http://www.theunionleader.com/article.aspx...99e9fb3-af40-40ff-b0f1-e2dbde0ebe3e

Basically, the bill proposes if you can legally buy a firearm, you can legally carry concealed without first obtaining a permit from your local chief of police (like we do now). This would make our carry law similar or same as VT. Doesn't really change much for me, I already have my permit.

If you have time to read the comments at the bottom, prepare to make your brain hurt -- morons on both sides of the issue. Christ, people are fucking stupid...

nice, let the people be armed. funny how the nay-sayers always use the "THERE WILL BE MASSACRE'S EVERYWHERE". if anything this will prevent massacres. if a guy runs into an establishment and moves to open fire on everyone, he'll be dead before he starts, considering everyone is armed.

Yeah, because we have massacres every day in Vermont.

I'd be 100% fine with banning firearms across the country.

It really wouldn't change anything -- NH currently can't deny you a carry permit if you are legally allowed to purchase/own a gun. Everytime you buy a firearm (for both handguns and long guns), the store has to call in your info to the Feds for a background check -- if you are a convicted felon, then no gun for you. I love the people who commented "O NOES, NOW GANG MEMBERS WILL HAVE SHOOTOUTS IN THE STREETZ!1!!" If "gang members" have guns, they didn't buy them at the local gun shop.

Then again, equally moronic comments from the other side as well.

Move to Great Britain, sounds like they have laws that are better suited for you there. Then again, you do live in the correct state for this kind of opinion. I'm not going to bother arguing with you, have a nice day.

THE BLOODSOAKED STREETS OF BURLINGTON

I knew that my comment would spark opposition. I did live in NH before MA, fyi. It's a beautiful state, and while I'm no stranger to shooting guns myself, I don't think it's necessary for civilians to have them. I know that people with guns kill people (not the guns themselves), but generally speaking, a place is safer with no guns.

So I suppose that means you're anti-hunting as well? Most of my guns are for hunting, with only 1 handgun that is soley for personal protection.

Again, I'm not going to argue with you, best of luck.

True, a place during peace time is safer with no guns, especially if there are children in the house. And though I am vegan, I support hunting your own game, so long as it's for food, not "fun". I think "personal protection" is a poor excuse to own a gun. But when shit hits the fan, I want to be packing.

There are pros and cons to both extremities, but we have a "right" to bear arms in this country.

Hypothetically speaking, think of it this way:

Say if China or some other country decides to invade the US on our soil. Yes, it has never really been done before (sans Pearl Harbor, but that was planned out - I'll save that for another thread) but there is always a possibility of it happening given the world we live in today.
So here we have China invading America with their troops marching down our streets, threatening civilians and killing us for the sole reason of being American and not Chinese. How would we fight back? How would we defend our families? With kitchen knives?
Fuck that, we need firearms. We can't rely on our military for protection of our civilians any more. We've just broken the 300,000,000 mark for citizens in this country. With the money and funding thrown at the Military Industrial Complex and the compartmentalization of their different offices strewn about, I would rather die with a gun in my hand than a kitchen knife.
I'm starting to think that our government cares less and less about your average citizen; this has grown to be evident for those who were in the middle class. It doesn't exist anymore. We are but peons on a large chess board, and the people playing the game don't care if they lose a few pawns.
I'm not sure how I feel about citizens owning semi-automatic weapons, but I 100% back our right to own guns. Whether it be pistols, shotguns, or potato launchers.

We're not arguing, just discussing the topic. I do not oppose hunting for necessity; I only find fault in reckless killing for "sport." This is just my personal belief though, and I also believe in personal freedom, that you or anyone else can do whatever you want in your own time as long as it doesn't infringe on my quality of life.

Thanks for the well wishes, best of luck to you too!

@aril: You really think that if China wanted to attack us, they would send in a human invasion by air or sea? That is crazy talk. Bio/electronic warfare would be more likely to follow after supply trade has been cut off.

I think "killing people" is a perfect reason to own a gun.

Freak, I know you're a big guy, but how do you conceal carry a hunting rifle?

Handguns have specific targets in mind - humans. Ever try to kill off that deadly poisonous snake with a .45 from 10 feet? How about a charging rhino with a .22?

