You need me to dig up articles, editorials, letters, and television news programs going back to the 90’s? Yeah, right.
You’re saying nobody objected when concealed carry was being passed in the states that didn’t have it before? Talk about a bs claim.
Your constitutional reasoning is defective if you believe that something established by State legislation is a constitutional right. We have a constitutional right to free speech and free exercise of religion, for example because it is clearly written in the U.S. Constitution (and most State constitutions, for that matter), and various precedents have established it applies to both Federal and State governments.
On the flipside, something like Sunday hunting, which is legal in 9 States, is a simple matter of policy subject to political majorities in the State legislature. I.e. very much not a constitutional right, but a simple policy choice States can make.
Yeah? Most states also have the right to bear arms in their state constitutions as well. And most of them are pretty explicit that it is an individual right.
I heard a lot of the same over-the-top ranting that pkbites did. Recent sample (regarding Texas’ adopting a bill to allow concealed carry without a license):
“I just cannot imagine what the streets of Dallas or Laredo are going to be like when gun-totting (sic) idiots start opening fire on people they “perceive” as doing something unlawful, like walking their dog in the wrong neighborhood, or God forbid, being the wrong color.”
Noting here that I do not support concealed carry without a permit and meaningful training. Applicants should preferably have a good reason for needing a permit, modeled on need for safety and security.
And yet many such States felt the need to pass legislation to allow permitless carry. Almost like they themselves disagree with your poor constitutional opinions.
This isn’t the claim pkbites made, he is saying back in the 90s “tons of people” were hyperbolically worried about concealed carry permits being issued at all. I’m sorry but examples of a recent article (not one from the 90s) on a separate policy topic isn’t very good evidence.
Yes, I would like you to substantiate your bullshit claim, your retort asking me to prove a negative is inherent evidence of poor faith on your part, an admission of lack of capacity to support the claims you have made.
Have the moral panic types EVER been right? It seems to me that every time there’s something that’s allowed/restrictions are loosened in any way, there’s always a big crowd saying that the sky will fall, human sacrifices will occur, dogs and cats will live together, and mass hysteria will ensue.
Doesn’t really matter whether it’s concealed carry, unfettered alcohol sales, open carry, gay marriage, you name it. There is NEVER a big difference in how life goes on for the unimaginably vast run of of humanity, regardless of what happened.
To use an example, my part of Dallas was dry when I moved here. You couldn’t buy beer or wine in the grocery store, and liquor stores were even further afield. All due to some weird-assed state laws that applied to some dry/wet county vote in like 1930. Basically it was something like the city voted to be wet at that point, in a dry county or something. But when the city grew, those new parts had never voted for being wet, so they remained dry. And when the county went wet, those parts remained dry, because they were part of the city, not the county. So in effect, there had to be a citywide vote on the matter or something, which finally happened around 2010 or so.
The usual churchy suspects were proclaiming that everything was going to go to Hell in a handbasket, that the fabric of civilized life was going to fray, we’d have rampant alcohol abuse, prostitution, etc… and so on.
NONE of that happened. Nor did any of the crazy stuff they said would happen when gay people were allowed to marry. Nor did any of the stuff they proclaimed would happen when concealed handgun carry was allowed.
It’s just resistance to change, IMO. It’s not even based in fact or good sense most of the time.
I recall some of the rhetoric in Texas as concealed carry was being considered by the legislation. You could find opinions in the editorial section of the Dallas Morning News worried that this would turn the state into the wild west and that minor incidents would turn deadly as more people were armed. Looking back I wouldn’t say it was “a lot” of people in Texas saying those things. After all, since concealed carry passed it must not have been too many.
To answer the OP, no, I wouldn’t sfeel safer. But then I don’t believe I’d feel as though I was in more danger either. When Texas started allowing concealed carry it didn’t really change anything for me. The only time I ever felt particularly worried about crime was when night time photography was a hobby of mine and I was out alone with a few thousand dollars worth of equipment. But nobody ever hassled me.
