Yup, it's officially a moral panic:

[friendly_iconoclast]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/university-of-texas-campus-concealed-guns.html?_r=0

College officials in other states with campus carry, like Colorado and Idaho, say there has been little noticeable impact. In Texas, only people older than 21 can carry concealed handguns, and university leaders estimate only a few hundred will do so in Austin. Mr. Marsh said most people would never even notice, which, he added, is “the whole point of concealed carry.”...

...Already, she said, the law has interfered with teaching. During her first class after the law took effect, she said, her English literature students discussed the rules and she explained how she could not legally prohibit guns in class, or even ask who had them.

“Three of them started crying,” she said. “We did not talk about Jane Austen that day.”...

"But f_i," you may very well say, "don't you realize just how dangerous this will be?"

Yes. Yes, I do:

http://www.dps.texas.gov/rsd/chl/reports/convrates.htm

(tl,dr version- 108 Texas CCW license holder were convicted of felonies in 2015)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=198548

Out of a population of 940,877-that's *1* conviction for every 8711 permitees

http://www.dps.texas.gov/rsd/chl/reports/ActLicAndInstr/ActiveLicandInstr2015.pdf

Active License/Certified Instructor Counts
As of December 31, 2015


Active License Holders:
937,419
Certified Instructors:
3,458

These numbers reflect the number of licensed individuals and certified instructors

Given the stated estimates by university leaders -and known conviction rates-
it would seem that UT will most likely go about 16 years before the first CC licensee
enrolled there commits any felony, much less one involving illegal use of
a firearm...

[Duckhunter935]

1. Not really surprised at the crying

Due to the outrageous fear mongering the controllers have been promoting.

[Eleanors38]

2. Should have provided a trigger-warning to the class.

Last edited Sun Aug 28, 2016, 05:58 PM - Edit history (1)

[Buckeye_Democrat]

10. Nice!

[guillaumeb]

3. A site to explore:

http://concealedcarrykillers.org/

This site compiles incidents involving CC holders committing murders.

[Duckhunter935]

4. How many were on a campus?

And just what is the percentage to overall permit holders? I bet the percentage is actually quite miniscule.

[friendly_iconoclast]

6. "I bet the percentage is actually quite miniscule." It is - see post #5

[Duckhunter935]

7. I know, that poster

Schooled me on how Oklahoma had only 40,000 CCW permits when I pointed out per his stated website only had 3 in the database.

[guillaumeb]

8. Check out the site.

And how many were red-haired, left handed doctors with a speech impediment?

And no matter how low the percentage, that does not obscure the fact that there are 30,000 gun deaths each year. No amount of explaining, or exploring likelihood of shootings by a particular group can explain these deaths away.

[Duckhunter935]

9. And once again, 2/3 are suicides

By ones own choice and do not involve others and are not a threat in classrooms.

[guillaumeb]

11. How many murders are committed by someone who then commits suicide?

Are suicides by gun somehow less of a gun death?

Does the family suffer less because it is a suicide?

[Duckhunter935]

16. I expect much less than single suicide.

I don't blame the rope for the two that I know used hanging to commit suicide. You don't do your side any good inflating the numbers to try and benefit.

[guillaumeb]

19. And no good is done by attemting to discuss murder in context of small sub-groups

of gun owners. The 30,000 dead remain dead.

[Eleanors38]

24. 2/3 of the deaths you cite are suicide, not homicide. nt

[guillaumeb]

43. The 30,000 dead remain dead.

[pablo_marmol]

48. This context-free burbling re. '30,000 dead' is a good example of why you're failing.

Of the 1/3 of the remaining homicides -- after suicides are deducted -- 2/3 are criminal-on-criminal. I'm not sure exactly how it breaks down after that, but one thing is certain. Citizens without criminal records who "snap" and jump straight to murder with a gun represent a very small percentage of the total.

So please......by all means......please proceed with your dishonest, failing strategy.

[friendly_iconoclast]

64. "30,000 dead" in this case is a 'thought-terminating cliche':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clich%C3%A9#Thought-terminating_clich.C3.A9

Thought-terminating cliché

In his 1961 book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of "Brainwashing" in China psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton introduced the term "thought-terminating cliché".This refers to a cliché that is a commonly used phrase, or folk wisdom, sometimes used to quell cognitive dissonance. Though the clichéd phrase in and of itself may be valid in certain contexts, its application as a means of dismissing dissent or justifying fallacious logic is what makes it thought-terminating.

Lifton wrote:

"The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed. These become the start and finish of any ideological analysis."

