traveling with firearms

[elle8]

okay so i am going fulltiming may 1st . plan on wintering in texas next winter . so most of my travels this season will be out west ,,,as much as i can see . my question is about firearms . does anyone have any tips of traveling with them ,,,,, legally and safely,,,, i have the nessersary license.

[facory]

I would never bring a nerf bat to a gun fight.

[JJBIRISH]

down home wrote:

mowermech wrote:
"...he doesn't need to carry a gun,..."
NEED has nothing to do with the fact that he branded ALL those who carry guns as "cowards".
If that is not what he meant, then quite possibly he should have said EXACTLY what he meant.
Sorry, but I still see the implication that back when he carried a gun, he was, in fact, by his own definition, a gun-carrying coward.
In Vietnam, I carried ALL THE TIME! Was I a coward?
When we go into the back country on a camping trip or fishing trip, I may be armed. I am not worried about people, but there are bears, mountain lions, badgers/racoons/skunks, etc., some of which may be rabid. Yes, "bear spray" might work, but a firearm WILL work! Shucks, even ol' Mama Moose can be very dangerous sometimes! As can Bambi!
"Be Prepared" isn't just for Boy Scouts!

When I do have a firearm on me, I feel no need to display it. It is not anyone else's right to say I can't. I keep in in the pocket because these nannies have succeeded in a lot, of people being afraid, of a tool and anyone with one as a threat. The Cop doesn't want to carry one that's fine. Denying the right we enshrined and protected from government and people like this is wrong. It is wrong to creat a privileged class, that can exercise their Right and deny others. Politicians and ex Leo's or even Leos have the "right" but no one else is wrong. It has ceased to be our Right and the Constitution is dead when the Privledged classes are the only ones allowed firearms, or freedom ,of speech and so on.I refuse to observe privledged classes. It is our rights. The course has to be cahnged back to intent and letter, of the Constitution.

And really what is that???
The amendment was to change exactly that intent and letter of the constitution… that is why it’s a amendment… right…
Now what was the original intent of the amendment???
And what were the reasons for it??? Why was it needed??? And who did it protect once ratified???

Or do we just use talking points and interpretations from the recent past??? If so whose talking points???

I think these are important questions that need to be answered to begin to understand that intent from the framers, and how it would relate to today…

[brooks379]

bigred1cav wrote:

brooks379 wrote:
There are a lot of car accidents where people die...should we not drive anymore and ban cars ? There are a lot of over weight people in America ....should we ban forks ? I carry concealed and travel with my family and hope I never have to use my weapon but should I ever need to defend my wife and kids I will have the means to do it.

If you proudly carry a firearm why do you conceal it as though you are ashamed?

Where do you travel you need a handgun hidden on your body to protect you from what? You do know an armed assailant will make you dead before you can uncover your hidden gun?

Cars when operated as designed are not designed to kill. Guns are. Overweight people do not enter schools and murder children with the fat on their belly or legs. Cite how many people have been murdered by a fork in past 300 years? It won't reach the number murdered by guns in 2013.

BTW I own and use and am very proficient with firearms. I am just not coward enough to carry one. I have that right as a retired Police Officer.

Why do I carry concealed ?????REALLY ??? because the law says we MUST.lol
Some people live in la la world..........
The reply to my post should be voted as the dumbest reply of the year...no, the dumbest reply to a post since the Al Gore invented the internet.
Why do we carry a firearms ? because a cop would be to heavy to carry....
PS. I spent 10 years in the USMC and had more than my share of firearms training and not only on a M-9 either.

[down_home]

mowermech wrote:
"...he doesn't need to carry a gun,..."
NEED has nothing to do with the fact that he branded ALL those who carry guns as "cowards".
If that is not what he meant, then quite possibly he should have said EXACTLY what he meant.
Sorry, but I still see the implication that back when he carried a gun, he was, in fact, by his own definition, a gun-carrying coward.
In Vietnam, I carried ALL THE TIME! Was I a coward?
When we go into the back country on a camping trip or fishing trip, I may be armed. I am not worried about people, but there are bears, mountain lions, badgers/racoons/skunks, etc., some of which may be rabid. Yes, "bear spray" might work, but a firearm WILL work! Shucks, even ol' Mama Moose can be very dangerous sometimes! As can Bambi!
"Be Prepared" isn't just for Boy Scouts!

When I do have a firearm on me, I feel no need to display it. It is not anyone else's right to say I can't. I keep in in the pocket because these nannies have succeeded in a lot, of people being afraid, of a tool and anyone with one as a threat. The Cop doesn't want to carry one that's fine. Denying the right we enshrined and protected from government and people like this is wrong. It is wrong to creat a privileged class, that can exercise their Right and deny others. Politicians and ex Leo's or even Leos have the "right" but no one else is wrong. It has ceased to be our Right and the Constitution is dead when the Privledged classes are the only ones allowed firearms, or freedom ,of speech and so on.I refuse to observe privledged classes. It is our rights. The course has to be cahnged back to intent and letter, of the Constitution.