Nope. Guns are for killing people. People invading your right to life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness. Personal protection? Maybe, but not likely. Invading armies? Maybe, not likely. Looters, rioters, etc.. if the bottom doth truly drop out? Maybe.

Point is, I want one. I want to be familiar, accurate, and completely LETHAL with one if I EVER NEED TO BE.

"people with guns kill people".

NO

FUCKING with people with guns gets people killed. There's a big difference in viewpoint there.

"FUCKING with people with guns gets people killed."

If you're implying that guns are only utilized by rational people who are provoked and have exhausted all their other options to resolve that conflict, then you live in a world full of candy rainbows.

ITT: Get shot, whine about it.

I live in the woods, neighbors are not close by. Someone could easily break a window and come in the house. If they have a firearm, I and my wife are fucked -- except for the fact that I'm armed to the teeth and sleep with a loaded handgun next to my bed.

I hunt because I greatly enjoy it, but I do eat everything I kill.

As Aril said, citizens can not depend on the government for protection. I don't know about you, but most cops (most, not all) that I've met aren't all that bright, and are the last people I would count on for protection. If someone who is a career criminal wants a gun, they will find a way to get one, regardless of whether firearms are legal are not.

no. they could also EMP us and render all of our electronics useless.

but they have a massive army.. why not send troops over? I was just using it as a hypothetical situation anyway. I was stressing the point that if we had someone marching down our streets (government, aliens, china, canada, etc), we would have to defend our families with something more than a kitchen knife.

Haha, we should hang out. Haven't figured out how to conceal a shotgun yet, but I did just pick up a .44 mag with a 7 1/2" barrel, with the purpose of using it for deer or bear hunting. My shoulder holster conceals it if my jacket is long enough. Plus, the thing is so fucking fun to shoot -- probably doing some more target shooting tomorrow.

I'll admit, I am a gun nut. I love target shooting, clay shooting, hunting and the peace-of-mind they offer my paranoid brain. Firearms aren't for everyone, but the 2nd Amendment is the 2nd Amendment, if you want to purchase a gun, get one. I would recommend a firearms safety course for anyone who is getting into shooting though.

Don't forget zombies...

I have a neat throwing axe I got at King Richard's Faire.

I understand where you're coming from living in the woods, I would probably do the same in addition to installing a security alarm system. I have no problem with your hunting style, following what I said previously.

My problem with the right to carry is the different world that America was, back when the law was made. While it is true about anything that if you want something bad enough, you can find a way to obtain it, many countries operate much more peacefully with a ban on guns. Law enforcement discussions aside, our country is overzealous about gun ownership. Owning a gun gives you security against an attacker if you find yourself in a position that you have one available if you need to use it, but it does not make your life safer.

I hypothesize that the quality of our law enforcement and any excessive force issues, racial profiling, etc., would be improved if cops did not carry guns. The role of an officer would be more authoritative, and less of the glamorized power figure that it currently is to some hopeful cadets who have something to prove.

Alex, do you watch the news? Ever?

Bet those kids in Libya are damned happy they have guns.

And egypt.

I'm not saying we're due for immediate revolt.

What I AM saying, is when an anti-gun person like yourself finds themselves surrounded by violence, revolt, looting, or any other number of REAL events happening all around the world, you'll be damned glad to have a neighbor like me or Freak who has acquired firearms and trained ourselves to safely and efficiently use them.

I'd just like to say that he does not speak for Mass residents, and there is NO SUCH THING as "BANNING FIREARMS" thank you.

actually, the local police chief can deny your request or hold it up for a looooooong ass time.

In a revolution scenario, or if there was widespread looting/pillaging tomorrow for whatever reason, I could only hope that you'd be on my side, and not against me. I live in a more urban setting than largefreakatzero, and since we're not due for immediate revolt, I'd prefer it if none of my friendly neighbors had guns.

The more pertinent situation is the reality that we live in today. Our country has a lot of morons (on either side of the law) that do not need to have guns, but do. I don't subscribe to the idea that having a gun will protect me against someone else who has a gun. I work in trauma at a Boston hospital and it is a constant reminder that guns in the wrong hands lead to bad things, so that is where I'm coming from. A lot more people die from guns than are saved by them... just saying. I hope owning a gun helps dissipate any paranoia you catch from watching your news.

