Tennessee bus hijacking shows need for 50-state concealed-carry gun laws

Xeno! I feel like an ass for saying so, but I didn’t know you were absent. Perils of a large-ish community. Welcome back. Uhm…where have you been?

Maeglin: thank you, sir.

treis: don’t neglect magazine capacity. Most hunting rifles are manually actioned (typically bolt; the Mauser Bros. knew what they were doing) and hold, on average, 5 rounds; more than sufficient for hunting purposes. This is where the term “firepower” (also a morbidly cool song from Icicle Works) comes from.

But don’t dis the semi’s either. Rock-and-roll (even just semi-auto style) is still a great way to kill a Saturday afternoon, and I dunno about you, but I’m pretty damned accurate with my Mini-14 at 100 meters, and that’s squeezin’ 'em off as fast as I can pull the trigger.

I’m still waiting on Anthracite to take up my challenge: she and I with Mini-14’s at 100, 200 and 300 meters. On meaness alone, I think she can take me.

Generally speaking: I didn’t say so earlier, but I also don’t see how armed passengers could have actually prevented the Tennessee Bus incident (I don’t think it qualifies as a hijacking per se; more along the lines of a bizarre suicide attempt, maye?). From all accounts, it happened so quickly…

And what I said earlier about the average airline passenger not having the necessary paranoia to maintain a 100% vigilant attitude against wierd behavior goes just as well for bus and train passengers as well.

Armed passengers may, I admit, may discourage terrorists, depending upon their tactical objective (that is, the immediate methodology for achieving their general objective of spreading terror). It may deter criminals. But the suicidally insane?

Sensor: this board’s been around a bit. Check around a bit (Search is your friend, right next to Preview) before posting.

Probably not, but an Air Marshall would be my first choice. Besides, cockpits are full of electronics and instrumentation, and flat-screen digital displays. :SIGH: I miss analog.

Anyway: one misplaced bullet has a much greater potential for catastrophic results in the cockpit (do you think future terrorists are going to be armed just with boxcutters?) than in the passenger cabin.

I dunno; think like a terrorist.

You want to take over an airplane, and crash it in a spectacular manner. You manage to smuggle weapons on board, and suprise the flight crew. The two Air Marshall stand up and kill Achmed and Acheem. You and Abdul rush the cockpit, while Omar and Saladin try to hold off the Air Marshalls, but the Emergency Cockpit Locking Device is engaged, and you cannot break down the locked, reinforced door.

What do you do? Throw down your gun and surrender? Stick your pistol in your mouth and pull the trigger?

Or point your pistol at door or window and empty the clip? Maybe start unloading upon the passengers? Sudden decompression isn’t necessarily catastrophic, but any pilot will tell you that it is an unpredictable, random element. Professional pilots (Top Gun bullshit aside) don’t like unpredictable, random elements discharging in a planefull of people in their keeping. It changes the aerodynamic profile of the airplane, which is basically a round-nose Greyhound bus with wings, and has all of the aerodynamic properties of a slightly rounded brick in the first place.

The burble of air stresses the fuselage. If it is an older aircraft, there is the possibility that metal fatigue could cause the fuselage to begin breaking up. Remember the Airplane on its way to Hawaii a few years back? The top of the fuselage began pealing back like a can of sardines, and sucked a flight attendant right out?

In other words: Air Marshalls and any notional armed passengers may be carrying pre-fragmented ammunition to prevent over-penetration. I seriously doubt that a terrorist group would be that conscientious.

Ergo: a closed environment at 35,000 feet, moving 500+knots does not need even the remote chance of random variables like bullet hole(s) in the fuselage. I want highly trained pistoleros with badges up there, not a guy who paid $300 and sat through a weekend’s worth of instruction***** to get a Concealed Carry Permit.

That guy can sit next to me on a bus, or a train.

But keep him the hell off of my airplane.

[sub]*****that’s basically what I went through in Texas to get a CCW.[/sub]

Something like this came up in a tread on private security and I was taking your line. I was wrong as are you. Weapons de-escalate situations. People will harass and unarmed security guard far more than an armed one. If everyone carried guns I would be willing to bet this would be a far more polite society. The implied threat of lethal force give most people a reason to think twice before proceeding with something stupid.

