Gun does NOT equal cowboy!

[Undertoad]

deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined

This is called statistical cherry picking and would get an F in a good statistics class.

Both sides indulge in this kind of thing...

[warch]

Guns are stolen, therefore people shouldn't be allowed to have them. Yeah. That makes sense.

No that's not what I said. Guns are stolen,and guns are "found" by people other than the owner often with deadly results and therefore secure gun possession should be a major concern as the NRA states. Conceal and carry, I feel, is less secure gun possession. You obviously disagree and so it is.

If the only reason we don't kill those around us is that we don't have immediate access to a gun, we should all be in mental hospitals, not walking(and driving) around free.

Well I'll agree with that. But I'd add that not all people are as calm, centered, and benevolent at all times as you. And is there any level of force or weaponry you would deny or regulate to your fellow citizenry?

Why should the cops decide whether or not a person can carry a gun? They are supposed to be public servants, not masters.

Well, I was talking specifically about concealed handguns. Cops are sposed to uphold the laws we democratically hammer out. And at this point I feel they may be in the best position to conduct full criminal background checks as well as monitor stolen guns, illegal sales, etc.

Somehow I think "hidden" is a strawman here. Or are you for legal "open carry"?

Nah, you can take out both hidden and deadly from that statement if you wanna. But you raise an interesting point. Why isnt the law to just carry? Why the conceal? There must be some advantage or reasoning, beyond aesthetics. If the arguement is a simple one of protection and crime prevention , why not just pack it the outside?

[JeepNGeorge]

Originally posted by warch
[i]
I'm not for banning all guns. I'm for rational control of gun proliferation, better enforcement of gun sale laws and background checks. I'm for letting law enforcement decide, case by case, who can get a permit for concealed handguns.

I think more gun education would be better.

I shot trap and skeet during high school for the local 4-H teams. So while other kids where learning about guns from the now governor of California, I was out getting hands on experience. You can't piece together the clay pigeons as nicely as the liquid terminator can reattach an arm.

No matter how hard we try the US can simply not legislate morality. Be it smoking, speeding, or gun control. No matter how many laws we pass we will not create a perfect society. What we can do is educate people. We can show them the truthful consequences of their actions.

Life is not a Mountain Dew commercial.

Maybe the media and hollywood are partially to blame for showing how cool Clint Eastwood is while he smokes a cigar and blazes his sixguns.

Maybe more people should listen to Folsum Prison Blues and listen to the regret johnny sang about knowing that unlike the train whistle he can never be free again cause he shot that man in reno just to watch him die, instead of (c)rap songs about busting a cap in somebody's azz cause they dissed you.

Maybe we need to put the 10 commandments back in school.

Maybe we need to do a lot of things, but I don't think stricter gun control laws is one of them.

[russotto]

Me, calm, centered, and benevolent? Not likely. But I've never tried to kill anyone. Not even maim them a little. To deny me (or anyone else) the right to carry a weapon on the grounds that if I have it, I might kill someone with it, is to assume I'm incapable of controlling or unwilling to control any murderous impulses I might have.

Cops are supposed to enforce the law, as you point out. Letting them decide who gets to carry a weapon and who does not goes beyond enforcing the law into becoming a law unto themselves.

PA law did (and may still) allow open carry. The problem is that cops and judges conspired to interpret that law so that if any part of the gun was hidden (e.g. by a holster), that counted as concealed carry.

There are a couple of sound crime-prevention arguments behind concealed carry versus open carry. One is deterrence -- open carry protects only the carrier. Concealed carry provides a degree of protection for anyone who might be carrying. The other is retention. I know of absolutely no instance where a person carrying concealed has had his or her weapon taken by a criminal. There are many cases where a person carrying openly (including cops) has had his or her weapon taken.

However, the main problem with open carry is what you might expect -- it makes anti-gun people nervous.

[warch]

To deny me (or anyone else) the right to carry a weapon on the grounds that if I have it, I might kill someone with it, is to assume I'm incapable of controlling or unwilling to control any murderous impulses I might have.

Well maybe. OK, not you, but anyone else. Its fair to assume that not everyone is capable of said control. Background checks seem generally accepted to be a good idea.

My belief is that your right to carry a handgun sufficiently threatens my right to public safety (and yours) due to variables of increased gun presence in community settings, your unpredictable actions, unintended accidents, and the actions of others that might aquire your weapon. I think arguements of crime prevention are bogus.

I draw the line at handguns. Others might at automatic weapons, others no line at all, roll out the missiles. Its a negotiation of rights in order to coexist.

