Kibby said:
I've had a CC permit here in NH for years, but now they removed the requirement.
OK, here we go on another one of my rants/dissertations/books again :roll: ....LOL
Here goes:
Although I am a resident of SC, I also have a NH CC permit, as having this permit gives me reciprocity with states not covered by the SC CWP. To get the NH permit, I think I did have to show a copy of my SC permit, as well as giving references, which, for that, I gave references of people I know with SCDNR that can vouch for my character. Isn't that dumb as hell that a driver's license is valid in all 50 states, but a CWP is subject to all kinds of restrictions, ifs, ands, or buts.....such as; this one is only good in this state, and this one is only good here, etc?
Especially considering that any idiot can get a DL, as long as they can pass a written test that only requires about a 75 IQ to pass, and a very simple road test that has to do more with parking a vehicle, and less with driving it. Get out on the roads sometime and pay close attention to other drivers, you will realize what I say is true, the roads are full of mental midgets that have no business being behind the wheel of a 4000 pound weapon.
But, to get a CWP, you have to pass an FBI background check, you are fingerprinted just like a criminal, then you have to ask permission and pay fees to exercise your right. (Oh, but people want to piss and moan about having to get a 10 dollar DL to show as photo ID to vote, saying that's a "poll tax" that discriminates against minorities....try exercising your right to own a gun if you want to see discrimination and oppression, ya freaking crybabies!!) To exercise your 2A rights, you're actually subjected to more scrutiny than an applicant for a LE job.
The 2A is NON-NEGOTIABLE, period. ANY laws that regulate firearms are a direct violation of this constitutional right. But don't expect the ACLU to come to your defense.....they're too busy making sure the election system is still gonna allow dead people, convicted felons and illegal aliens to vote, or suing a school for a teacher displaying a US flag or saying the pledge of allegiance, or suing some state for trying to stop the tidal wave coming across the Mexican border.
And forget the NRA defending gun rights.....all those ***-kissers know how to do is compromise and piece-meal away our constitutional rights, in an effort to appease the anti-gunners. The 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, and the 1986 FOPA were all brought to you by the fine folks in the NRA, that simply do not understand how to deal with the enemies of freedom and liberty.
It's not "compromise, appease, and tip-toe on eggshells" it's "NO COMPROMISE, NO SURRENDER!!" Just as the rattlesnake on the Gadsden Flag says "Don't Tread On Me"
Period. Anything less is inexcusable and unacceptable.
To the NRA: Stop apologizing every time some psycho on a rampage shoots up a place, stop letting the anti-gunners throw the guilt trip upon the NRA and all gun owners....and stop placing blame on the gun, or even the shooter himself.... and instead, lay the blame squarely upon the shoulders of who is responsible for such acts....the legislators and dictators who tell the peasants they cannot carry their firearms for protection.
Everywhere a mass shooting has taken place (such as the recent one in CO) the people are prohibited from carrying firearms. And, just as a side note, in every nation where genocide or ethnic cleansing has taken place.....the citizens have been disarmed, just as they were by the 1934 German Firearms Act, which, BTW, the 1968 GCA is virtually a carbon copy of.
The only way we will get firearms laws overturned, is the same way we got rid of alcohol prohibition.....for everyone to blatantly violate the laws, and then for juries to nullify charges and throw it out of court. If this happens enough times, they will stop enforcing these ridiculous laws, and once they stop enforcing them, they will be removed from the books. It happened with alcohol prohibition, and it can be made to happen with the 20,000 firearms laws on the books.
It's just going to take jurors with the courage, common sense, and wisdom to forget about that "basing their verdict on the law as it is read to them" and instead ask themselves one simple question when they go to deliberate:
"was anyone actually harmed by this alleged crime?"
If so, then by all means, convict the SOB and throw him under the jail. But if not, then, let's stop wasting taxpayer money to convict/defend and/or incarcerate this guy...send him home, with an apology from the arresting officers and the court.
Sorry for the rant! :LOL2:
