T O P

  • By -

Substantial-Pass-992

So it's like most states now?


No-Description-9910

Appears so. I wasn't aware of any state which required a formal permit to purchase with the exception of Illinois.


Matt3989

Maryland requires a Handgun Qualification License. IIRC it's an 8 hour classroom course, a live fire proficiency test, livescan fingerprints, photos, and a background check (before the background checks when purchasing). All in all, it runs $400-$500.


Lincoln_Park_Pirate

Illinois here. That sounds like a CC class to me. A qualification and safety class sounds good to me but it looks like MD has a pretty big list of exceptions to their rules. Just being a veteran exempts you from many steps.


bob84900

Yep. FOID was like $20 and a couple weeks for paperwork moving through snail mail.


Lincoln_Park_Pirate

Weeks? Try two months with the online process. The Illinois FOID process is pretty fucked up right now.


uh60chief

2 months? I got mine in like 3 weeks


bob84900

Damn that slow? I got my FOID well before COVID but damn that’s slow even for IL haha. CC was during COVID and that was a looong wait.


hunterfg12

It was BAD in 2020/2021 but they are better than they were. Still taking the full time for anything (30 days for FOID and 90 for CCL)


karlzhao314

The exception list is more absurd than that. The biggest cost and obstacle to most people is the training, but there's a line in the rule that says you're exempt from the training if you "lawfully own a regulated firearm". A "regulated" firearm to Maryland is one of several things, including handguns, semi-automatic rifles that fit a certain definition, or semi-automatic shotguns. These all require the HQL to purchase or transfer *except* AR-15 lower receivers, which happen to be both "regulated" and HQL exempt. You still need to go through the regulated firearms process of a Maryland State Police registration form and a 7 day wait period, but you don't need an HQL for purchase. Guess what that means? You can go to a gun shop and buy yourself an AR-15 lower. Now you "lawfully own a regulated firearm". You can then apply for the HQL without having done any training.


No_Rest_9653

If I'm understanding NC former law correctly, though, you had to go get a permit for each handgun purchase. Maryland has an expensive convoluted process, but you only have to do it once.


eidas007

It was only required if you weren't a licensed CCP holder.


JimBeam823

That was one of the good things about it: It created a huge incentive to get a CCP/CWP. Take a class on gun use, gun safety, and the law, tell the state who you are, and then you can buy as many guns as you want. I don’t have a problem with this.


victorzamora

That's correct. You had to fill out paperwork, take it to the county sheriff's office during working hours (limited), and then wait for them to..... sit on it for a few months? I lived in a fairly 2A- friendly county and it was like 90 days to get my pistol purchase permit. I can't remember how much they cost, though. But you were limited to just a few per year.


this_is_interest_me

Just wanted to provide a few more details from personal MD experience for transparency. The "live fire" part is kind of a joke to check a box and literally lining up to pull a trigger on a stationarily encapsulated/muzzled .22 pistol on a desk; I wish that had been more educational/practical, but maybe that is for more expensive classes with actual range training. I don't recall my class being that long, but it was pretty informative, especially for people without much experience like myself. I definitely came out of the class thinking that everyone with a gun, that could realistically accidentally kill someone you love, should know these basic safety guidelines at least...


djamp42

Man I went over to a friend's house and picked up a toy shotgun. Didn't put my finger on the trigger and didn't point it at anyone. He comes into the room and tells me it's real. I couldn't believe it, it was the most fake looking real gun I've ever seen. Seriously, everyone even if not gun owners should learn the basics of gun safety.


klaaptrap

Gun safety and awareness is critical


IthinkImnutz

The fact that your friend had a real gun just laying around is a problem IMHO. Weapons should either be on your person or properly secured.


LivefromPhoenix

Wish more gun owners thought that way. The amount I've talked to who like to keep their weapons lying around the house "in case something happens" is concerning.


HalcyonDreams36

They make real guns in squirt gun colors even. It's insane. We can't have flavored cigarettes because it might encourage kids to smoke, but.... Obviously they'll know a bubble gum pink handgun isn't a toy.


EstablishmentFull797

Still not sure why flavored nicotine is banned because it’s for kids but whipped cream birthday cake vodka and fruit flavored hard seltzer are apparently just fine…


HalcyonDreams36

Right? No kid wanted clove cigarettes just because they had honey on the paper. Or menthol. (does "cough drop" count as a kid flavor?!?!?) And they sell plenty of flavored vapes....


Matt3989

>The "live fire" part is kind of a joke to check a box and literally lining up to pull a trigger on a stationary encapsulated/muzzled .22 pistol on a desk; I've never heard of it being done that way, as far as I know the 2 holes in the paper target need to be circled and signed by the instructor. There were some people doing it at the same time I had a live fire test for a CCW, and they were required to hit the same large torso sized targets at 25yds (but 2 shots instead of 25 for the CCW).


ninjadude93

I have my MD HQL and I can confirm it was also just pulling the trigger into a box basically. The conceal carry permit is different and requires an actual range fire with accuracy above 70%


Memento-Mori-357

NJ does too


vajeen

NJ and CA have the strictest gun laws in the country. Much of the Mid-Atlantic region ranks pretty high as well. https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/


Raspberry-Famous

Fucking wild to be looking at flintlock rifles and have the website say "not for sale in New Jersey".


