|
This is a discussion on Mississippi Senate Bill 2469 within the Concealed Carry forums, part of the Gun Forum category; No idea how far this will get, but here is some positive legislation that is currently pending: http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/MS_SB2469.pdf...
| |||||||
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
01-21-2011, 01:55 AM
| #1 |
| Forum Admin  Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Clinton, MS
Posts: 1,176
|
No idea how far this will get, but here is some positive legislation that is currently pending: http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/MS_SB2469.pdf |
|
| Register |
| Welcome to the SIG Talk Forum dedicated to SIG Sauer Pistols and SIG Sauer Rifles. We welcome everyone and the community is free to join so register today and become part of the SIG Talk Forum! |
|
01-21-2011, 04:57 AM
| #2 |
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| |
|
01-21-2011, 04:13 PM
| #3 |
| Super Moderator  Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: California
Posts: 3,746
|
I have mixed feelings... On the one hand, its a plus for the right to carry side. But on the other hand, allowing carry in unsecured areas of secured public buildings can open up an avenue to have some idiot open fire towards the secured side from the unsecured side resulting in multiple shooting victims. This will cause the anti-gunners to start a gun control campaign, possibly causing the state to lose their right to carry. Some times certain legislation causes more harm than good. But I guess its how you look at it.
|
|
|
|
01-21-2011, 06:20 PM
| #4 | |
| Forum Admin Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Clinton, MS
Posts: 1,176
| Quote:
The reason I do not worry about this happening is that this bill only pertains to conceal carry permit holders, and I can't think of a single case where a "crazed shooter" ever turned up to be legally carrying a concealed firearm. In my humble opinion, permit holders are absolutely NOT the people you have to worry about. | |
|
|
|
01-21-2011, 08:14 PM
| #5 | |
| Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: California
Posts: 3,746
| Quote:
I agree, in most cases the permit holders are not the people you have to worry about... From a public safety standpoint, if a building is to have restricted and unrestricted areas, hopefully the building will have some sort of fortified barrier to separate the restricted and unrestricted areas sort of like at the airports. This will minimize the "ah shits" from occurring. | |
|
|
|
01-21-2011, 08:50 PM
| #6 | |
| Forum Admin Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Clinton, MS
Posts: 1,176
| Quote:
I think somewhere in the bill it defines secured areas as those that require use of metal detector scanning or individual screening. If that is the case they will be well separated as you mentioned. | |
|
|
|
11-19-2012, 03:54 AM
| #7 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: SWMO
Posts: 113
| Quote:
| |
|
|
|
11-19-2012, 06:23 AM
| #8 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: AZ
Posts: 7,093
|
it'll just take extra guards that separate secured/unsecured, more taxes to pay for it.
|
|
|
|
11-19-2012, 06:24 AM
| #9 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Tampa Fl & Ebensburg Pa.
Posts: 1,057
|
Tampa has an instance where an parking lot impounder shot a man dead .The impounder had a concealed permit and was dressed in level 3 vests. he was found guilty and received 35 to life. Now the state is scratching their watch and winding their ass to figure just how he got a ticket to carry. Bad apples can get in any barrel.
|
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar SIG Talk Discussions | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hello from South Mississippi | sigpro2022 | New Users | 2 | 02-09-2012 07:16 PM |
| Howdy from Mississippi | BubbaT | New Users | 6 | 10-29-2010 06:00 AM |
| Another NEWBE from Mississippi | TomBomb | New Users | 4 | 10-14-2010 05:58 PM |
Linear Mode
