carry a pistol?

[FutureRyder]

Firefly - Malcolm Reynolds: "Don't you stand for that. If someone tries to kill you, you got every right to kill them back."

If someone is carrying legally, that's fine. It's your right, I respect, but I really don't need to know.

If you don't carrying, that's fine. It's your right and I really don't need to know.

And if your carrying illegally, I REALLY don't need to know.

Posting online what you do with it when you're in a state that you can't carry, is akin to people posting on Facebook that they are going on vacation. How many homes were broken into while people were on vacation because they stupidly posted it for the world to see on Facebook?

As has already been said in other terms, it's a Concealed Permit, you shouldn't be flashing it in the real world or the virtual world.

 

[zrc]

"I don't recall you posting any data to back up your 'facts' about 'violent crime reduced due to CCW laws'. It's been awhile since I looked up the data, but my memory of what it stated was that it was a wash at best.

If you'd like to supply me with some data to back up your stance--- PM it to me and I'll gladly take a look into it.:thumbup: "

See Lott and Mustard study from 1997 (redid study in I believe 99 to verify results), most definitive study ever done on the topic by two University of Chicago professors. They noted an over 8% drop in murder, I believe 6% in rapes (this is from memory, but I know it's pretty darn close), and similar results in every catagory of violent crime. They also noticed a corresponding increase in property crimes (said there appeared to be a "replacement factor") such as car thefts and other crimes where there was little chance of confronting the victim. Interestingly they have done numerous updates, and have noted that the two years with the largest drops in violent crime, immediately followed the years with the highest gun sales. One was the year after Columbine when folks rushed to beat the knee-jerk laws they were expecting, the other was after the ***** election (no explanation necessary).

Here is a fun one.

http://www.rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm

 

[Firefly]

These are the same people that set up the road block in Cuba and profiled you. I worry that you are still under some strain from the heat and the loss of your RS.

In direct reference to the red, depending on where you are at, those levels of expertise and skills are from people who went to an academy and are now volunteer police officers waiting to make a big bust or some such non-sense to make a name for themselves. Also, in Cleveland, TN about 2 months ago, a cop was killed, in a single car crash. Just his own vehicle, doing 120 mph in a 45 mph zone going around a curve to get to a place to try to help another officer make a bust. So following Seth's rules, he doubled the speed to 90, then added his nut size of 30 and failed to survive the curve. This would be the same person you are waiting to show up and resolve the situation with their expertise and skills.

I am down with your argument, however, everything I have heard you say about police in reference to road blocks in Cuba makes this an odd statement

Welcome to hades, I'm the devil's advocate.

I don't see things as BLACK or WHITE like some do.... I see gray. I can agree with someone on topics where otherwise I may think they're off their rocker.

I don't like or agree with checkpoints - PERIOD. That has nothing to do with the cops - or their qualifications.

In all the scenarios you all mention-- the chances of me being in such a situation are SO minimal--- I don't worry about it - ever.

 

[Bob Denman]

They actually passed that law down there as a reaction to a city up North (The of which escapes me! pps, passing a law banning gun ownership.
Morton Grove perhaps??

 

[Firefly]

Here is a fun one.

http://www.rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm

Yeah-- and that would never hold up in court.....no way-- no how.

 

[Bob Denman]

Fly, it actually DID hold up and is in place today...
It was Morton Grove, Illinois that banned handgun ownership back in 1981; Keenesaw struck back with what they had to work with!

 

[Firefly]

"I don't recall you posting any data to back up your 'facts' about 'violent crime reduced due to CCW laws'. It's been awhile since I looked up the data, but my memory of what it stated was that it was a wash at best.

If you'd like to supply me with some data to back up your stance--- PM it to me and I'll gladly take a look into it.:thumbup: "

See Lott and Mustard study from 1997 (redid study in I believe 99 to verify results), most definitive study ever done on the topic by two University of Chicago professors. They noted an over 8% drop in murder, I believe 6% in rapes (this is from memory, but I know it's pretty darn close), and similar results in every catagory of violent crime. They also noticed a corresponding increase in property crimes (said there appeared to be a "replacement factor") such as car thefts and other crimes where there was little chance of confronting the victim. Interestingly they have done numerous updates, and have noted that the two years with the largest drops in violent crime, immediately followed the years with the highest gun sales. One was the year after Columbine when folks rushed to beat the knee-jerk laws they were expecting, the other was after the ***** election (no explanation necessary).

Yet they keep 'expecting' such laws like the end of the world in 2000-- then in 2010---- then in 2012--- and they never happen... but gun shops are cashing in on the unfounded fear and rhetoric.

Ain't no one coming to take yer guns folks... just ain't happening.

 

[Firefly]

Fly, it actually DID hold up and is in place today...
It was Morton Grove, Illinois that banned handgun ownership back in 1981; Keenesaw struck back with what they had to work with!

I'd need to see proof bro.... no way this would be legal here in the USA. So you're saying someone who didn't own a gun went to court over it and lost? I ain't buying it......got some proof?

I mean-- it's illegal to spit on the sidewalk too.. but not enforced.

If someone took this to court... I don't see how they could lose.

 

[steve635]

"Oh-- and 'this' administration isn't taking guns either-- they actually have never said much either way... and actually expanded gun owners' rights.. you can now carry in the National Parks due to the signature of our current leader.... :thumbup: All of those rumors were started by none other than gunshop owners to boost sales.... nojoke

No one's 2nd Amendment rights are going away... not now-- not ever."

