If you carry a concealed gun, you are the problem

[Hugabear]

I don't want to hear any 'law abiding citizen' garbage. Zimmerman was a 'law abiding citizen' as well, and still is legally. We've seen too many cases lately where some "law abiding citizen" with a concealed gun killed some young person in "self defense".

How many more young people need to be killed so that gun lovers can carry their previous weapons with them everywhere?

[Kurska]

1. .....

[Mojorabbit]

6. LOL nt

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

63. ^^^ +1

[galileoreloaded]

2. thank goodness you have no power to make that decision.

that's why i vote for democrats with strong civil liberties records.

[Ohio Joe]

3. They can't get over their fear...

They would prefer innocent people were killed rather then do something non-murderous about their fear.

[pintobean]

5. Carrying a gun is not murderous

Firing it at someone can be, but is not necessarily murderous. I think you know that, though.

[Ohio Joe]

8. What else do you do with a concealed gun?

Open up on random firing ranges that wander by?

Use it to open walnuts?



Someone walking about with a concealed weapon is afraid and ready to kill at a moments notice.

[Liberal Veteran]

11. "A wild firing range appears!"

I hated that part of the game.

[pintobean]

12. Unarmed people are killed without notice all the time.

I see nothing wrong with someone trying to increase their chances of survival, as long as they're doing it legally.

[VOX]

22. Is there anyone out there who should NOT be able to "increase their chances of survival"?

When you frame the issue this way, there's a significant (and illogical) increase in headroom -- shouldn't a schizophrenic be able to increase his chances of survival? Or a violent felon on probation?

By this argument, owning a tank and a bazooka would increase the chances of one's survival.

[pintobean]

42. "as long as they're doing it legally"

You must have missed that part.

[Ohio Joe]

34. Then they are indeed afraid...

That must suck to be so afraid you will kill for that fear.

[pintobean]

108. We all have fear.

We deal with it in a way that suits us. Some people confront it, some take whatever precautions they think are necessary, and some try to run and hide from it.

I've been robbed at gunpoint. Looking at a revolver a foot in front of your face is not very pleasant. You can see that it's loaded. I don't have any problem with anyone taking whatever legal precautions that they think are necessary.

It appears that some here have a fear of people who arm themselves for protection. I don't think insulting people on an internet message board will them help deal with that fear.

[Ohio Joe]

115. Having fear and letting it dictate your actions are different things

Personally, I am very afraid of guacamole (What can I say, I have an irrational fear of the stuff) so I do understand fear... But I also don't let it drive my actions. If I am at a cook out and some places a bowl of it on the table next to me, I don't freak out or destroy it... I've never sought out or armed myself with an anti-guacamole weapon. Almost no one that knows me IRL is even aware of how much the stuff bothers me. We are humans and we can control our fears.

I have also had a gun in my face... Back around '82... maybe '83, I had a part time job in a bar that got robbed. Very scary... It would have been better if there were no gun that day... It would have been worse if every drunk asshole pulled out their weapon to 'save the day'.

The solution of 'more guns' to the problem of gun violence is not logical or rational. It is fear based and 'I' at least, do not let my fears control me.

[pintobean]

127. Never start a food fight in a Mexican restaurant. nt.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

88. I propose that trying to increase one's chance of survival with concealed firearms

...is inversely proportional to the attempt to lead a full and rewarding life.

Yeah, I know, I'm off-topic.

[Dash87]

315. I've never seen someone shot or been shot at.

I think many CCW holders are paranoid and think that everybody is out to get them. That's why they're so quick to shoot innocent people.

[ZombieHorde]

31. "Open up on random firing ranges that wander by?"

So funny!

[Eleanors38]

145. Well, that's what I see wandering by when using this ammunition:

[ZombieHorde]

146. That's some fine ammo. nt

[Daemonaquila]

44. I'm ready to kill at a moment's notice.

Carrying a gun wouldn't make any difference. I've lived in very rough neighborhoods, have gone toe to toe with the drug dealers and pimps, and I've had my home broken into and been threatened with death multiple times. I've had to physically protect myself in the street from violence multiple times. I've never carried a gun because I prefer other weapons. But I'm theoretically ready to harm or kill someone every time I walk out of the house, if they try to harm me first. Weapon of choice means absolutely nothing. It's time the anything-anti-gun crowd gets it through their skulls that a person who'll kill with a gun is the same person who'll kill without a gun. The only issue is whether that person has self control, training, and good judgement.

[Ohio Joe]

45. Seek help - nt

[BainsBane]

54. carrying a gun wouldn't make a difference?

So why does anyone need to carry one?

[VOX]

17. A gun's very existence demands its own use...

Sooner or later, it's going to get used, but in what way? Safely? Accidentally? Carelessly? Murderously? Who can say for sure?

Most of the time, most people can govern their own behavior -- but a fair percentage have no interest or are incapable of doing so, and they still have access to serious weaponry in this country. It's now a public health problem.

[Hoyt]

19. Zman would never have taken off after Trayvon without a gun to bolster his courage.

[pintobean]

48. There's only one person who knows

if that's true. If it is true, I bet he constantly tries to convince himself otherwise.

[Hoyt]

56. It's true of him, and most who need a gun to venture out.

[BainsBane]

15. Don't you know guns are instruments of love?

They magically make a society law abiding, whereas gun control creates wide-spread homicidal rage. So say gunners

[leeroysphitz]

4. What kind of coward is so fearful they can't go about their lives without a hidden weapon.

Frightened little children and or authoritarian psychopaths.

That's the deal.

ETA: I spend most of my waking hours working in one of the worst neighborhoods in Detroit. I haven't carried a firearm since I was in the army and I laugh at you wimps that can't even muster the courage to go to the grocery store in your rural or suburban towns without your little toys.

[ZombieHorde]

32. What about a person who has been raped or physically attacked in some other way?

Do they become frightened little children or authoritarian psychopaths if they purchase a pistol afterwards? I think some people just don't want to be a victim.

[laundry_queen]

96. Then they need help

seriously. Someone with untreated PTSD walking around with a gun is not a solution.

[Hoyt]

110. So, maybe we make some accommodations for rape victims, etc., but that's a small

number compared to people who have no reason like that. An innate/genetic fear of being victimized, does not mix well with a gun on city streets.

[Pelican]

151. Got it... Once you've been raped....

... then you have a right to protection.

Good plan

[Hoyt]

169. The 94% who don't carry, have rights too. Problem is most who carry are callous bigots,

not someone prepared to defend themselves against rape.

[Lee-Lee]

179. And you base this on?

What experience?

As Democrats we claim to be above the kind of baseless stereotyping your post demonstrates. You should try to be.

I have tough over 1000 people the NC CCW class. If any were bigots, they sure didn't mind the mixed race brown skinned girl teaching them.

Around 80% of my students have been female.

Around 30% were minority.

Around 20% were LGBT of one gender or another, as I have done a number of classes that were all LGBT students.

The reality is self defense is not just for right wingers.

Most of my classes are done when one person gathers enough friends and family to do a class and I do it for them instead of regular scheduled and announced classes, so I have been able to do classes for populations that would generally be apprehensive about going to a CCW class where they don't know anybody. I have found this helps me be more inclusive of groups normally not represented and makes them more comfortable. One person takes my class, like it, so she gets 5-10 interested friends to do it and coordinates it.

Oh, and I read every news report of a CCW holder in this state who does something improper with the CCW. To date I have not seen a single one of my students names.

[Hoyt]

184. You might be an exception, but I've lived in NC and know the kind of folks who tend to tote.

[Lee-Lee]

185. More likely you know the kind

Of people who advertise they carry.

Sometimes people who have known me for years get shocked when it comes up that I carry, it isn't something I advertise or make a point to bring up in conversation unless it naturally comes around to it.

You might really be surprised who you know that carrys at least some of the time- especially if they think you are the kind who will be judgmental with them about it so they don't mention it.

[Hoyt]

186. Yeah, we had another person who posted here -- also an "instructor" -- that used to say same things.

Sorry, I don't believe people carrying guns are the answer to society's problems.

I will give you that women might have some reason to tote at times, but at least most of them don't get into the kind of crud the gun culture spews or are likely to pull a Zimmerman.

So far, we don't have ads like the following aimed at women:

[premium]

189. What you believe is irrelevant to what the law is Hoyt. nt.

[Hoyt]

200. That's what we are talking about, Premium, bigoted gun laws that need to be changed.

[Decoy of Fenris]

190. Female advertising in re; firearms is quite common.

[Hoyt]

199. From right wing gun sites, yeah. But manufacturers tend to play up to male self-esteem issues.

BTW -- Ron Paul is a big supporter of the National Association for Gun Rights.

You need to hang out on non-right wing sites.

[Decoy of Fenris]

202. I just did a quick google of "Female advertising for guns." There's quite a lot of them in general.

I just happened to pick the first picture I saw, and there's quite a few others.

Besides, if you're looking for gun advertisements, by definition, they'll be more on right-wing sites than left-wing. It's a catch-22.

[Hoyt]

205. Finally, a gunner who admits that most gun "enthusiasts" tend to be right wing (hence bigots).

Zippo was quite the "enthusiast."

[premium]

206. Misrepresenting what someone posted again Hoyt?

Decoy of Fenris said no such thing.

[Lizzie Poppet]

213. Seriously?

Next you'll be claiming that the sun rose in the east...

[premium]

214. I think you meant to reply to Hoyt. nt.

[Lizzie Poppet]

217. Nope

I was just making a joke about you posting something really obvious. Sort of like "water is wet," "poop smells bad," or "Hoyt indulged in amateur psychoanalysis based on anecdotal evidence."

[premium]

219. Ahh, ok, I get it now.

[Hoyt]

247. You gun nuts can't tell if you post to right person, yet you are prepared to shoot on city streets.

[premium]

254. No. 1 Hoyt, I'm not a gun nut,

you know that, no. 2, I don't even carry a gun anymore, even though I live in a very red town, all my friends are repugs, we just don't talk politics, I don't feel the need to, feel very safe in my little town.