Like I said, I've got no problem with you bagging a deer or protecting your home. I just dont want to ride the bus or stand in a DVM line, or go to a losing Cubs game (!) in which everyone is packing. I've seen those law abiding crowds get ugly.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by warch
I suggest that other items- were not constant, and were not considered in the analysis. Maybe increasing the number of gated retirement communities lowered crime. Or maybe it was the extra funding the Catholic missions received. Or maybe there were less days over 98 deg. But as proof of causation, its not clear, its correlation that proves nothing. You can measure a lower rate of criminal incidents,(assuming the definition of criminal incidents remains consistent), but targeting the probable cause of the change take more control. Here is some interesting info on John Lott whose study is most often sited

That's just one guy who has apparently done studies. There are a lot more out there. Of course that story says nothing about the positive aspects involved in CCW...sounds like a bunch of anti-gun nazis up there.

I just said that last part to point out that the pendulum swings both ways.

Chicago became the murder capital of the US during a time of prosperity in this country. Now, I'm sure that there are several reasons why the murder rate went up in Chicago...but if you live in a city of 3 million people, where cops have 9 million things to do, and the populace is unarmed...don't you think the criminals would use that to their advantage?

Would an armed civic response, or the threat of one, have prevented the shooting? Nah. If crossfire had broken out would more of us at the bus stop been at higher risk of injury? Yeah.

That's just your opinion though...you really don't know if that would happen or not.

So far, the main impact I can see of the conceal and carry laws in MN is a boom in sales of signs that state "(name of establishment) bans guns in these premises" (They cant say "on" unless you own the property.) Gun ban signs are posted everywhere- small businesses, churches, restaurants, bars, theaters, schools including this University, Xcel energy center hockey games, the state fair grounds, city hall, the state capital, . You can pack it in the parking lot. Also sited at most community gatherings "Minnesotans against getting shot" petitions to have the law repealed.

But has there been an increase in violent crime or violence involving guns since CCW went into effect?

Gun deaths continue - the Cold Spring school shooting . The shooter was talked down by an unarmed teacher. Got his gun from home where it was a legal purchase- Dad's in law enforcement. This is now a familiar scenario. Troubled kids with access to this tool will use it.

That situation doesn't relate to the CCW issue though. It sounds like the dad had the piece before CCW went into effect, so it's not like that had anything to do with the kid losing his mind. That could have happened at any time.

Kids have had access to guns for a while now. I would imagine that it's not too terribly hard to get a piece on the shadier streets in Minneapolis or St. Paul. If you want a gun bad enough, you'll get it...or get caught.

And a few weeks back a woman was killed and her lawyer shot through the neck at a court hearing, the hand gun was legally purchased by the shooter, a cousin of the victim. The shooter lured the two to a court house she knew didnt install metal detectors. The gun ban sign didnt deter her actions. Again crossfire in lobby wouldnt have done much preventively.

But that's not the fault of the CCW law. That's just another moron being criminal...and the failure of whatever level of government involved to have adequate security.

Crimes involving guns are not going to disappear...we have them here all the time. And you don't even have to believe the stats...b/c each side loves to skew 'em their way.

But let me put it to you this way, since you come across as a Democrat or liberal.

You would be outraged if minorities weren't given the protection afforded to them in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You'd be fuming if the courts tried to limit our 1st Amendment rights through something like a Mapplethorpe exhibit.

You see, the Democrats love to give people things...even if it costs taxpayers a ton of money. But yet, most Democrats and liberals seem to want to take guns away from people. It clearly seems like a 2nd Amendment violation to me, but the Democrats will try and justify it to no end. And I'm not saying this is necessarily you, warch, but that shit irks me to no end. That's as bad as conservatives trying to inject morality into our society...b/c they think it's the right thing for everyone.

People who suffer moments of unstablity, or consider suicide, or are immature, stupid and curious, or are murderous, when there are guns available, will use this effective tool on themselves and others. My concern is that a concealed handgun law will not make communities safer, but rather make more handguns more available to all imperfect audiences.

How is this going to happen? Particularly when the laws involving the purchase of guns have not changed.

People doing stupid shit with guns on themselves isn't going to change just because of CCW. As far as to others, it won't go away, but the chances of one getting away with it are going to shrink. After all, you never know who has a gun.

Plus, it's not really easy to get a CCW license...at least from what I've seen. There's a lot of hoops to go through. Does that help cut down on the number of idgits that get guns? Based on what I know, I'd say it helps.

But we're talking about good law-abiding citizens who legally want to protect themselves in case shit jumps off. Sure, some folks probably get a swollen head from having a piece, but that's the exception and not the rule. Guns are serious things--they're not taken lightly by most Joe Q. Publics. Not to mention, some states don't give a whole lot of leeway as to reasonable use of a firearm in a dangerous situation--I know Missouri's are rather narrow.

You've lived in two states previous to MN with CCW. Austin is generally considered one of the safest cities around...and Texas has some incredibly "loose" gun laws. Did you feel particularly nervous while living in Texas? I'm going to wager "no."