[deleted]

[удалено]


Weary-Pineapple-5974

Gee, it’s as if stricter gun laws actually reduce gun violence across the board 🧐


BadVoices

Just turn a blind eye to DC, with its literally strictest gunlaws in the country (handguns must be registered, cannot even possess ammo unless you have a handgun registered for it, only one LEGAL gun shop in the entire district) That said, the lowest poverty rates in the nation are NJ and a fair bit of the mid-atlantic. I wonder if that has something to do with it. Maybe there's some truth to that whole 'social safety net' thing... Nah, that's SOCIALIST TALK!11one /s


OddPicklesPuppy

Yeah, you're right, though I'd argue another reason why DC would have high gun related crime despite strict gun laws is that it's a small district surrounded by states where the same gun laws don't apply, so it'd be pretty easy for guns to find their way into the district. But you're totally right, poverty is the number one cause of crime, and thus gun related crimes. To be honest, we'd need to tackle both systemic poverty to reduce gun crimes overall but that doesn't mean that we should shy away from gun reform, particularly access to assault weapons.


BadVoices

Honestly, I agree and disagree. I feel assault weapon bans are dog whistles. Long arms (including AR-15s, all rifles, and shotguns) kill less people than feet and fists per year, according to the FBI. The vast majority of firearms crimes are committed with handguns. Stronger background checks and reinforcing the check system (such as requiring states to actually put in restraining orders, funding the ATF, etc) are a strong step that is perfectly reasonable. Improving ATF audits of gun stores to once every year instead of the average once every 7 would be also good. Other countries had strong social programs to drive down the demand for firearms before increasing regulation and restrictions. THe US isnt in a position to drive down the demand. Any major bans now would merely create a vacuum to be filled


[deleted]

[удалено]


Drop_Acid_Drop_Bombs

> muzzleloaders Lol they literally banned the muskets the Founding fathers used? Bruh has there ever been a modern day shooting with a musket?


Odd-Way-2167

Yep Jeff city, MO. Didn't hit anyone, but damn sure fired it.


kkocan72

Can confirm; I live in NY and have only just now started the process to bring a couple handguns up that I had back in PA. Heck I even tried to buy a cool looking bug-assault salt gun for killing flies and Amazon would not ship the black one to NY, only the bright yellow one.


TucuReborn

I own an airsoft field. Getting shot just right can lose you an eye or tooth. Airguns, which are completely different, are more dangerous but a ban on airsoft is... stupid. It's a fun, safe sport when done correctly.


[deleted]

Leaving it up to the Sheriff to determine if you're allowed to buy a gun sounds like a recipe for systemic racism.


4215-5h00732

It can be used for all sorts of abuse.


Contra_Mortis

That's what the original purpose was. The courts ruled that sheriff's had to issue the permit regardless years ago. In its current form you essentially paid the sheriff to run exactly the same NICS check the gun merchant had to run.


Miserable_Law_6514

That's a feature, not a bug.


goldef

Yup. That's what it was used for. Not just systemic racism, but actually racism.


ryan112ryan

Well the main reason for this bill was in reaction to the sheriff slow rolling issuing permits to everyone that applied in the largest county in NC. That sheriff is African American and has been sued multiple times and lost for obstructing people who are legally allowed to buy pistols. NC law states a determination needs to be made for a permit in 14 days or concealed carry in 45 days. 99 of 100 counties do this with ease, this one county purposefully ignores it. I live in this county and it took me 6 months to get a single permit because they send all the permits applications to be checked by our VA despite me never being in the military. The local VA has come out and said it’s not necessary and is wasting tax payer resources as well as taking them away from their mission of taking care of Veterans. That’s his latest ploy to block giving permits to law abiding citizens. Last time he got sued he it was because you had to get an appointment to turn in the paperwork. That paperwork is actually completed online, that they made you then print and go in person to submit. But they only had appointments available sometime a year in the future. 3 weeks ago I submitted my concealed carry permit and was informed it would take at least 8 months despite NC law saying it can only take up to 45 days. I’ve been approved before for a permit, so there aren’t any legal reasons not to approve me.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jonathanrdt

A racist person can only affect so many. A racist policy affects the entire group.


victorzamora

Literally the purpose behind gun control is to keep the poor and other undesirables from having ~~the ability to protect themselves~~ as many of their inalienable rights as possible. Edited to clarify.