[Hoyt]

257. Too bad your fellow gungeoneers don't feel the same. Maybe you should talk to them rather

than egging on their gun nuttery.

[premium]

260. Sorry, not my place to tell others

whether or not to carry a firearm, that's their choice, mine's not to.

What others want to do is their decision and I respect it.

[Lizzie Poppet]

258. RIF

The person posting knew precisely who she was posting to...obviously.

[friendly_iconoclast]

288. You know *only* the kind of folks you've encountered-good, bad, or indifferent.

And if those people are by and large assholes, you need to change the sort of people
you hang with...

[Pelican]

183. 10s of millions of callous bigots...

That sure is convenient...

[friendly_iconoclast]

289. You cannot possibly know how most of a group that numbers in the millions thinks.

The fact that you would claim to speaks rather more about you than them...

[Hoyt]

302. Well your buddy Decoy says the majority are right wingers -- and they are definitely bigots.

You guys need to get your stories straight when you are sitting around comparing weapons.

[friendly_iconoclast]

304. Decoy didn't make that claim-and if he did, it's an argument from authority

[premium]

305. Misrepresenting again, eh Hoyt?

Not surprised, he said that most of the ADS are on RW sites, not most CC'ers or gun owners.

[OneGrassRoot]

195. That's my question...

While I'm not a fan of hunting, I respect that others actually need a rifle -- old-fashioned -- to hunt in order to feed their families, mainly in rural areas.

I can respect that some people like shooting strictly as a sport. I know a few people who do not own guns nor do they have plans to but simply go to a range periodically as a sporting activity.

Your example is what comes to mind the most when pondering why I don't advocate a ban on guns altogether (even if it could never happen anyway).

Which makes me wonder this morning about the viability of taser guns for regular citizens, with the same controls we advocate for other guns? A less lethal alternative but a means to protect oneself.

[premium]

197. Tazers don't work worth a shit

on someone hopped up on meth, coke, heroin, PCP, and I can state that from personal experiences.

[Lee-Lee]

204. There is a reason cops don't carry just tasers

They are a good less-lethal alternative is some, certain specific situations. But they have some significant limitations.

You only get one shot. After that it is very clumsy to reload a new cartridge. If you miss that one shot under stress, you are in trouble. If you have more than one attacker, you are in trouble.

They are very range limited. 15 feet for the civilian models, so that means to use it somebody must be within 3 steps. In LE circles that is often considered too close to allow a person with a knife, because they could possible close that distance before you can react and fire a taser of gun.

They only incapacitate for a very short period- that is OK if you have another police officer right next to you ready to handcuff them before they get their wits back about them. The minute the electricity stops flowing, the person hit is back in full control of their body.

They can be ineffective if somebody is on drugs.

You would be very hard pressed to use one against somebody attempting to gain entry to your home or vehicle in many circumstances.

For a taser to work, both probes must have good penetration into the skin. That means you must hit with both probes, and both must get through to skin. In the winter if somebody is wearing layers heavy clothing this can be a problem, and leather jackets also can slow them enough to prevent good penetration. If either probe hits a button, zipper, or hard object in a pocket you have the same problem.

I have taken the ride on a taser (we had to be tazed in order to carry one) and used them on people. It wasn't fun being tazed, it felt like a bunch of sledgehammers whacking my body, but if I was alone on a call and had a dangerous suspect in front of me, my hands were on my gun. The taser came out only if I had backup on scene with a gun out in case it failed.

[Hoyt]

209. Tell me Lee-Lee, how often would a normal citizen need to shoot someone at more than 15 fee on

a public street?

[Lee-Lee]

216. There are lots of instances actually

15 feet is a very, very close range.

If a person is coming at you with a knife or other contact weapon, 15 feet is too close to allow then to get. Google "Teuller Drill" and watch some videos, we did those drills in our basic law enforcement training to show that an attacker with a knife at 21 feet will almost always be able to close with you and stab you before you can draw, aim and fire a pistol or taser.

I have seen self defense shootings during armed robberies at greater than 15 feet. Also in apartment hallways, a persons front porch, there are lots of examples.

But even if we toss the 15 foot thing out, the other limitations are pretty significant. I usually advise my students to get a good quality pepper spray that shoots a stream ahead of a taser- it will gain you a few more feet, it has more than one shot, and if the attacker is affected the results last longer. But it has downsides as well- it does not affect all people, it can blow back into your eyes, and if you use it from inside your car against an attacker trying to get in you must lower the window and you will be affected to the point driving away will be difficult.

[Hoyt]

218. I'm all for pepper spray. Guns, not so much since you can't take that bullet back.

Fact is on the streets, you won't have someone coming at you from afar with a knife. They will get right up on you, then pull it in the highly unlikely event something like that occurs. At that point, a gun is pretty useless.

Now, if some of the gun nut toter sees someone who looks suspicious approach -- you know, like Trayvon Martin -- they might grab their guns. That happens a lot, as does a callous gun nut shooting someone in the back for rummaging in their carport.

[premium]

221. Happens alot huh?

Post links to those lots of incidents, I'd like to see them, or, is this your personal experience, and if so, why do you get guns pulled on you lots?

[Lee-Lee]

233. Saw lots when I was a deputy

And read a whole lot more accounts, we always kept an eye in such incidents.

[premium]

238. I did too, but Hoyt's talking

about CHL holders, he seems to think that they're all bigoted rude toters waiting for the chance to pull their gun and shoot someone.

[Lee-Lee]

225. I am glad you can predict the future behavior of all criminals

But yes, life isn't the movies and TV, sometimes they do display the weapons early.

Criminals are not always the brightest, add in drugs and alcohol and even less so.

Sometimes people walk up on a crime in progress, and become a second target.

My own self defense story involve a guy who pulled his knife at 25 feet, luckily he was moving slow so I had chance to draw. And displaying the gun was enough. Meth not only makes people do stupid things, it makes them do it stupidly.

You can't say with certainty that all criminals will behave just like you claim they will. I can say with certainty I have seen them do just what you claim they wont.

[Hoyt]

227. I suspect you could have handled without "drawing," but hey if you carry a gun why not use it.

I think that was Zimmerman's defense.

[Lee-Lee]

231. Now you are a self defense expert too..

Last edited Thu Jul 18, 2013, 01:26 PM - Edit history (1)

I am walking to get into my car. Man is approaching, asks if it is my car, I say yes, he pulls a knife and say "we are going for a ride"

I could have run, and hoped I was faster and didn't trip. I didn't exactly have running shoes on.

I could have tried to finishing finding my keys, choose the right key, get in the car, start it and drive away before he got to me. I might have been fast enough.

Neither was a sure thing, for sure. If either faile the outcome for me would have been far worse.

The gun worked perfectly, he saw it and immediately ran. I didn't even have time I grab my badge wallet out so he really knew he picked the wrong victim, but the officers that found him a short while later made sure to let him know.

Tell me, Hoyt, what do you say I should have done?

[premium]

235. He'll tell you to throw a can of beans or use a bicycle tire to defend yourself. nt.

[Hoyt]

248. You ought to try it, Premium, rather than your guns.

[premium]

255. That's funny Hoyt,

because you know I don't carry a gun anymore, haven't since I retired, and, despite living in a repug dominated town, I feel very safe.

[Hoyt]

256. I do too, and see no need to spend my life preparing to shoot someone a la Zimmerman.

[Hoyt]

237. Interesting, in post #218 above it was a knife, now it's a gun.

Just because you've always lived by guns, doesn't make you a "self-defense" expert -- only a gun expert, and then it's questionable if you are any better than Zimmerman's self-defense buddies.

Post #218 -- "My own self defense story involve a guy who pulled his knife at 25 feet, luckily he was moving slow so I had chance to draw. And displaying the gun was enough . . . . ."

[Lee-Lee]

245. My error

That is what I get for typing from a phone and not proofreading. It was a knife.

But you still didn't answer my question- what would you do?

BTW, as far as my credentials, I have law enforcement experience and am not only a certified CCW instructor but also certified to teach self defense- armed, unarmed and less lethal- by 4 different credentialing bodies (there is no real single certification body, so I took several instructors courses to get a wide range of experience and exposure) , my former employer paid for some of that when I was assigned to work just domestic violence cases and I have kept it up since leaving LE. It makes for a nice side income I can do on the weekends.

I also, based on that, got selected to go to school to become a Combatives Level I (hand to hand combat) instructor by my Army Reserve unit. I am hoping to get Level II instructor school done next fiscal year if the money is there.

I am even an NRA certified instructor, paid for by my department many several years ago, I am sure that means you will immediately brand me a right wing racist nut and be sacred to death of little ol me, however.

[Hoyt]

246. From this expert, a staff is quite effective against one wielding a knife. Not as "sexy" as a gun,

but just as effective against a knife.

My next question was going to be if you are certified by NRA, but I see that you are one of Wayne's disciples.

My personal belief is that it doesn't do someone who is getting a CCW any good to only hear what the NRA has to say. They need several hours/days of "in-your-face" instruction on why guns are not good for society, why there are better options than guns, etc. Ain't gonna happen though until we change the system because NRA instructors are wed to guns and the profits they get from them.

Finally, this is not a war zone, no matter how much you guys try to make it that way.

[Lee-Lee]

251. A staff?

That is great for a laugh.

Can I fit that in my purse?

A staff means you allow an attacker to get well within striking distance- not a good idea. Among all the other reasons it is a bad idea.

Here in NC the NRA has zero to do with CCW instruction. The course outline is payed out by the state. That said they mandate 8 hours of class time plus range time,but really only have specific guidelines to cover about 4-5 hours, and the rest they leave general guidelines like "teach how each type of pistol functions" and such. So I take that time to go deeper into safe methods of carry, how I remain vigilant so hopefully you avoid putting yourself in a situation where you will ever need the gun, and such. Lots of safety lessons, lots of using real world incidents to break them down and show what a person did right, did wrong, etc. I even use Zimmerman as an example what not to do- even if you believe his account, he put himself in the position to have the supposed attack happen.

