally carry guns here but criminals certainly do and murdered people with knives, weapons, and their hands and feet.



https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/09/7-killed-on-subway-in-gun-controlled-nyc/

 

[AlexanderA]

Carrying is not the crux of the gun-rights debate. Possession is. I think we're putting the cart before the horse by focusing so much on the carrying aspect. After all, you can't carry what you can't own.

 

[Mikhail Weiss]

When the law does not serve the people but instead imperils them, where is the incentive to follow such law? Where is the moral authority of such law?

Oh. Wait. We know the answer.

That said, the victim in the story appears to have missed his opportunity to disengage. That said, the story also identifies him as working in security (among other things), which may have incentivized him hold the villain for arrest. Alas.

 

[Aim1]

When the law does not serve the people but instead imperils them, where is the incentive to follow such law? Where is the moral authority of such law?

Oh. Wait. We know the answer.

That said, the victim in the story appears to have missed his opportunity to disengage. That said, the story also identifies him as working in security (among other things), which may have incentivized him hold the villain for arrest. Alas.

Perhaps in this case.

I saw one this year where a woman was "pushed" onto the tracks by a man in front of bystanders who didn't help and died when the train hit her.

She wasn't pushed. The man picked her up and dropped her numerous times because she was fighting him and eventually he was able to carry her to the tracks and throw her on.


They made it sound like she was standing at the edge and he gave her one shove onto the tracks.


One of the most horrible things I've ever seen.

 

[BJung]

So that the General Public learns that Gun Owners are good and normal people. I am a Californian and am not a use to seeing people carrying guns in Public. Even seeing concealed guns make me nervous. If it bothers me, then it would make the majority of Californians nervous and (most likely) any Liberal. Yet, when I was young, I could ride my bicycle downtown to the city limits to go shooting. What changed but respect. Carrying guns in some cities would be a problem too. I will assume you live in a more rural area. Guns are tools. But in some cities, the punks there think guns are for imposing yourself on others to rob or rape. Their mindset is different unlike (I assume) you. And so, open carry would be hard to promote allowing punks and gangs to walk around with their guns.

 

[Tinman357]

BJung

The punks, thugs, and gangs are already walking around with their guns. And using them quite often to kill, rob, and rape.

Unconstitutional laws only affect the law abiding. Not the criminals.

 

[MedWheeler]

BJung writes:

I am a Californian and am not a use to seeing people carrying guns in Public. Even seeing concealed guns make me nervous. If it bothers me, then it would make the majority of Californians nervous and (most likely) any Liberal. Yet, when I was young, I could ride my bicycle downtown to the city limits to go shooting. What changed but respect. Carrying guns in some cities would be a problem too.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. It sounds like you disagree with law-abiding people carrying because certain "sensitive" (i.e.: weak) people might be made nervous. Is that correct?

To date (and I've lived through a lot of dates), I have yet to see where law-abiding folks being armed has been a problem to anyone other than the "selectively-offended", nor have I seen any scenario where such has lead to more crime.

 

[George Dickel]

So that the General Public learns that Gun Owners are good and normal people. I am a Californian and am not a use to seeing people carrying guns in Public. Even seeing concealed guns make me nervous. If it bothers me, then it would make the majority of Californians nervous and (most likely) any Liberal. Yet, when I was young, I could ride my bicycle downtown to the city limits to go shooting. What changed but respect. Carrying guns in some cities would be a problem too. I will assume you live in a more rural area. Guns are tools. But in some cities, the punks there think guns are for imposing yourself on others to rob or rape. Their mindset is different unlike (I assume) you. And so, open carry would be hard to promote allowing punks and gangs to walk around with their guns.

Your statements sounds like you are more afraid of people who have been subjected to a background check and issued a carry permit. Why?
You have nothing to fear about me legally carrying a firearm for my protection from the "punks" you mentioned.

 

[BJung]

Your statements sounds like you are more afraid of people who have been subjected to a background check and issued a carry permit. Why?
You have nothing to fear about me legally carrying a firearm for my protection from the "punks" you mentioned.

I travelled out of State and saw a few people with open carry and noticed some with concealed. I know you guys that carry them are okay, just the same shooters I meet at the shooting range or wherever. It's unnerving only because it's never seen around here in CA. I grew up with guns around shooting bb guns, reloading.. But here in CA, the Liberals will turn you in at once if the Government asks them to.

 

[Wolfshead]

 

[Demi-human]

It's unnerving only because…(snip)

…Where you live now is so repressive. Their, expressed or implied, messaging is working.
Studies prove, however, that more people concerned with their own personal safety is a much better situation than being at the will of villains while we wait the allotted eleven minutes for the government officials to arrive, only to file the notes on scene, after the fact.