In George Orwell's 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, the fictional constructed language Newspeak is designed to eliminate the ability to express unorthodox thoughts. Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World society uses thought-terminating clichés in a more conventional manner, most notably in regard to the drug soma as well as modified versions of real-life platitudes, such as "A doctor a day keeps the jim-jams away".

In her 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt described Adolf Eichmann as an intelligent man who used clichés and platitudes to justify his actions and the role he played in the Jewish genocide of World War II. For her, these phrases are symptomatic of an absence of thought. Arendt wrote, "When confronted with situations for which such routine procedures did not exist, he [Eichmann] was helpless, and his cliché-ridden language produced on the stand, as it had evidently done in his official life, a kind of macabre comedy. Clichés, stock phrases, adherence to conventional, standardized codes of expression and conduct have the socially recognized function of protecting us against reality, that is, against the claim on our thinking attention that all events and facts make by virtue of their existence."

[pablo_marmol]

65. Yes. Yes it is.

It's also makes the user appear both dishonest and infantile.

[DonP]

70. To be polite; "Overly Simplistic" applies

Gun Control Motto: No thought more complex than a bumper sticker can hold, no "research" so old and irrelevant that we won't use it.

[pablo_marmol]

77. You are correct, of course, Don........

..........but there are times when I get tired of being polite with those who lack the character to examine their biases, and sling dishonest insults.

After all, this is the group that accuses us of lack of compassion simply because we don't sign off on useless, knee-jerk legislation.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

68. We should catalog Thought-terminating cliches. One of the ones I notice most in GD is

"The nutters will be along any minute now to explain this away."

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

69. We need a new thread for that but:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11729858#post491

...preserved there for posterity.

[Eleanors38]

71. Since I have to comb through GD for gun posts, it shouldn't be a surprise.

[pablo_marmol]

78. "The nutters will be along any minute now to explain this away."

Translation:

The pro-rights people will be along any minute to inject facts into our faith-based drooling.

[Duckhunter935]

42. Except suicide is not murder

Sorry to say, you are the one that fails to understand that simple fundamental fact and is trying to conflate the two into one.

[guillaumeb]

44. The 30,000 dead remain dead.

[Duckhunter935]

46. 2/3 by their own choice

Interesting you are anti-choice

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

49. Not only that but they remain deader than those who...

...are killed with fire and blunt objects and those who kill themselves with drugs or knives.

[beergood]

54. i agree

if were going to include suicide, then lets include all suicide not just suicide by gun. i know one who hung himself, another who overdosed.

what do you think are homicide rate would be if we included all suicide? definitely more than 30,000.

[guillaumeb]

55. That would be a larger topic, but we were speaking of "death by gun".

[beergood]

56. so your saying

my friends deths don't count because there was no gun involved?

[guillaumeb]

57. I already answered your question.

And this IS a gun group. Perhaps you should post on this topic.

[beergood]

117. "And this IS a gun group. Perhaps you should post on this topic."

you are correct, my apologies. on the topic of guns, which is you preferred firearm, caliber for target shooting? i enjoy my 12 gauge mossberg 500 with Improved Cylinder choke. i shoot 00 buck, slugs, and birdshot. my second favorite is my rifle chambered in .223 it has very low recoil. i can shoot all day without any discomfort.

[guillaumeb]

119. My shooting is confined to one gun at this point.

A Springfield repro .58 musket.

Much more kick than your .223, less range, and probably less velocity but it does make a big hole.

And slower to fire as well.

Why slugs? Do you hunt also?

[beergood]

120. "Do you hunt also?"

no, its just that slugs like buckshot and birdshot shoot differently. i like to test my firearms, that way if i ever have to use them (either for self defense or food) ill know how.

i would like to get my hands on a musket one of these days. what type of action is yours?

[oneshooter]

121. It sounds like one of these.

[beergood]

122. forgive my ignorance

but i thought by the time the percussion cap was invented the musket was obsolete. both sides of the civil war used rifled muskets that shot minie balls. correct?

[oneshooter]

123. Definitions

Rifled Musket Built as a smooth bore musket, later returned to armory to have the barrel rifled.

A "rifle" was fitted with a fully rifled barrel as original.
The term"rifled musket" was a commonly used to describe these weapons. They had a larger bore and a thinner barrel than a regular rifle of the time. It also used a relatively light powder charge (60gr of 2Fg) than a rifle of the same bore (80-100 gr 2Fg) while using a heavier projectile ( 585gr hollow base Minie vs a 286 gr round ball).