@ark: I'll ban your blastbeats as they pose an imminent threat to the children.

Learning burst beats to stay ahead of the curve.

I'll see you in Lethal Weapon 5.

bbl, moving to great britain lulz

People die from all kinds of things, Alex. But I've never killed anyone. Neither has Freak. And banning guns would only effect US, not the people sending folks to your ER.

Point is preparedness, practicality, safety, and accuracy. You can't just pick up a gun and hit what you aim at. People that think like that cause the accidents putting people in the ER. (or just plain criminals with illegal firearms). Safety, training, practice, are necessary. And while your desire for a ban would take that away from us, it would do NOTHING to prevent crimes committed with illegal firearms - which is the MAJORITY of gun-related fatalities.

And for the record, if I were in your neighborhood and there were unrest, I'd be the first guy volunteering a shift watching to keep looters and troublemakers out of our neighborhood.

And THAT is the people you want to take guns away from by banning them.

Meanwhile joe wigger six pack can mow down some guy that looked at him wrong using a gun stolen out of a store or residence that has been off the books since 1982, and nothing about a ban will ever stop him.

"A well armed populace is the best defense against tyranny."

Yer so smart shnookie.

You should swing by sometime, haven't seen ya in a billion years.

I realize the gap between people who are trained to handle guns and those who buy them on the street for whatever reason. It is the latter that brings people into the ED more often, obviously. I am no expert on gun control but I assume that a lot of the illegal guns on the street were legal at one point or another, and then stolen.

I'm not trying to start a movement here, just saying that if it came to a vote, refer to my original post. Not that it will, as all past efforts to rewrite the language of that amendment have been futile. I hope you have read my previous statements about personal freedoms as well.

"The point at which I have a problem with someone who swings their fists around is right when it hits my nose."

Preparedness is fine, but if China attacks, good luck staving them off with your personal arsenal.

I'm not worried about china attacking.

You seem to ignore out own social and economic climate right now. We don't need guns to protect from invading armies.

Now how about when enough people have had their unemployment benefits cut long enough for them to be desperate to feed themselves and family?

That becomes a little more real, a little more likely.

I thought it was obvious but to clarify, that part of my response regarding China was toward arilliusbm's lunacy, not yours.

When the unemployed hordes unite in a rage of militant song and dance, I'm quite sure they won't head to your place for food. But who knows, since the dollar's value is declining, maybe guns will be the next source of currency. I better start stockpiling too, there's oh so much to be afraid of...

I almost finished with my homemade 9mm slavshit smg. BATFE can suck my bawls.

remember your trigger dicipline.

Also: Alex, when you're talking about disasters and such - with societal upheaval more than anything - "time to buy a gun" is too late to buy a gun. When the bottom drops out of the economy for good (or whatever other petty bullshit finally sets it off), it becomes a moot point.

It's easy to tell ourselves we don't live in Egypt and that we're in no danger of armed insurrection. Takes one bad day on Wall Street to tip that applecart right over, and this pot's been boiling for going on 200 years, now.

No, I know there's plenty of guys I've met from MA that are die-hard hunters and card-carrying NRA members. I was referring to your borderline unconstitutional gun laws, not the residents themselves.

Yes, I know they do pull that, but you can fight it in court. It should be no more than 2 weeks by NH law that they should take in issuing the permit. If they deny it, it must be because of a criminal record, or something to that effect. Depends on how far you're willing to take it. Luckily, I've never had a problem.

Good to know I'm not the only paranoid one. IMO the next 5 to 10 years is going to get ugly. This country is in a decline -- hard tellin' not knowin' what's to come.

i don't know but i would imagine it would go something like cats and dogs living together, rivers and seas boiling and then mass hysteria.

Here's a bizarre one: http://www.newser.com/story/114060/calif-l...-fast-track-right-to-pack-heat.html

California politicians want to be able to carry -- instead of changing the law for everyone, they only want to change it for themselves. Shitty, IMO.