I took the NRA courses, but like it or not the NRA is the single largest provider and certification body for civilian and law enforcement firearms training- so if you see a cop the odds are very high either they took an MRA course of the person who teaches and certifies them in firearms has.

So yeah, I took NRA courses. Never was a member, never will be. But if you are going to claim every person who has taken an NRA course or a course from an NRA certified instructor is too biased to listen to, you are including probably better than 90% of cops aside from big urban areas like NYC...

[sarisataka]

264. Works for some

but you must have a frame of reference for this poster...

under-educated, paranoid, white (hence bigoted), and the like

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2993861

[premium]

271. Let's not forget this guy.

[friendly_iconoclast]

292. Once again, you tout mandatory "abstinence-only" instruction.

In case you hadn't noticed, the other, better-known sort of "abstinence-only" instruction
(also beloved by religiously-minded authoritarians) doesn't actually work very well...

[friendly_iconoclast]

294. These "in-your-face" abstinence-only instructors would be paid, amirite?

There ya go, Hoyt! A chance for you to profit as well.

[friendly_iconoclast]

290. Many here purport to have telepsychological powers.

Not only do they claim to know how criminals will behave, they also claim to know what
millions of people they've never talked to or met really feel.

[premium]

212. Thank you Lee-Lee

As a USFS Ranger, 99% of the time, I was on my own and would often encounter drugged/drunk hikers/campers, my first instinct if I got into a confrontation was my sidearm, not my tazer.

Tazer's are useful in very limited circumstances, but when someone is hopped up on drugs, their about worthless.
I backed up a Helena, MT. cop one day on an DUI stop, guy got out of his car and charged us, cop hit him with the tazer, didn't faze the guy, I peppered him, still didn't faze him, we ended up rolling on the ground for a couple of minutes before we finally got him under control. Turns out this guy was all hopped up on PCP.
I shudder to think what would have happened if either of us were alone trying to take this perp into custody.

[Hoyt]

220. Well, that kind of stuff doesn't happen often to John Q gun toter on the street. But, it's nice to

fan the fear.

[premium]

222. Not fanning the fear,

I'm speaking from lots of experience, what's yours?

[Hoyt]

226. I admit, never had job of busting small time pot growers in national forests, but I've walked many

streets and haven't needed a gun, although I have had to take evasive action a few times -- including dealing with bigots with their guns.

[premium]

228. Small time pot growers?

You have no idea what goes on in our national forests and parks, these so called "small time pot growers" are pretty vicious, they set up booby traps designed to maim or kill, they threaten or shoot at hikers/campers/LEO, they deface the forests/parks, they steal water sources, they pollute the land with their chemicals.

I've come across trip wires, punji stick traps, and some pretty sophisticated traps, I've come close on more than one occasion to being a victim of these vicious people and their traps, I've had Ranger colleagues, BLM and USFS, that were injured by these traps, I've dealt with injured/wounded civilians who were pretty fucked up by these so called small time pot growers and their traps.

Until you've walked in our shoes, you have have no idea at all.
Small time pot growers?

[Lee-Lee]

232. Tell me about it

We had some hanging tiny fish hooks on ultra lite line at eye level, among other booby traps, to protect fields.

I never was convinced marihuana prohibition wa a good thing, but the big time growers were definite scum.

[Major Nikon]

203. Maybe people who don't carry guns don't want to be a victim either

Works both ways.

Guns don't make us safer. Guns make us less safe.

[leeroysphitz]

240. My bottom line is my family.

If a person carries a weapon near my family i.e. "in public" they increase the danger of gun violence to my family.

Tragic circumstances aside; One persons need to FEEL safe should not trump my family's right to BE safe.

Dig THAT.

[pipi_k]

33. Another type of coward...

the retired police officer who put his life on the line every day for nearly 18 years before being injured on the job.

Who had to listen to some real nasty shit from real nasty people he arrested over the years. Like guys who would threaten to come to his house and rape his wife and daughters. Because he arrested them.

This was at least 30 years ago, and you know, those people are STILL out there holding their grudges, as I found out a couple of weeks ago from someone who is friendly with the wives of two very nasty guys who have been in and out of trouble for years. Still talking about "that cop from _____" (city where he worked).

A few years ago one of these skunks got into some big trouble and ended up disrupting life for hundreds of people because of reports he had weapons (and possibly a bomb) in an apartment.

No bomb...but lots of weapons.

This guy would think nothing of shooting that retired police officer dead in the street.

I'm married to that retired police officer. He's the type of "coward so fearful he can't go about his life without a hidden weapon".

[Incitatus]

55. Correct.

Then there's judges, lawyers, witnesses, etc. etc. that have made some very nasty enemies by doing the right thing and have a legitimate concern for the safety of themselves and their family.

Not every concealed carrier is a cop wannabe hoping for a shootout. The ones I know hope they never end up in a situation where they have to use it. Of course, I am not friends with any rabid right-wingers.

[Socal31]

7. Are you sure they are "the problem"?

Do you have statistics to back this up?

[Hoyt]

142. Do you have stats they aren't a problem, or are setting us up for trouble

in future?

What are you suggesting, we have to wait until vast majority of citizens say screw gun toters/accumulators?

I think most folks are tired of bigots and/or gun lovers pulling Zimmermans. They damn sure should be.

[Socal31]

153. Yes, I have "Future stats"

You can meet me near the sportsbook or roulette table and I will fill you in.

[Hoyt]

168. With some issues you have to use commonsense, rather than stats.

[friendly_iconoclast]

297. Because those pesky stats keep messing up the narrative.

[Hoyt]

301. Do you care to show me stats indicating proliferation of guns will not cause issues in future?

You can't. But, hey, lets just put changes off until another 100 million guns are floating around -- about a decade.

[friendly_iconoclast]

303. I can't show stats that you wont be conked on the head by a meteorite, either.

But I can show that it's statistically unlikely- that's *all* any honest person can do.

[Lizzie Poppet]

300. When empirical evidence contradicts "common sense", then...

...it may be common, but it sure ain't sense.

[friendly_iconoclast]

306. Voltaire would have scoffed reading post #168

[friendly_iconoclast]

307. So much for that whole Enlightenment thing...

[Hoyt]

309. LMAO - like strapping lethal weapons to your body is enlightenment.

[MotherPetrie]

9. Probably a lot more, unfortunately. The NRA has spoken.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

10. bullshit...

just fucking bullshit...

sP

[Skittles]

14. yup, a country full of gun nuts is fucking bullshit

Ted Nugent and George Zimmerman are their poster boys

[LaydeeBug]

272. Since half the USA are gun nuts, the other half decided to get ARMED

Because if THEY have a GUN and YOU have the SIDEWALK, you will die every time.

[Skittles]

310. yup - that is the NRA's wet dream

everyone armed and paranoid

[LaydeeBug]

313. The NRA's wet dream is the USA's bleak reality

and there is no paranoia about it.

But there ARE guns. That's just the hand we're dealt and the way it is

[donco]

13. Why is my

caring a weapon (pistol)a problem now that i am legally doing it;as apposed to when i used to carry it and not be legal?

[BainsBane]

16. So you admit to being a law-breaking

gun owner because you carried a gun when it was illegal to do so?

[donco]

18. sure do.

If you need an explanation just ask.

[BainsBane]

21. No need

I just like to keep track of all the examples that expose the lie of the law abiding gun owner.

[donco]

25. Who said it was

" law abiding gun owner"?Just someone that likes to live and let the attorneys sort out the rest.

Outside of my military service never had to shoot anything besides targets in thirty years of carrying though. Sadly had to wave it around menacing upon a few occasions though.

[BainsBane]

38. all the gungeoneers constantly go on

about how gun owners are law abiding.

[donco]

70. Its good

that your keeping score.While your their, check and see how many post that i have made in that forum.

[BainsBane]

86. Why should that matter to me?

You've already confessed to committing a felony with a gun. That's the information that's relevant to me.

[donco]

114. Your the one

the one that said "all the gungeoneers constantly go on "to someone that finds whats referred to as the gungeon one of the more boring foums on DU.SO...connecting the dots comes up with you keeping score.Am i wrong?your not keeping score?

[BainsBane]

116. You didn't make that claim

You admitted to breaking the law.

Whether someone argues for guns in GD or in the gungeon, it's all the same to me. The point is the pro-gun nonsense, not in which forum or group it is advanced.

[donco]

124. OK we got my breaking

the law settled. now tell me if you are contending that " it's all the same to me".Why did you say that"all the gungeoneers constantly go on"in your post?Seems to me to be a bit inconsistent.

[LAGC]

118. Actually, carrying concealed without a permit is only a misdemeanor in most jurisdictions.

And more and more aren't even requiring a permit at all...

[VOX]

24. Please explain why you feel the need to be packing a gat...

Do you drive an armored car? Are you a bodyguard for a stalked celeb?

Or are you a member of your community neighborhood watch, combing your local streets for malefactors?

[Lee-Lee]

36. I am a person who has had a random stranger attempt to carjack her in the past

and have a mentally unstable ex who I suspect is messing with meth now.

Everybodies experiences in life give them different perspective. Because I was carrying off duty when I was a cop I prevented at minimum a carjacking, possibly a rape or murder of myself. I am no longer a cop, but should I value my life any less now?

[Hoyt]

23. Zman, Loughner, Holmes, Stawiki, NRA prez' son, etc., were all legal.

Last edited Thu Jul 18, 2013, 07:43 AM - Edit history (1)

Until they weren't. Zimmy is legal again.

Waving a confederate flag, wearing a Swastika are legal, but friggin wrong.

Try leaving you guns at home, if you can. Society will appreciate it.

