Visited my local gun shop today...

Because of severe gun control laws it would be very difficult for me to get a permit. If it was easy I would carry.

Why would anyone choose to go into a crime zone unarmed?

 

So, you told the authorities you wanted to carry concealed in Boston for "lawful purposes" and they let you carry?

Are you the mayor?

 

Because most people are rational and know the chance of getting shot in a 'crime zone' is one in a gazillion.

 

Obviously. If I knew how to blur out certain personal info on the computer I would send you a pic of my LTC. Seriously, can we move on?

 

Are you incapable of "shooting hogs" with a single round or two at the most? Sounds like a marksmanship problem if you require a 10 or 20 round magazine for a high powered rifle.

If you reach for a high powered rifle over other firearms such as a hand gun or tactical shot gun for home defense then you're selecting the least capable firearm to defend your family during a home invasion. High powered rifles are designed for effective shooting at ranges of 100 yards or more while the typical home invasion never exceeds about 20 feet to the possible target.

There are people licensed to have fully automatic rifles and there are people licensed to have large explosive devices that can topple large buildings and they don't represent a threat with their fully automatic rifles or their ton of explosives... but other people with the same fully automatic firearms or with a ton of explosives do represent a threat to the public safety.

As long as the Supreme Court of the United States, and the federal courts under the Supreme Court, retain the judicial Power in "all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution" (the delegated authority of the Supreme Court under Article III of the Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court are enforced there isn't a threat to the United States that's "One Nation under our Constitution" (not under God).

There is a threat to that protection today because of some Republicans in Congress that are attempting to undermine the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation with false allegations for partisan reasons to protect President Trump's nefarious criminal activities when we know that Trump has violated the law.

Even without any other evidence the Comey memo's document President Trump lying to the head of the FBI by claiming he never spent the night in Moscow during 2013. In case people missed that lying to the FBI is a felony and Trump lied twice about not spending the night in Moscow because there are literally dozens of witnesses, including his own body guard, that have testified he spent the night.

The DOJ and FBI have the primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with the laws and Constitution of the United States and undermining their creditability endangers the Rule of Law under the Constitution in the United States. Don't worry about the Second Amendment. Worry about the entire Constitution and the Rule of Law in the United States that's being threatened by some members of the GOP in Congress today for purely partisan reasons. Worry about our President that has no regard for the Rule of Law or the Constitution in his actions.

Fortunately the US Supreme Court still retains the final authority so even the nefarious attempts by some GOP members of Congress and President Trump to undermine the Rule of Law and the Constitution will ultimately fail.

 

A battle rifle may not be the best firearm to defend one's home, but it is certainly the best firearm to defend one's town.

 

Yes I've been reading some of the nonsense articles posted about exploding organs from 223 rounds written by people who know next to nothing about firearms.

The 223 round is a rifle round, so it does have more energy as all rounds fired from a rifle do. Longer barrel and all. Hydrostatic shock itself is a much-debated theory on both sides of the concept.

I've seen 556 used on people and it's not some awe inspiring round that hollows someone out when it hits them. If anything, our troops that use it, from Vietnam forward, continually complain about it's effectiveness on the battlefield.

It's a round you can't even legally hunt deer with in most states. It's classified as a "varmint" round.

The Waffle House guy wasn't reloading, his weapon malfunctioned or jammed, rendering it inoperable. While he was screwing with it, someone did manage to disarm him.

Reloading a magazine, unless you've never touched a gun before, is a sub-second action if you've practiced doing it at all.

The Parkland shooter used 10 round mags in his AR.

In a mass shooting, people are going to run away. If they are cornered and have no way to flee, that's the point at which they might fight back unarmed. That's why we have a couple cases where a gunman was disarmed in a place people couldn't flee. Not surprisingly, bare handed attempts to disarm someone shooting at you doesn't have a high success rate.

The Ft. Hood shooting saw multiple trained military folks rush the shooter unarmed, only to be killed in the attempt.

I have not seen anywhere that the Vegas shooter was using 100 round magazines. All I saw and read about were piles of pre-loaded 30 round mags stacked in piles next to the firearms.

The Aurora shooter tried using a 100 round mag and his jammed, causing him to switch weapons. Here's a tip: most large capacity 50 to 100 round drum magazines suck bad. You're more likely to jam than anything else.

A simple pump action shotgun could easily achieve the same or greater amount of destruction, and so can hand guns.

Again, most dead in a school shooting was done with handguns.

Yes, all modern weapon systems can be deployed with sub 10 seconds between shots, easily.

You folks can keep blaming the weapon used all you want until we, too, have our butter knives taken away from us.

The problem isn't that a gun can kill people, the problem is that we have so many people in our society willing to kill others.

And yes, the founding fathers could conceive of technology. The Puckle gun and other types of machine gun type weapons were being created even back then.

Oh, and Whitman used a bolt action rifle to effect one of the worst mass shootings in history, so there goes your "deer rifle" theory.

 

I believe you have a carry permit. please don't post any personal data, but I would like to know if they asked you why you feel that you *need* to carry a gun.

If you have no fear when you are out an about in Boston why get a CCW permit?
Can you paste up a plain text copy of the blank CCW application form?

 

Well, since you're safe, so must be the rest of the country - and thus, we clearly do not need any more gun control laws.

 

Demographics.

 

That depends on where you go in America. All of America's urban Hell holes are dangerous.
Surely you know that.

 

So... what felony have you committed and not yet been caught?

 

So, you are saying you do not actually need a gun and put that on your Boston CCW application and they gave you the permit?

 

I told you why. I was new to the process of getting a gun license. So I asked a friend what I should apply for and he said to go for the LTC. So I did. It's nothing more than that.
You can't google the application form yourself?

 

Your subjective opinion here is meaningless - these firearms are in common use for traditionally lawful purpose and then qualify as 'bearable arms' as the term is used in current jurisprudence. As such, the right to own and use them is protected by the 2nd with same veracity as every other bearable arm.

 

"P rogressive" government has been carefully crafting urban Hell Holes for decades.

 

No I don't know that. Hell holes? Apparently I've missed all these war zones you speak of.

 

So you got a CCW permit - in Boston - just for the hell of it?

 

This statement is false.
Don't try to support your position with false statements.

However true this may be, it means absolutely nothing.

 

Well no, I needed a license to be able to get a gun so I could go target shooting. That's what I use my gun for. I used to go shooting with my dad and never needed a license because I shot his guns but when he passed my brother and I decided to get our license so we could continue target shooting.

 

You should read more American newspapers - or take a little trip to London.

THE INDEPENDENT, London murder rate overtakes New York for first time ever after spate of fatal stabbings and shootings, By Maya Oppenheim, Sunday 1 April 2018.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ate-new-york-overtakes-stabbing-a8283866.html

 

You need a CCW permit to go target shooting in Boston?
Strange place - Boston.

 

Beyond that the Founding Fathers had the blunderbuss and the dragon pistol - rather nasty personal WMDs.

 

Wait...there are murders in areas where millions of people live? I'm shocked...shocked I tell ya....shocked...

 

I don't know about Boston, but there are gun ranges in the state that will rent you a weapon for target shooting at their range