In skimming through this thread I am seeing alot of offhand references to gunfights over parking spaces and such. This is pathetic. If I was permitted to carry my gun, am I going to draw down on somebody for cutting in line, no. People who carry will assume others will carry. If someone draws their weapon all of the laws that currently pertain to use of lethal force will come into play. Will a couple hundred idiots end up in jail because they brandished a gun over something stupid, probably (and IIRC under CA law not be allowed to OWN a gun for 10 years). Will my hometown turn into Dodge City with running gunfights and duels, nope. Because people won’t want to draw their guns unless they have to.

I agree with several others that open carry is better idea. CCW should be used for those who can justify it to their local authorities as it is now.

Training wise, several people are implying that every crisis situation will turn into a veritable hailstorm of lead and hundreds of bystanders will be killed accidentally by good samaritans. Verifying your target and beyond are still important parts of any gun safety program and will continue to be. People are not suddenly going to dispense with their concern for human life because you strap a gun on them.

Also that training does not mean you are good with your weapon, I agree with this but I also have no problem that people pass a qualifying test like police officers. Its not hard, I outshot several cops in shooting matches so I would be willing to bet that 90% of the people who tried could pass police shooting qualification for accuracy with no specialized training.

If by “polite” you mean “terrified.” If I meekly cooperate with someone because he has a gun and I don’t, it isn’t because I respect him, it’s because I’m afraid he’ll shoot me if I don’t cooperate. In fact, I’ll probably dislike him even more because he’s armed.

You see, I have no way of knowing if he is reasonable and won’t shoot me for no reason. For my own protection, I have to assume that he will shoot me if I get even slightly out of line. So I will be polite and oh-so cooperative.

But if he ever puts that gun down…

(In this example, I am assuming that the person is not a cop. I simply will not permit a civilian to point a gun at me and get away with it if I am in the right. I think it’s very rude for someone to point a gun at me for no reason. So much for a “more polite” society.)

Perhaps you wouldn’t, but that doesn’t mean that everyone will behave like you. Don’t believe that everyone thinks like you. Some people have a lot of trouble assessing risks and anticipating consequences; we call some of them “convicts.”

And what about those people with disabilites who can’t carry? I guess they’re just out of luck?

jab1:

to quote “English” Bob, they must “…rely upon the goodwill of our fellow man, and the forebearance of reptiles.”

“People who need people
Are the luckiest people
In the worrrrrrrld…”

Barbara Streisand

So the populations of Arizona and Texas, where exposed carry is legal, tiptoe around in terror. Any TX or AZ posters available? Why would you be disrespectful of a stranger anyway he might have a gun now :eek:

So you would would start an argument with someone but only if they are unarmed? You seem to be helping me?

A police officer is not going to point a gun at you for no reason. Yes pointing guns at people for no reason is rude, and illegal. If someone did what you stated above they will probably spend a few days in jail and have their carry privledges revoked. Not to mention the fact that drawing will probably attract alot of attention from bystanders. Especially armed ones if they were around.

Who are not allowed to own or possess guns except under a few very specific circumstances.

Well if I had to toss out a quick line to draw, if you have a drivers licence you can carry. So yes mentally handicapped, blind, uncontrollable epileptics, illegal aliens, sorry no gun for you. Plus toss in all the no gun classes, convicts, 5150’s, history of spousal abuse, under psych treatment, etc.

I was assuming a situation in which someone was pointing a gun at me for no reason.

I ought to be able to have a discussion with someone without fear that he’ll pull a gun on me, yes.

You mean it’s not lilkely that one would do that. The chance is not zero. But cops are trained as to when they ought to draw a weapon; most civilians are not.

That makes me feel a whole lot bettter. :rolleyes: I believe more in crime prevention than I do in crime punishment.

And watch the bullets fly!!

How many convicted criminals are going to obey those laws?

How many people would that eliminate? And are they supposed to depend upon the kindness of strangers for their protection? If so, why can’t YOU do that?

Jab1: I’m not getting the gist of your beef. Are you saying that because the physically handicapped can’t carry concealed that no one should? I’m sure that a paraplegiac could, but not a quadriplegiac, of course, or those who are blind.

And while Sensor Beef may have had a point above about armed confrontations on aircraft, your straw-man arguments against concealed carry have been thoroughly debunked for the past several years in the state of Texas, and over 30 other states of the union that allow concealed carry.