[FunkyLeprechaun]

161. I can see the Autocorrect :-)

Loughner*

[Hoyt]

164. Thanks. Sometimes I get gum or gin for gun.

[sweetapogee]

180. most likely

you get gin!

[MrScorpio]

20. Damn Skippy! nt

[hack89]

26. So what percentage of murders are committed by people carrying concealed guns?

legal concealed guns, that is. Illegal concealed carry is a different matter.

I am sure you can prove that CCW carriers are responsible for a significant proportion of gun violence in America - I can't imagine a gun controller making things up.

[Hugabear]

27. How many dead children are acceptable to you?

How many more Trayvons have to die at the hands of 'law abiding citizens'?

[hack89]

28. So you have no clue do you?

what about all those kids dieing at the hands of honest to god criminals with illegal guns? Which is the bigger problem? Why not concentrate on the greater threat?

[Hugabear]

29. Well then I suppose the solution is more guns

If only every kid had a gun

[hack89]

119. Now you are just being silly. nt

[ProdigalJunkMail]

166. not silly....

hysterical and overcome with emotion...

sP

[BainsBane]

60. Here you go

http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_article.pdf

[hack89]

120. Which doesn't answer the question

what percentage of murders are done by legal concealed carry permit holders?

[BainsBane]

130. a greater percentage than from people who don't carry guns

But I know the argument. Since a majority of CC holders don't murder, the lives of the victims aren't worth worrying about. The lives of Trayvon and others aren't statistically relevant. Besides, the 2nd Amendment gives gun nuts the right to kill black men because the paranoid are "afraid." Obviously they are afraid. They are afraid to leave the house without a gun. They're paranoid.

These are people who look for trouble and because of that they find it.

[hack89]

162. If so many are looking for trouble

Last edited Thu Jul 18, 2013, 08:43 AM - Edit history (1)

why do statistics show lower levels of crime and fewer arrest for CCW carriers then the general population?

If you had 100 CCW holders and 100 non-CCW holders and were asked which group was more likely to shoot someone, the answer would be the non-CCW holders.

Of course the lives matter. I am just disappointed you only apply that standard when it comes to guns.

[aikoaiko]

30. Not many involve actual conceal carry it seems.

Zimmerman was a notable exception.

[Lizzie Poppet]

37. No fair confusing the hand-wringers with facts.

So much bullshit amateur psychoanalysis and staggering lack of critical thinking skills in this thread. I weep for the future of the progressive movement.

[BainsBane]

39. over 500 killings by CCW holders

I don't call that trivial.

[aikoaiko]

79. Perhaps, but how many of them were actually carrying concealed when they committed

a homicide?



I'm happy to look at your data reference?

[BainsBane]

83. All were CC holders

That the killers like Zimmerman get away with murder doesn't change the fact they killed. Yes, the law allows white people to execute blacks on sight. That's what you're relying on to justify concealed carry? The racist judicial system?

http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm

[aikoaiko]

98. 500 killings over 8 years really isnt that much....

...although I respect that each death is truly significant to loved ones.

The data set from VPC shows that the killings these folks committed often did not involve a concealed weapon. They used rifles or handguns kept in houses or cars.

[BainsBane]

103. So those lives don't count?

Because they aren't a big enough statistical sample? How many people have to be killed before your decide they matter? Justifiable homicides have doubled since SYG laws have passed, and they are used by whites killing blacks 11 to 1. These are policies promoted by ALEC, the NRA, and the Koch brothers, the most reactionary elements in American society.

[aikoaiko]

117. But 500 homicides our of 150,000 shooting deaths over 5 years...

...hardly supports the OP that concealed carry is "the problem".

Fortunately, the political momentum still favors shall issue concealed carry. It was wonderful watching Illinois go "blue".

[IMG][/IMG]

[BainsBane]

107. See this

http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_article.pdf

and http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

[hack89]

125. How about subtracting the sucides from that list? nt

[BainsBane]

131. Oh right. The lives of suicide victims don't count

Lets subtract suicides, murders justified by racist courts, and everyone else. Is there anyone's life besides your own that matters to you?

[hack89]

163. The OP is about concealed carry and murder. Please stay on topic

eliminating CCW will not eliminate gun suicides - do you really think those people who committed suicide would not own guns if they lost the right to concealed carry?

You are incapable of answering questions factually, aren't you? It is all about emotion. This is perfect example. Bring up an irrelevant issue to pad your numbers and when called on it, toss out a "what about the children" insult.

[GreenStormCloud]

170. Over 120 of thoe were pure suicides.

That's right. Over 120 of those the only person harmed was the CCWer, who killed only himself. The VPC page doesn't even list the method of suicide. Of those 120, certainly many of them used methods other than guns. Do you really think that not having a permit would have made any difference?

[hack89]

172. They have to pad their numbers some way. nt

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. Utter horseshit.

Millions and millions of CCW permit holders...a handful of incidents. CCW permit holders are verifiably less likely to commit a crime than the general population.

Math: perhaps you've heard of it.

[BainsBane]

41. then provide evidence of that

Mother Jones shows otherwise.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

[Robb]

43. Nonsense. They are only verifiably less likely to be convicted.

Would you like a recent example?

[Lizzie Poppet]

49. An example? Useless. A verifiable statistical body? Knock yourself out.

Anecdotal evidence is worthless as a basis for determining broad policy.

But if you think you can demonstrate that CCW holders are arrested (or even considered "persons of interest" in a criminal investigation) at a greater rate than the general population, then by all means do so. Cite your sources.

[Robb]

51. Concealed carry permit holders are excellent at beating the rap.

Only 2 out of 10 arrested concealed carry permit holders end up convicted of the crimes for which they were arrested; the overwhelming majority either beat the rap completely (46%) or are convicted of lesser crimes (32%).

[Lizzie Poppet]

68. Didn't think you could answer the actual question.

But from the very study you cite:

male Texans who are over 21 years old and are not CHL holders are 7.9 times more likely to be
arrested for commission of a violent crime than male Texans with a CHL; and female Texans
who are over 21 years old and are not CHL holders are 7.5 times more likely to be arrested for
commission of a violent crime than female Texans with a CHL.

Not convictions, arrests.

Enjoy your crow. Let me know if you'd like me to suggest a wine...

[Robb]

106. 8 times less likely to be arrested, 5 times less likely to be convicted.

I'll bet they get asked what they're doing out this time of night less often, too.

[GreenStormCloud]

173. That study was flawed.

Texas became CC in 1995. For the first couple of years there was a good bit of confusion among the cops about it, which led to some false arrests. The study was done in 1999 on conviction data that was only recent to 1997.

[BainsBane]

61. You've been given evidence but choose to ignore it

Here is more. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_article.pdf

You, on the other hand, scream about facts yet provide none.

[friendly_iconoclast]

296. And *you* ignore the fact that you're dealing with a group of +10 million

[DanTex]

53. Teh stupid...

Conceal carriers are not a uniform statistical sample from the general population. The relevant comparison would be between people with a CCW permit and a demographically similar group of people that does not carry a concealed weapon.

Of course, the gun nuts never want to talk about that, even the ones who pretend to know math. Would you say they are too dumb to understand this point, or simply dishonest?

[Lee-Lee]

87. Are you saying

That demographics are a better prediction of criminal activity than being a CCW holder?

That certain classes of people are more likely to be violent?

Hmmm...

You are bordering on what the righties do blaming minorities for crime..

[Lee-Lee]

99. No

But I have heard the same argument made based on race.

[DanTex]

105. The argument is based on statistics.

For example, you can't get a CC license if you have a criminal record. So right off the bat, it's not at all surprising that CCers commit less crimes than than the population at large, which includes people who have a criminal record.

So the real question is do CCers commit more crimes than a similar group of people without CC licenses. There's not data to answer that question for sure. However we do know, from the literature, that:
-- gun ownership correlates positively with homicide rate
-- tighter gun laws correlate with less gun deaths
-- shall-issue laws are associated with an increase in crime rates
-- stand your gun laws are associated with an increase in non-justified homicide
-- people who live in households with guns are more likely to be homicide victims than those who don't.
-- etc.

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. "Yeah, you would, if you were informed and sincere."

Exactly. All this bleating isn't about saving the lives of young black men, cute suburban kids, or anyone else. It's about attempting to restrict, via the power of the state, behavior they don't approve of (despite the astronomically remote chance it will ever cause any harm to them).

[Eleanors38]

148. And that wraps up yet another culture war chapter. Thanks.

[joeglow3]

46. When the thousands of people with illegal guns stop killing

Until then, I will not begrudge anyone protection.

[Ohio Joe]

52. More guns to stop killing...

This is the problem.

[joeglow3]

58. Ask trayvon Martin how your theory worked out

Oh right you can't. Bringing skittles to a gun fight doesn't end well.

[Ohio Joe]

62. And if there had been no guns?

Nobody dead... Yet, gun nuts still want MORE GUNS! Insanity.

[joeglow3]

65. I want to be able to defend myself

First prove you can remove illegal guns and then you can move on to legal guns.

[Ohio Joe]

73. So until you feel 100% safe you want the right to kill when you are afraid...

How do you function on a day to day basis with such fear?

[joeglow3]

76. Resorting to personal attacks says a lot

About both the poster and their faith I their reasoning.

[Ohio Joe]

90. I'm not attacking you...

I know I would not be able to function if I was that afraid and I'm curious... How you do it?

[joeglow3]

94. I am not an arrogant asshole

I personally don't own a gun. However, I also don't go around telling people they need to think and feel like I do all the time. Maybe a rape victim has a hard time doing that. And I bet you would look down on them as well.

[Ohio Joe]

111. I don't look down on gun nuts... I feel sorry for them having to live with all that fear

Rape victims wielding guns are not a problem in this country today, so going off into some non-existent realm does nothing for the discussion. Back to it...