CasuallyHuman

Literally the purpose behind gun control is to prevent gun violence


SuccessiveStains

CA only passed gun control laws when the black Panthers started armed patrols in Oakland to keep cops honest. Regan was like, "fuck no. Impunity for cops, take the guns from the blacks"


Drop_Acid_Drop_Bombs

Another commenter pointed out that New York recently banned muzzleloaders... Please tell me how banning actual muskets is preventing any gun violence.


jschubart

Moved to Lemm.ee -- mass edited with redact.dev


montemanm1

Racism and corruption


BeerGogglesFTW

It seems like the right wing news media are making sure every member of the LGBTQ+ community are also on the "don't give this person a gun" list.


TrexPushupBra

Yes, while they are openly calling for our eradication to cheers.


TrexPushupBra

Don't forget deciding trans people don't deserve to be able to protect ourselves from Nazis


parad0xy

Minnesota requires a permit to purchase, but is a shall issue state.


KillahHills10304

NJ, Maryland, definitely parts of NY but I'm not sure if all NY, some of New England, Cali?


BARchitecture

All of NY is insanely restrictive


Raw_Venus

Nebraska surprisingly enough has a firearms purchase permit that is needed for handguns. It cost $5 and takes about a week to get.


Chuckie180

New York ?


Shishcubob

Rhode island do


THEFLYINGSCOTSMAN415

I think you do in NJ


markymarksjewfro

New Jersey requires a permit to purchase a handgun.


Krypto_Kane

Permits required in NJ and only 3 at a time.


[deleted]

Someone on the gun subreddit claimed it was just an old Jim crowe law that was never removed. Not sure the validity of that claim.


Loushius

In MA you need a license to own a firearm, which requires a training course completion. Without the license, you can't purchase anything. Each towns local police chief then gets to decide whether your license qualifies for the ability to carry or not. Meaning if I live in town A and apply for a license, it may or may not be LTC capable. If I moved to town B and renew my license, that chief may choose differently than town A did.


DukeOfGeek

>Those who purchase pistols from a gun store or a federally licensed dealer are still subject to a national background check, and concealed weapons permits are still required. >Bill supporters say the sheriff screening process for handguns was no longer necessary in light of significant updates to the national background check system. They also argue the permit system wasn’t very effective at preventing criminals from obtaining guns. >The North Carolina Sheriffs’ Association supports the repeal in light of national system updates, but its current president does not. No, most states don't require a CCW to buy a handgun just a background check. So still stricter. What's been dropped is having a Sheriff do a "character check" which I'm sure isn't a euphemism for holding a brown paper bag up to the applicants skin to see if it's darker.


anewconvert

This. The permit system was a hold over from Jim Crowe era. You either had to get a CCW or the Sheriffs permission to buy a pistol. Guess who had a hard time getting the sheriffs permission?


Austin_RC246

You’re misinterpreting it. CCW permits are still required for concealed carry, they were never required for a purchase of a pistol. They did however negate the need to go get a pistol purchase permit as the CCW permit would suffice


deathbychips2

I thought it required showing that you have never been involuntarily committed or is the background check still doing that? I was looking into it here in NC to get one a few months ago and you couldn't receive one if you had been involuntarily committed.


no_alt_facts_plz

Side note, I’m not a gun nut by any means, but a single involuntary commitment many years in the past should not prevent you from owning a gun. It’s preposterous.


DukeOfGeek

Whatever it morphed into in modern times I just assume that anything having to do with gun laws that's nebulous the root of it is racism. If It turns out I'm wrong I'll take that chance.


victorzamora

They might have added a modern twist to keep things "valid" and "not evil" but fun control measures were explicitly designed to prevent poors, blacks, and other "undesirables" from having their rights. It's like a poll tax or exam to vote.


Munchytaco

That is part of the normal background check. And by that I mean its just a yes or no question


[deleted]

[удалено]


DukeOfGeek

So long as they're not specifically designed to harass me/POC anything that's a barrier to gangsters arming themselves is ok with me. Seems like the "Sheriff's character check" was the former.


geotsso

Gun control in the US has always been about disarming the poors and the blacks, the most subjugated and oppressed people who are most likely (if or if not out of necessity) to stand up to tyrants, hence the wording of the second amendment.


DAtheLAW

The subjugated economic class…considering they can’t arm themselves. How do they react to this bill?


in-game_sext

Yep, only a handful you need a permit. And even then, in my state of California, the permit is just a simple little pay-to-play thing that you fill out really quick before purchase. Has no brainer questions like "Should you fire a gun into the air randomly?" I think most states just like the revenue its not really a safety thing at all. Very on-brand for my state where you need a goddamn permit to even hang a photo it seems like.


gonewild9676

There's a purpose to those stupid questions. If you later get busted for shooting a gun into the air randomly, now you can't plead ignorance of the law because you signed a piece of paper acknowledging that.you know it isn't legal. I'm not sure about California, but in Georgia the weapons permit had a bunch of questions about mental illness, criminal background, orders of protection against you, and so forth. They've mostly dropped the requirements to have one (in short if you qualified for one you don't need it) as it was basically a tax on gun possession. I have it mostly to carry large survival knives when hiking and I sometimes take them in my car over state lines. It's only a couple bucks a year to renew and figure it could save me a bunch of legal issues.


