U.S. Veterans Should CC Without the Redtape

[Pepper46]

When you start exempting anyone based on status in the community, wheter it be a judge, or vet., you are asking for trouble, kinda like the immigration thing, no exemptions period.
Follow the rules, as they apply to everyone.

 

[Art Eatman]

The issue isn't "Who gets to carry?" The original question has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

Basically, the question has to do with rewarding veterans by eliminating any of the real-world paperwork needed for a CHL.

We live in the real world. If anybody wants a CHL, there's gonna be paperwork and various personal requirements. That's the way it is. So, let's stay away from our general consensus of woulda/coulda/shoulda about what we see as foolish laws. IOW, stick with the main subject.

Art

 

[Jimmie]

As for the original question... I think it's a great idea. It's feasible, especially for now while the country is more or less supportive of the military. And it'd be one more segment of society that could exercise their 2A rights. If you tackle it one segment at a time, before you know it, all of society is covered. Airline pilots need to preven hijackings. Military members are already trained (at least that's the sales pitch.) Postal carriers need protection from rabid dogs. Garbage men... and on down the list until all of society is liberated.

 

[kludge]

I have an idea!

Everyone should be allowed to carry without the red tape, but in lieu of that...

Every four years your driver's license expires.

When you renew everyone automatically gets a background check.

If you pass they mail you a drivers licence with a blue background in the photo.

If you fail you get one with a red backround in the photo.

Everybody with a blue background can:

• get into a bar
• buy a handgun
• carry a handgun

No more registra... *ahem* I mean Brady background checks! Nobody know who owns guns and who doesn't, it's just pre-approval. You can buy a gun anywhere, in any state, at any time.

Pay the tax, get a AOW, NFA, whatever.

 

[fletcher]

If they didn't think it was necessary, why do you?

Where are you pulling this from? I have not once here advocated or supported a requirement for training. I merely stated that in the current state of things, nobody should be exempt from the current requirements, whatever they may be.

Ideally, anyone who can be trusted to own a firearm should be able to carry one.

 

[Gewehr98]

Guess again.

I will take pot shots at those air boys all day, every day, for ever and ever, amen.

Not here at THR, you won't. You *might* find the door...

 

[Langenator]

Just to play devil's advocate...veterans overall aren't necessarily any better or more law abiding than non-veterans. Even elite troops.

Or did you miss the Rangers who robbed the bank?

Apparently they used some AK-47s that they snuck back from wherever they'd been for the job.

Oh, and all Rangers have security clearances. The background check for those entails a bit more snooping than what goes on to buy a gun or get a CCW permit. Fat lot of good that did.

 

[Soybomb]

Veterans, I think, should be allowed to conceal carry in any state without having to go through the training and fees.

They have already been trained.

Absolutely. In fact I'll take it a step further and say we all should be able to. We already have states where people can carry with no license or training and no one has been able to show me that its a problem.

 

[Alphazulu6]

...

 

[scout26]

Lee Harvey Oswald
Charles Whitman
Timothy McVeigh

Nope, sorry, we're not anymore special then anyone else. And none of us recieve any training on use of force or particular state laws for CCW. In fact not too many service members ever see a sidearm, much less familiarize or even ever qualify with one.

Bad idea.

 

[Sergeant Sabre]

As a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, I disagree with allowing vets to carry without the "red tape.