You don't hear about people going apeshit with guns in the heat of the moment too often--the woman in Alabama a few years ago comes to mind. It's sorta like airplane crashes to me--for every plane that crashes, thousands more take off and land safely. With guns, for every nutjob that goes retarded with one, there are way WAY more that are responsible with theirs.

Bottom line--guns are good, Warch is a good egg, if only a bit misguided or confused.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally posted by lumberjim
oh ho... Reeeee heeeeee heellleeeeee? come clean, onyx....what side of the road do you drive on? s or z? come on.... aluminum or al-you-minnium? .....chips or fries? go to the john or the lu? which is it?

I drive on the correct side of the road, depending on the country I'm in at the time.

I have trained my accent away from the most part, until I get on the phone with a countryman and then I kick back into it without thinking. I've had to do that, because I work on the phone, have for 6 years, and you'd be surprised at how many people don't understand a British accent. Especially people from the south. Even when I'm speaking slowly.

Most of the time I use American words (sked yoo al and vy ta min), even when using my accent. I've spent more time in America than in England, and I hold citizenships in both countries.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by OnyxCougar
and I hold citizenships in both countries

-10, illegal

[xoxoxoBruce]

[quote]I'm not for banning all guns. I'm for rational control of gun proliferation, better enforcement of gun sale laws and background checks. [quote]
They have hundreds of laws on the books, and have for a long time, that control the sale of guns. Even though I have a Concealed Carry Permit, I can't buy a gun without a background check. It's a federal felony to attempt to buy a gun if you are not eligible. Since this system went into effect, tens of thousands of people have been stopped from buying guns. How many of these "felons" have been procecuted? ZERO as in zip, nada, none. We don't need any more laws. We need the law enforcers to do their part.

I'm for letting law enforcement decide, case by case, who can get a permit for concealed handguns.

They do. The way the law reads in PA, you apply, get fingerprinted, submit 2 photos and loooog forms. Then the Sheriffs office does a background check, contacts your police dept, the FBI, your neighbors, your employer and your friends. If they can't find a reason you shouldn't have a permit they have to give you one. That's case by case as far as I'm concerned. The only difference in this system is it puts the burden of proof on them. Oh, then you have to renew every 5 years with new pictures and a less thorough check as they are just looking for changes. I've had my permit for a long time and I've been told that new applicants have to prove formal training now, but I can't say for sure.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally posted by sycamore


-10, illegal

No it's not. +10 for me to resume to pre-deduction points and -10 to Syc for posting without checking first.

[Uryoces]

Did I miss something somewhere? Are you, OnyxCougar, a Brit? I have no problem understanding a British accent. Monty Python, BlackAdder, Fawlty Towers, Blake's Seven, and Doctor Who have served me well.

So I suppose you mentioned this several months back, and I just didn't notice?

[slang]

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
I've had my permit for a long time and I've been told that new applicants have to prove formal training now, but I can't say for sure.

Pends on where you are. I walked into the county courthouse without a CCW at about 10am one friday in 2k and I had a fresh permit in my hands by 10:20. No shit. In and out, provided you pass the background check. You need not own or even register a handgun with the permit. Also our office staff isn't horrified at the notion of granting people their 2a rights, because so very many people own and carry a variety of handguns without incident . Someone applying for a CCW is about as common and unthreatening as those getting any other court or county document.

This might scare Warch types but it's been working pretty well here for a number of years. If it were a problem you can bet the Brady Bitch would have some campaign against the county.

Murder is almost unheard of here and , in fact, the last murder was committed with a knife. To bad the victim dint have a piece.

There are firearms injuries here sometimes but they are normally hunting related. The last I remember was from about 20 years ago. A hunter shot another from long distance in the head. Charges were filed for negligence or somesuch but I cant remember if there was a conviction.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally posted by slang


Pends on where you are. I walked into the county courthouse without a CCW at about 10am one friday in 2k and I had a fresh permit in my hands by 10:20. No shit. In and out, provided you pass the background check. You need not own or even register a handgun with the permit. Also our office staff isn't horrified at the notion of granting people their 2a rights, because so very many people own and carry a variety of handguns without incident . Someone applying for a CCW is about as common and unthreatening as those getting any other court or county document.

That's the local Sheriff handling permits on a case by case basis as the state intended. They feel the local law enforcement knows their constituents best. How did they do a background check, Slang?

[slang]

Originally posted by warch
Its fair to assume that not everyone is capable of said control.

I agree.

Something I noticed soon after I started carrying full time was that many people didnt have faith in the own self control enough to carry. They were elligible for a CCW but didnt apply for one.

This seemed silly to me when I heard someone explain that they shouldnt have one. But it makes sense. Many people eliminate themselves from consideration. That's perfect. Many people dont want to take the responsibility and they recognize how serious a burden this can be.

Hey, I'm all about the choice! Yea or Nay! (just dont tell me I cant participate becuase you dont)

[slang]

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
How did they do a background check, Slang?

PICS, I assume but not sure.