A Sensible Question for Gun Owners

[otis24]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
Originally Posted By: Falken


Legal Concealed Carry reduces crime, period.


No. It simply doesn't. Never has.


Don't question my right to own a gun and I won't question your right to be defenseless. Owning a gun won't prevent crime from happening. It will ensure that the best possible outcome on my behalf should someone seek to perpetrate crime against me.

As Harry Calahan said, "Ain't nothing wrong with someone getting shot, as long as its the righ SOB's getting shot".

You should google "Of wolves, sheep and sheep dogs". I'm a sheep dog.

 

[AlienBug]

Originally Posted By: Falken
Alienbug,

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...un-pe/?page=all

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact...de391_blog.html

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

So there you go, feel safe now, unless you are in a gang.


Originally Posted By: Falken
Alienbug,

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...un-pe/?page=all

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact...de391_blog.html

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

So there you go, feel safe now, unless you are in a gang.


I do feel safe, because crime is currently at historically low levels. And I have been a pistol permit holder for 20 years.

But the linked articles do not show that legalizing concealed carry reduces crime. In fact, the Washington Post article said:

Quote:
No link between right-to-carry laws and changes in crime is apparent in the raw data, even in the initial sample; it is only once numerous covariates are included that the negative results in the early data emerge. While the trend models show a reduction in the crime growth rate following the adoption of right-to-carry laws, these trend reductions occur long after law adoption, casting serious doubt on the proposition that the trend models estimated in the literature reflect effects of the law change. Finally, some of the point estimates are imprecise. Thus, the committee concludes that with the current evidence it is not possible to determine that there is a causal link between the passage of right-to-carry laws and crime rates.


Now as I wrote earlier, there is a correlative relationship between carry permits and crime. In fact, if your original quote had been "Places that allow legal concealed carry have lower crime rates. Period. I would have agreed.

 

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted By: Falken
A guy at a gun shop told me this analogy when I was 15 shopping with my father:

Imagine a city, somehow perfectly devided down the center by a perfect set of laws, that were enforced 100%.

One side, Side A, NOBODY HAD A GUN. Not even the police.

The other side, Side B, EVERYONE HAD A GUN WHO WAS AN ADULT. EVERYONE.

Now, you are the very first criminal to decide to break the law and rob someone at gunpoint, and you realize that you can ignore laws, and generally people don't get caught.

Which side of the City would you choose to be a Criminal? Well, no need for you to answer...

The point is, a Criminal depends on you to be UNARMED.

Legal Concealed Carry reduces crime, period.

You're right, Trayvon should have had a gun too, instead of candy, and the outcome would have been a lot more correct for him. He could have properly defended himself and stood his ground where he was, at his own home. Yep if everyone has a gun around their waist, what a world of safe living. Your gun dealer was so right on the money.

 

[AlienBug]

Originally Posted By: otis24
Originally Posted By: AlienBug
Originally Posted By: Falken


Legal Concealed Carry reduces crime, period.


No. It simply doesn't. Never has.


Don't question my right to own a gun and I won't question your right to be defenseless.


Where did I question anyone's right to own a gun? I simply challenged a statistically unproven assertion.

I've been a gun owner for 30 years. Used to carry every day, but honestly it's just too much of a hassle when my job entails going to courthouses and town halls, and I have to remember whether it's my turn to pick the kid up from school etc. It gets to the point where you're living your life around having a gun, and with street crime as low as it is, it simply made no sense.

 

[Ethan1]

Gun rights are enshrined in the Constitution, and the Constitution is the law of the land. Anyone who doesn't like it is free to organize a Constitutional Convention. Failing that, they could attempt an unarmed coup d'etat. More likely they will exercise their 1st Amendment right to whine on the internet.

 

[Falken]

goodtimes,

If two criminals run into eachother... Well, whatever I guess.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
Originally Posted By: Falken


Legal Concealed Carry reduces crime, period.


No. It simply doesn't. Never has.


Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Show me the proof please.


Here ya' go. Yell if you need more.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/09/murder-drops-as-concealed-carry-permits-rise-claims-study/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...un-pe/?page=all

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/cri...mits-less-crime

http://truthinmedia.com/crime-rates-in-chicago-plummet-after-il-implements-concealed-carry/

http://humanevents.com/2014/01/03/study-shows-concealed-carry-laws-result-in-fewer-murders/

http://godfatherpolitics.com/16245/report-shows-conceal-carry-reduces-murder-violent-crimes/

 

[AlienBug]

Originally Posted By: BISCUT


[censored] of a consistent "correlation" isn't it? Stronger "correlation" than many studies on cancer that have lots of us following their recommendations.