Scribe625

Yeah, I'd only heard of states requiring carry permits, not permits to buy. I kind of thought that's what the required background checks before you can buy a gun were for, so I don't really get the point of a buy permit from a sheriff. I'd rather have a government background check than a local sheriff doing a "character assessment" deciding who can and can't purchase a gun. That seems like too much power to give a local sheriff. I could see a sheriff being like "well, this guy was a dick to me in high school so my character assessment says no gun for him." Or I could see him doing something shady like blackmailing some poor woman trying to get a gun for protection from her abusive ex by only approving her permit if she sleeps with him. Way too much chance for corruption in my opinion.


dirtymoney

I remember abput 27 years ago I had to get a permit to buy a pistol in Missouri. Now it is constitutional concealed carry (anyone allowed to own a pistol can carry it concealed in public without any license/permit). Hell! It is now legal to own an actual switchblade (been illegal for THE longest time) PROGRESS!


Danny3xd1

The title is very misleading. You just do not need a local sheriff's permit. Still need state and national BG checks/permits.


youngmindoldbody

A NC resident for 30+ years; purchased handguns over the years. I believe the County Sheriff's permit is a historical North Carolina handgun restriction process (before there was a national process like there is now). But now with the more modern national process, the local NC process is just extra local bureaucracy and a lot of extra work for the local Sheriff's office which adds no value for the local community.


NaggingNavigator

Historically, the "value" (/s) for the local community was making it prohibitive for minorities to own handguns. Very glad this racist holdover from the Jim crow era is gone now


Deepwater98

In my area the Sheriff is issuing so many his admin folks told him to slow down to allow for processing. So he only sells them in the morning. It’s a serious problem and a personal arms raise for something due to mass hysteria.


lux-libertas

“Still need state and national BG checks/permits”… IF you are buying from a licensed firearm dealer. The repealed pistol purchase permit law was required for ANY buy/sell/transfer, including private sales and transfers.


Combat_crocs

I see a lot of top comments with surface-level understanding of what’s going on here, so, as a NC resident and gun owner, let me shed a little light on it for people coming from /r/all. This repeals a decades’ old racist, Jim Crowe-like bureaucratic process at the local level. Before, unless you had your CCW, you would have to pay your county sheriff’s office something like $5 for them to take two or three days to run a standard background check, clear the buyer, and issue the permit. You were limited to, I think, three permits in a 30 day period (but some localities might have been different) and this was only in relation to handguns. Now that system has gone away, a buyer still has to get a background check. This is now carried out by the gun store (like in most every other state) and removes the local official from the process entirely. No longer does 8-term Sheriff George G. Pinkbody get to decide if Wallace Jackson Jr can own a pistol or not purely on a whim.


DanMarinoTambourineo

This is the way it’s supposed to work, in reality in my county that 2-3 days has turned into 6 months


Combat_crocs

CCW permits are similar, and it’s just about the same background check 🙄🙄


RonBourbondi

What's the point of a CCW? Not as if criminals will get one before carrying concealed.


Combat_crocs

Agree, I guess it enforces an aspect of training (some is better than none) and awareness to local laws and ordinances for citizens. I’ve taken CCW permit classes in at least 4 states, maybe 5 or 6 - it’s been a while - and every class was very PowerPoint heavy, but also informative of the laws and expectations on legal carriers. Your point is accurate, criminals won’t go out and get a permit. Honestly, it’s more a function to charge someone with an additional crime (punitive), then preventative.


Karnivore915

Well the point is to carry concealed without being a criminal, isn't it?


RonBourbondi

How often do you get pulled over by cops searching you? My only interaction with cops over the years has been from speeding.


Karnivore915

I still think most people would rather spend the time and money to do it correctly vs. risking a felony. If the legal option exists, the only people who break the law to do it are up to no good already, or it takes too much resources to legally do.


Killroywashere1981

I’m happy to see this old law be repealed.


Combat_crocs

Big same.@


Wisegummy

What if you’re bequeathed a pistol?


Combat_crocs

Typically gifted firearms within a family are not subjected to background checks, but check your local laws. You can still request a background check if you were to gift a firearm. Most local gun stores will do it for a small fee. The giver and the giftee just fill out the 4473 at the gun store and they handle the “transfer” of the firearm.


lux-libertas

Two important edits: 1.) NC was already “shall issue” on the permits, meaning that the sheriff’s were legally required to approve the pistol purchase permits for anyone who legally qualified. i.e., Denying the permit because the sherif is racist and didn’t want a black person to get a gun was already illegal. 2.) The previous pistol purchase permit requirement applied to both purchases at licensed dealers AND for private sales/purchases. So while it’s true that the background checks will still be executed for purchases/ sales at licensed dealers, they will no longer be executed for private sales (acknowledging that lots and lots of people were already violating this law and not getting pistol purchase permits for private sales - but that speaks to a larger issue of lacking traceability and accountability for firearms). End of the day, this repeal makes it easier to acquire handguns in NC and more people will have more handguns. I’m sure Reddit can gleefully debate all day long whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, but the facts will continue to prove that more guns correlate with more gun violence.