"I personally don't own a gun"

No? In post #65 you said you wanted to defend yourself so I assumed you did, my bad... You just want more guns... Even though you don't have guns... And you want more guns until you have 100% safety.... ok then

"However, I also don't go around telling people they need to think and feel like I do all the time."

On a message board... On the internet... You are trying to tell me I should not voice my opinion... ok then

Have fun with the fear

[joeglow3]

128. Why do you assume only someone living in constant fear

Would own a gun?

[Ohio Joe]

132. We are discussing those who do the concealed carry

But regardless... Why else are there so many? Do we really have that many people who just 'collect' them? I think not. They have them because they are afraid.

[Skittles]

320. try to think like a gun humping coward, Ohio Joe

then you'd know

[warrant46]

178. Bad Choices

I've seen armed robbers who brought a knife to the store to threaten the clerk, had the ensuing gunfight not work out in their favour

[Robb]

59. It's a time-honored business model.

Find a conflict, arm both sides, gin up fear, re-arm both sides.

[BainsBane]

64. Exactly, it's all about corporate profits

[The Straight Story]

50. Hmmm since you don't seem to be replying much may I suggest these images:

[Hugabear]

97. I made my point

And I have responded to a few posters.

Just because I don't respond to each and every post doesn't make me a troll. Nice try though.

[The Straight Story]

113. Well, I dunno

Seems like trolling when you post something you know is flamebait and that you are not at all willing to listen to the other side of an argument on.

You didn't expound on why you think such people are the problem. My dad has a ccw and rarely uses it, but it does cover him should he be out somewhere and have his gun with him - example, we had someone breaking into a house here and dad got his phone to take a pic and took his gun/holster. Because he was wearing a coat that would be considered concealed and he could go to jail if he didn't have his ccw license.

Now he was not wanting to confront the person but they did see him taking a pic of them as they drove away and stopped and came back. Turns out it was the guy who bought the house and it was normally his dad who was there. He was thankful we were watching out for him (and I had caught several people stealing copper from his house before - and the cops did nothing. I even had the cops out here one time and they caught people and just made them put things back and let them leave).

I don't think you want to listen to reason, have your mind firmly made up, and anyone who does not agree is 'part of the problem' - so yeah, seems like trolling/flame bait when you don't want real discussion where people can learn from each other.

[Lee-Lee]

57. The statistics say you folks not carrying guns are a bigger problem...

Here in NC non-ccw holders kill people at a rate 5x what CCW holders do.

Despite all the chicken little hysteria about blood in the streets, being out to kill, etc. the fact is that if you don't have a CCW, and I do, you are statistically 5x more likely to wrongfully kill somebody with a gun if we both live in NC.

CCW holders also are far less likely to commit any other violent crimes, and even far less likely to get a DUI, than non CCW holders.

Here in NC a CCW holder has a duty to report, meaning if a law enforcement officer contacts them they must state they have a CCW and are carrying. Ask any NC LEO and you will 99% get the same answer- they get less worried when they get notified, because they know it is a person without a criminal history who takes pains to follow and respect the law. I know that is how I was when I was a cop. CCW holder= good guy unless they do something to show otherwise.

So you anti CCW folks keep up with your delusions that CCW holders are all out to kill and are murders. Don't let facts get in your way. But know when you say such things in a political setting, people who are educated on the subject see you running on pure emotion and ignorance and are less likely to believe anything else you say. It is why gun control is a losing subject for Democrats here in the south as well.

[BainsBane]

66. What is your source?

You don't even bother to list where you got that data.

Here are two sources that contradict you
http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayres_Donohue_article.pdf
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

[DanTex]

69. The charts are from "thetruthaboutguns.com"

Gun nuts don't like research from legitimate academic institutions. They prefer gun blogs for some reason.

[BainsBane]

71. and she refused to read an article from Mother Jones

because it was "biased."

[Lee-Lee]

74. Ohh, I read them

But I am honest about how accurate they are.

Guns, gun crime and self defense are something I know more about than the average person. So I can more easily spot bullshit and slant- and every MJ article on the subject has lots of it.

That is simply how it is.

I am sure there are subjects you consider yourself very knowledgeable on, and when you see inaccurate stories on those subjects you call them out as well.

[BainsBane]

80. That you justify it doesn't mean you know about it

You site RW blogs. That says it all.

[Lee-Lee]

85. I cite all kinds of sources

But I double check the numbers too.

I am intellectually honest enough that if I find accurate information on a blog I would mostly disagree with, I still see it as accurate.

Sorry I don't play your "ooo, it disagrees with me, no way I could even consider if it may have some correct info" game.

[BainsBane]

91. You hid your source

You didn't even site. YOU are the one who started the "if it disagrees with me I wont' consider it." You have absolutely no self awareness. Unbelievable.

There is nothing you can post that convinces me that paranoid gun holders can kill just because they get spooked when they see a black guy. There is no equivalence between killing and not killing. If people don't plan on killing, then they don't need to carry a gun. The act of dong so shows those are people ready and willing to take a life. They are by nature more violent than those who don't carry guns. That they feel a need to carry a gun also shows they are more paranoid. Normal people do not spend their time thinking about how to kill others.

[Lee-Lee]

95. Your post is all emotionally driven

and very poorly based in fact.

I carry. I teach others to carry. I don't spend my time "thinking of how to kill others", and I have no clue where you came up with that nonsense but it shows a very ignorant, biased and unrealistic view of CCW holders.

I don't plan on killing. I plan on doing my best to not let myself be a victim, and if the chance is there maybe prevent somebody else from being one.

I do not want to take a life. I do not plan to take a life. But I am prepared to if it comes down to them or me, or to defend another innocent person.

By your logic cops must all be planning to kill every day, since they carry guns.

[BainsBane]

102. If you don't plan on killing

Why do you carry your gun? Here you contradict yourself:

But I am prepared to if it comes down to them or me, or to defend another innocent person.

You just said you are prepared to kill.

You aren't a vigilante. Mind your own business and no one will bother you.

Cops perform a public service. They are trained, and even then they kill people they shouldn't. Guys like Zimmerman track people minding their own business and then shoot them. If he hadn't gone looking for trouble, Martin would be alive. Obviously Martin's life means nothing to the right-wing gun cabal because he's a black man, but the rest of humanity values human life, even if the person is black.

[Lee-Lee]

112. Maybe English is not your first language

But PLAN ON does not mean the same thing as PREPARED TO.

I have a CPR card. I don't PLAN ON doing CPR tomorrow, but I am PREPARED TO.

"Mind your own business and no one will bother you." Sorry, been there, done that, and got bothered by a guy with a knife who said we were gonna "go for a ride". From your posts you would rather I be found dropped off in the woods stabbed with my panties around my ankles than have a gun available to me, but I am sure glad that just pulling my gun made him change his mind and run.

Zimmerman is the exception to the rule, a bad example for sure. Claiming all CCW holders are like him is like saying all Occupy protesters were just like the guy who defecated on a cop car and rapists based on the actions of a tiny minority. Did you do that too?

I am off to bed- I will pick this up tomorrow.

[Nevernose]

122. Why are you so afraid?

What's got you so hell-bent on the need for a gun?

[Lee-Lee]

75. The numbers they are based on are accurate

If you can prove me wrong, use the numbers, don't just attack a source.

Can you do it?

[DanTex]

82. Of course they are! They came from a right-wing gun blog! In a nice bar chart!

You don't seem to get it. If you introduce numbers, you need to prove them right. You don't just get to cite a right-wing gun blog and then assume it's accurate and non-misleading until someone proves it wrong.

Otherwise, I could just say "concealed carriers in Wyoming are 12X more likely than non-carriers to molest children". And in Oklahoma it's 15X. And in Oregon it's 17X. In Georgia it's 9X. Prove me wrong! Prove me wrong!

[DanTex]

67. LOL. So you get your research from "thetruthaboutguns.com"?

see post 53.

[Lee-Lee]

72. They cite the statistics back to a NYT article, so the numbers come from there

And I see folks citing Mother Jones, they have a clear history or skewed statistics the other way on guns- badly.

I will tell you what- instead of attacking my source, disprove the numbers.

Can you? I went and double checked the numbers they cited, because I use them when I teach CCW classes in NC.

If you can't show my numbers are bad, you are not disproving anything.

Show me where I am wrong about crime numbers for CCW holders in NC.

Can you?

[DanTex]

77. Mother Jones has a cleared history of skewed statistics, by "thetruthaboutguns.com" is legit?

Sorry, come up with something legitimate if you want to have an intelligent discussion. If you want to make an argument, the burden is on you. I'm not interested in the game where you throw out some crap from a right-wing gun blog and then insist that the burden is on me to "disprove the numbers".

I'd suggest reading some of the academic literature on gun violence -- some links have been provided in this thread and others -- but if you're anything like the other gun fanatics here, you're probably not interested in legitimate scientific studies.

Also, see post #53.

[Lee-Lee]

81. No

I said I went and checked the actual numbers for myself.

I don't trust any source fully unless I check the numbers.

The numbers for crime statistics in NC by CCW holders were easy to check and verify-

So, can you prove me wrong, or are you still going to act like children yelling "cooties" because I linked to a gun blog?

[DanTex]

84. You checked them yourself? Really? Ooh, I'm impressed!

So we have some numbers posted on a right-wing gun blog that have been personally checked by another internet gun fanatic. Wow. That's some solid evidence.

Also, see post #53. (why do you keep ignoring that)

[BainsBane]

78. Attacking a source?

Who would do that? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3252236 I guess only liberal sources deserve attacking. Right-wing ones are fair and balanced.

Trying to pass RW crap off here as legitimate by concealing your source doesn't fly here.

[Hoyt]

165. But we do have Zimmermans in our streets.

[Lee-Lee]

171. The exception is not what you should base policy on

The assholes here in NC are trying to make it harder for abortion providers because one asshole doctor in another state was doing the wrong thing.

Is that right?

