Jump to content

Guns and 2nd Amendment continued: open carry backlash?


DanteGabriel

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

MC,

The problem is now those who do worship at the alter of the Constitution.  We might see real change in our lifetime but it's still going to be a while.

 

Could it realistically be done in today's political environment?  Could either side give up ideological points in order to put a framework together that could last 200+ years or would scoring points trash the entire process?  More importantly would the entire union survive or would states start threatening to splinter in order to score those same political points?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

MC,

They also thought warrants being necessary prior to searches, freedom of speech, press, and religion were important.  Should those be chucked because they were wrong about slavery and women's sufferge?

Or, perhaps, people being wrong about some things may not make them wrong about everything.

Scott, 

This is a fallacious argument you're making here. The contention was not 'it's in the Constitution and therefore must be wrong' because of slavery et al, but rather is refuting the contention that it being in the Constitution does not make it right, as per slavery etc. No one is arguing that everything in the constitution is wrong. No one is arguing that slavery makes freedom of speech wrong. All anyone is arguing is that slavery shows that something being in the Constitution doesn't make it right.

Not sure if that was just professional habit or an accident, but you falsely inverted the argument to disprove a straw man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to decide what to get once my permit comes through.  My sister carries a .40 cal pistol for work, and since CT limits me to a ten a round clip, I kind of feel like I should go larger than  9mm anyway.  Got any recommendations?

We're a concealed carry state. So something too large is probably not a great idea, but I kind of like the idea of a 1911.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SkynJay said:

Could it realistically be done in today's political environment?  Could either side give up ideological points in order to put a framework together that could last 200+ years or would scoring points trash the entire process?  More importantly would the entire union survive or would states start threatening to splinter in order to score those same political points?

 

Would it be the end of the world if the US did splinter into smaller States?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James Arryn said:

Scott, 

This is a fallacious argument you're making here. The contention was not 'it's in the Constitution and therefore must be wrong' because of slavery et al, but rather is refuting the contention that it being in the Constitution does not make it right, as per slavery etc. No one is arguing that everything in the constitution is wrong. No one is arguing that slavery makes freedom of speech wrong. All anyone is arguing is that slavery shows that something being in the Constitution doesn't make it right.

Not sure if that was just professional habit or an accident, but you falsely inverted the argument to disprove a straw man. 

James,

I was pointing out that saying that because slavery was in the Constitution other portions of the document are necessarily suspect was itself a problematic argument because it, necessarily, calls into question all provisions of the Constitution in the same fashion.  

I agree that the individual provisions of the Constitution are moral or immoral on their own merits.  That said morality or immorality of indivudual provisions of the Constitution should have little or no bearing upon whether those provisions should have force and effect.  Ignoring portions of the Constitution because you happen to find that provision immoral calls into question the validity of all provisions based upon others moral views.  That creates serious problems if you want law to be universally enforceable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mcbigski said:

Trying to decide what to get once my permit comes through.  My sister carries a .40 cal pistol for work, and since CT limits me to a ten a round clip, I kind of feel like I should go larger than  9mm anyway.  Got any recommendations?

We're a concealed carry state. So something too large is probably not a great idea, but I kind of like the idea of a 1911.

In most professional circles the caliber debate seems to have been settled, and the 9mm has won. That said, a major advantage of the 9mm - namely its higher ammunition capacity - is negated by your state's 10-round magazine limit.

The remaining 9mm advantages, however, are increased controllability, quicker follow up shots due to reduced muzzle lift, reduced muzzle flash at night, and cheaper ammo allowing more practice time with your gun.

With quality modern Hollow Point ammunition the terminal performance of the 9mm is very close to that of the 40 and 45 calibers. Real pity about your state's magazine capacity limit though, else the choice would have been an easy one.

So caliber wise I say go with what you prefer, but brand wise I would not go with a 1911. A polymer Glock 19 or CZ P07 Duty would be far superior for Every Day Carry purposes.

I have 2 9mm Glocks, for what it's worth, and couldn't be happier with my choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, mcbigski said:

Trying to decide what to get once my permit comes through.  My sister carries a .40 cal pistol for work, and since CT limits me to a ten a round clip, I kind of feel like I should go larger than  9mm anyway.  Got any recommendations?

We're a concealed carry state. So something too large is probably not a great idea, but I kind of like the idea of a 1911.

go large, and hard as hell, similar to one of the protagonists of the vorrh, who carries one of these.  i kinda want one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is reduced muzzle flash a thing for consideration for anyone planning on using it for self-defense? In what scenario will reducing the flashing at the muzzle during firing aid in self-defense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, TerraPrime said:

Why is reduced muzzle flash a thing for consideration for anyone planning on using it for self-defense? In what scenario will reducing the flashing at the muzzle during firing aid in self-defense?

Reduce the temporary blinding effect from the muzzle flash at night.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sologdin said:

go large, and hard as hell, similar to one of the protagonists of the vorrh, who carries one of these.  i kinda want one.

My pops owns a s&w .500. One day it will be mine.  When I get it I hope to get a concealed weapon permit for this firearm that can kill anything in North America.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MercifulChief said:

My pops owns a s&w .500. One day it will be mine.  When I get it I hope to get a concealed weapon permit for this firearm that can kill anything in North America.  

 

I think it would represent a very great challenge to conceal that beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MercifulChief said:

I would wear it awkwardly across my chest beneath a jacket. None would fuck with me.  All grizzlies, polar bears and moose would step aside.

so you've essentially ceded asia to the tigers and the seven seas to sharks?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MercifulChief said:

I think it will kill a shark or a tiger as well. Only shot coconuts and squash with it so far. They bowed to its supremacy. 

To be fair, coconut is a bit nuts and the squash is quite squishy. Methinks sample size could use expanding along the veggie/animal axis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TerraPrime said:

To be fair, coconut is a bit nuts and the squash is quite squishy. Methinks sample size could use expanding along the veggie/animal axis.

$3 a bullet places unfortunate limits on how many fruits, nuts, and vegetables get blasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, MercifulChief said:

When dad bought it the seller threw in five boxes of ammo.  I was free to shoot to my hearts content.

As I've said before, I don't particularly enjoy shooting. It is fun for about 10 minutes or so, then I tend to become bored with it. To me, a gun is a tool. The defensive capabilities it provides to me is where the main attraction lies.

It means I can defend my family against any number of unforeseen threats. And that is my main priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

As I've said before, I don't particularly enjoy shooting. It is fun for about 10 minutes or so, then I tend to become bored with it. To me, a gun is a tool. The defensive capabilities it provides to me is where the main attraction lies.

It means I can defend my family against any number of unforeseen threats. And that is my main priority.

Please keep in mind that presence of the the gun also poses a (unforeseen and unthinkable) threat to your family. And treat it as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...