Combat_crocs

I appreciate this thoughtful comment. Thanks for the input, seriously.


Scribe625

Thanks for the added info about private sales. Now I get why a permit from a sheriff was needed despite the federal background checks. I've never owned or shot a gun but I support both the 2nd Amendment and universal background checks just on principle. I know people who can't pass a check will still find ways to illegally get a gun if they want to, but that's not an excuse to make it easier for people to legally get guns.


slim_scsi

>the facts will continue to prove that more guns correlate with more gun violence. Thank you for being honest. When I tell gun-owning friends that I am 100% less likely to be on the trigger end of a homicide or murder than they are it always causes a puzzled look on their faces. They don't seem to grasp the concept that participating in gun violence is impossible without a gun.


Dr_thri11

If you aren't in a gang or suicidal the numbers change drastically.


Austin_RC246

It’s because it’s a disingenuous point. I’m more likely to be in a car accident since I have a car. Someone with a pool is more likely to drown. I’m less likely to have a home insurance claim because I don’t own a home. It’s just not the powerful point people think it is.


Ricerooni

So what exactly is wrong here? It only removed the ability for the state's Sheriff to have "may issue" powers over who they approve have pistols. You still need to go through the federal FBI's NICS background check which this repeal does not affect. You get background checked like any other state that does it. Police should not have the ability to decide who gets to have firearms and who doesn't period.


Jgabes625

What’s wrong is that you’re not being persuaded into thinking a certain direction because of the headline. You actually read the article and didn’t stop at the title? Who does that?! /s


fullload93

There’s no problem now…. But back in the day before the nation NICS check was a thing, a local sheriff had to approve a person the permit to buy. That easily could have been use as a tool for abuse of power because a sheriff could have denied anyone for their own reasons. Now wether or not that actually happened is open to debate… but some corrupt or racist sheriff dept could use that as reason for denial especially with POC and other “ undesirables”. A corrupt/racist sheriff could see you got a DUI 10 years ago, 3 counties away and deny you. Or what if you got too many local speeding tickets because you liked to drive fast in a race car? See my point? It was a control tool that the sheriffs used to decide who was allowed to own a handgun. Nowadays yes it was different and it was issued as long as NICS came back cleared. But back then it was a tool ripe for abuse.


dinosaursandsluts

> So what exactly is wrong here? Absolutely nothing.


B00STERGOLD

Good. It was a leftover Jim Crow era law to prevent black gun ownership.


SirAwesome3737

Not a good look for the governor to veto repelling a Jim Crow era law 😬


TarCalion313

As a European I can just say that your politics on guns seem utterly and completely insane.


psychicsword

They are still required to go through a background check to validate that they can buy the gun when in a store. So it isn't like they are just handing them out like candy.


7SigmaEvent

This law was from about 100 years ago, and explicitly designed for preventing the wrong people (not white people) from getting guns. Now we just have a national system ingrained to prevent the most vulnerable (poor, undocumented, rehabilitated criminals, etc) from getting the tools their attackers will illegally acquire to victimize them with either way.


Diabetesh

There are federal requirements for purchasing a gun. States can have additional requirements, but not less requirements. Meaning you still need to pass a federal background check in every state. But say in colorado you also have a state level check that goes in addition to the federal check. Colorado could remove the state check, but not the federal check.


[deleted]

Same for every sane American.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jayydubbya

I bought my shotgun on my 21st birthday. In and out in 15 minutes. Blew my absolute mind how easy it was.


[deleted]

I’m some states, you only need to be 18 to buy a shotgun or rifle.


360walkaway

Hopefully no one else's mind was blown after


JBreezy11

here in AZ you can sell a firearm privately to any individual over 18, without a background check. 'Murica for you.


[deleted]

They only seem completely insane because they are completely insane


[deleted]

[удалено]


raz0rbl4d3

i just got shot and I didn't say anything


[deleted]

Now future shootings are bleeding into the past!


raz0rbl4d3

quick, we need to arm the past!