[rkortes]

BurbMan wrote:

mowermech wrote:
"BTW I own and use and am very proficient with firearms. I am just not coward enough to carry one. I have that right as a retired Police Officer."

Are we to assume, then, that as an active police officer who carried a pistol when on duty, you WERE a coward? If anybody who carries a gun is a coward, then you must have been back then.
It pays to THINK about what you have just typed before hitting the "Post Message" button! In other words, say what you mean, and mean what you say!

That's just assinine...He carried a gun because it was his JOB to find and disarm criminals....that's not his JOB anymore...therefore he doesn't need to carry a gun, he is confident in his abilities to protect himself and his family without needing to carry a gun. As many of us are.

Virtually all of my friends that are retired law enforcement DO NOT carry concealed weapons. Most seem to learn in their careers that more injuries and deaths (including increased successful suicide) come to those that own and carry guns than those that do not. Death by accident among gun owners is much higher than the protection that they can/may offer. That being said, I do own, but don't carry a gun... ignorance I guess.

Here's some quantitative research on the topic:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

[SpoiledRotten]

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Your RI CCW only has reciprocity with 20 other states.....mostly mid-west/central states. Nothing west coast.

Best thing to do is keep them inside your RV.......don't open carry from RV to vehicle when transporting to go target shooting.

Don't tell........unless asked by an LEO (cause LEO already knows you have a CCW and you don't want to get caught lying to them)

Otherwise Nobody's Business.

Be smart, be cautious, be safe

This poster beat me to it. If you are going to run around your RV waving your gun, then you may have problems. If you keep it to yourself, don't advertise, and don't be far from it if you need it, then no one needs to know. I keep mine with me most of the time. I have CCW, but if someone doesn't like me carrying in their store or anywhere else, chances are good that they won't know anyway. Those places that post "NO GUNS", are the first places that the criminals will hit, so those are the places responsible citizens need to be packing unless you do like me and just don't patronize those places that are against our 2nd Admin rights. If I happen to be somewhere that a person doesn't like my weapon, I'll surely not use it to defend them.

[JJBIRISH]

Jayco25E wrote:

JJBIRISH wrote:

musicman54 wrote:
so no one here but a few belives in the laws of the land the constution and does anyone know what infringed upion mean or are they just words

instead of being judgmental, maybe you could explain the meaning for those of us not so well informed…

but you need to also be able to define Arms as referenced in the 2nd Amendment by its authors … or what they could have possibly envisioned as Arms, 200 hundred+ years later…

you might also enlighten us on why the 2nd amendment was thought to be needed in the first place, and why it mentions security of a free state, and what is meant by that…

when written did the 2nd amendment cover all Americans, and which American people’s right to bear Arms shall not be infringed upon at the time of passage…

while the 2nd amendment is short, and I agree with the individual right to bear Arms it guarantees, its explanations and history might not be so short and straight forward…

that may mean the intent was not as short or as straight forward as the amendment either…

if I might ask what is your source of information or expertise on the subject???

unfortunately I am not as well versed as many or as well as I should be…


.

Since this thread has already got out of hand I am going to add to it. Its been proven that a well armed PUBLIC is a well behaved PUBLIC. And my view on it is my RV is my second home. And just like my first home I have the right to protect my home and family with a gun. So why should my second home be any different just because it has wheels.

First off I am not anti-2nd amendment and believe I have the right to protect myself with appropriate force as necessary… My post had nothing to do with that…

I would like to read your source and evidence on the well-armed public being a well behaved public… where was it proven and by whom was it proven???

You apparently missed what I posted about the well-armed west… well armed and well behaved is like a pendulum and as the power swings so does the behavior… never all good and never all bad..., but how far one way is to far… and there is a to far…

I am more interested in what people believe about their rights as guaranteed by the 2nd amendment as compared to the reasons for the second amendment adoption, real reasons…

I believe the 2nd amendments intent is being miss used and miss applied to suit one segment of our society and not our society as a whole… ant that is the bigger danger to the country…

BTW my concerns addressed in that post have gone unanswered…

[mlts22]

MrWizard wrote:
Everyday somewhere in this great nation
Somebody uses a firearm to defend their lives or families life
But it doesn't get reported in the media news like drive by shootings and mass murder
Especially in Cities like Loss Angelos or New York city

+1. You hit the nail on the head there.

[MrWizard]

Everyday somewhere in this great nation
Somebody uses a firearm to defend their lives or families life
But it doesn't get reported in the media news like drive by shootings and mass murder
Especially in Cities like Loss Angelos or New York city

[bigdogger]

code3run wrote:
Also I know a group that was camping and a drunk idiot from another rv got angry over something and came out shooting at them with an ak47. Nobody was hit but really you never know when you may need to protect yourself.

How about a link to this incident and how much prison time did the guy get? Shooting at people with an AK47 is not something the police and the courts laugh off. Oh, amd by the way, a great way to get yourself killed is to confront someone shooting at you with an assault weapon while you are armed with a handgun.