Is there room for improvement in Texas’ and other’s systems of licensed concealed carry? Arguably so. That doesn’t mean that they are ineffective and should be scrapped.

As I stated before, your right to feel free from being threatened by people with firearms is no more or less valid than my right to feel free from being threatened by criminals with firearms, and being able to do something about it.

If the handicapped are reasonably safe without guns, why isn’t anyone else?

Which right is more reasonable?

jab1:

Has anyone seen Diana Moon-Glompers lately? How about George Orwell? I’m feeling a little more equal than others. Who said that the handicap are or are not reasonably safe with or without guns? I’d rather think it has more to do with where they live. Handicapped folks in bad neighborhoods may be targeted more frequently than healthy people, as they cannot fight back as effectively. If I were a cop, such predators wouldn’t last long on my beat.

Which is why I’m not a cop.

An objection to legalized CCW on the basis that not everyone is capable (physically) is absurd.

You missed the point entirely. If I were a small business owner in a rough neighborhood, I’d say my right to self-defense against criminal predation trumps your fears of nebulously hypothetical scenarios. If I lived in a home with an abusive, gun-owning spouse, I’d say my right to feel safe and secure trumps his right to threaten or intimidate me with a gun.

Reason is a matter of perspective, so an unbiased analysis of “most good for the least harm” needs to take place. With about 250,000 Concealed Carry Licensees in Texas, there have been no blazing gun battles in the streets, no “Texican Stand-Offs” between groups of pedestrians, no rowdy people pulling guns in stores or restaurants, etc. Arizona has Open Carry. Don’t need a license. Just strap on your gun and go to town. Where’s the stories of bullet-induced mayhem in Arizona? Vermont?

Everything Sarah Brady et. al. predicted regarding concealed carry has not come true. If anything, the overwhelming majority of people that have had licenses revoked were for non-payment of alimony or child support, failure to pay utilities, taxes, vehicle registrations and such. At least in Texas. YMMV.

Nope.

Is there any state in which exposed carry is legal?

Thinking of moving, SPOOFE? :smiley:

Not especially. I’m kinda cozy in California. I’m just really curious, especially since there always seems to be a lot of emphasis on concealed weapons and very little mention of visible weapons (in law-making, or gun debates, anyway).

I think arizona and new mexico both have unlicensed exposed carry.

Ya know Lib, I can’t figure how you can go from a thoughtful and cogent explanation of your personal theology to having everyone secretly pack heat for a free for all when the first car backfires. It is almost like you are two different posters using the same screen name.

Now, I’ve always carried a pocket knife for use as a tool. I think prohibiting high schoolers from carrying a pocket knife (I did when I was in high school) is just plain stupid. The only reason box cutters were effective in hijacking planes was because everyone assumed it was an extortion situation where no one would get hurt. No one is going to assume that anymore. But allowing guns to be carried concealed everywhere? In bars? In cars?

People get angry or irrational all the time. I’d like to think that if some irrational person gets a thing for me, that they might not have deadly force within two seconds reach. The fact that they might be punished after the fact to slaughtering me or a loved one is simply no comfort.

I, for one, would appreciate a cessation of the posting of Libertarian Party propaganda on the site. Let’s make it voluntary. If not, I know where the Democratic Party Websites are.

Please don’t take this personally, but rather as a call for less proselytization. I happen to like Libertarian politics in a more pragmatic sense, I just don’t want to be hit over the head with them.

Shoot, New Mexico doesn’t even allow concealed carry permits, according to the CNN site I stumbled across earlier tonight. Do a google search on “gun rights” and it’ll be one of the top hits.

Blown out.

The population of Texas at the last census is 20,851,820. 250,000 would be only 1 out of every 83.4 people. Y’all are still way too outnumbered to be dangerous. But I say it’s only a matter of time…

And just how many people have a CCW in those other states you mention and what are the populations of those states? I bet the number of CCWs is also minuscule when compared to the total population.

Wow, now I believe that it is not. Sure, I have seen Texans on TV carrying their guns in holsters, but “nope” pretty much settles it for me. I believe carrying that way is legal sometimes. More precisely, in some places. Using logic, if guns are legal, how can you take them anywhere if non-concealed carry is illegal? Carry in vehicles usually invokes different laws which vary from state to state. Concealed carry laws are complex, and not relevant to this. If anyone feels compelled to type “cite please,” I refer you to minty green.