Haha, wow. Typical.

Well, obviously politicians are more responsible and more trustworthy than the rest of us...oh wait.

You serious?
Politicians are nothing but a mere representation of the general beliefs of the local citizenry, nothing more. Nothing should seperate them from your average citizen; we vote them into office to speak for us.
But alas, how it not so. They are, in most cases, upperclass people who feel some sort of entitlement because of their position. They'd take money over their own values. Politicians are corrupt to begin with; no law shall cater solely to that of politicians.

Dude, totally not serious. SM: 2837982748237910238473281947 *tilt*

Just ask Mojo, they're LYYYYYIINNNNNN' COCKSUCKERS!!!!

Figures.. didn't clink it

It has been about that long. I'll definitely come down sometime. At the same place I'm assuming?

Conceal carry laws are fine in rural/semi-suburban settings but there are serious issues if you start extending that to cities. Urban environments are very stressful to humans, particularly walking thought cities when your brain has to deal with dozens or hundreds of new human faces at a time.

Given the amount of bullshit fights that break out in bars, I would posit that guns would cause more damage/loss of life since drunk people cannot be counted on for anything resembling reasonableness. Especially with particular people and their tendency towards aggressive behavior. Homo urbanus: go ahead and use some kind of non-lethal weapon instead.

yup

currently unemployed. Shithole job finally fired me. Oddly, I'm actually happy about it. That place ate my soul. Now it's growing back slowly.

In Guns We Trust

Don't "Posit". Go find some facts. There's plenty of states already allowing conceal carry - find me some instances of people whipping out guns and killing each other in bars at an alarming rate.

Otherwise, it's pussy warry-wart rhetoric from someone completely uneducated on the subject. The same kind of pussy warry-wart rhetoric already tying up the vast majority of our political system. Maybe instead of talking about what they don't know, they could shut the hell up and spend time learning instead.

Meanwhile, conceal carry is NOT a license to shoot people. Pull the trigger, and deal with a potential lifetime of loss, legal troubles, and much much worse ramifications. People are going to break rules. Sometimes with lethal results. But the same is true of automobiles, a PRIVILEGE people treat like it's their RIGHT to drive as fast as they want, however they want. People will fight like hell to keep and defend this privilege to drive, but then turn around and criticize the lethal ramifications of a constitutionally given RIGHT to own a gun. RETARDED BACK ASSWARDS LIBERAL PUSSY CRAP, that's what I think of that.

And if you disagree, I will shoot you.



JK

eloquently put. last night i was hanging out with some friends and this guy was carrying a concealed pistol. i thought it was great.

Minnesota ain't have no problems with concealed weapons.
When I was growing up in Texas, motherfuckers would have shotguns Xed in the back window of their truck cabin cause they don't give a fuck.

SM: I'LL FUCKING KILL YOU

LOL

Clearly you didn't bother to actually check on anything I wrote. I'd be happy to provide you with articles and studies showing that urban environments are stressful to humans. As for my positing, what the fuck is wrong with throwing out an idea? I didn't claim any facts, with the exception that drunk people are more likely to be aggressive and unreasonable, which I doubt you would contest.

I don't see how my suggesting people carrying weapons that have less potential to kill people based on a snap-judgement makes me a pussy. And there's no correlation to draw between people driving and carrying concealed weapons. People die in car accidents when cars fuck up and do not do what they are supposed to, people die from gunfire because the gun did exactly what it was designed to do. Regardless, my view on driving is that its become this sick perversion of American views on private property ("my car, I can do what I want, fuck everyone if I'm driving dangerously in a car which damages public health").

How about you me some examples of cities(above 100,000 people at least) where people are given blanket permission to carry concealed firearms. I'll happily change my view if presented with evidence.

You'll be happy to change your view unsupported by evidence if provided with contrary evidence?

NO FUCKING WAY.

Next, I'll be wiping your chin, cleaning your ass, and putting away your gym sock for you. Do your own work, you're the one "positing".

Was it in a city with more than 100,000 people, or at a bar? Because if it was, your friend would clearly need to start indiscriminately firing at people.

In Worcester that'll barely earn you 2 wanted stars.