[beergood]

124. thanks

[oneshooter]

125. No problem.

been building and shooting front stuffers for over 40 years.

[beergood]

126. whats it like

shooting them? do they kick like a 12 gauge? the only long guns i've fired are an ar chambered in 556, a mossberg shotgun and a mosin.

[oneshooter]

128. Since I am a traditional shooter I shoot mainly Flint. Locks with PRB.

The recoil is less than a modern rifle even though the muzzle energy is the same as a modern cartridge. The weapons are heavier, but we'll balanced in the hand.
My LongRifle has a 44"x15/16" barrel, it is .50 caliber and will throw a .495dis. 147grain cast lead patched round ball at 2500fps. using a charge of 100gr of Geox 2Fg black powder.
Equal to a modern 30-30.

[guillaumeb]

127. I do not hunt any longer.

I did with the uncles when I was younger.

The Springfield is a Dixie Gun Works .58 black powder.

Accurate, but has a kick. (An understatement)

They are fun to shoot. It is a percussion type, muzzle loader, although I have seen breech conversions.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

14. Where do you see that?

And how many were red-haired, left handed doctors with a speech impediment?

I've looked at some of the descriptions already, but perhaps you can point me in the right direction.

Or is that some kind of saying that I've never heard?

[guillaumeb]

21. The attempt by some gun enthusiasts to divide gun owners into

small sub groups. A way of minimizing the 30,000 gun deaths each year.

[Eleanors38]

26. Attempt by some banners to apply Orwell to the King's English.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

27. Ahh, gotcha.

I was so accustomed to being treated like dirt for my red hair and freckles as a kid (which thankfully went away as I got older), I wondered if there was indeed a problem with red heads and guns.

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. Just as all car owners are responsible for traffic deaths.

And all computer users are responsible for child pornography, identity theft, and botnets.

And everyone with a prescripition for painkillers are responsible for overdoses.

[guillaumeb]

22. None of the objects mentioned are designed specifically to kill.

But you knew that.

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. But they *do* kill on occasion. Are those killed by cars and drugs less dead than shooting victims?

[Eleanors38]

28. Using the standard in #19, no.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

31. Is killing absolutely bad?

[guillaumeb]

51. What if you were the target?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

52. You're evading. What if I was the target? Would using deadly force to stop that person be bad?

[guillaumeb]

53. You asked originally if killing was bad.

Unanswerable with no context.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

59. "Unanswerable with no context."

Which is the essence of gun control.

You constantly complain that gun are designed to kill. Yet, you treat that without context. You make your declarations without regard as to why any one party may act with deadly force and treat all parties as engaged in something bad.

If someone were to act against me with deadly force without provocation from me would I be entitled to use deadly force?

(And don't retreat to a slew of questions about the practicality of such a scenario. That debate can be had elsewhere. I'm asking about the legality/ethics/morality of employing deadly force.)

[guillaumeb]

60. Self defense is a concept that I believe in.

Was the Trayvon Martin case self-defense?

If Zimmerman had not been carrying, would Martin be dead?

[friendly_iconoclast]

62. Fine words, indeed- but they do not answer the question asked. Here it is again:

If someone were to act against me with deadly force without provocation from me would I be entitled to use deadly force?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

66. Particular cases do not have bearing on a right.

[guillaumeb]

73. That "right" is an inextricable part of the case.

[beevul]

75. Oh nonsense.

Its a right to keep and bear, not a right to murder.

It seems you can't be bothered to differentiate.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

76. The claim that Zimmerman exercised a right has no bearing to anyone outside of the case.

Libel and defamation cases are often defended under the pretext of free speech rights. Yet, even when a party has been found to have libeled or defamed another party that offense has no bearing on the balance of free speech rights.

[gejohnston]

79. Yes it was self defense

It was a clearest case of self defense possible, never mind the false narrative created by Ben Crump, race baiting ambulance chaser not so extraordinaire. The only reason it went to trial was because Rick Scott wanted to help out Angela Cory's re election, who is the DA in Jacksonville. She isn't well liked by the black community and was facing a tough re election. Even though the Seminole County DA determined it was self defense based on the evidence, Scott decided to help out sleazy Cory. This time, the NAACP and the NRA teamed up against her, and she lost the Republican primary.


If Zimmerman had not been carrying, would Martin be dead? Probably not, but the witnesses were calling 911, and the cops got there about a minute after the shot. Chances are, Martin would be doing time for felony assault at the very least. In Wyoming, it would likely be assault with a deadly weapon. Wyoming defines a "deadly weapon" as anything that can reasonably used to inflict death or grave bodily harm, including balled fists and sidewalks.
If Zimmerman were not carrying, would be be alive or not a vegetable?

