Is this a whoosh?
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Presumed by whom? You?
Cite? (you’re wrong. 2.5 million DGU’s a year wrong)
Cite?
Most attacks begin with converstation and are predictable.
Cite?
If criminals know that potential victims may be armed then that certainly has deterrent value.
If potential attackers know that some of the population are armed, they are less likely to attack anyone.
Cite?
Victims certainly are selected. Do you think that a 6’3" 250 pound guy in his 20’s has an equal chance of being attacked as a single woman or elderly person on the street at night?
Yes, I’m sure that Wierd Al was being sarcastic.
You, my friend, are a walking advertisement for “Bowling for Columbine”. The typical, prefabricated paranoia he’s talking about. There is no reason whatsoever for a normal citizen to carry a piece…unless, of course, you live smack dab between the Crips and the Bloods. Are you constantly accosted by criminals? Are they coming through your windows every night? Do you get mugged on a daily basis on your mass transit system?
I’ll tell you what WILL happen. The same criminal that messes with the unarmed citizen will mess with you, and you won’t have the time or mental wherewithall to un-conceal your gun and use it on him. In fact, you’ll probably end up blowing away someone you know and love.
Sure, once in a while, all circumstances will be perfect and the gun concealer will “get his man”. But mostly, he won’t. Bet on it.
You, my friend, appear to be a walking advertisement for those easily swayed by the ridiculous propaganda that is Bowling For Columbine. The world is a dangerous place my friend. Google some violent crime statistics. Just because it doesn’t happen in quiet little suburbias doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I am the very definition of an average middle class white male who lives in a quiet peaceful place, and I have been stopped while wearing a red dewrag to keep my long hair from my eyes and asked if I was a Blood. Luckily by a Blood. Who then proceeded to tell me about how he had folded his wings and wasn’t actively banging anymore, and how the only people he had killed were three guys that had murdered his friend, so he really wasn’t a violent guy.
I spend lots of time in the woods in the south. There are dangerous people down here. Drunk teenagers, or even wild pigs. People will fuck with you for no reason. So will hogs.
Just because you don’t need a gun doesn’t mean that there aren’t a lot of people who do.
OK
They already have no clue if the person is carrying or not.
This can easily be addressed. How do they enforce the current laws? What about this law will make their job harder?
Silly, if your going to break the law then your not a person who`s going to go throught the process of getting a CW legally. Besides, you can currently possess a firearm in your own home - Without this law.
Thats fine. At least with the bill well have fingerprints, records, registration, classes, ballistics, etc., for those who carry legally. If you fuck up, your out.
If thats a major obstacle, then Im sure the parties could negotiate.
In reality your penalizing those who want to acquire guns legally. Those who obtain them illegally are not phased at all and will continue to do so.
Right, and those are his opinions. He should let the damn thing go up for the vote and quit twisting the arms of fellow democrats who are in favor or it, one of whom actually sponsored the bill. I guess that`s politics though.
Scroll down to - “Latest Armed Self-defense News Stories:” at the bottom of the page.
Do you have a smoke detector or fire extinguisher in your house?
If you live in Ohio, doesn’t the law say that you do need to get a permit for concealed carry?
I don’t care about “the typical gang member involved in a driveby shooting”, we are, or should be, talking about the typical citizen with a CCW.
Nevermind not doing a LOT of research, you don’t appear to want to do any.
Which requirements, in which states? What are your standards for the way the law should be enforced, and for what follow up should occur? What states are failing to meet these standards, and what negative consequences have they experienced because of it?
I believe part of it is the thinking that if CCW becomes common beyond a certain threshold, criminals who wish to engage in contact crimes like mugging will be deterred by the fear of not knowing who might be carrying a gun, Thus, even people who don’t carry guns will benefit. Also, some people are just plain freaked out by the sight of a gun. I suspect this may well apply to some people right here in this thread…
Cops never know if someone they are pulling over has a concealed weapon. Remember that key word, “concealed”. And I would think that they would only need to know if the person they were pulling over had a CCW permit if that subset of the population had a statistically greater propensity for assaulting police officers. Do they?
If we are going to make emotional appeals, then I can just as well say that the bill would give victims of domestic violence one more tool with which to defend themselves. But that would be wrong, because laws shouldn’t be based on emotional appeals, or what people are “worried” about. The burden of proof you have assumed here requires evidence.