Owning a gun is all the evidence you need to be right about anything. Such fundamentals are what this nation was built upon.

GTA: Worcester - I need to start working on this ASAP.

True DYA, This state itself would be a great layout for a new GTA. Worcester would be good for a shorter zombie survival game with heavy ICP influence.

Coercive authority: Not so bad if you squint real hard and pretend it's not there.

Might makes right isn't pretty, but it's never going away as long as one human wants something another has. We just hang a lot of pretty words and make it really complicated so it doesn't FEEL that way.

1 man with a gun = a robber
10 men with guns = a gang
100 men with guns = a militia
1000 men with guns and 10 guys in suits telling them what to do = a government

All a matter of scale.

Gun ownership should be mandatory and all guns should shoot circular sawblades. ONLY THE ZERO POINT ENERGY FIELD MANIPULATOR IS REAL

THE END

So you're proposing there would be a gang building buddy system to the game? Sounds good to me, but there might be some genre confusion (FPS/RTS/MMO) if too many people join up!

Not proposing, pointing out that this is how it's ALWAYS worked since one dude told another dude, "you can't do [X] anymore and here's why" with a rock in his hand. It's all gradation and illusion separating any government ever from any other band of brigands. So attacking gun ownership with a "might makes right" argument is like criticizing owners of heavy rocks because "well, what if gravitation acceleration suddenly equaled 9.8 meters/second squared and they started falling, you ever think of that?" It's a given, inescapable as rain in April.

(I'm engaging in some mild hyperbole here, but this stuff always tickles me.)

Oh wait, you're talking about the game. HERP DERP.

ME SMART, MAEK A INTERNET

LOL consider yourself tickled.

Absolutely right. Currently, if you even pull a gun on someone, you can be prosecuted for criminal threatening. Followed by the po-po taking ALL of your beloved firearms. You need to prove that you are substantially threatened, and currently need to try the option of retreating before using deadly force.

There's a new bill being voted on tomorrow in the NH House that could change some of that if it passes:

House Bill 210, introduced by state Representative Richard Okerman (R-Rockingham 4), would permit law-abiding citizens to use force, including deadly force, against an attacker in their home and any place outside of their home where they have a legal right to be. In the face of unlawful attack, law-abiding citizens should not be forced to retreat or run from a place they have a right to be.

210 is in answer to a guy up north who ended up doing time because he was holding a gun when he told a woman to get off of his property - didn't point it at her, only brandished it. She rose a stink, and he got fucked, which pissed off 3/4 of the state, hence the 210 law.

Also, another one allowing you to keep your piece(s) in a locked vehicle:

HB 235, introduced by state Representative Gary Hopper (R- Hillsborough 7), would permit the carrying of a firearm in one’s locked personal motor vehicle and prohibit a business entity from banning an employee, customer, or invitee from possessing a firearm in such person’s locked motor vehicle while on the business entity’s premises.

I'm all for anti-gun laws as long as they're enforced by police armed with sticks and strong language.

I am cheerfully asking you for evidence to back up your assertions and you're just giving me livid vitriol. I have revised my positions and admitted my error in numerous discussions as contentious as this, give me evidence don't just yell like a fucking child.

As for the articles I referred to, I can email you pdfs as I don't think they're available free online.

Ribald haberdashery?

No, you're making an uneducated point, with no relevant evidence available in the wide array of current statistics and evidence, and then demanding others prove THEMSELVES when they call you on talking out of your bum.

Why should I even so much a GOOGLE for you, when you're the one making the point? I'm not your research assistant. You said "I thnk X" I say burden of proof is on you, because I feel that by taking time to do your own research you might

1) learn something
2) in the future take time to grasp a subject before you jump in and "posit"

I wasn't implying that you were my research assistant, I just wanted you to supply evidence to back up your point as I offered to do for mine. So that we could both
1) learn something from each other
2) have a discussion rather than a shouting match

It is hard to draw a positive or negative correlation between opening up of conceal carry laws over the past 25 and the firearm homicide rate. I was very wrong to assume that there was data to support my position, and the truth is it doesn't obviously support it. However, I believe that it is a bad idea to allow urban populations to arm themselves in the long run. I'm not saying that concealed carry laws give people a license or a reason to just shoot someone. What I'm saying is that it creates a context in which it is much easier for someone to get shot for a trivial reason.

