The process in Mass is very similar and the background check is the same, but the cost is a whole bunch more! At last check it was $100.00 The cost of living on the other side of the fence where life is so much better. NOT!

I dont oppose the license requirement, but I think it does nothing to protect the public. Its just a means of slowing people down. In the end it really makes no difference in anything. Its just another means of tracking everything we do and squeezing more money out of the working man.

Agree the mental health aspect is an issue…actually the biggest issue. But if a background check kicks out felons and denies them the right to carry I’m all for it.

Really, you know this how? When has a mass shooting ever been where you would have expected it?

Do you know how most criminals get their guns? Yep stolen from homes and vehicles. I have a lock box (made for guns) in my truck but it wouldn’t take much to open it with a few tools.

Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle, the movie character played by Gene Hackman in the 1971 film, The French Connection, was an undercover NYPD police officer who haunted the Manhattan subway system, chasing big-time drug dealers in these wild crazy, running chase scenes, moving from subway car to car to car.

As I recall his concealed handgun was a smallish revolver stored away in an ankle holster, and it seemed to all be a doable carrying method for Popeye Doyle as he ran like hell through the moving trolley cars! ..... :laugh:

Isn't that something like walking around with an anchor attached to your ankle when done in the real world of local N.H. and not in a movie scene? That ankle holster carry method probably gets old, very fast, and not very practical plus an ankle holster is no good while wearing shorts or a swim suit. .... ;)

Apparently, from the four different individual men who I saw at various different days and times inside the Plymouth Market Basket, the gun of choice that everyone is now carrying is a black semi-auto, a large fat gun that probably has a lot of bullets. You can just forgetabout that small revolver that worked good for Popeye Doyle ....... now-a-days ...... no self-respect'n open carry DUDE would be wanting to be seen in public with a little revolver like that ...... no way! ...... it needs to be a serious semi-auto ....... with a backup magazine or two ...... today! ..... yes sir .... that's right! .... ;)

But how many felons do you really think are applying for CC licenses??? Even the stupidest among us cant be that dumb and to try for a CC License being a former felon. God help us if society has de-evolved that much, and if so, the fact that these people would have a CC License is probably not our biggest problem!

Very sad, and unfortunately all too true,,,

I really think this thread has run well past any value to anyone. Its just becoming an unfortunate tool to pit otherwise reasonable people against each other. I dont see any reason for the banter to continue, peoples minds are pretty made up as to where you stand on this matter and I dont see much change coming out of all this except to irritate each other. Its just a subject thats too divisive accomplish anything,,,

Exactly my point why there should be checks. How many felons do you think are carrying in states like NH with no permitting required................plenty.

Popeye drove a Pontiac LeMans, based on the movie year must have been a 1970 or 1971 model. Based on your logic, everyone should drive 1970 vehicles, have to be showing off if you drive anything newer than that???

I'm not arguing that, IMO, many open carry people are doing so for the show, I firmly believe that. But I don't think owning a modern weapon is unreasonable.

If they are carrying, the gun they have isn't legal. Felons won't pass the background check to buy and the fact is there are more felons carrying in Chicago with no license than in NH that we actually can document. And that state and city has some of the toughest gun laws in the country.

Felons will carry no matter the permit requirement. Your argument is specious and deceptive and or totally misguided.

Any detail portrayed in the movies such as running through NY with a revolver in an ankle holster is just for effect and not representative of real life activity.

But if I read your post correctly you are not advocating for a revolver in an ankle holster, but at the same time you also seem to be hyper focused on what are probably rather indiscreet 9mm pocket pistols, as it is doubtful that the folks you are seeing in Market Basket are shopping with large guns such as long slide or wide body/hi cap 1911's or 50 caliber Desert Eagles on their belts.

So one would think that seeing a smallish black 9mm pocket pistol would be the most indiscreet handgun someone might have as their open carry gun. As such, shouldn't you be happy for their efforts to carry such an indiscreet pistol? My guess is that most of your fellow customers are oblivious to the people with handguns and thats a good thing.

Would you rather they carry a high polished stainless 500 S & W in a chest holster? Or maybe a gleaming stainless Death Wish 475 Wildey or Dirty Harry 44 Auto Mag just tucked in their pants like Charles Bronson or Clint Eastwood,,, Of maybe the previously mentioned leather western gun belt with like 20 extra rounds on display with a beautiful pair of nickle plated Colt SAA's ala the Lone Ranger??? Now wouldn't that be an interesting site.

So many options and yet its still nearly impossible to satisfy everyone,,,

And the licensing and background checks do nothing to stop criminals from breaking the law, it only impacts law abiding citizens.

How is that helpful? Its a very odd system we have built that restricts the law abiding and does nothing to prevent the lawless from their actions,,,

Before I moved up here I lived in Ma and a $100 cost covered me for 5 years now my non resident is $100 a year and don’t even think about missing your deadline for renewal.

If you are over 70 years old there no charge for your permit. If you are a Ma. resident.