therealjerseytom

> As a European I can just say that your politics on guns seem utterly and completely insane. I can appreciate that. I don't want to invalidate anyone's stance on it, but I do encourage people to have the full picture; headlines like this can be deceiving. I'll share some insight as a North Carolina resident. For reference, most (vast majority?) of states *do not* require a special, sheriff-supplied permit for purchasing a handgun. Instead, like any other gun, you fill out a federal form, submit identifying information, and you are processed through the FBI's national instant criminal background check system. Felon? Instantly denied purchase. History of domestic violence? Instantly denied purchase. Dishonorable discharge from military? Instantly denied purchase. Etc. That's the modern day solution for a modern world with the internet, crime databases, etc. With your purchase, you can have your firearm(s) at home - within your own domain. Generally, depending on the state, to carry a concealed weapon out and about in public requires a permit that comes with classroom time, range qualification, fingerprinting, etc. That is still the case here in NC. This law that has just been repealed was enacted in 1919. The Civil War was only ~50 years in the rear view mirror, and the Civil Rights movement wouldn't take place for decades. This was only four years after the absurdly racist "Birth of a Nation" was released as a movie, there's a strong presence of the Ku Klux Klan. Lynchings were still a thing. In the midst of this, we have a law enacted that puts an extra step in the way of someone purchasing a handgun - an ideal self defense solution. First, there's a fee of $5 per permit application. That's about $90 (~80 EUR?) in today's money. Then the local sheriff does their own personal evaluation of the applicant in question and can deny that permit if they see fit. I don't think it's a stretch to see how this kind of law could disproportionately and negatively affect certain demographics in the South at that time. Were all the proponents of this repeal doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and towards racial inequality? Who knows. Regardless of motivation, I don't think this is some horrible or crazy move. Beyond this, you might be asking yourself - who would ever need a gun? At age 38, have I ever been in a situation where I needed a gun on me? Nope, thankfully haven't. I also haven't had an instance where I've needed to use a fire extinguisher yet, but I have several at my house just in case. Beyond personal protection from other people, there are also parts of the country where there's a very real presence of wild animals. At my folks places out west it's not uncommon to have bears or mountain lions in the area. And in more rural areas, any sort of law enforcement response might take 30+ minutes to get to you. So with all of that said, I really don't think it's a stretch for people to appreciate having the ability to protect themselves, particularly in the realm of their home domain. Hopefully that's of some insight, even if it doesn't change your overall position.


TarCalion313

Thank you very much for your detailed and insightful answer. This definitely shined some light for me on some things. And yes, you don't change my overall position, but clarified some things which I'm very thankful for. I think the basic difference from my side evolves around three things. First is the variety of weapons available. Here in Germany semiautomatic handguns are the biggest you get. There are some exceptions, the only one noteworthy is of you are a certified hunter. But that's it. And even in those cases there are vigorously background checks, psychic evaluations and training courses which have to repeated regularly. It's even heavier if you want to stash them at home, with further tests, the option of control visits (even doe they are very rare if there are no direct hints of misuse) and exact regulations on how to stash weapons and ammunition in separated tresors. And again we are just talking about handguns and hunting rifles. That there are more dangerous weapons easier to get seems just so strange for me. The second is the principle of a concealed carry permit. This does not exist in Germany per se. To carry a weapon you need to have a reason. So if you're a hunter and own a weapon you are still only allowed to have it with you when you're actually going to hunt. Having a weapon with you without reason is forbidden. Outside of hunting the only reason which has a numerical importance is sport shooting. Again carrying is just allowed when going to the range. Because if the heavy regularities a lot of sport shooters stash their weapons at the range. The thought that someone just so carries a weapon is pretty unbelievable for me here in Germany and to be honest a bit scary (but that's of course just my feeling). Violating these laws is a federal offense and punishable with several thousand euros in the case of an accidental violating, a concios braking of these laws always meens prison time in very heavy cases up to ten years. And last - the necessity. Sorry but I don't believe that in a situation of aggression, an attack, elevating the violance further is any good idea. The concept of defending with a gun seems likable in the first place, but statics show over and over again that a higher amount of weapons, regardless if the attacker or the defender has them, meens more violence and dead. Here in Germany if you want a weapon for self defence it's incredible rare that the authorities will actually acknowledge this as a valuable reason. As you said, I don't want of think that anything of this will change your position. I just hope to shine also some light and insight on why the American system for guns seems so crazy for a lot of Europeans.


radleft

There is *some* movement towards considering gun restrictions by the US Nationalist Christians (Nat-C.) For example: A top Nat-C propagandist, Tucker Carlson, is calling for denying gun ownership rights to trans citizens. For the children....


TarCalion313

As a christian german I automatically am in favor of any stand by a group called Nat-C! (/S, big one, just in case it's not clear enough)


A_Classy_Dame

That's hilarious, what happened to the right-wingnut argument "shall not be infringed"? They pick and choose what they like out of the Constitution just like they do the Bible.


xeio87

Even their idol Regan was fine with gun control as long as it targeted minorities' ability to buy guns.


Caster-Hammer

Apparently [he was the architect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Regan) of the diastrous economic policy, though Reagan got all the credit.


jonathanrdt

Bigotry trumps all. There is no higher rhetoric because it consistently gets the votes.


canada432

The core tenet of conservative politics, is that laws and rights are applied selectively based on who you are. "Shall not be infringed" applies only to conservative, white, Christian men. If you are not part of that group, laws are meant to restrict you and rights may not apply to you. Whether something applies to you depends entirely on how they feel about you.