Maybe, maybe not.When I was in Florida a few months ago, I ran into Crump's legal partner at a local shooting range. Coincidentally, our carry guns are the same make, model, and caliber.

[guillaumeb]

80. Is this the official NRA fairy story version of the murder of Trayvon Martin?

Amazing.

[gejohnston]

81. It is the objective facts and evidence presented at trial

which I attended. Facts and evidence don't have an ideology nor religion, they simply are the objective reality. That Objective reality is neither "alt right" nor "progressive", but simply the objective truth.
But then, I treat all ideologies the same way I treat all organized religion, always with skepticism and sometimes disdain.

Yes, that is the real reason why Scott chose her to be "special prosecutor". Either way, not only is he a Tea Party Republican, she is also extremely unethical. Just some of her antics trying to get Zimmerman convicted of something, would get her disbarred in any other state. Think Duke LaCrosse.

[guillaumeb]

82. Objective facts has nothing to do with this.

It was the testimony presented.

And was Trayvon Martin allowed to testify? No, he had been already executed by a clown who was looking for a reason to shoot his gun.

Zimmerman's subsequent history tells us all we need to know about his character and veracity.

[gejohnston]

83. Objective facts have everything to do with it

Nothing you said or might think is supported by objective facts.

And was Trayvon Martin allowed to testify? No, he had been already executed by a clown who was looking for a reason to shoot his gun.

What would he say? All doubt "he said and he said" goes to the defendant. The forensics spoke, the eye witnesses spoke. What was he going to say? The eye witnesses were lying about him pounding Zimmerman's face in and bouncing his head on the sidewalk?

Zimmerman's subsequent history tells us all we need to know about his character and veracity.

Not relevant to the case, but one of the evidentary hearings was about the stuff on Trayvon's social media and data on his phone. His character wasn't exactly stellar. Oh, and the twelve year old kid in the photos Crump and Al Sharpton was waving around, wasn't him. My opinion of any of these people have nothing to do with it.

People who know Zimmerman say that the whole thing changed him from a decent person to something more dark. If you were violently assaulted, killed your attacker, then smeared and falsely called a racist by race baiting con artists like Al Sharpton and Ben Crump, and prosecuted for a non crime, you would not be the same person, and not for the better. That is before possible internal physical injury.

I'm not going to waste any more electrons with someone clinging debunked false narratives and lies, be it this nonsense or those who deny climate change, the Holocaust, or the Armenian Genocide. The objective reality is what it is.
I am a liberal, not a progressive nor a conservative. My core values are these
facts, evidence, and reason over emotion, ideology, and dogma.
I treat the left wing anti Christian and Mormon bigots with same disdain as I do right wing anti Muslim, atheist, Wiccan bigots. However, all of those religions, and the ideas they represent, is fair game to criticism.
All racists and bigots suck. I don't care if you are Al Sharpton or Trump, I still detest both of these people.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

84. He baited you and you took it.

He's doing everything he can to avoid the discussion about whether or not people have a right to self-defense.

He's going to pick the most controversial particular cases that will win him the most support in the forum in order to muddy the waters.

[gejohnston]

85. go figure

story of my life. At least he used a good fly instead of gas station worms.

[guillaumeb]

86. So poor George Zimmerman is actually the victim in all this?

That explains it. A live victim, as opposed to the real perpetrator, the dead, unarmed black kid.

[friendly_iconoclast]

87. The character of persons in particular cases have no bearing on rights in other cases

If they did, there would be no 'Miranda warnings'- Ernesto Miranda was a career criminal, as
well as a rapist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Miranda

[guillaumeb]

88. Zimmerman was looking for an excuse to use his gun.

He was told by the authorities to back away and let the police handle it.

But he was so excited at the opportunity to be the protector that he "prematurely fired" his weapon.

[DonP]

89. Wow! That's a pretty "creative" interpretation of the actual evidence and testimony

Plus another fine example of online mind reading.

But it's easier for some folks to buy into a comfortable narrative than read all those complicated court records, or respect the US Jury system.

[guillaumeb]

92. Creative writing, or the NRA rewriting history?

Timeline:
February 26, 2012 - George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, calls 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood. He is instructed not to get out of his SUV or approach the person. Zimmerman disregards the instructions. Moments later, neighbors report hearing gunfire. Zimmerman acknowledges that he shot Martin, claiming it was in self-defense. In a police report, Officer Timothy Smith writes that Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of the head.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts/

Instructed to not get out.....