Well, the President did tell Sarah Brady that he was working harder than ever to get rid of guns, but that he was just working under the table (paraphrasing but that's pretty close). Then coincidentally a few months later "Fast and Furious" came to light. Again just coincidence I'm sure that the year before leading members of congress (from an unnamed party), were calling for additional gun laws, based on the mistaken notion that predominantly U.S. guns were being used in the Mexican drug wars (FBI and DEA agents testified before the committee that this was not the case). Then, curiously, an American administration actually forces the imagined transgressions to occur. Sure it could be unrelated, but I think there's a better chance of my aunt having testicles.

 

[Bob Denman]

Yeah-- and that would never hold up in court.....no way-- no how.

Way and how!
Here's what they did to make it palatable to everybody...


[SIZE=+1]Kennesaw Police Chief Dwaine Wilson said no one has ever been prosecuted under the ordinance.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1][/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Among those exempt are residents "who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine." Others exempt include the physically and mentally disabled, paupers and those convicted of a felony.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1][/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The law contains no clause addressing punishment for violating the law. If convicted, City Clerk Diane Coker said punishment would be determined by the general penalty clause of the Kennesaw Code Ordinance - probably a fine of about $100.[/SIZE]

 

[Ron2andia]

To carry or not, that is the question..

I struggle with this one all the time. I do have a CWP but can't decide whether to do it consistently or not. My answer is sometimes.

 

[Firefly]

Fly, it actually DID hold up and is in place today...
It was Morton Grove, Illinois that banned handgun ownership back in 1981; Keenesaw struck back with what they had to work with!

Actually after the ACLU took them to court they changed the law....

The city added a clause exempting conscientious objectors, criminals, the mentally disabled and people who could not afford a gun.

So it's not mandatory to own a gun there.......

 

[zrc]

I don't see things as BLACK or WHITE like some do.... I see gray. I can agree with someone on topics where otherwise I may think they're off their rocker.

I don't like or agree with checkpoints - PERIOD. That has nothing to do with the cops - or their qualifications.

In all the scenarios you all mention-- the chances of me being in such a situation are SO minimal--- I don't worry about it - ever.

I mostly just enjoy "poking you with a stick". Only commentary that I have made not in jest recently is here, otherwise, Im up to my usual shenanagins.

 

[steve635]

not much for cliches' but I'll make an exception.

"The only ones I want doing such things would be the police... not citizen vigilantes....."

Remember when seconds count, the police are only minutes away!

 

[Firefly]

"Oh-- and 'this' administration isn't taking guns either-- they actually have never said much either way... and actually expanded gun owners' rights.. you can now carry in the National Parks due to the signature of our current leader.... :thumbup: All of those rumors were started by none other than gunshop owners to boost sales.... nojoke

No one's 2nd Amendment rights are going away... not now-- not ever."

Well, the President did tell Sarah Brady that he was working harder than ever to get rid of guns, but that he was just working under the table (paraphrasing but that's pretty close). Then coincidentally a few months later "Fast and Furious" came to light. Again just coincidence I'm sure that the year before leading members of congress (from an unnamed party), were calling for additional gun laws, based on the mistaken notion that predominantly U.S. guns were being used in the Mexican drug wars (FBI and DEA agents testified before the committee that this was not the case). Then, curiously, an American administration actually forces the imagined transgressions to occur. Sure it could be unrelated, but I think there's a better chance of my aunt having testicles.

Yeah-- and bigfoot landed in a UFO last week in my back yard.... I think he wanted a photo of your aunt.....

We're gonna get this thread yanked if we continue down this path...... but let's just say your above statements are interesting theories that have yet to be proven. I typically withhold judgement on someones actions until they actually DO something.. and the only thing they have DONE is expand gun owners rights... the rest is pure speculation and conspiracy theory.

I don't expect any changes regarding the 2nd Amendment anytime soon... just not gonna happen.

 

[Bob Denman]

"The only ones I want doing such things would be the police... not citizen vigilantes....."

Remember when seconds count, the police are only minutes away!

Steve, I think that we need some Tee shirts made up with this one! :thumbup:

 

[shelbydave]

Yeah-- and that would never hold up in court.....no way-- no how.

...But according to the article, it DID hold up in court.

Bottom line is that strength is always a deterrent. In school, you never see the bully picking on the athelete, it's always the weak. In real life, if a thug thought or knew you had a weapon, and would NOT hesitate to use it, he would leave you alone - unless he was a madman anyhow...
I was looking for the article, but I recall earlier this year that a small town in South Carolina had the largest per capita ratio of women carrying, and getting proper training. They mentioned the crime rate stats, and they were considerably lower than the surrounding areas.

As far as what you say that the chances are so slim that it would happen to you, just the fact that violent crimes are still in the news indicates that there ARE chances... The people on here who DO carry, simply choose to reduce those chances even further...

 

[steve635]

Changing the subject?

"Yet they keep 'expecting' such laws like the end of the world in 2000-- then in 2010---- then in 2012--- and they never happen... but gun shops are cashing in on the unfounded fear and rhetoric.

Ain't no one coming to take yer guns folks... just ain't happening."

The point here (germane to the conversation) is that when they did buy guns in record numbers, regardless of the motivation, there was a corresponding drop in violent crime. The evidence requested was promptly provided, so the subject was even more promptly changed.

 

[steve635]

too late.....

Steve, I think that we need some Tee shirts made up with this one! :thumbup:

Sorry Bob, there already out there.

http://www.cafepress.com/pissofftheleft/3592872

 

[Pappy John]

Sure.... I've had a carry permit in my home state for 30-something years, and a non-res Florida permit for the past 6 that makes me legal in 33 states.

It's like life insurance. I don't ever want to use it, but I wouldn't be without it. Bad things can happen too quickly for the police to help. They're good at making those chalk outlines though. Their responibility is not to protect you from violent crime, but to investigate after a crime has occurred, and hopefully bring the responsible party to justice. Small comfort if you're a dead or seriously injured victim.