You know how criminals are, never carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. :rolleyes:
How much do you think it really matters? I’m really doubting if the minimart clerk gives two shits on whether the stolen gun in his face belonged to a CCW holder, or the liqour store owner down street. It’s a numbers thing.
Yeah, you do, because they should be carrying the most efficient weapon possible, right? The handgun’s not efficient, like you said, so the police would be better off with a better weapon. Something with longer range and more stopping power. Right?
Are you kidding me? You’re the one who said you oppose concealed handguns on the grounds that they “put more guns on the street in the hands of criminals.” And when I ask if the criminals are really stealing concealed handguns specifically, or just handguns in general, you tell me it doesn’t matter?
Have you been drinking?
Well just like I’m sure brandishing a handgun helps deter crime, Brandishing is usually sufficient to take someone’s money as well.
Wait, are you claiming no CCW holders weapon has never been stolen? Like I said it’s a numbers game, increase the number of handguns, no matter whose, you increase the potential number available to be stolen. Unless you’re going to tell me they’re selling pajamas with extra room for shoulder holsters. In which case I concede the argument.
Just anecdotally I would say that most people who carry a handgun all the time also keep it very close to them while they’re sleeping, so I think these people are unlikely to have a gun stolen from them. Sure, in terms of numbers alone, more people with CC means there are more people with guns that can be stolen by criminals. Fine, I’ll give you that. But DO they actually get their guns stolen by criminals? Do you actually have any statistics at all or anything to prove that any significant proportion of illegal handguns on the street are stolen from permit-holders? I mean, since you’re the one who brought it up, I’d kind of like to see some sort of proof for this.
Isn’t your argument sort of undercut by all the illegal handguns on the street in places with very restrictive concealed-carry laws?
Sorry I missed this one. No, they shouldn’t public safety rules out a weapon with more stopping power and while the shotgun is a very good area denial weapon it’s also indiscrminate to a much larger degree that a handgun. But you did notice how I have I’ve said repeatedly that I wouldn’t try to legislate handgun ownership away. I just said it contributes to crime.
I strongly disagree. You both seem to forget that most criminals are actually cowards who prefer to pick on those they fell will be easy prey.
Who’s going to fuck with someone they know for a fact is armed and prepared? You really think a potential robber is going to intentionally go for the guy wearing a freaking gun? “Hey, let’s mug that guy carrying the gun!”. Yeah, right!:rolleyes:
If you’re going to argue this, you better post some cites that show open carriers to be victims of crimes more often than those who CCW. Until then all you have are opinionated guesses.
I think you need to look up what an area denial weapon is, because you clearly don’t know.
I also have to wonder if you’ve ever even fired a shotgun before, since you seem to have a pretty exaggerated idea of how “indiscrminate” it is.
You also claimed earlier that:
I assume you have some examples of CCW holders who have gone on killing sprees.
My recall is that something like fifty to a hundred thousand handguns are stolen in the US per year and that was considered underreported, but I can’t remember where I read that. I’ll try and find a cite in the morning.
FWIW, James D. Wright and Peter Henry Rossi argue that a small number of criminals who steal handguns in bulk (hundreds or thousands) constitute 80% of all gun theft by volume. Presumably the firearms then end up on the black or gray market. See page 199, top. Note that no confidence intervals are given: I’m uneasy about the statistical support of this claim. (Example: are 11% of all gun thieves total blowhards?)
On page 205, half of all gun thieves have stolen a gun from a car at one time or another. But remember, we’re less interested in the average gun thief than the average gun stolen. Cite.
I disavow all knowledge of this topic.
So, yeah, some places, you need a CCW license just to transport the gun from place to place.
Some places, you can’t open carry.
Some places, you can open carry, but why not get the license just in case you want to wear a jacket?
Some places, it’s viewed as impolite to walk around with your gun hanging out.
Basically, if you can afford it, why not get one? Frankly, if I had any excuse, I’d get one of those level 3 firearms dealer licenses just so I could own a machine gun.
Cause, you know, awesome.
If you’re willing to pay enough, you don’t need a Class 3 SOT to get a machine gun. You just have to buy a transferable machine gun (one registered prior to when they closed the registry in '86), pay a $200 transfer tax, and jump through a few Form 4-related hoops. Given that the ATF seems to be cracking down on FFLs who don’t have a bona fide business presence (and an FFL is a prerequisite to getting the Class 3 SOT), buying a transferable MG is generally your best bet.
And to preempt a huge derail as to why private citizens should or shouldn’t be able to own machine guns, crime with legally owned machine guns is virtually non-existent and was virtually non-existent even before the registry was closed to new entries in '86.
If someone is carrying their gun with them whenever they’re out of the house I’d think it less likely to be stolen.
I didn’t mean they would “go” for the guy with the visible weapon in that they’d try to mug/rob him, I meant they would “go” for the guy with the visible weapon by shooting/eliminating that person first and foremost. In my opinion, open carrying a weapon puts you at a disadvantage because should a criminal act occur, you’d likely be the first one blown to smithereens.
In a bank heist, who are the robbers more likely to go after, the security guard or the random people doing business in the bank? Or consider a mass shooting situation where the shooter essentially wants to kill as many people as possible… Don’t you think they’d kill the person with an obvious handgun protruding from their hip first?
I know there’s two sides to this argument and I agree that in certain situations, open carrying a handgun may act as a deterrent to crime in the first place. I just think it’s more likely to act as a hindrance to your personal safety and the thing you want to do most when a crime is occurring is to blend in with your surroundings…
Okay, a lot of crimes are committed with stolen handguns. What in the world does that have to do with law-abiding citizens carrying their weapons concealed? How is a concealed weapon more likely to be stolen than an unconcealed one? I’d bet money that a large majority of guns are stolen from homes, automobiles, and gun stores when they’re unattended, that is, not being currently concealed and with a person.
Open carry is legal here. I still carry concealed. I prefer having the element of surprise, for one thing. I also prefer not having to deal with local LE every time some pants-wetter spots my gun.
Yes and no. You’re confusing a situation of certain, extreme danger where there is no safe option with one of uncertain, varying danger. In your example, the crooks are immediately declarng they are willing to kill, and kill lots of people, to get their way. At such a point, your own defense is being armed. Being unarmed may buy you a few moments, but you are still in a very bad way. Of course, if you are arguing for concealed weapons, that’s all well and good. 
In any case, robbers almost always stay well away from any situation with armed opposition.
I think the vast majority of people who are unfamiliar with the concept of open-carry laws - which is to say, the vast majority of people, in general - would assume that anyone with a handgun on the exterior of his body was a police officer, even if he was wearing street clothes.