Iowa sheriffs object to new 'shall issue' law

[Racenet]

I had a carry license in Iowa back in 1980 (or there about). They were big on only issuing (what they called) professional licenses. Police, security, business owners and the like. The average Joe would not even be considered. Even the professional licenses were a bitch to obtain and 9 times out of 10, they were issued for "On the job only". Of course, if you were one of the holy ones, you received an unlimited one.

Times sure have changed there and you can see the old way of thinking is still ingrained in the law enforcement culture there.

 

[tcarter01]

I had a carry license in Iowa back in 1980 (or there about). They were big on only issuing (what they called) professional licenses. Police, security, business owners and the like. The average Joe would not even be considered. Even the professional licenses were a bitch to obtain and 9 times out of 10, they were issued for "On the job only". Of course, if you were one of the holy ones, you received an unlimited one.

Times sure have changed there and you can see the old way of thinking is still ingrained in the law enforcement culture there.

S&%t..Even Assachusetts is now better than what Iowa back then sounded like...

 

[firestorm]

So, you're saying a convicted felon, released from prison for "good behavior" should not be a PP? You sure we ALL agree to that?

Yes, I am. All liberty minded people who see the 2nd amendment as a right would agree with that. If they are too dangerous to be in society, then they should either be kept in prison until they are not, or killed if that can't be done. Once someone has served the sentence that we as a group decided should be the punishment for a crime, why do they not have their rights back?

Are felons disallowed from speaking their mind in public? Perhaps they are no longer allowed to openly practice their religion? Or maybe they are required to allow the government to quarter soldiers in their homes, I mean they did commit a crime...

 

[Mesatchornug]

So, you're saying a convicted felon, released from prison for "good behavior" should not be a PP? You sure we ALL agree to that?

His phrasing is a little close to "no true Scotsman," but I'll bite. Yeah, if you support the second amendment then you definitionally believe that all free people have a "right to keep and bear arms" that "shall not be infringed."
To say otherwise is to...I think the phrase is "out yourself."

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[Varmint]

When even Pro-2A folks can't even agree what would constitute reasonable/justifiable "disqualifying information", how do you expect LEOs to agree when they are often the ones who have to clean-up the mess after a shooting?

When all you see is the 'worst' in something, day-in and day-out....their gut reaction is "I don't want to deal with this anymore, go away".

That doesn't make sense to me. Statistically, LEO rarely see crimes by LTC carriers, so why would they target the most law abiding? This is about control.

 

[GlockJock]

Fortunately, my rights don't depend on her opinion of how they should be applied.

 

[Varmint]

Yes, I am. All liberty minded people who see the 2nd amendment as a right would agree with that. If they are too dangerous to be in society, then they should either be kept in prison until they are not, or killed if that can't be done. Once someone has served the sentence that we as a group decided should be the punishment for a crime, why do they not have their rights back?

Are felons disallowed from speaking their mind in public? Perhaps they are no longer allowed to openly practice their religion? Or maybe they are required to allow the government to quarter soldiers in their homes, I mean they did commit a crime...

If this is hard for some people to stomach, think of it in a practical sense. All prohibiting former felons is doing is hoping you’ll catch them in possession of a firearm, before they’ve done anything bad with it. Even if you’re successful, odds are good you will be putting someone back in jail when they simply wanted a firearm to protect themselves or their family, and would never have committed a crime with it. You will ruin a person’s life before they have a chance to get back on track.

There are plenty of laws to punish an ex felon who acquires a gun and commits a crime with it, and those laws are much less likely to punish the innocent.