High crime cities have larger police departments than low crime cities. That correlation holds true throughout the country.

 

[Falken]

Alienbug, please provide some proof at this point that CCW increases crime, otherwise you just agreed that more people with guns reduces crime.

Police officers are really just law abiding Citizens themselves with guns...

 

[OneEyeJack]

We need to continue to set up "gun free" zones. Most if not all of the current mass shootings have occurred in those designated zones so the system is working. That is, a shooter knows where to go to shoot people where there will not be any citizens shooting back. Our politicians know everything about taking care of such problems are they are always correct because they are experts. All you have to do is give up your gun knowing that the system will protect you and take care of you. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Falken]

'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.' -Ghandi

 

[AlienBug]

Originally Posted By: Falken
Alienbug, please provide some proof at this point that CCW increases crime


I never made that claim. I don't think it does.

 

[totegoat]

I don't see a question. Trying to instigate a problem?

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Bobcatguy
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/03/opinio...region&_r=0


Good grief! Another guy posting anti-gun rhetoric in the Firearms Section when it has clearly been stated by a moderator that there will not be pro or anti-gun discussions in this section? And take a look at the guy posting-a brand new guy with only a few posts!

How much more of this nonsense are we going to have to go through?

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Benito
As per a recent thread, this is the wrong sub forum to discuss such a topic.

And as an added warning to anybody who is "anti-gun", there is a member who said he would notify the moderators with a view to getting you banned if you did post anything "anti-gun" in this sub forum.

Good luck!


You are darn right I will notify moderators. We were told by a moderator that there would be no pro or anti-gun discussions in the Firearms Section. Maybe if you have a problem with that you can take it up with the moderator. And I think everybody knows in the Firearms Section that you, and dirtydannyd, were two of the ones using anti-gun rhetoric not very long ago in the Firearms Section.

Why don't you stop following me around Benito? Are my posts that important to you?

And somebody beat me to it notifying moderators about this post.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Falken
A guy at a gun shop told me this analogy when I was 15 shopping with my father:

Imagine a city, somehow perfectly devided down the center by a perfect set of laws, that were enforced 100%.

One side, Side A, NOBODY HAD A GUN. Not even the police.

The other side, Side B, EVERYONE HAD A GUN WHO WAS AN ADULT. EVERYONE.

Now, you are the very first criminal to decide to break the law and rob someone at gunpoint, and you realize that you can ignore laws, and generally people don't get caught.

Which side of the City would you choose to be a Criminal? Well, no need for you to answer...

The point is, a Criminal depends on you to be UNARMED.

Legal Concealed Carry reduces crime, period.


I like that analogy. I also like the phrase "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: DB_Cooper
The 2nd Amendment was written in case the American citizens needed to protect themselves and their property from a tyrannical, imperial, power crazed government..bandits were an added plus.


That made sense when the gov't had the same weapons the citizen had.

Not so much any more.

 

[Y_K]

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
You're right, Trayvon should have had a gun too, instead of candy, and the outcome would have been a lot more correct for him. He could have properly defended himself and stood his ground where he was, at his own home. Yep if everyone has a gun around their waist, what a world of safe living. Your gun dealer was so right on the money.


Trayvon was on a drug prowl, the "candy" is a well-known component of a well-known mix, he was the attacker, not the defender in the fight.

 

[Y_K]

Originally Posted By: AlienBug
I've been a gun owner for 30 years. Used to carry every day, but honestly it's just too much of a hassle when my job entails going to courthouses and town halls, and I have to remember whether it's my turn to pick the kid up from school etc. It gets to the point where you're living your life around having a gun, and with street crime as low as it is, it simply made no sense.

I hear you, but it made sense to Lynne Russell and her husband after all those years. I wonder, how many years has he been carrying for?

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Why don't you stop following me around Benito?

If anyone is doing any following, it is you. I just checked and in most threads that you and I post in, you post after me. Including this one where ironically you accused me of following you!

Moreso, whereas I post mainly in threads that you don't post in, you almost exclusively have been posting in threads that I post in before you.


Originally Posted By: Mystic
Are my posts that important to you?

In case that was a serious question, the answer is that your posts have zero importance to me.