It wasn’t enough for George Zimmerman to kill Trayvon Martin.
In an interview with The Daily Beast this week, Zimmerman made it clear he has no remorse about shooting the 17-year-old boy to death in Sanford, Florida, and bears outright hostility for the parents whose son he took away forever.
“They didn’t raise their son right. He attacked a complete stranger and attempted to kill him,” Zimmerman said of Martin.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/17/george-zimmerman-taunts-trayvon-martin-s-parents-they-didn-t-raise-their-son-right.html

Zimmerman is an unrepentant murderer. SO yes, there is some "creative remembering" happening here. Feel free to post a refutation. With links.

[DonP]

94. So the NRA rewrote the court records?

They are a lot more powerful and connected than we thought.

And ummm, try the actual available court records, not CNN or the Daily Beast second hand crap as a source.

It might make you look slightly less foolish, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

[guillaumeb]

95. Oh wise man, you forgot your link.

[DonP]

96. No, what I forgot is that gun control fans are lazy as well as cheap

But as a self appointed expert on the trial, evidence, witness statements and what all their motivations were, I figured you must have poured over all the actual transcripts already, to arrive at your considered opinions and findings.

Soooo...there's this thing called Google, maybe you've heard of it?

Several other effective search engines, or so I've been told.

But since gun controllers seem to go by bumper stickers and cartoons rather than actual facts, maybe it's a new concept?

[guillaumeb]

111. You made a specific allegation. You have refused to back it up.

Unable because you cannot find proof?

[DonP]

112. So, we'll add "not the sharpest pencil in the drawer" to lazy and cheap

Not worth wasting any time on hopeless cases.

Besides, you've pretty much proven that you cant get any gun control passed, no matter how much you all whine and posture online about it.

Go back to your "activists", ask both of them about all their real world activities to support gun control.

[guillaumeb]

113. More evasion and avoidance.

Just admit that you cannot find this "evidence" that you claim exists. You will feel better.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

114. If I'm attacked without provocation and fear grave bodily injury do I have a right to

use deadly force?

please take a moment to answer the question. I'm sure you would not want to give the appearance of evasion and avoidance.

[guillaumeb]

115. Yes.

The evasion and avoidance was not directed at you.

[beevul]

116. You need to be provided evidence that courts keep records? N/T

[DonP]

118. Way, way too much like work, ... easier to rely on cartoons for your opinions

Doing something as "complex" and mentally challenging as Googling "Zimmerman v. Florida court record" and actually reading the court records is way beyond the average gun control fan's capabilities. Might be too "difficult" for them. Easier to cling to your religious beliefs, mythology and bumper stickers.

If they did, they might trip over some actual facts, as opposed to the manufactured media narrative, and have to restructure their incorrect and unsupported suppositions and that would make smoke come out their ears.

And nobody likes second hand smoke.

[beevul]

90. Thats your opinion.

Zimmerman was looking for an excuse to use his gun.

Thats your opinion, which is completely unsupported by so much as a single fact.

Think about that for a minute (I know, you wont).

He was told by the authorities to back away and let the police handle it.

Nothing like the smell of equivocation in the morning. The dispatcher whom Zimmerman was on the phone with, had no authority to tell Zimmerman anything one way or another.

But he was so excited at the opportunity to be the protector that he "prematurely fired" his weapon.

Multiple eyewitness accounts place zimmerman at the bottm of a skirmish getting his head pounded into pavement or concrete before he fired the gun - how much longer should he have waited?



You're just here trying to win an unwinnable argument, and throwing everything against the wall that you can find within hands reach, vainly hoping something will stick. We've all seen this before, and we've all heard your oft repeated talking points before. You aren't coming up with anything new, or even novel.

We're keeping our guns, and our rights.

[friendly_iconoclast]

91. For the sake of argument, let us concede that your estimate of him is correct.

That would have nothing to do with the actions of the other >10 million concealed carriers

[guillaumeb]

93. No, it does not.

And I am not saying that every, or most, or any significant percentage of CC owners are killers.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

97. If someone, without provocation, threatened me with grave injury or death would I

be justified in using deadly force to protect myself?

[oneshooter]

99. Of course NOT!!!

It is the sworn duty of Law Enforcement to protect you!!! If they fail in this duty then it is their job to put a nice chalk ring around your body.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

100. I wish my other interlocutor would answer the question. He's made a point to answer so many other

threads but he seems reluctant answer this particular question even though it has been put to him at least 3 times now by me and another poster.