A few bad apples with community organizations turned in bad voter registrations during a drive, does that mean we should push to restrict voter registration?

There is fraud in SNAP, Medicaid, and so many other social programs- do you advocate eliminating them because a minority of users abuse them?

[Hoyt]

174. Bigots carrying guns is a totally different issue from social programs.

The bad apples are people and profiteers promoting more guns in more places.

[Lizzie Poppet]

263. hit.nail.head

We see this over and over and fucking over again: some awful incident occurs, like Sandy Hook or the Zimmerman acquittal, and a segment of the population jerks their knees hard enough to register on a seismograph, clamoring for sweeping policy changes based on astronomically rare occurrences...all the while blithely ignoring vastly more common incidents (like the thousands of "everyday" non-newsworthy homicides per annum). Critical thinking skills of paste...

[friendly_iconoclast]

299. They use Zimmerman like anti-abortionists use Kermit Gosnell.

And as we've seen, they certainly don't like getting called on it...

[olddots]

211. MMM graphs & charts

this changes everything

[badtoworse]

89. I don't carry, but I'm very comfortable with those that legally do.

For every Z, there are likely thousands of people who carry and are not a problem. I'm not willing to surrender anything in terms of RKBA because of one Zimmerman.

[Logical]

93. RKBA does not have to mean concealed carry. For many years it did not. n-t

[Lee-Lee]

100. Marriage does not have to mean same sex, for many years it didn't

You wouldn't accept that argument as valid would you?

[Logical]

104. RKBA is not impacted without CC. n-t

[badtoworse]

101. I agree. The point in my mind is making major changes in law over one incident

In my opinion, it does not result in good law. New York's response to Newtown is a good example - an embarrassment.

[NaturalHigh]

249. I agree.

I have no plans to get a CCW permit, but my wife is planning to get one. She is a wonderful (and very liberal) woman who has no plans to shoot anyone, but she feels that she has the right to defend herself and our kids. I agree.

[ileus]

109. Guns kill people donja know.

That being said I'll continue to carry my personal life saving device.

[krispos42]

121. ROFL

Right.

Thousands killed a year by career criminals preying on victims or in gang warfare, and you're worrying about CCW permittees?

Really?

The powers-that-be thank you for being properly distracted from the massive profits they make from keeping drugs illegal.

[BainsBane]

134. hundreds a year

Drugs? WTF did drugs have to do with Trayvon's murder? Talk about a straw man.

What is this? All black males are drug dealers?

[krispos42]

135. The illegal drug trade directly results in thousands of deaths a year.

Big Pharma, Big Alcohol, Big Tobacco, and the Prison-Industrial Complex all love having things like pot illegal, and they don't care how many die in gang conflicts as long as they have nice fat profits.



Interesting that you immediately associate illegal drugs with Treyvon Martin, a black teenager.

BainsBane
134. hundreds a year

Drugs? WTF did drugs have to do with Trayvon's murder? Talk about a straw man.

What is this? All black males are drug dealers?

[BainsBane]

138. The OP is about Zimmerman

And you know full well it is motivated by Trayvon's death. Yet you are the one who bizarrely brought up drugs as a way to try to accuse the OP of something nefarious. That is entirely on you. You made the connection. No one else. Rather than defending your views, you chose to attack the motives of another poster. What's particularly ironic is the gun industry is one of the biggest profiteers from the gun war.

[krispos42]

140. And you're responding to ME

You want to talk to the OP, you know where it is.


I cannot defend my views when they are not under attack, because your previous reply to me was in no way connected to the post you were replying to.

Try again. I love to hear that it was me, not you, that thought Treyvon Martin was a drug dealer.

[BainsBane]

143. Such a strange disconnect

You brought up drugs to attack the OP. My comment was based entirely on your allegation. You're being disingenuous here and that smile shows you know it.

I bet you didn't even bother what the OP's views on legalization are.

[krispos42]

147. Your comment was based on your excessive extrapolation of my comment

My comment to the OP was he, and others in the gun-control movement like him, are up in arms about people with CCW permits murdering (not killing, murdering) people (an event that occurs very rarely in public) while ignoring the many thousands that are killed annually due to the War on Drugs, and how various wealthy corporations profit immensely from people like him missing the big picture. That is the extent to which I brought up drugs.

The analogy here is that American democracy is broken, and the OPer (and people like him) are focusing on fighting voter fraud while ignoring election fraud, campaign-finance laws, and the antiquated two-party system.


Your attempt to twist my words into "Trayvon Martin was a drug dealer" with a racist slant sprang entirely from your own brain. That's all you. At no point have I ever suggested that Martin was a drug dealer.


And the OPer's views on legalization are not particularly relevant if people like him are focusing their attention and efforts on repealing CCW permits instead of ending the War on Drugs.

[ieoeja]

223. You're using world wide stats now?

Worldwide thousands may die a year because of drug related crimes, but not in the US. According to the FBI in 2011, more murders in the United States were the result of a non-crime related argument than for all other reasons combined.

Gangs were responsible for less than 200. Not thousands. Less than 200.

The person you are far most likely to be killed by is a family member, friend or neighbor. And very few of those are planned. They happen when someone loses their temper.

Which brings up an interesting point.

Given: most killings occur when someone loses their temper,
Given: most people do not have a gun on them when they lose their temper,
Then: most killings should be committed without a gun.

Except, of course, they aren't. Which must mean that most people who lose their temper and attack someone fail in killing them. Unless, that is, they had a gun on them when they did lose their temper. Then someone dies.

[krispos42]

234. Try this out

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-10


Narcotic drug laws 390
Gangland killings 150
Juvenile gang killings 523


Those three alone are 1,063 dead.

Then you have the wonderful land of "other", of which some unknown portion is directly related to illegal drugs:

Other arguments 3,128
Othernot specified (felony type) 494
Unknown 4,812


That's nearly 9,500, so take a stab at a percentage. 10% drug-related gives you 950 murders to pile onto the War on Drugs. Is 10% a reasonable guess? Is 30%? I don't know.


And then you have the periphery crimes... people committing crimes to get money to buy illegal drugs, which is some unknown portion of these:

Robbery 734
Burglary 92
Larceny-theft 11
Motor vehicle theft 23


The other major reason for murder is arguments with friends and family, which has probably has little to do with the War on Drugs.


Both major reasons greatly outweigh any perceived damage to society from people carrying concealed (legally) in public.

[hunter]

123. Hunter is in a bad mood. He will take guns from cowardly idiots, and he will not give them back.

Crazier than his grandma, mom, a few of his siblings, and many ancestors.

Zero tolerance for idiots with guns, and I have art to make. Your gun meets Mr. Lincoln Arc Welder.

Want to play Wild West? I can do that.

[Lizzie Poppet]

126. Watch out!

[hunter]

129. Mr. Lincoln Arc Welder is hungry.

...

[Lizzie Poppet]

210. Riiiiiight.

[hunter]

215. Like this guy.

[Eleanors38]

149. Ooooo! He's gonna do it with a computer, too!

[hunter]

191. Mr. Lincoln Arc Welder is hungry.

...

[premium]

188. Ooooooooooh, an internet tough guy.

I'm quaking in my shoes.

Careful, one day you're going to bite off more than you can chew.

[hunter]

192. Mr. Lincoln Arc Welder is hungry.

...

[premium]

194. Uh Huh.

[hunter]

198. post 196

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3287564

[premium]

201. And......................................?

That's your opinion, one not based on reality or facts.

[cthulu2016]

133. CC permits are a big problem, but it does not follow that

everyone with a CC permit is a problem.

[LittleBlue]

136. Zimmerman is a paranoid cop wannabe

I don't think most gun owners are like him. Such a person might have a valid reason for carrying a gun, like living in a crime-ridden area, unlike Z's Dirty Harry suburbia fantasies.

[sarisataka]

137. If that is the case

I will continue to be that sort of problem

I spent most of the day at the library; my internet was down so I used their's to do my work. Per my daily custom, I carried a 1911(!) I was the only non-Hispanic Caucasian in the place(!!) Of the 5+ cultures, the majority were African-American(!!!) Most were teens(!!!!) And they were reading(!!!!!)
I did help a little girl get a book off of a high shelf and didn't feel threatened one little bit.

Last week bad timing put me in the wrong place at the wrong time.
http://www.twincities.com/ci_23647697/payne-phalen-brawl-one-gun-shot-one-person?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com
I was there for the 8:30 fight. Chatted with some neighborhood teens about the police actions (we had different opinions) and the stupidity of the fight (we agreed on that).
They knew I was armed (you're packin') I wasn't a cop (we know, you don't smell like police) and they didn't care (it's all good)
Felt no threat there either.

I am pretty sure one of the ones I spoke with died an hour later

[BainsBane]

139. Is it legal to bring a gun into a public library?

Or were you violating the law?

That article is a perfect example of why carrying guns is dangerous. A misunderstanding became deadly. Why you thought that helped your case, I can't imagine.

[sarisataka]

141. Yes, libraries are legal

only courthouses and the Capitol are off limits without pre-notification to the responsible authority. I find it is easier on everybody to either not bring a gun or turn it over to the Deputies when I visit those places.

The OP stated those who carry are the problem. The unspoken word is legal carriers, obviously. There was no misunderstanding, just attitude. The shooting resulted from a seventeen year old suspect who returned to the scene when the groups decided to finish the fight after the police left. That those involved felt the need to continue a fight was very unwise. To choose to bring a gun to such a scene is the height of stupidity. Legal carry was not a problem.

I am all for charging the person or persons responsible for providing the teen with the gun to be charged as accessories, at minimum.

[BainsBane]

144. "to choose to bring a gun to such a scene is the height of stupidity"

while you just admitted to bringing a gun everywhere.

[sarisataka]

152. In the context of

going out looking for trouble. If carrying the key is to avoid trouble. That is why when I found myself inside the perimeter I joined the spectators. I pay taxes to have a police force to break up a fight.

