[CLUE-Talk] Bowling for Columbine

[grant]

>
> But one must remember that we have a 2nd Amendment right to own firearms.
> There is no corresponding right to own or operate a vehicle.  A vehicle
> operators license is a privledge granted by the issuing state.  The
> firearm <--> car analogy is used often, but isn't really applicable.
> Background checks or proficiency exams are not required before one can
> exercise thier right to free speech or to practice religion.
>
However, when you commit a crime, you give up your rights.  I have no
problem witha check, if it takes only a few minutes.  As for the
licensing, I am talking about a concealed carry.  I think it is reasonable
to expect someone to demonstrate proficiency before being allowed to carry
a concealed weapon in public.  Just as you are required to have a license
to drive a car on the street, but not to own/purchase onw, or to drive it
around your own private property.  I say let people buy them, and own
them, and use them on their own property, unless they are known violent
felons, but make them be licensed to carry in public concealed.  I am
undecided about letting them carry exposed weapons without a license.  My
gut tells me to go for it.  My brain says it would never get passed.
Imagine the likelyhood of being mugged with a pistol in a holster on your
side.