This crazy world

[strmwalker]

I wouldn't have a problem requiring all permit holders to through a basic firearms self defense course. Might separate the wannabee's from folks that have the proper skills and judgement capabilities.

this where I disagree I DO NOT believe in a PERMIT to do what is your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bare arms ;
now with that said I have no problem with a background check !!!

[fishingpox]

I think in that same link I read where Philly city parks are off limit.

From the link. Phila is the only pace in the state where open carry is prohibited without a permit.
You do need a license to carry a concealed weapon on streets or most other public places in Pennsylvania, as well as in cars and trucks. And in Philadelphia you need one to carry a gun openly, in a holster. But in the rest of the state a license isn’t necessary for “open carry.” As for schools, the law’s murkier than you might think, but the chances are you’ll be stopped if you try to take a gun into a school.

[Shellback]

this where I disagree I DO NOT believe in a PERMIT to do what is your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bare arms ;
now with that said I have no problem with a background check !!!

If you believe in the constitutional right to bear arms, then why should we require background checks? Here's the text of the second amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Doesn't say anything about background checks. If we go by the second amendment, I'd have to believe any nut case has the right to bear arms. I whole heartily agree an experienced armed citizen could have prevent many deaths in Colorado or Connecticut. But someone who just happened to pass a background and bought a gun to carry? Not so sure about that. I would hope that you would want your local police force to have proficiency tests for guns. Not so unreasonable to require an armed citizen to pass some type of test.

[strmwalker]

So if you pass a background check, anybody should be able to carry?

now understand that we have a right to agree to disagree !!!I did not say a word about requiring nothing !!! what I said is I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH A BACKGROUD CHECK that's a big difference !!!

if you pass the background check and want to carry then yes !!!

[strmwalker]

I whole heartily agree an experienced armed citizen could have prevent many deaths in Colorado or Connecticut. .

here again is where we have to agree to disagree!!! a gun did not and will not kill anybody it is the person not the weapon !!! is it the car that went out and got drunk that killed ??? is it the knife ??? is it the ax ??? it all comes back to the individual with the object !!!! NOT THE OBJECT !!!!

[Lowellhturner]

As far as "properly trained", here is an UNDISPUTABLE fact: in combat situations, 25% of all common infantry soldiers DO NOT actually AIM ie LOOK THRU the sights, they simply point the weapon and shoot in the general direction of the enemy. And 15% of ALL US Army troops CAN NOT be taught to ACCURATELY navigate using a map and compass...and these same troops are NOT entrusted with bayonetes in peace time because there is no SAFETY built on them...YES, let`s arm EVERYONE who legally can be and then dive for cover...

[Lowellhturner]

And BTW, the 2cnd Amendment was referring to MUSKETS and light cannon, NOT machine guns, assault weapons, tanks, jet attack aircraft and nukes...

[strmwalker]

And BTW, the 2cnd Amendment was referring to MUSKETS and light cannon, NOT machine guns, assault weapons, tanks, jet attack aircraft and nukes...

no one said anything about machine guns,assault weapons,tanks,jet attack aircraft and nukes !!! I hope one day you can clear your head of all the deranged thoughts going on in there and have a intelligent come back and stay on topic to a post !!!!

[deathb4disco]

And BTW, the 2cnd Amendment was referring to MUSKETS and light cannon, NOT machine guns, assault weapons, tanks, jet attack aircraft and nukes...

So the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to phones, faxes, email and the internet?

[HLLeonard]

So the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to phones, faxes, email and the internet?

--
That is a good question..... I would still be uncomfortable with john Q Citizen having machine guns, assault weapons, attack aircraft and nukes.