[mowermech]

"...he doesn't need to carry a gun,..."
NEED has nothing to do with the fact that he branded ALL those who carry guns as "cowards".
If that is not what he meant, then quite possibly he should have said EXACTLY what he meant.
Sorry, but I still see the implication that back when he carried a gun, he was, in fact, by his own definition, a gun-carrying coward.
In Vietnam, I carried ALL THE TIME! Was I a coward?
When we go into the back country on a camping trip or fishing trip, I may be armed. I am not worried about people, but there are bears, mountain lions, badgers/racoons/skunks, etc., some of which may be rabid. Yes, "bear spray" might work, but a firearm WILL work! Shucks, even ol' Mama Moose can be very dangerous sometimes! As can Bambi!
"Be Prepared" isn't just for Boy Scouts!

[Jayco25E]

JJBIRISH wrote:

musicman54 wrote:
so no one here but a few belives in the laws of the land the constution and does anyone know what infringed upion mean or are they just words

instead of being judgmental, maybe you could explain the meaning for those of us not so well informed…

but you need to also be able to define Arms as referenced in the 2nd Amendment by its authors … or what they could have possibly envisioned as Arms, 200 hundred+ years later…

you might also enlighten us on why the 2nd amendment was thought to be needed in the first place, and why it mentions security of a free state, and what is meant by that…

when written did the 2nd amendment cover all Americans, and which American people’s right to bear Arms shall not be infringed upon at the time of passage…

while the 2nd amendment is short, and I agree with the individual right to bear Arms it guarantees, its explanations and history might not be so short and straight forward…

that may mean the intent was not as short or as straight forward as the amendment either…

if I might ask what is your source of information or expertise on the subject???

unfortunately I am not as well versed as many or as well as I should be…


.

Since this thread has already got out of hand I am going to add to it. Its been proven that a well armed PUBLIC is a well behaved PUBLIC. And my view on it is my RV is my second home. And just like my first home I have the right to protect my home and family with a gun. So why should my second home be any different just because it has wheels.

[BurbMan]

mowermech wrote:
"BTW I own and use and am very proficient with firearms. I am just not coward enough to carry one. I have that right as a retired Police Officer."

Are we to assume, then, that as an active police officer who carried a pistol when on duty, you WERE a coward? If anybody who carries a gun is a coward, then you must have been back then.
It pays to THINK about what you have just typed before hitting the "Post Message" button! In other words, say what you mean, and mean what you say!

That's just assinine...He carried a gun because it was his JOB to find and disarm criminals....that's not his JOB anymore...therefore he doesn't need to carry a gun, he is confident in his abilities to protect himself and his family without needing to carry a gun. As many of us are.

[JJBIRISH]

Today and for years now there seems a push to define or redefine the intent of the 2nd amendment…

The wild west even had to check their guns when in town, it’s not theater or folklore…

but quit simply that is not a part of the plan to turn citizens against any and all gun regulation through the use of fear, with no regard for need or application of commonsense…

In the past we were able to regulate guns without cries that we shredded the Constitution... today some in power and prominence see ignorance and amnesia, as ideal traits of a mind shapeable and obedient citizenry…. This is all developed and driven by profit motives…

Some examples of that past gun legislation might be, and I am sure there are many more…

>

Dodge City, Kansas

As early as 1876, Dodge City had a ban on carrying guns on the north side of town (the south side remained wide open), a ban that was rarely enforced. However, by 1883 the death toll from gun play had risen sufficiently for the town fathers to enact a stricter ban.

Ordinance No. 67 enacted August 14th 1882 specified that no one could “carry concealed or otherwise about his or her person, any pistol, bowie knife, slung shot or other dangerous or deadly weapons, except County, City, or United Sates Officers” and raised the fine from twenty-five dollars to one hundred dollars, no small amount in 1882. The Dodge City Times declared:

“There is a disposition to do away with the carrying of firearms, and we hope the feeling will become general. The carrying of firearms is a barbarous custom, and it’s time the practice was broken up.”

>

Tombstone, Arizona

In 1881 the town council passed an ordinance prohibiting the carrying of weapons in the town limits: Ordinance No. 9 “To Provide against Carrying of Deadly Weapons”, effective 19 April 1881. Excerpt:

It is hereby declared to be unlawful for any person to carry deadly weapons, concealed or otherwise (except the same be carried openly in sight, and in the hand) within the limits of the City of Tombstone.
This prohibition does not extend to persons immediately leaving or entering the city, who, with good faith, and within reasonable time are proceeding to deposit, or take from the place of deposit such deadly weapon.
All fire-arms of every description, and bowie knives and dirks, are included within the prohibition of this ordinance.

I hope the moderators allow the thread to run there needs to be some adult conversation on this subject that is more complicated than the few historic words that drive it…

[mowermech]

"BTW I own and use and am very proficient with firearms. I am just not coward enough to carry one. I have that right as a retired Police Officer."

Are we to assume, then, that as an active police officer who carried a pistol when on duty, you WERE a coward? If anybody who carries a gun is a coward, then you must have been back then.
It pays to THINK about what you have just typed before hitting the "Post Message" button! In other words, say what you mean, and mean what you say!