Example: Men in lower-income areas of cities can be prone to act in rash ways to resolve jealousy issues. The position of being in a relatively low-status position can lead individuals to take extreme risks over what people in general might call "trivial incidents". Since cities characteristically group those with low-status together one would expect more of these explosive "trivial incidents" to occur and cause problems, and indeed that is borne out in research. (Wilson, David S. Evolution for Everyone, p 94-96)

So, would it not make sense to err on the side of caution and arm less rather than just arming everyone (who-is-able-to-obtain-a-permit)?

The japs said they didn't invade during ww2 specifically because they were under the impression that all Americans had guns! Admiral Yamamoto said "there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".

I live in NH and have my permit, no problem. The only difference is they get $10 for like 4 years with a permit and if the new law passes they won't. You don't need any permit to buy a gun now, the only difference is they won't get $10 from residents, big deal. To anyone who says there will be gun slingers in all the bars . . I go to the bar, with my gun and haven't shot anyone yet. You can who most of the folks who have guns and who don't. The ones that don't make up scenarios that are unlikely out our fear.

So hopping on the first one-way rocket off this rock; once there are no frontiers left on Earth, there's nowhere to go but backwards. Can't wait to Get My Ass to Mars.

Owning a gun isn't just for shooting people, there are lots you can do with them. I own a .22 pistol, plan on getting a .45 and a couple rifles. I have my concealed carry permit. I'm in the Army and every year we have a shooting competition that I want to be a part of and I own a gun for practice and such.

Compared to the national scale, NH is one of the top 5 safest states. To my knowledge, there is not a lot of gun crime happening but I could be naive. Also, committing a crime with a gun and expecting to get away with it is really dumb because you spend about an hour filling out paperwork while the gun shop owner calls the government to run a background check on you. Your signature is on official paperwork along with the gun you just registered. You would only be incriminating yourself which is the reason why you don't see a lot of people just popping off shots at others.

bennyhillifier

Could be my naïevety and love of statistics, but aren't states with looser gun laws normally safer?

This.

Guns are a necessary evil in this world. Considering how easy it is for criminals and people who carry them for means of harming others to get em' on the street, everyone who is a legal, law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry.

...briefly, I have to say it's the most disgusting feeling to have a gun pulled on you. I went to a Dubstep rave last week in San Fransicko and as I was hiding my belongings in my car ('cause I parked in a sketchy neighborhood) a cop walked up and pointed his gun at me. I'd rather have one and not need it than need one and not have it, but, if I was carrying that night I would have gotten hassled waaaaaay more than I did. Supposedly, people were robbing cars in the 'hood and me in my black hooodie, hood up, fit the description. Happy drugs were more than necessary that night despite whether or not they were on the agenda...

hahahaha ever since San Andreas came out i realized my life mission is to become a billionaire so i can pay Rockstar Games to create this. one of the main reasons is because i want to drive 200 mph through Kelley Square.

do it in real life with your new car u won't or is you pussy a

I'm from MA, prettyfuckingliberal, and I don't think guns should be banned. I think the drug laws should be lifted so gangs have less to shoot each other over. That'll do more to decrease gun death than banning firearms.

Arizona is a concealed carry state and no one shot that lunatic who plugged the nice politician lady Sarah Palin put a hit out on sooooo

Yup, pretty much.

Nope, one idiot firing into a crowd is lethal enough. They instead jumped on him and took him the fuck down. Now the question is, how many people with the balls to do that would have been at the rally for the ANTI gun representative? (Giffords was pro-gun)

Yup.

Indeed.

Hahaha, fucking perfect.

Anytime that "indeed" is uttered or written, I always think of Omar. Best gay character EVAR.

people think everyone owning a gun will be like the wild west, difference is no one who owns doesnt own a gun now is going to rush out to buy one if this bill passes.

and gangstas get gones illegally just like all people with criminal intent do.

WUT?

THIS MAN'S A FRUIT

Kiwi or mango?