[oneshooter]

103. I think you scare him. n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

106. I can't imagine anyone less imposing than me.

[pablo_marmol]

109. But.....but.....but.............

YOU'RE A GUNNER!!!

[Straw Man]

47. Nor are they specifically designed to defend oneself.

None of the objects mentioned are designed specifically to kill.

But you knew that.

Weapons can be used offensively or defensively.

But you knew that.

[JonathanRackham]

34. 30,000 misrepresented statistics.

[krispos42]

129. You are denying difference in circumstances, which prevents effective action to prevent those deaths

You cannot fix the problem if you refuse to correctly and accurately identify the problem. Suicides via gun is a distinct and separate issue from gang shootings, which is a separate and distinct issue from friend/family shootings, which is a separate and distinct issue from spree killings.

Over 41 thousand people committed suicide last year; less than half used a gun. Magazine limits and bans on "assault weapons" will not address gun-related suicides, which occur in the privacy and leisure of a person's home and involve only 1 cartridge.

The US crime rate dropped in half from 1991 to 2010 or so, and it had nothing to do with gun laws, it had to do with 2 seemingly-unrelated progressive policies: cleaning the air and giving women control of their reproductive system.

To fight smog, we mandated catalytic converters on cars. But the lead in gasoline clogged the converters, so we outlawed leaded gasoline. Within a couple of years, the air was virtually free of airborne lead, and the children born after 1974 or so had far less lead in their tissues.

Lead causes brain damage, making children dumber, more violent, and less able to control their impulses or to plan long-term. When the lead was removed from the air, the children stopped being poisoned by it. Thus, when the new generation of lead-free children became teenagers and thus most likely to become violent criminals, far fewer of them became violent criminals because their brains were normal. This would have been around... 1989.


Likewise, women's rights expanded to both birth control and abortion, meaning that more women were having children at "the right time" and thus able to raise them better than in the older says, when women simply had to have as many kids as nature said, when nature said, and then had to try to raise them under far more adverse conditions.

The Pill and the IUD became popular in the mid-to-late sixties, so the effect of having fewer kids born into situations where they were likely to become violent criminals would have been... in the mid-to-late 80's.


Progressive social and economic policies save lives, but we can't get them passed with Republicans running things. And as long as the solution to gun violence is seen as a hardware problem, it will:
a) politically mobilize gun owners to a far greater extent than non-gun-owners
b) not address the root causes of violence and depression, thus not changing murder rates or suicide rates.

[guillaumeb]

130. If poverty and social inequality are the primary causes of crime.

the solution is to "fix" those problems. But really fixing those problems is far more difficult than posturing about being "tough on crime". Posturing is favored by politicians from both parties.

Very nice post, by the way.

[krispos42]

131. Thank you

I want to see these problems fixed, but it's pretty much impossible with Republicans running things.

Many gun-control proposals, IMO, would require a very high expenditure of political capital, would have a long-term and fairly steep backlash affect FOR the Republicans, and would have no visible impact short term and very little (probably statistically insignificant) long term.

And it doesn't fix the situation that can lead to murder, but it might make murder a little less likely. For example, sometimes domestic abuse escalates to murder. If we assume that a gun-control policy reduced the odds of the abused being killed by his or her abuse, it doesn't change the fact that the abuse is still happening. Beatings and denigration and burning and cutting... those things are still happening, scarring the victim and anybody around him or her.

Whereas working to crack down on domestic abuser (through various methods) will not only make murder of the abused less likely, but also reduce the number of abusers, the number of abused, and the number of people affected on the periphery of the abusive situation.

This effect will not only be much more net positive for society, but because the kind of people that care about domestic abuse are in power, they would do other things that broadly benefit society.

That's my opinion.

We don't have a prayer of getting a lot of things that are broadly beneficial to our society done if we're not in charge.

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. A fisking of that site that will give the doctrinaire a sad:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117219362

Once again, the VPC hopes you are both easily frightened and poor at math

The Violence Policy Center has cranked up its evergreen moral panic
"Concealed Carry Killers"- and the gullible and doctrinaire fall for it:

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22concealed+carry+killers%22&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

http://www.democraticunderground.com/126210658

Concealed Carry Tragedies Include Workplace Shooting, Six-Year-Old Unintentionally Killing Father.

Washington, DC — Concealed handgun permit holders are responsible for at least 873 deaths not involving self defense since 2007, including 29 mass shootings that killed 139 people, ongoing VPC research shows. Since there is no comprehensive record keeping of fatal incidents involving concealed carry permit holders, this tally most likely represents a small fraction of the actual total.