I don’t have the facts on hand to respond to these. But like I said before, none of this is prejudicial to the principle of liberalized CCW laws, only a specific way it is being implemented.
Should I? Have the police in other states also opposed these laws when they were proposed? If so, and the laws were subsequently passed, did their opposition turn out to have been justified? Or did they change their minds after getting the benefit of hindsight?
Also, to what extent should the police have their way when it comes to laws affecting public safety? There are after all plenty of laws we could pass, that would enhance public safety by making the job of police officers easier, that we haven’t, because such laws would be an intolerable burden on freedom.
My understanding is that, in theory you can legally carry openly, in practice the police will arrest you for “creating a public disturbance” or some such. Remember what I said about people getting freaked out by guns.
Cite, please?
You tell me. You’re the one trying to make the case that it’s a bad idea.
Cite, please?
If enough people carry concealed, how will an attacker know whether or not anyone is carrying a gun? See what I said to bnorton
Correct. I should probably use smilies more, but I just don’t like to.
Ummmm…
More Pit stuff, and it’s not even very good by Pit standards. Again I will not dignify it with a response, except to note that catsix made an excellent rebuttal to it. Way to go, catsix!
Ummm…
Cite, please?
Cite, please?
Cite, please?
I am JUST using them as a “control group” of people with no gun training aiming at a target. My hope, admittedly WITHOUT any research, is that the people licensed for CCW be required to demonstrate proficiency with their tool, both when the license is first issued and at regular intervals thereafter. Is there a limited life for the permit? Will all of the background checks be repeated at every renewal? These are things I would want in a CCW law, but as I said I am not against it so quit being so damned hostile, as in the following two quotes:
Jabbing at your supporters like that is a good way to lose supporters.
Check post # 27.
I’m sorry, I saw you in a thread for people trying to argue against CCW and misinterpreted your position. You seem to be more interested in discussing specific details. I do think, though, that it was right for me to ask you what you think the standards for these laws ought to be.
Yeah, well there’s a dozen. Let’s all just freak the fuck out and start packin’.
Well, yeah. What is your point? I’m not going to accidentally extinguish a family member to death if they come home late one night. If the kids find the keys to the smoke detector, they can’t blow their head off with it. It’s all about the odds. The odds are much greater that your gun is going to hurt someone you care about before it hurts someone who wants to hurt you.
Carrying concealed makes it harder for criminals to pick out ‘easy’ potential victims, since they can’t tell at a glance who is armed and who isn’t. Also, a surprisingly large number of people react badly to the sight of a hostered gun; carrying concealed allows one to keep a weapon on one’s person without unnecessarily upsetting these folks.
Yes. But I do not recognize laws that infringe upon my inalienable rights.
I have nothing against concealed carry in general, and I don’t know enough about this particular law to know if it’s a good one or not. There’s one point in this debate that bothers me though - If cops, as has been said, are already in the position of not knowing whether the person they pull over has a gun, isn’t it also the case that muggers are already in the position of not knowing whether their intended victim has a gun? Yet clearly muggings still occur.
Why is this?
How about the potential for borderline situations to escalate into the extremely serious? I’m thinking your standard fender bender. Big dude in the car that got hit gets out and starts spewing profanity and violating personal space. The other guy gets nervous and draws Mr. Glock. Turns out big dude also has a gun. Suddenly a relatively minor incident becomes gunfight at the OK Corral.
I know that there’s a maxim that “an armed society is a polite society”, but the downside is that someone gets to decide it’s OK to draw on someone who’s being verbally aggressive.
Concealed carry means that there are going to be a lot of guns that are at least somewhat available – in coat pockets or handbags or wherever people keep them. What happens to the gun when you want to go into someplace that doesn’t allow them? Yeah, I bet there are rules that say the gun has to be locked in a trunk or a gun case or something. There are rules that say you have to use seatbelts too, and people routinely ignore them. The problem with responsible gun ownership is that a lot of people are not particularly responsible on a day-to-day basis.
I think that having a gun constantly present means that there will be a temptation to fiddle with it/ use it. Not on people – just plinking away. But I’d predict an increase in accidental discharges and/or accidental injuries.
American society has a hard enough time refraining from shooting each other when the guns are locked up! As Finagle said, there will be situations where tempers flare and someone will get shot for being verbally abusive.