If I expected to go somewhere and get into a fight I would:
A)not go there
B)not bring a gun
C)not go there

Someone carrying is (IMO) obligated to avoid trouble. To use a recent case-
See a suspicious person and call it in- fine
Observe from a distance to give the person's location-ok
Loose sight and pursue- overstepping civic duty, now there is responsibility for what happens after (I would have kept the jury tied up for as long as it took explaining this concept)

Choosing to be armed is for a situation so dire and immediate that 911 is not sufficient.
It also (properly) requires a mindset that says ego and pride must always take a back seat to caution and common sense. This is the main reason most who ask me about being armed outside of the home I advise against it. In the home is a different set of circumstances but still is not for most people (again, IMO)

Edit> I should add that logically if a person chooses to be armed, carrying always is the only thing that makes sense. You do not put a seat belt on when you think you may have an accident. If a person knew the day their house would catch fire they would have a BBQ for the entire city fire department that day. To those who 'carry only when I need to' I say then don't do it at all. If a person thinks they need to be armed today, see my A,B and C above

[Ohio Joe]

154. You needed a gun at a library?

Why would anyone need a gun at the library?

[sarisataka]

155. Nope, not at all

and that is just the way I hope it goes forever.

I once read a quote, I think by Winston Churchill, that said something along the lines of-"A gentleman may go his entire life without the need of a pistol. Yet the day he does need one, he will need it very badly and there are not many things that will be an adequate substitute."

As I said in the post above, to me it only makes sense to carry always or not at all- where legal of course. Having a permit to carry gives no special privileges to violate the law.

[Ohio Joe]

156. So you risk an accident just on the off chance of being able to kill someone?

You are really that afraid that you have to carry one everywhere?

Good to know you are just another responsible gun owner... Till you are not any more.

So very, very fucked up.

[sarisataka]

157. I have been around firearms personally and professionally

for over three decades. I have seen literally over a million rounds fired. I have seen three rounds fired without a finger touching a trigger.
Two were on an overheated machine gun that cooked off. The third was on a SAW with a bad sear that fired one round while loading. I believe an infinitesimal amount of the reported accidents truly are accidents . The rest are stories to cover negligence.

Believe me when I say I never wish to be in a situation where I can choose life or death for another human being again. That said, it is also not in my nature to go onto my knees and beg for my life.

The fear meme is the most misunderstood point of all. Some people do carry out of fear. Yet to those who cannot conceive of carrying a weapon, who I in no way look down upon- everyone is different, can only relate from an outside perspective. They would only choose to carry a weapon if in mortal terror, if even then. That someone would choose to carry without having that fear is alien so the assumption is fear must be the sole factor.
I recently returned from visiting a state that does not recognize my permit to carry. I wished I have a revolver loaded with shotshell when encountering a rather territorial rattlesnake, but we compromised- I got the hell out of his personal space. When I travel the US or other countries and cannot carry, I am neither more nor less fearful. I am simply aware I have one less option to protect myself.

I could say you are just another responsible driver... Until you are not any more. I have lost more friends and family to drunk, distracted drivers than to weapons, including more than one war.

[Ohio Joe]

158. You were playing with a child... In a library... With a loaded gun... You consider this responsible?

Really?

[sarisataka]

159. Handing a child a book is hardly playing

Do you consider police who visit schools with loaded guns to be irresponsible? I have seen them read stories to first graders and play a round of kick ball with the older children.

[Ohio Joe]

160. Yes... Playing kickball with children and a loaded gun is irresponsible... Was that serious?

I am not one bit shocked gun nuts would even stoop to defending playing with children while carrying a loaded gun. Having to live with a fear of a single moment that may or may not occur in your future (and one you claim to do everything to avoid), you are driven to have to carry a gun even while playing with children... It must be over whelming... I feel bad for you... I feel worse for all the people you put at risk.

[premium]

193. He never said he was playing with a child with a loaded gun,

he said he got a child a book that was beyond the reach of the child. Why do you keep misrepresenting what he actually said?

[sarisataka]

250. Yes- serious, now read the whole thing

It was a Police Officer, on duty, will full gear including their issued firearm that was playing with the children....
I send my children to a small school in a suburb. The police of the community stop by fairly often; the fire department does the same thing.

[Ohio Joe]

266. Yeah, I read the whole thing... Cop... Loaded gun... Playing kickball with children... I got it

I'm not sure how to even reply to such a statement though... I really did think you were joking.

I think that we are not even close on what being a 'responsible gun owner' means... I can simply think of no circumstance where playing with a child/ren while armed with a loaded gun... By anyone... Is in any way, shape or form being 'responsible'.

Does your fire department come armed to play with the children as well?

[sarisataka]

270. I was thinking you had misunderstood

and I was the one playing with them.

You see armed people every day- think about it police, security guards, armored cars drivers, civilians, criminals... and they are around adults and children. I have seen hospitals with armed guards who pass through maternity wards...
Are ALL of the people irresponsible?

The fire department does have axes on the trucks, they even let the kids touch them and push the siren button

[Ohio Joe]

284. The way I look at this...

'Being around' and 'playing kick ball with' are... Very different things. 'Having an axe on the truck' and 'a loaded gun on your person', while either group plays with children is again... Very different things and I see trying to equate them as being dis-honest here.

"The fire department does have axes on the trucks, they even let the kids touch them and push the siren button"

Do they play kick ball with the kids while carrying the axes? I'm betting not. What part of playing kick ball while carrying a loaded gun a good idea then?

[sarisataka]

293. While not something I would choose to do

kicking a ball while carrying a gun in a level 2 or higher holster is no more hazardous than walking with it. The OP postulates mere possession is a hazard.

Though I have authority to carry on the school property as their hired security consultant I only do so when on official business. I will then be professionally dressed and openly carrying in a top level retention holster. The kids then call me 'Mr. ...' rather than 'such and such's dad' and I do not join in games. That happens about twice a year when the school evaluates and tests their intruder drills in conjunction with local PD. When I coach the school soccer team, I keep my pistol in a lock box I installed in my vehicle for times when it is necessary to disarm.

[Eleanors38]

150. Well, all this fear-projection by the controllers has made me sleepy. Night y'all.

[Decoy of Fenris]

167. 73 CC deaths a year, seven years, .00002% of gun crime, 1 : 4,794,520 odds against.

Your premise is false, even if your heart's in the right place.

[pintobean]

175. That's probably enough to drive the Heart Of Gold

across a galaxy.

[Decoy of Fenris]

187. Comparably: Same odds of 7 card Straight Flush, probability of 0.00000021% per person. n/t

[Hoyt]

224. What are odds you need a gun on a typical city street?

[pintobean]

239. I know the bet.

[Decoy of Fenris]

252. 1 in 514,147. Ten times more likely than death by concealed carry.

ON EDIT: I think the actualized "real" probability is higher than that, given concentrated violence and firearms within a city's limits.

[Hoyt]

259. I suppose if you are doing illegal things in high crime areas. Rather than preparing to shoot

someone, I would suggest avoiding those areas so that your odds are so small even a gun nut knows they are irrational for strapping one or two onto their bodies before venturing out.

[Decoy of Fenris]

267. Nah, that's just the countrywide average for both stats you asked after. n/t

[Hoyt]

269. There's your problem, you should not use countrywise averages when determining if you need a gun to

venture out.

But, even using countrywide averages -- you are wasting your money and time arming up to leave your house.

Join the 94% who have decided guns really aren't necessary to go just about anywhere in our country.

[premium]

273. There's YOUR problem

it's their money to spend, not YOURS.
Good for the other 94% who don't carry, that's their decision, why is that relevant to those that do?

[Hoyt]

279. Did not intend to respond to you or Rand Paul.

[premium]

280. Rand Paul?

I sure hope you didn't pull a muscle stretching for that comparison Hoyt.
Even you have to admit that was a really weak response.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

243. LOVE IT! n/t

[JimDandy]

176. Precious, my precious....

Really... I think you meant 'precious weapon' in your post.

[GreenStormCloud]

177. NO. We are part of the solution. Legal concealed carry saves innocent lives.

Legal concealed carry saves more innocent lives than it takes.

In Texas the detailed statistics are compiled annually by the Department of Public Safety and published on the internet. It is likely that the Texas experience with Concealed Handgun Licenses would be about the same in other states. The last year for which statistics are published is 2011 for convictions. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/index.htm

In 2011 there were 512,625 people who had CHLs. Out of those people there were exactly three (3) murder convictions and three (3) manslaughter convictions. Out of the general population there were 578 convictions for murder in its various forms.

So very, very few CHL holders go bad, but some do.

The DPS also publishes an annual Crime in Texas Report. http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/10/citCh3.pdf
From that report, page 15:

Statistics on murder circumstances, victims, and
victim/offender relationships on the next page
include justifiable homicides. Justifiable homicide
is the killing of a felon by a peace officer in the
line of duty or the killing (during the commission
of a felony) of a felon by a private citizen. In
2010, there were 98 justifiable homicides, of
which, 50 were felons killed by private citizens,
and 48 were felons killed by police.

In Texas all homicides, even those that are clearly self-defense, have to go before a grand jury which will rule if the killing was justified or not. So those 50 justified private citizen homicides were ones in which the defender genuinely and legitimately feared for his life. Since most shootings are merely woundings there would be a much larger number of justified woundings in which the defender genuinely feared for his life, but that number is not kept. Obviously there are dozens of cases each year in which a CHL holder uses their gun to save themselves.

Dozens of innocent lives saved versus six innocents killed shows the concealed carry is working in Texas. As already stated, there is no reason to believe that other CCW states have a different experience.

Legal concealed carry saves innocent lives.

[Hoyt]

182. Sure. Trayvon's murder is now counted as a gun saving Zman's worthless life.

[wercal]

181. Missed by a mile

"If you carry a concealed gun, you are the problem"

I guess the epidemic of gun violence in this country has been committed by concealed carry holders? I must have missed that on the five oclock news. Maybe they ran a teaser, and I should have stayed up to catch it on the late news.