With the stress from reading this thread I wont make it to 70,,, :(

Lol. I think I said back a couple pages gun debates never go anywhere. Heels are dug in on both sides:laugh:

Because the debate is by the people that do not make the decisions.

The most you can do is decide to shop/work there or not based on policy and enforcement of the policy.

Businesses will adjust policy to achieve the highest degree of satisfied customers and employees.

1971's "Popeye" Doyle Was On-Target...
 

My first observed case of "open carry" was at a little sandwich shop at the end of Squam Lake. I was put-off by the sight. :( (No badge...no uniform--just wrong). :mad:

In 1971, an ideal concealed-carry firearm was the Smith & Wesson model 37, 5-shot revolver. As a Deputy Sheriff, I carried one in a modified leather ankle holster for 27 years. (Retired with three years USN service credited). Back then, I boarded commercial airlines while carrying a loaded 6-shot or 5-shot revolver. :eek2:

In 1971, Miami-Dade County had no money for armaments so I had to supply my own (required) "38" and ammunition. In my case, my on-duty firearm was a caliber "S&W 38" revolver--not caliber "38-Special" revolver. (Grip-safety for the cognicenti). Forty bucks "got me legal" with my new employer. :cool:

When on duty, in plain clothes, concealment of the County-issued Smith & Wesson model 15 revolver was EASY--just pull out the shirt tails and cover the comparatively huge wooden grips.

Sometimes, I'd forget I had the model 37 revolver with me, and more than once, mowed the lawn with it firmly strapped to my ankle. :o

(I only needed it once--well, make that five times. :o )

Just for the record, I think "open carry" is stupid--and dangerous.

Legalized "open carry" is a bridge too far, IMHO. :rolleye1:

Well, we have had legal open carry since before the State was founded. And to my knowledge it has never been restricted by the government except in certain locations and situations.

In case you were not aware it is ILLEGAL for a felon to be in possession of any firearm. It is an IMMEDIATE disqualifier to purchase a firearm and why background checks are performed.

If caught it is another felony conviction and could be a lot of trouble for the person who last purchased it.

The reason why a felon cannot get a permit or would even try is that they cannot under any circumstances legally possess.

I just read that no license or permit is needed to carry concealed in NH, unlike out west.

Ya misused the word felon and probably should have said criminal. At any rate felons aren’t buying legally anyway. But I have no doubt in my mind that in open carry states with no permitting required there are bad guys open carrying. I worked with the general public for years and quickly learned how stupid people are.

Yes NH recently did this. I want to say it was a couple years ago. The logic is quite simple on this. To purchase you have to pass a background check, to carry concealed you have to pass the same checks again. Why? It is repetitive and stupid. Did anyone really think going through the motions of this was really doing something meaningful? Ah yes it's a visual "feel good" right?

Bottom line if you qualify to possess then you qualify to carry. Grounds for legal possession is a mandatory prerequisite.

Why there are multiple layers here makes no sense at all. Not unless you begin to understand the reason why these meaningless and stupid regulations are put into place. They aren't meant to do anything at face value as advertised, rather they are meant to make it so painful to legally acquire, possess and carry that many will just give up and not bother.

It's been years since I bought a gun or ammo in MA. When last I did, I had to show my FID card. Does NH require anything like this? Is any kind of license required to carry or is an ID and background check all that is needed?

I bought some .22lr yesterday in NH, and all I had to do was show my license.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

The "real" bottom line in all this is no form of gun control has actually ever accomplished anything except to restrict honest citizens. As criminals dont worry about the law, they dont buy guns legally thats too complected and costly, they steal them or buy them underground for half of what we pay and with no license requirement of waiting periods, and when they carry they never worry about permits.

Gun control is a fantasy, there are enough guns for every man, woman and child to have several each, so the cats out of the bag. Al gun control does is add cost to the purchase by honest citizens, and generate more money for government. It does nothing to stop crime. Simply look at Chicago, totally uncontrolled crime and illegal possession and criminal use of guns. And only honest citizens are impacted by the countless gun laws and restrictions.

Gun control, another failed experiment brought to you by the people who live in fear and dont actually see the world as it is and the big picture. And what doe these same people all have in common, armed body guards! Sickening,,,

Couldn't agree more. Well said.

Its a very disappointing situation, I think most reasonable gun owners support reasonable firearms safety standards/restrictions/laws, but then when we agree to ANY restrictions, those who are completely against any firearms in civilian hands take gross advantage of the situation and the floodgates of gun control open wide exceeding any level of reasonable.

One only needs to look at the utter nonsense in Massachusetts where the state attorney general empowered themself to require each and every new gun sold in Mass to be lab tested and certified at the manufactures expense to pass ridiculous standards and then still need to be approved by a board before being offered for sale in the state. AND then each and every variant of that gun must be certified and approved even before being offered for sale, when the only difference is barrel length or finish such as blued vs stainless vs nickle, no mechanical difference between the models. This requirement was not voted on by the public, this was not voted on by the legislature, this was not voted on by any politician, it was a shameless power grab and we let it happen and continue to happen. Its a horrifying example of totalitarian power mongers imposing their will on the people who will not push back. Its a frightening example of government overreach that continues to go unchecked.