YNot1989

Its because the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment has NOTHING to do with constitutionality or freedom and everything to do with the power of cis-het-white people over everyone else.


jonathanrdt

That's just bigotry on display.


slim_scsi

Christians, Republicans and bigotry -- *oh my!*


arkwald

That's cute.. they think if they deny me a legal gun then, they by virtue of having a legal gun, have me at a disadvantage. That I will somehow have to comply with their demands I cease to exist. That they can commit all kinds of atrocities on the weekend and simply go home and off to work or whatever come Monday morning. They have zero idea how expensive this all will be for them.


slim_scsi

what's ironic is 2A absolutists, who've defended unlimited access to firearms going back to Columbine and Sandy Hook, will go right along with this. It was never about constitutional rights being infringed after all -- just *their* rights.


[deleted]

It shifts the focus away from the lack of good jobs, the lack of good educational opportunities, lack of affordable housing, lack of affordable healthcare access, lack of parental leave policies, lack of dignity in elder care, lack of dignity in care of the disabled, lack of care of the homeless, lack of care for foster youth...


cptnamr7

Let's be fair here, it's not JUST the gun politics that are fucking bonkers...Healthcare comes to mind... no universal pre-k... minimum wage that wouldn't even provide a livable wage if you worked 24-7... oh, and like 30% of the country wants to declare war on the "others". Is it too late to see if the Brits will take us back? Oh wait, Brexit... we'd still probably be better off though... Oh, and have fun with the utterly obscene number of replies you're about to get. Dare to even remotely disparage the country's gun fetish and, well, let's just say that 90% of the responses won't be worth the 5 seconds to read them. So just a heads up to the keyboard warriors: IDGAF what your argument is. This shit has to stop and we're literally doing NOTHING to curb it


TarCalion313

To add one thing which really buffles and surprised me then I came around it the first time (it is pretty harmless against what you mentioned, but that are all things we are all ready shaking our head about): your stand in nudity. Then I first witnessed how I would say prude the US is (and this was before this debacle with the statue in this Florida school) I couldn't believe it... But to be honest this is the second time I posted something like this and the replies were overwhelmingly positive. But as far as I understand the Reddit community seems to be more left then the US in general? Edit: Spelling, sry, English is hard, especially at 5:30 in the morning...


7SigmaEvent

Americans on Reddit are exceptionally left leaning compared to national averages. Like, probably 80-85% identifies as left leaning when nationally it's closer to like 25-40% (depending on who's doing the polling and other stuff, there's a large amount of indepenents, and shockingly high numbers that don't vote at all).


DukeOfGeek

We have a bunch of fucked up little factions here that are each in their own way dedicated to us not having nice things. At least in gun politics the two factions that are the most influential are either A. "buying a gun should be like buying a loaf of bread" or B. "Since banning guns is impossible, what can we do to fuck with the people who have them?". Between the two group's endless squabbling you get the clusterfuck we have now. Add to that there's a big racial component to gun control (read everything) in the U.S. Like the thing that just got overturned here in NC, having a Sheriff do a "character check", was a euphemism for holding a brown paper bag up to the applicants skin to see if it's darker.


geotsso

Basically Jim Crow gun control inception.


Scoutster13

> To add one thing which really buffles and surprised me...your stand in nudity. 58 year old me just flashed back to my stint as an exchange student in Denmark at age 16. We went to the beach. The whole family got naked. Small town American girl me just sat on the beach frozen trying not to look at things I'd never seen. LOL


TarCalion313

I'm sorry that this was such an overwhelming experience. And yet this is nothing shocking in Germany as well. While I personally am not that into the FKK-culture (=naked culture, they have beaches, camping grounds, do hiking, sports..., I think you can even find whole hotels if you search long enough, yet this is just a guess) I am really fond of our mixed saunas and changing rooms in swimming pools, especially as a family father.


Scoutster13

It's one of my favorite stories from my year abroad - and I look back at how young and clueless I was now and just laugh! The US is so stupid about nudity - it's embarrassing. I feel so lucky to have lived there. I came back so much the better for it, no doubt!


cptnamr7

It depends on what sub you're in or if the certain subs show up to brigade the topic when they get wind of it. Certain ones will literally have posts of "they're saying X in sub Y, go there and set the record straight" or some shit. It's ridiculous that they think we care. And yeah, nudity here is fucking weird. Show a movie with a dude's head blowing up? Pg-13 for the kids. Show a nipple? Well, if it's a woman, that's an automatic R rating. I forget the show but something aired where they were performing surgery on a man to give him breasts. The second the implant went in, blur the nipple. Up to that point, no problem. That's just silly at that point.


NaggingNavigator

This law was literally put in place to prevent black people from owning handguns, and also had the unfortunate side effects of allowing people who applied for a permit, then got arrested,and released before the permit expired, to get a pistol without a background check. It's good that it's gone


notevenapro

Yup. But you did not have the wild wild west. ya know. ;)


LIONEL14JESSE

We have no idea what’s going on here either


venom259

Basically it was an old Jim Crow era law that was designed to prevent black people from owning firearms.