On any given day, look in the newspaper in any major city, and you will most likely find:

A murder

That is 'the problem'.

People who legally carry a concealed weapon are only reacting to that problem.

[hunter]

196. You can read how fearful these gun owners are in their replies to this thread.

Without their guns they feel small.

Guys like Zimmerman carry guns because they are afraid.

[Lizzie Poppet]

208. Only if you think "telepsychoanalysis" has the slightest value.

Just sayin'...

Oh, and I don't have to feel small, I am small: 5'3, 109lbs. Do you see why I choose to carry? It's not as if I've some sort of overwhelming fear, although I do recognize that as a small woman, I have a not-insignificant chance of being assaulted. I simply choose to add this particular element of preparedness.

[Jenoch]

207. I don't have a CCW permit,

but if I did and I chose to carry a concealed gun it would be a current gun and not a previous gun.

[Bake]

229. Flamebait. And typical.

Other than that I won't even respond.

Bake

[Just Saying]

230. Yes and somehow we're the hysterical and emotional ones

But they feel the need to carry a deadly weapon with them at all times.

We need to work to change the laws. We need registration and background checks and it needs to be harder to get a CCW. We also need to get rid of SYG laws. We need to put more value on human life.

Frontline did a great piece on how criminals get guns. Check it out if you haven't seen it already: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

The gun lobby just has too much power and it's an uphill battle but we need to work to make changes because it's only getting worse.

[Lizzie Poppet]

261. Anyone calling CCW permit holders "part of the problem" is pretty obviously...

...acting on emotion (or just deliberately trolling), since there isn't a trace of substantive support for that assertion. There is, in fact, a mountain of evidence suggesting that assertion is nonsense. CCW holders commit crimes at a lower rate than average. Calling us "part of the problem" is unsupportable, bigoted horseshit.

[Just Saying]

265. Average what?

Average gun owners, average Americans? Who?

Let's see your "mountain of evidence."

Frankly I think most pro gun people are full of unsupported, bigoted horsehit to use your term.

I have to tell you that I don't want guns around me or my family and I should have that right too. I'm very happy that while I live in a CCW state there are very few places at allow guns.

[premium]

274. You don't have that right out in public or private businesses

that allow firearms, you do have that right in your own home/business.

You do have to right to refuse to frequent a business that allows firearms and you do have the right to not visit someone's home that does have firearms.

Most of the time, you won't even know if someone is CC or not, if you do know, then the person isn't doing it right and probably breaking the law.

[Just Saying]

278. I live in a state where private business can and do make it illegal to carry on their property.

Ohio. You're right that I probably wouldn't know in public but somehow that doesn't make me feel safer.

I do avoid homes where there are guns and in fact ask parents of children my kids visit.

[Lizzie Poppet]

281. Same here in Oregon...and that's a very good law.

The CCW permit holders I know, myself included, honor that preference on the part of property owners, too (despite knowing that armed criminals will not). They have the right to make that choice, and I'm glad the law reinforces that right.

[Just Saying]

285. Anything is possible

But I'm not overly concerned about armed criminals. I'm more concerned that armed citizens would be more dangerous than helpful should that rare crisis arise.

[Lizzie Poppet]

275. Average Americans, obviously.

As for the evidence, there are surveys cited in this very thread. Here's one: http://www.txchia.org/sturdevant.pdf Note that the difference in rates is enormous.

Until such time as it can be verifiably and empirically demonstrated that CCW poses an undue risk to others, then your claim of having a "right" not to have guns around you is unsupportable.

[Just Saying]

282. I can look at your and other's "evidence"

But at first glance my first question is who did this analysis? I'm really not going to look thru 50 odd pages of stuff to try to prove your point. Besides in the "mountains" you should be able to show me some conclusions from respected sources, right?

I'll continue to work for legislation that keeps your dangerous hobby the hell away from me.

[Lizzie Poppet]

283. *shrug* Suit yourself.

If you'd bothered to scroll past the cover sheet, you'd have noted that there's a brief summary. Kinda tells me how interested you really are in learning whether or not CCW holders are a statistically-legitimate risk... You've made up your mind (based on fuck-all in the way of evidence), and that's that, apparently.

I'll continue to oppose the sort of emotion-based, pointless legislation you advocate...and let's say I'm not real worried about the outcome.

Ta-ta...

[Just Saying]

286. And I'll continue to not live in fear

And as a result not feel like I need to carry a gun everywhere.

A summary only tells me what whoever that is thinks about stats of a 2 year period in Texas. I'm not interested enough in your point to dig to figure out where he got info, who he is and if it's accurate. I did scroll and again have no interest in going thru 50+ pages.

Don't worry, but those of us not driven by fear and paranoia to need guns so badly will work to protect ourselves and our families from folks so worried about their precious hobby (and let's be real, that's all it is) that they fight against laws that would keep guns from criminals and the insane on the off chance it might inconvenience them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

287. Me, too!

But thanks for the bullshit amateur psychoanalysis (repeated ad nauseam by your fellow anti-gunners). Worth every penny I paid...

But might I suggest your efforts be directed less at people who pose only the remotest possible threat to you and yours and more at, you know...actual threats? Join people like me in supporting reasonable regulations that might actually help (like universal background checks, strict enforcement against traffickers and straw purchasers, severe penalties against those who actually use a firearm in crime, sensible storage and security rules for gun owners, etc.). Attempting to restrict those who pose no plausible threat to you only turns us against your efforts.

[Apophis]

236. Anyone who carries a concealed weapon is a potential murderer, IMO.

[Lizzie Poppet]

241. So is most anyone else.

Sure, possession of a weapon might make that easier...but all that is speculation. What actually occurs is that CCW permit holders commit murder at a lower rate than average.

[premium]

242. Anyone who owns a car is a potential drunk driver,

any male is a potential...................., you get the idea.
Anyone can be a potential murderer, whether or not they carry a concealed weapon.

[sweetapogee]

276. which reminds me of an idea I have

It's a buyback program called "Bourbon for Guns". I haven't decided on all of the incentives but I'm thinking along the lines of this...Instead of $50.00 Walmart gift cards (which only encourage people to shop at a store that doesn't pay a living wage), turn in an AK, get a bottle of Single Barrel Beam or Gentleman Jack. An AR (w/ high capacity clip) turn-in would net the same PLUS a box of 25 count Don Diego Corona's!

[premium]

277. Hmmmmmmmm.

Interesting idea, let me have a drink while I mull it over.

[Apophis]

291. Carrying a gun raises the potential to be a killer.

That's the only reason anyone would carry a gun.

[sweetapogee]

311. exactly!

same as carrying a condom raises the potential to be a sex predator! Watch out for dudes with trojans concealed in their wallet!

[Lizzie Poppet]

314. Your first statement is true. Your second is nonsense.

"That's the only reason anyone would carry a gun."

Bullshit. I've carried guns for many other reasons, and I'm hardly unique in that. Obviously recreational usage doesn't qualify (I don't hunt...), but even the more-relevant purpose of self-defense doesn't equate. Killing isn't the reason, isn't the purpose of defensive carry. Killing is one possible outcome of self-defense usage, and not even the most likely one.

This distinction is far more than a semantic quibble. It points up a very important distinction in terms of intent and motivation.

[Apophis]

316. The only reason anyone would carry a gun on their person would be to kill.

Plain and simple. It's not about going hunting or target practicing. If that were the case, then why bring a gun with you to retail establishments, restaurants, or movie theaters?

Check. Mate.

[Lizzie Poppet]

317. I already explained why that's wrong.

Clue: most defensive gun usages don't involve killing.

Checkmate, indeed. I'd sure love to play chess with you...for money.

[Apophis]

318. The point of my post obviously went over your head.

[Lizzie Poppet]

319. Not even close.

I understood your assertion completely, thanks very much. I simply consider it to be complete nonsense, for reasons I've already detailed. Since your response has consisted of nothing beyond a rather wordier version of "uh-huh," I see no reason to continue this conversation. Believe what you like...

[hughee99]

244. Exactly!!! The problem isn't the people who rob, kidnap, rape and murder other people,

(the kind that puts such fear into those who do carry guns) the problem is the god damn people who think they can protect themselves by carrying a gun. If only THOSE people carrying guns thinking they're protecting themselves would stop doing that, the problem would be solved. Right?

[premium]

262. ^^^I saw what you did there.^^^

[jpak]

253. Huzzah!

[LaydeeBug]

268. Not in Sanford, Florida, where the sidewalk makes it a fair fight.

That's "if you carry a concealed weapon, you are probably a minority child who is well aware that it is open season on you and your people since sidewalks are considered a weapon".

Lock and load, and if they roll up on you, so slowly while you're walking, you can BEST believe that is SUSPICIOUS behavior and you should turn around, and AIM.

Don't shoot. But AIM. That way they won't come chasing you. You will be standing your ground.

Anybody saying any other thing in this day and age and in light of what is happening to our children is the problem. Because GZ gets his gun back.

We have to know how to AIM.

They have to know the fight *will* get *fair* if we ever are to stand a chance.

edit: minor typo, but if half the populace is armed, it is almost silly for the other half not to be

[rl6214]

295. Why don't you work on the gun violence in Chicago

That sort of violence is the real problem.

[Ohio Joe]

308. The problem is in Chicago? Not anywhre an unarmed teen is murdered?

Fascinating.

[hughee99]

312. If concealed carry is "the problem",

then places that don't allow that, like Chicago, shouldn't have an issue with gun violence, right?

I believe the poster is suggesting that the OP has misdiagnosed "the problem".

[Omnith]

298. Stereotype much?

[Lizzie Poppet]

322. Blatant sexism always does SO much for an argument.

And I'm not talking (just) about the use of the word "pussy," in case that hadn't dawned on you.

[B Calm]

323. Paranoia is a sickness