This is exactly why gun owners finally get fed up and say NO, No more restrictions of any kind, No more rules, No more anything, bring back the wild west because all the cost and delays and restrictions have done NOTHING to prevent crime. Its a total fantasy that gun control accomplishes anything other than to drive up cost and burden to law abiding people. Criminals do not suffer in the least, and crime is NOT reduced.

So when you start talking about open carry vs concealed, and the impact, dont be at all surprised at the backlash. Law abiding gun owners have hit the wall of total BS lies that any gun control accomplishes anything. And anyone who is "uncomfortable" seeing a gun needs to grow up and be an adult. We all got over the discomfort of seeing people that look differently than we do, talk differently than we do, dress differently than we do, act differently than we do. So unless you see someone actually dangerously handling a gun in public, you have ZERO credibility saying you were uncomfortable or intimidated or anything. This us utter childish and useless nonsense.

Perfectly Said... Common Sense Gun Control is code for the Gun Grabbers never being satisfied. We can never give an inch on our rights. We are already losing so many of our First Amendment rights every single day. And there are those that applaud it... and usually they are the ones who end up becoming a victim of their own agenda eventually. There is always another extreme position that the totalitarians want to make mainstream. They are NEVER satisfied.

Again sad but true,,,

Someone who gets it!! Thank you.

The NYTs, So There Must Be Some Truth In It...
 

Eleven states are restoring convicted-felons' gun rights:

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/u...20crime%2Dfree.

More Stupid... :rolleye2:

I would like to agree its stupid, but in truth I cant read the article without paying,,,

Also, its 10 years old, are you sure this is still applicable???

What makes you think the open carry guy is not a common criminal?
How often do we hear about a "good guy with a gun" blasting away at a suspected shoplifter in a crowded parking lot?
How often do we hear of guns being stolen in burglaries, or a child shoots another child with a gun, because the "responsible" gun owner didn't secure the gun?
Just because someone buys a gun legally, doesn't mean he/she is a "good guy", or not irresponsible, or not a blithering idiot.

Need
 

It’s better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it……
Just sayin….

Why in the world would you think that a felon would draw attention to themselves by openly carrying a weapon? Absurd. More likely plain clothes LEO.

Sent from my moto g(9) power using Tapatalk

States like Arizona are what I call the "new Americans" they dont have the longstanding identities of places like New England with our deeply ingrained beliefs, so sometimes they see the world differently, sometimes with a new clearer perspective. They are not always right, but they can be very different.

So this is their latest thinking on the open carry matter. Its an interesting take and not for everyone, probably not for me, but it is one perspective from "new America"

Enjoy ;-)

https://scontent-bos3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...b1&oe=61255BAB

Yes--this is similar to what I was describing before. Not really serious self-defense, more like dressing up and pretending

No disagreement, and it is certainly not what we are used to seeing in the last hundred years, but in reality how are we harmed. Sorry but feeling uncomfortable or intimidated is not legitimate. Many feel just as uncomfortable seeing big burly men with beards and tatoos getting off their bikes and walking into the Market Basket, while most have gotten used to it.

I know of no cases where just the act of open carry has resulted in injury to anyone. The perceived risk is a fantasy. Its like seeing a 40' Fountain with giant supercharged engines on Winnipesaukee. Its just being there is not a risk to anyone, its when it is used improperly that it becomes a problem, and how often does that really happen??? We probably have far more 25' boats causing problems every day than any giant speed boat.

Same for open carry, I'll be willing to bet NH has far more murders caused by stabbing and being beat to death with bare fists then were the result of anyone who was openly carrying a handgun.

So whats next, steak knife registration, smart knives that can only be used by the registered owner, no hollow ground knives,,,

Its all a mater of perspective, not actual data driven fact.

And again, this from a guy who has never carried openly and probably never will.

You're killin' me-- on the other thread you just advocated regulating paddle boards

Yes for factual reasons, not fear mongering.

Do you really believe just having a gun in a holster that is viable to others is of the same kind and level of risk a paddle boarder will be exposed to while navigating around the close quarters of a public dock being used at the very same time as power boats, with constant wakes coming in, variable wind, and a potential current?

I cant see how you can call them similar matters for risk.

But maybe you can articulate your concerns in the form of actual risk, and I will certainly consider any reasonable facts. For example should paddle boarders be required to wear tethers? As if the board gets away from them they are at even greater risk. Or should open carry holsters be required to be specifically fitted to the guns to ensure proper retention? We do not want loaded guns falling out of holsters!

Legitimate concerns are usually clear to everyone, whereas fear and fear mongering look very different.

Your opinions may well vary and clearly do on some matters, and you are entitled to your opinions no argument. Its when you impose restrictions on others that are not legitimate fact based risks that we will have disagreement.

Well so says I ;-)

ATB