I, will necessarily have to, imagine nude beaches to be similarly unnerving, however, that is the law of that land. As well, no more humans drown at a nude beach than a regular one, statistically.

Remember how stressful the first time behind the wheel is? Because it’s novel, and new, it’s exhilarating. Now it’s normal, I hope. Because after seeing it a few times without negative reinforcement it’s not scary anymore, right?

 

[entropy]

So that the General Public learns that Gun Owners are good and normal people. I am a Californian and am not a use to seeing people carrying guns in Public. Even seeing concealed guns make me nervous. If it bothers me, then it would make the majority of Californians nervous and (most likely) any Liberal. Yet, when I was young, I could ride my bicycle downtown to the city limits to go shooting. What changed but respect. Carrying guns in some cities would be a problem too. I will assume you live in a more rural area. Guns are tools. But in some cities, the punks there think guns are for imposing yourself on others to rob or rape. Their mindset is different unlike (I assume) you. And so, open carry would be hard to promote allowing punks and gangs to walk around with their guns.

Got news for you. Those who carry guns for nefarious purposes do not often carry them openly even in States where this is legal. ( For those who can legally do so.) There are three reasons for this:
Ignorance. Many criminals don't know some states even allow open carry. They want the element of surprise. They don't want to set off any alarms in potential victims heads until the have control. Third, not surprisingly, is they don't want every cop they come across to FI (field interview) and run their name. Much easier to do (even to the non criminal open carrier) if they gat is out.

 

[Hokkmike]

Because there is no reason you shouldn't.....

 

[Smaug]

Besides the fact that there aren't enough cops to protect you in public, public transportation is public, not private and you should be able to carry your gun there.

NY states that you can't carry in sensitive areas like subways and public transportation......this is exactly why you need to be able to carry there.

Citizens can't legally carry guns here but criminals certainly do and murdered people with knives, weapons, and their hands and feet.

NY has a long history of making it illegal for folks to protect themselves with a gun. I think they're concerned more about the bystanders who may accidentally be shot than one or two guys fighting.

When they make laws like this, "Gun-free Zones" what they're REALLY making is target rich environments for crooks.

It's a bad situation, because if I carried anyway, protected myself (illegally) and lived, they would make the rest of my life a mess. Maybe endangering it even more by throwing me in prison or costing me my life's savings to protect myself in court. It's an awful situation to have to ask: "Would I rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6?"

Let's go a bit west to Greenwood, IN, where that mall shooter was stopped by a citizen packing heat: IN is a constitutional carry state, but the mall was a "Gun-free Zone". He chose to carry concealed anyhow. If it didn't turn out (relatively) so well, he could have been run through the ringer by the owners of the mall for violating their "Gun-free zone". The mall owners could be considering backlash if they go after him; like a completely boycott of the mall.

How would this pan out if a mugger approached a guy in the subway in NYC, the intended victim pulled his CCW and ventilated him? (assuming no bystanders were hit) I bet NYC would press charges anyway against the guy who defended himself, just to make a public example.

 

[Ethan Verity]

Carrying is not the crux of the gun-rights debate. Possession is. I think we're putting the cart before the horse by focusing so much on the carrying aspect. After all, you can't carry what you can't own.

I feel the two go hand in hand. If I wasn't allowed to carry my handguns, I probably wouldn't even bother owning them... they are completely worthless to me locked up in the gun safe at home, if I'm being attacked on the street.

 

[F-111 John]

NY states that you can't carry in sensitive areas like subways and public transportation......this is exactly why you need to be able to carry there.

In someplace like NYC where car ownership is low, if you can carry at point A, and you can carry at point B, but you must use public transportation in order to get from point A to point B, you should be allowed to carry on public transportation.

 

[.308 Norma]

If I wasn't allowed to carry my handguns, I probably wouldn't even bother owning them... they are completely worthless to me locked up in the gun safe at home, if I'm being attacked on the street.

What about all of the guns folks lose in "boating accidents?" I read about those a lot - even right here on THR. It seems to me that guns on the bottom of lakes or reservoirs (because they became illegal to own) are every bit as "worthless" as guns left in safes at home because it's illegal to carry them.

 

[SSN Vet]

My daughter went to school in NYC and rode subways extensively. She went back after graduating and tried to make it on her own there. She's abroad visiting her sister now, and moving home to figure out the next phase of her life afterwards. Hopefully, that means goodbye NYC. I'll be so happy to be done with NYC.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Virtue signaling progressive local government officials here in Colorado have been asked to show the overwhelming rates of malfeasance caused by permitted carriers in the 18 years of "Shall Issue". They can't, so they just resort to "feelings" and emotional talking points while attempting to restrict lawful carry. It's truly patronizing and disgusting.