I couldn't be arsed to look for any 2014 or 2015 screeds from them, so let's
look at one from 2013:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023118413

Research Details Hundreds of Examples of Innocent Lives Lost to “Concealed Carry Killers"


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 27, 2013
3:18 PM
CONTACT: Violence Policy Center
Avery Palmer, 202-822-8200 x104, [e-mail]

As Zimmerman Case Begins, VPC Research Details Hundreds of Examples of Innocent Lives Lost to “Concealed Carry Killers

WASHINGTON - June 27 - Washington, DC— As the trial opens this week over the deadly shooting of Trayvon Martin, research shows that similar fatal incidents are shockingly common. The Violence Policy Center has uncovered hundreds of examples of non-self defense incidents involving private citizens legally allowed to carry concealed handguns. These incidents resulted in 516 deaths — including 24 mass shootings and the killing of 14 law enforcement officers.

Doing the math, and according to the VPC, concealed carriers are responsible for 357
deaths over the last three years, or 119 a year.
Lets stipulate, for the sake of this argument, that all of those deaths were murders
even if they were not.

Now comes the part where the wheels fall off the panic mongering.

The lowest estimate I can find for the number of concealed handgun permit holders
in the US is 11.1 million- other figures cited were a high of 12.8 million but
I'll stick with the low one. Taking that number, and using the numbers given by the
VPC, we see that 119/11100000 = a murder rate of 0.93 per 100,000 permit
holders, a rate about one-fifth of the US population as a whole

Source for US murder rate:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-1

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/preliminary-semiannual-uniform-crime-report-januaryjune-2015/tables/table-3

Worse for the controllers, these numbers mean that those 'concealed carry killers'
kill at a lower rate than does the populations of the UK, France,
Australia (where have I heard that name recenly?), Ireland, Canada...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

http://rboatright.blogspot.com/2013/03/comparing-england-or-uk-murder-rates.html

and at par with Norway and Sweden

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172193622#post8

Read it again ... slooowly. No debunking is involved

Debunking would indicate the OP was trying to prove the VPC wrong with it's claimed numbers.

The OP accepts all of the VPC numbers as is, with no argument.

They then compare it to the factual number of concealed carriers in the country. That's not debunking, it's what we call "Math"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172193622#post19

9 years of data...less then 100 deaths a year, including suicides...

"Concealed handgun permit holders are responsible for at least 873 deaths not involving self defense since 2007, including 29 mass shootings that killed 139 people, ongoing VPC research shows.
...
In the vast majority of the 684 incidents documented in Concealed Carry Killers (585, or 86 percent), the concealed carry permit holder either committed suicide (293), has already been convicted (222), perpetrated a murder-suicide (53), or was killed in the incident (17). Of the 74 cases currently pending, the vast majority (64) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide, four were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and six incidents are still under investigation. An additional 25 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving the gun of the concealed handgun permit holder."

http://www.vpc.org/press/latest-concealed-carry-tragedies-include-workplace-shooting-six-year-old-unintentionally-killing-father/

Once incident in DC was about a Texas permit holder who killed 13 with a shotgun at a Navy Yard in DC.

"Alexis purchased his Remington 870 shotgun and two boxes of shells from Sharpshooters Small Arms Range in Newington, Virginia just two days before the shooting. Alexis had a concealed carry permit from Texas and had previously held one issued in the state of Washington."

[guillaumeb]

12. 30,000 gun deaths a year. Keep parsing and explaining.

Perhaps that will give some comfort to the families of the 30,000 victims.

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. Your collective guilt-tripping and appeals to emotion seem not to be gaining traction

How, exactly do you differ from Pamela Geller or Donald Trump, aside from
the identity of your particular bêtes noires?

[guillaumeb]

17. A certain number of people literally do not care about others.

As long as they can do what they wish to do, the consequences of their choices do not matter to them.

Sometimes these people are called Libertarians.
Sometimes they are called sociopaths.

[friendly_iconoclast]

23. And those individual people are responsible, not an entire group

[beevul]

33. Yes. Some of them focus on what other people own.

As long as they can dictate to whom they wish to, the consequences of their choices do not matter to them.

[guillaumeb]

35. 30,000 gun dead are also the consequences of choices.

Agreed?

[beevul]

36. Not my choices. N/T

[jmg257]

41. I agree - at least 2/3 are in that example...suicide and all. Guess most are in fact, as others

decide to kill.

