🇳🇱
NICE! As much as I hate the right every once in a while they do something good. Apparently now states **must** issue permits to carry a handgun to anyone who requests it unless they have an explicit reason not to (like they have a criminal history)... This makes all states "shall issue" states!
This is great, am really excited to see the #2A being expanded!
https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-guns-decision-second-amendment-new-york-2022-6
@freemo Firstly, this is from last year, it's not new. Secondly, it's based on some bizarre legal theory, creating a legal principle that did not previously exist and does not make sense: specifically, that the state can pass gun control laws only if there is are "historical roots" for the law in question. So it's (again) the court making up the law it wants, rather than the law it's got.
Thirdly though, and most importantly, why is this a good thing? You're a gun nut, I get it, and that's fine - you're a responsible gun owner and all that.* But why does the fact that responsible owners are responsible mean that it's a good thing for everyone to be given a gun for the asking, even if there is no reason to believe they know what they're doing or will be responsible? We don't give cars to people who haven't demonstrated they can drive safely, for the good and sufficient reason that in incompetent hands they're lethal, and cars aren't even designed to be lethal weapons.
*Personally, I don't get why you would have a need to carry a gun in public, and open carry in particular is physically intimidating to others in the same way that walking around with a large and aggressive dog is. So I must say I think it's particularly anti-social. But that's not a safety issue, merely a courtesy one.
Open carry benefits those around you as a direct deterrent to criminal behavior. The sight of the weapon on a competent looking man or woman says, "F* around and find out" to would be evil doers.
The large dog can serve a similar purpose IF it is well trained and not threatening to act wildly on its own. (Guns don't often have the problem of acting on their own. When they are improperly holstered, the bearer feet tend to be the victims.)
If anything Open Carry means better trained and more responsibke people can carry and display it while people who are twitchy ir not well suited to carry a gun can not carry one but still indirectly benefit from its protection.
Personally id say open carrying is a civil service if well trained.
@freemo @sdgathman You two as gun lovers think open carry is reassuring. I as a person who doesn't interact with them much find someone carrying a gun intimidating. If I ask you why you are carrying one, you will say "For protection", or similar, but that reassurance from someone I don't know means nothing. Are you drunk? Are you a drug dealer? Are you psychotic? If I disagree with you? If I cut you off in the car? If I spill your beer or trip over your foot or turn out to think Trump is the antichrist? Safer simply not to interact with you, so I won't unless I have to.
One thing you and I likely agree on. Driving drunk (or otherwise intoxicated) is a crime (or should be), and so is carrying lethal force like a gun while drunk (or should be). It's one thing to be "twitchy", and quite a more deadly thing to be drunk.
My favored weapon would be ancient long bow (3 rounds/sec 12 round "magazine"), but I haven't had 5 acres min for beginners practice (shots go wild, like with an ancient sling shot). So crossbow is equivalent to a musket in self defense, actually loads a bit faster than a musket, is quiet, and uses non-toxic materials.
Anyone prepared to defend themselves (even with non-lethal force) should sign up with a legal defense organization for self defense. You will be persecuted legally if you survive an attack.