• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wyoming law allowing guns without permit prompts doubts

I think this is fine for Wyoming. Wyoming is the least populous state, and so doesn't suffer from social issues that more urbanized states, such as California, facee. I also doubt that Wyoming is a major hub for organized crime, which is one reason why some states pass laws on prohibiting ex-cons from purchasing or owning a firearm.

Such has always been a States Right to regulate...but even so no state has the right to infringe upon private ownership in totality as the City of Chicago and the District of Columbia have found out. It is up to the citizens of each state to decide whether or not a state permit must be issued to arm oneself in PUBLIC...but there is no prohibiting ownership in the privacy of your own property. And what sane Citizen would authorize private ownership of Nuclear arms or heavy military attack weapons such as 50 Cal. machine guns..etc.? But...even if a state like Wyoming should authorize UNLIMITED ARMS, a neighboring state could make it against the law carry certain weapons into that state. Even as much as some progressives do not like the fact.....THE STATES BILL OF RIGHTS (amendments 1-10) have not been rescinded, and the State Constitutions are used for more than Federal **** Paper.
 
Last edited:
It's Wyoming. I'm not sure why this is even making headlines.

It's the tenth largest and least populated state in the U.S.

Gun control doesn't really seem like much of an issue, considering that aside from the occasional range war, there just isn't much going on there.

Now you know why not much CRIME has been going on there...no? They used to hang horse thieves and rapists.
 
The idea that you need permission form the government to exercise a constitutional right that explicitly says shall not infringe is abhorrent. Its kind of sad that they need additional laws uphold the constitution. Although I thought Wyoming was on the states was one of the majority of states that did not require a permit/license to own a firearm.

You don't need a permit to own or openly carry a firearm; you only need a permit to carry one under your jacket, which will remain the case until July 1.
 
Am glad for you guys of Wyoming hope Washington State follows you guys.
 
Careful. You're opening yourself up for a conservative to do a pointless partisan snipe at you that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

What you mean just like he just did ?
 
Bad move. Guns should be like cars.

In Wyoming and other rural areas, as with vehicles, there can be more room for leniency, though I still disagree with it.
 
It's "fly over" country to pretty much everyone but the people who live there. Have you actually been there? It's absurd how bland and desolate that state is.

Yes I have been there. I've been to Montana too, one of my favorite places.
 
Bad move. Guns should be like cars.

In Wyoming and other rural areas, as with vehicles, there can be more room for leniency, though I still disagree with it.


Cars are not an enumerated Constitutional right, and also kill more people annually than guns. :mrgreen:
 
It's "fly over" country to pretty much everyone but the people who live there. Have you actually been there? It's absurd how bland and desolate that state is.

I've been there, Montana, too and both were ****ing awesome.

This is what was most awesome about them,

It's absurd how bland and desolate that state is.

You can't beat the feeling of independence that you get from knowing that the nearest anything is 50, or 60 miles away.

Being able to tote a pistol, without a permit would make it even better.

I can understand a permit from a safety standpoint, because it requires a person with zero gun experience to learn how to safely handle a firearm, but other than that they're nothing more than an attempt at government control of our personal lives.
 
I think this is fine for Wyoming. Wyoming is the least populous state, and so doesn't suffer from social issues that more urbanized states, such as California, facee. I also doubt that Wyoming is a major hub for organized crime, which is one reason why some states pass laws on prohibiting ex-cons from purchasing or owning a firearm.

If more pople carried guns, those plaes around the country might not have all those social problems. Guns + Darwinism = a better society.
 
If more pople carried guns, those plaes around the country might not have all those social problems. Guns + Darwinism = a better society.

Um, that's not really a good argument. The opponents of shall-issue-permits and free-open-carry usually bring up the whole "wild west bloodbath!" thing... which invariably turns out NOT to be the case when these laws are passed. People not inclined to obey the law already carry guns if they want to.... see Chicago and DC. People who ARE inclined to obey the law do NOT go around shooting other people unless circumstances FORCE them to defend themselves, as has been demonstrated by shall-issue-CCW stats for three decades.

Darwin wouldn't really enter into the picture in a big way.... unless you want to legalize dueling. Just sayin'.
 
Um, that's not really a good argument. The opponents of shall-issue-permits and free-open-carry usually bring up the whole "wild west bloodbath!" thing... which invariably turns out NOT to be the case when these laws are passed. People not inclined to obey the law already carry guns if they want to.... see Chicago and DC. People who ARE inclined to obey the law do NOT go around shooting other people unless circumstances FORCE them to defend themselves, as has been demonstrated by shall-issue-CCW stats for three decades.

Darwin wouldn't really enter into the picture in a big way.... unless you want to legalize dueling. Just sayin'.

Ok, well let me quote Robert Heinlein, then.

An armed society is a polite society

This goes along with my point,

People who ARE inclined to obey the law do NOT go around shooting other people unless circumstances FORCE them to defend themselves

if more people wer armed, in those situations where they needed to defend themselves, there might be alot fewer assholes in the world.

The, "Wild West blood bath", argument usually loses steam, when the real facts are introduced to the argument. The murder rates in the, "West", were 75+% percent lower, than they are now; in some cases 90%.
 
The, "Wild West blood bath", argument usually loses steam, when the real facts are introduced to the argument. The murder rates in the, "West", were 75+% percent lower, than they are now; in some cases 90%.

Yes, I did some research into that some years back and it is true. The "wild west" was actually less violent in some ways than many of our modern cities, despite the ubiquitous availability of arms.
 
Guns without permits? Oh, my, what's next free speech without a permit? Religion without a permit? Due process without a permit?

Sorry, folks, but a law abiding citizens don't need a permit to practice a fundamental right the last time I checked.
 
It's "fly over" country to pretty much everyone but the people who live there. Have you actually been there? It's absurd how bland and desolate that state is.

Of course it's fly over country for everyone, how else can you take in the miles of untouched wilderness except from the air? I'm a pilot, I paid thousands of dollars to learn how to fly over places just like Wyoming!
 
Back
Top Bottom