[ileus]

45. I suppose the only way to show care is a gun ban?

[beergood]

98. "A certain number of people literally do not care about others."

i am one of those people. its no one business what i read, eat, what guns i own, or who i sleep with.

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. Remarkable few of which were caused by by the group under discussion

Do you similarly blame electric car drivers for particulate pollution near highways?

[guillaumeb]

18. What is the source of the electricity?

Coal generates particulate matter, as does oil.

[friendly_iconoclast]

29. A thoughtful reply to a question not asked- and I should have said CNG vehicles, not electric ones

I see no difference in this thread than I would someone carping about diesel
particulates affecting the health of city dwellers (and they indeed cause harm)
when the subject of discussion was CNG (compressed natural gas) vehicles

[guillaumeb]

37. If you had specified CNG, I would have responded:

about the pollution dangers of fracking. And methane emissions as a driver of climate change.

[virginia mountainman]

39. Isn't it a sad commentary

That when you engage those on the opposite side of the debate, before you can even start to debate them, seems like you must teach them some basic math, basic human behavior, current laws, and basics of firearms before you can even start to demolish their talking points....

Rather amazing, and amusing all at the same time.

[JonathanRackham]

32. 532 people have been killed by police so far this year.

That's a higher percentage rate than the CCW permit population.

[guillaumeb]

38. Are you suggesting disarming the police?

I would agree if you would extend that to the general population.

[JonathanRackham]

40. Except the police aren't covered by the Second Amendment.

Try disarming the criminals first and getting all the current illegal guns off the street. Unfortunately that's the root of the escalation that goes on.

Criminals first, then the police, then the law abiding people.

[jmg257]

58. Interesting - 885 total permit-related gun deaths in 9 years...

Which includes a lot of suicides, and unintentional deaths, along with homicides, mass-killings, etc.

Certainly some jackasses getting gun permits that shouldn't have them.

But +/-100 total deaths a year for the millions and millions who have permits??

Thought it would be higher.


Edit: to correct it's since 5/2007, so 9 years - not 8.

[DonP]

61. Now estimated at 14 million permits, not counting constitutional carry states

So you could reasonably throw in another one or two million for those states.

I don't think my calculator goes to that many points right of the decimal to figure out what the average "death toll" from CCW is.

But I do know it's a hard figure to raise a viable moral panic and legitimate outrage over.

How pathetic, that they are trying to recycle the whole Brady Bunch 5 year old "Concealed Carry Killers" PR stunt.

[Duckhunter935]

63. Indeed so

That poster when full out on that one, posting in several threads. Seems to have gone into hiding now about it.

[jmg257]

67. While around 1200 criminals are responsible for over 400 deaths in Chicago alone every year.

And they KNOW who they are!!

Moral panic wasted - and outrage clearly mis-focused.

[Hangingon]

50. There has been very little comment from the other TX colleges.

Some private schools have decided not to allow concealed carry as their right under the new law. The public schools have moved forward with plans to allow concealed carry. Only at UT Austin have I heard the complaints. I am sure opinion on this law varies at other TX public universities,but they have not reacted at UT Austin has.

[Eleanors38]

72. In UT lit classes, the study of Long Dong Silver is required.

EDIT: refer to LDS in Wiki. A porno star in UK noted for his apparent state-of-Florida-size dingbat (c. 1960)

[Hangingon]

74. Our Flagship university!

[no_hypocrisy]

102. What ought to be done until concealed carry is revoked:

If a student takes out a firearm in a non-emergency, non-life-threatening situation (example: heated disagreement in class with professor or classmates), that student should be criminally charged with and prosecuted for assault with a deadly weapon or something similar to discourage recklessness.

[Duckhunter935]

104. In most states that is already the law.

You are not to draw your weapon unless you are going to use it.

[SQUEE]

105. Great idea, we can call that sort of action...

Brandishing?

I think the State of Texas is a little ahead of you on this.

[DonP]

107. Along with about 40+ or so other states

Always amazed at how much people that want new laws don't know what's already on the books.

[pablo_marmol]

108. And they see no_hypocrisy in arguing from a position of ignorance........

........while scolding Republicans for doing so.

Right. No hypocrisy.

[DonP]

110. No, they really take great pride in not knowing things

After all; "You don't really need to know what it is if all you want to do is ban it".

That's why they wind up with so many "loopholes" after they pass a law. Then they use their own stupidity to raise campaign funds to close the "dangerous loopholes" they created out of ignorance.

A vicious circle at work