In my case (CC permit) they run your finger prints through the crime computers to see if you have criminal record and they have up to 45 days to issue your carry permit. This check includes an FBI check also.
Apologies. Saw this post: Am I the only one who finds this humorous and salutes the man with the 2X4 for his cleverness? Didn't realize it was from the first page of this thread, and was responding.
Partly, yes. Why is that a problem? The secure and appropriate storage of guns is a part of responsible gun ownership right?
If the purpose of owning a gun is hunting then there is no real need to have it stored at home unless you're genuinely living in the middle of nowhere.
I've already said I don't buy the home defence argument. If a gun is stored properly at home, then it's locked away. In which case it's usefulness in home defence is greatly diminished. So if you fear for your life that much, you're money would likely be better spent investing in a panic room or some sort of monitored alarm system.
It's extremely unlikely anybody in America is going to take up arms against their state or federal governments in any serious way that will make a difference. Successive governments have already curtailed your rights over the decades and most Americans haven't even noticed. It's also extremely unlikely that any country with the capacity to launch an invasion on America is ever going to do so.
Now I'm take a wild guess here. But I'm fairly certain the police in the USA would really prefer civilians did not get themselves involved in mob justice or take the law into their own hands.
So it's entirely appropriate now to ask why people need guns at all much less need so many of them? And if people are to have guns, under what conditions should they be allowed to own guns, store guns, use guns and what types of guns should they be allowed?
If the answer is self defence, then the question as to why America is such a lawless country really needs to be addressed.
There is no reason guns cannot be safly stored in the home. There are a plethora of gun safes and lock available. Even some allowing for quick access like this type: http://www.meijer.com/s/gunvault-multivault-deluxe-gun-safe/_/R-170423;jsessionid=2C6C1A1FB5EC8269F26AE5443C30FE0D.instance01?CAWELAID=699987275&cagpspn=pla&cmpid=Google-G_US_Meijer_eCom_PLA_Sporting_Goods&kpid=GV2000CDLX
Safe storage in the home is also not inconsistent with self-defense. Our safe is next to our bed and has a push-button combination lock. I can get the safe open faster than I can get to a phone and dial 911.
Storage in the home allows for frequent maintenance much better than storage at a gun club does. This is important for everyone's safety.
The storage at a gun club group has never explained why putting thousands of guns in one clearly-marked building, outside of city limits, with nobody there overnight would reduce gun theft instead of increasing gun theft. Seems to me a terrible idea.
Totaly agree. But that should include the choice of "where" is upon said "responsible owner" (key word- "responsible")
Many hunters do not store their guns near where game is taken. They have to transport it from somewhere, like their home.
I have known a few people who have used a gun for defense. I have also known a person to be held prisoner in their home when they went into their panic room. They simply could not leave the room. That said, the gun for defense should not be about protection of property-IMHO, but mainly protection of life. Guns can be secured in the home and taken out upon readiness when the residents are home. I know a few people who once they get home, they removed their defense gun from security and stashed it in ready mode. Then when they leave their home, they locked it secure again.
Somwhat agree. But the US ownership is more of a right to have it. Hiding behind the constitution is one way of keeping the government in check.
Many officers I have spoken to, rather have a armed-trained civilian to take up the unbalance of police coverage. Many metro police departments are under-staffed. The most likely discussion I have had with officers is to remove the quantity of firearms in wrongful circulation and get more law-biding firearm owners into a better responsible-trained mode.
This could be said of knives, bombings, etc. You seem to not understand, that the gun is only the tool, not the main problem.
Because, unless you have been raised into a society (esp a rural area) which already has guns as a part of, and that you do not want to get shot, then you will understand.
As I said in one of my other posts, it is easy to be a "Armchair Quarterback"
Just how much first-hand experience with gun clubs do you have?
The Medford Gun Club is open three days per week, four hours per day. There's no employees; it's run by volunteers and members. It's comparable to your friendly neighborhood goju-ryu dojo, not comparable to a large corporate bank. This is pretty typical.
Do you have paid employees standing guard at your martial arts club 24-7? Of course not. Why do you expect that any other hobbyist club has the resources for that sort of thing?
If I remember correctly Akiwolfie is in the UK. The gun clubs there I am sure are run differently than the ones in the US. I understand in the UK you are required to keep guns at a club, having a security guard present might well be the norm there, possibly even required. I'm sure someone here will fill us in.
I just want to know what the first-hand basis for all these regulations are that he's proposing. Is it because he is intimately familiar with the operations of UK gun clubs? Or is he someone with no first-hand experience with firearms who is proposing regulations for something he doesn't understand?
I normally don't demand that someone explain the basis for their opinion, but when that person has done the same to me (I think it was him who demanded of me "do you own a gun and why"...and yes, I own a Browning BPS and have posted pictures in another thread), and that same person is proposing numerous specific regulations in a haughty and condescending tone, I think the question needs to be asked.
We wouldn't want someone with no martial arts experience explaining "sensible" rules about when and how karate could be practiced, even after a shocking incident like the Bobby Joe Blythe attack. Why should someone with no firearms experience and presumably no experience in gun clubs be telling everyone in snarky tones how gun clubs should have sole custody of constitutionally-protected private property?
I am interested in hearing how this storage process works in the UK. Also who can not buy a gun there? Whatever else we might say, they don't seem to have problems with shooting like we do. We are different countries so their solutions might not work as well here, but that also doesn't mean they do not have any good methods.
The issue with stabbings isn't nearly as bad as the issue with guns in the US. But we've still taken steps to get it under control and eradicate the problem.
Well if I remember rightly there are something on the order of 3 million AR-15s in the USA, which is just the tip of the iceberg when considering all guns privately owned in the USA. If a gun owner needs to be a member of a gun club to own a gun then a market is instantly created to support clubs that are open more frequently with full time professional staff.