I remember those hysterical predictions too.
The fact that YOU were too lazy and/or too self-centered to pay attention to what was going on around you is not evidence that such things did not happen.
FWIW, I do remember of hearing and reading about predictions of violence in the CC debate years ( decades ) ago too. I distinctly remember a talking point thrown about describing “a Fort Dodge mentality” and the like. Lots of references to Fort Dodge for whatever reason.
You sure it wasn’t a “Dodge City mentality”?
Fort Dodge, Iowa does for whatever reason have a significantly higher crime rate than Iowa as a whole, but I don’t think it’s because there are shoot-em-ups on the downtown streets.
The plural of anecdote isn’t data. Despite pkbites seeming to get really upset and confused, it isn’t actually impossible to find news articles etc from the 1990s. I was alive in the 90s and have been a life long advocate of gun rights. I certainly remember that people have always opposed expansion of gun rights, I do not remember anything I’d describe as “widespread” hysteria as states that previously had very restrictive gun laws established concealed carry laws in the 90s and early 00s.
I don’t even remember much hyperbole as constitutional carry was implemented, while there was certainly some, constitutional carry laws have been going into effect for over a decade and the only time I remember significant national dialogue on them at all was in the last 2 years, when a few states like Texas and Ohio implemented them.
I also don’t generally think a few scattered op-eds by hysterical people justify the bold claim that a huge mass of people were foaming at the mouth upset about these laws, and then super genius Pkbites smirked as the legion of imbeciles was proven wrong. Instead I think it was mostly not that hyperbolic and not that significant in volume.
That may be because the populace at large had realized how wrong the nay sayers over the permit laws were years back.
To the extent this is relevant … even if you discount the profound limitations of memories about ‘something that happened decades ago …’ unless you have methodologically valid proactive surveys, using a randomized sample, it’s extremely hard to gauge public opinion on any of these issues.
I think @bump made a very good point about the sky falling, but it’s verrrry easy to get a misleading sense that there’s a massive chorus of shrill voices when it’s actually a very small percentage – either with the loudest platforms or the widest press coverage – who stand out.
And they may not represent a broad swath of the population, basically, on any issue.
Here is a Texas Tribune story, from 6/2021 that says:
But even that polling data tells you nothing about who’s taking an ‘activist’ role, what their proverbial picket sign might say, and whether/how much media attention they’re being paid.
And that’s putting aside the ‘recollection can be very faulty’ piece – a very controlling piece in so many instances.
There’s an element to which “worry warts” will hyperbolically worry about everything. I think it is a political choice to characterize a small minority of people like that as some swelling social movement of moral panic. I can certainly remember some unjustified mass panics in my lifetime, but not about gun permitting. I remember the “unintended acceleration” fiasco that hit Audi and Toyota cars, or the people who still check Halloween candy for razor blades etc.
Nobody said it was a majority of the populace. But there were significant numbers of voices, especially coming from the media, that concealed carry was a death warrant for public safety. Didn’t turn out that way yet few of them have publicly admitted their error.
Yea, I remember when Ohio finally passed its concealed handgun licensing law in 2004. Toby Hoover of the organization Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence was on TV every night, predicting “rivers of blood will be flowing in the streets.” Never happened, and crime continued to steadily decrease.
A month ago we finally got constitutional carry. Same thing… many prominent Ohioans, including some police chiefs, came out against it. I have always found it interesting that these people never apologize when their predictions don’t come true.
Better post an actual cite or you’ll be called a liar as well.
I don’t think an apology from those types is needed. Just an admission that their predictions were wrong.
That ‘significant number’ may be significantly small.
Shall we digress further, and discuss the ratio of “times people call for an apology from their ‘opponent’ to ‘times said apology was issued ?’”
Or should we just stipulate that apologies in politics tend to be incredibly rare, indeed.
ETA: or public admissions that one was wrong about somethiing.