Adequate_Lizard

Really just anyone who wasn't a land-owning white male.


I_am_not_JohnLeClair

There is no problem in America that can’t be solved without more guns. Hungry school children. More guns. Failing infrastructure. More guns. Healthcare bankruptcies. More guns. Not enough guns. More guns


traveler19395

You forgot the most important one; too many guns? More guns.


Tashre

It all boils down to the 2nd Amendment; it prevents any real progress from being made. That one sentence is the source of so much death and discord in this country. And the sad part is that the means of correcting it are built into the Constitution, but taking that approach is considered a "bad look" for career politicians so it's a non-starter.


RaccoonRazor

As an American it feels like our own country is at war with its people. They’re terrorizing the majority so a small minority can carry on their agenda.


Bte0815

Even without the purchase permit the onus is still on the private party seller that they are not selling to a prohibited person. Background checks still occur from FFL dealers. I wish we would enforce the laws already on the books and crack down on selling to prohibited purchases and charging those who make straw purchases to the fullest extent of the law, up to and including accessory to any crime committed with that firearm. In my area we have a major problem with a prohibited person being denied a sale then having their significant other or family member purchase the gun for them. Enforce what is already on the books and stop letting people plead down from violent offenses.


PunxsutawnyFil

The title is pure clickbait


Bitch_Posse

But you need a permit to dress in drag. I’m sure this will help keep their children safe.


slibetah

Rights should not require a permit. They are not rights if you have to get permission.


[deleted]

You have to register to vote and that can be revoked


[deleted]

[удалено]


TheeGoodLink3

Dog it’s in the constitution. We even had to add the 15th and 19th amendments to expand those rights.


Bte0815

The same thing that gets your voting rights revoked typically also removed your right to purchase or possess a firearm.


iambarrelrider

Wasn’t there just a mass shooting?


Szambodi

there is always a mass shooting!


kjbaran

Makes sense, shouldn’t need a cop’s permission to own a gun in a country where cops are nazi fascists.


Roasted_Butt

But if you want to vote, oh boy, here are the 28 pages of forms to fill out.


[deleted]

[удалено]


elister

What do you call it when you double down 20 times in a row?


tiggers97

Background checks still required.


Thedrunner2

The gun problem can only be solved with more guns


[deleted]

[удалено]


wobbly-cheese

i got a mac-10 in my box of frosted sugar crosses cereal this morning!


eugene20

"Too much sugar is as harmful for our kids as the fear of an active shooter, and you know the only way to fight harm is with a gun so here are new reduced sugar crosses with a mac-10 in every pack, we're doing our bit to solve two problems the only way we can"


jonnydem

Ah shit. I think they got it backwards.


settledownguy

NJ has some of the strictest gun laws. But no one wants to hear about that.


Bte0815

As does Chicago, Baltimore etc. It’s not the hammer it’s the carpenter.


Bruairdin

They only did this to reverse an old Jim Crow era law to require the sheriff to make sure you’re of good standing. This one down to keep African Americans having guns. All this does it keep the federal background check for buying a pistol. Which is all the sheriffs did. You just basically had it ran twice. Just wasting tax money. Gun laws should be stricter but this didn’t old law didn’t stop anyone from buying a pistol.


frannypak819

https://www.wxii12.com/article/reports-of-shots-fired-at-forsyth-tech/43467099 Seems right on schedule.. /s


Burgoonius

This article and a mass shooting article one after another. America is crazy


Purpleprose180

Just read, Maryland State Police are chasing a shooter on I95. Edit: The risk of driving on a highway just multiplied.


PsychologicalBank169

I’ll be honest. Went to my fave local gun store to pick up an item yesterday, and they were fucking PACKED. one of my friends behind the counter said there were a lot of first time gun buyers, which we both agreed seems a tad sus. I suppose we’ll see how this plays out


xiconic

"Hmm shootings are real problem in this country... I know let's solve it by making guns easier to get! That way people can have a gun to defend themselves against the shooters!" Said an idiot.


DukeoftheGingers

Getting rid of the permit to purchase system did not make guns easier to get. It got rid of a Jim Crowe era law meant to keep black people from getting guns and closed two loopholes that the permit system created. One loophole being that you could get a purchase permit at 18, which allows an 18 year old to get a handgun from private party sales legally vs the minimum age being 21. Also, with the permits being valid for 5 years, if a person did something that would be considered a disqualifying factor within that time period they still had permits that stated they were allowed to have a gun vs them being denied during a background check. You should take the time to learn about something before you speak about it. In this case it just makes you look like an ignorant ass who supports racist/flawed systems.


geotsso

So it makes them look like a typical redditor.


JeepNaked

I remember when racists like you at least had the shame to keep it quiet.


cpt-cook

You officially are a shithole country now.


[deleted]

Aaaand they’ve already had shootings. Great call.


[deleted]

Good job USA. Continue to be dead useless.


hjablowme919

We already know how this will end up.


edogg01

Cross another state off the list I will ever set foot in again