 

[BJung]

…Where you live now is so repressive. Their, expressed or implied, messaging is working.
Studies prove, however, that more people concerned with their own personal safety is a much better situation than being at the will of villains while we wait the allotted eleven minutes for the government officials to arrive, only to file the notes on scene, after the fact.

I, will necessarily have to, imagine nude beaches to be similarly unnerving, however, that is the law of that land. As well, no more humans drown at a nude beach than a regular one, statistically.

Remember how stressful the first time behind the wheel is? Because it’s novel, and new, it’s exhilarating. Now it’s normal, I hope. Because after seeing it a few times without negative reinforcement it’s not scary anymore, right?

I try this by letting my neighbors know that I shoot. And, in the process, I think they are a use to me be a shooter. But still, they are Liberals and Liberals are part of a Gun Controlling/ Anti-2nd Amendment Party.

 

[Aim1]

Virtue signaling progressive local government officials here in Colorado have been asked to show the overwhelming rates of malfeasance caused by permitted carriers in the 18 years of "Shall Issue". They can't, so they just resort to "feelings" and emotional talking points while attempting to restrict lawful carry. It's truly patronizing and disgusting.

Well, before any state becomes a carry state the usual "It'll become the Wild West" slogan is thrown out there.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Well, before any state becomes a carry state the usual "It'll become the Wild West" slogan is thrown out there.

The problem is that we have been a "Shall Issue" carry state for 18 years- a fact that has rubbed Puritanical Progressives wrong the whole time. The Triple D state government, unhappily politically unable to extinguish carry in the whole state, instead authorized local municipalities to wage war on the 2A and carry within their own fiefdoms. The goal being making EDC legally impossible for anybody who lives or works near the major population centers. Remember- the life and happiness of the misunderstood and marginalized thug is far more important than your or your family's lives.

 

[MedWheeler]

BJung writes:

I try this by letting my neighbors know that I shoot. And, in the process, I think they are a use to me be a shooter. But still, they are Liberals and Liberals are part of a Gun Controlling/ Anti-2nd Amendment Party.

Yes, they are.
You admit that you have been indoctrinated by the political environment of your home state to be "nervous around the lawfully-armed." However, you have taken steps to break free from that. Good on you.

 

[Insignificant bill]

So that the General Public learns that Gun Owners are good and normal people. I am a Californian and am not a use to seeing people carrying guns in Public. Even seeing concealed guns make me nervous. If it bothers me, then it would make the majority of Californians nervous and (most likely) any Liberal. Yet, when I was young, I could ride my bicycle downtown to the city limits to go shooting. What changed but respect. Carrying guns in some cities would be a problem too. I will assume you live in a more rural area. Guns are tools. But in some cities, the punks there think guns are for imposing yourself on others to rob or rape. Their mindset is different unlike (I assume) you. And so, open carry would be hard to promote allowing punks and gangs to walk around with their guns.

huh? Thats the same bs argument used against Permitless carry.
It is false propaganda
al

NY has a long history of making it illegal for folks to protect themselves with a gun. I think they're concerned more about the bystanders who may accidentally be shot than one or two guys fighting.

When they make laws like this, "Gun-free Zones" what they're REALLY making is target rich environments for crooks.

It's a bad situation, because if I carried anyway, protected myself (illegally) and lived, they would make the rest of my life a mess. Maybe endangering it even more by throwing me in prison or costing me my life's savings to protect myself in court. It's an awful situation to have to ask: "Would I rather be judged by 12 or carried by 6?"

Let's go a bit west to Greenwood, IN, where that mall shooter was stopped by a citizen packing heat: IN is a constitutional carry state, but the mall was a "Gun-free Zone". He chose to carry concealed anyhow. If it didn't turn out (relatively) so well, he could have been run through the ringer by the owners of the mall for violating their "Gun-free zone". The mall owners could be considering backlash if they go after him; like a completely boycott of the mall.

How would this pan out if a mugger approached a guy in the subway in NYC, the intended victim pulled his CCW and ventilated him? (assuming no bystanders were hit) I bet NYC would press charges anyway against the guy who defended himself, just to make a public example.

Those signs in Indiana have no force of law behind them. They have to ask you to leave.

 

[BJung]

I'm not arguing with you guys against open carry or concealed. Frankly, I'm personally not into carrying open myself but wouldn't mind having the option. But as for CA, I'm just telling you what the mentality is here. The only exception might be in the NE section near Oregon and the both the Sierra foothills and the area east of the Sierras.