|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Jun 11, 2008 8:29:44 GMT -5
Here's another story about the right to carry a personal firearm openly. I'm personally not comfortable with a patron carrying in a restaurant where alcohol is served. It's like lighting a match at a gas station. www.marinij.com/ci_9254139Notice the over 6,000 comments. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jun 11, 2008 11:35:35 GMT -5
I can kind of agree with no carry in a bar. But I think carry in a restaruant is fine. Notice that it says that they were not drinking.
I read through a bunch of the comments. I notice a lot of fear and projection on the part of the anti-civil rights posters. Many seemed worried that honest citizens would show the same lack of self control and self discipline that they feel in themselves. I will agree that not everyone should be allowed to carry. Most liberal politicians come to mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Jun 11, 2008 13:34:36 GMT -5
The CDC's "numbers" hae been debated ad nauseum for years. They are quite often misrepresented, and most particularly by the anti-gun left which is seeking to disarm us all to the point that only government and it's agents would have firearms. This is particularly true of the specious "child victims" numbers quoted above. And accidental deaths by firearm are at an all time historic low in this country. More people drown in swimming pools each year in America, to cite just one common causality, than are accidently killed by misuse of a firearm.
Yet still the left bellows endlessly that we must disarm. Funny... I recall a revolution once started over an attempt by a King's army to disarm the locals. Lexington and Concord ring a bell Sauntrelle[/i]?
I've owned and used firearms responsibly all of my adult life, including many years as a law enforcement officer. And in all that time I've never had the experience of seeing any firearm that was able to discharge itself. They are an inanimate object, a tool that if misused can cause grievous injury. Yet the left continues to insist that it is the gun that is the problem, not the knucklehead who mis-uses it.
And while the propagandists of the left would have us believe that there is an ever growing "epidemic of gun violence" the most recent figures from the FBI continue to show violent crime trending downward. That seems to be particularly true in the 38 states where concealed carry with licenses issued with a minimum of bureaucratic fuss have become the norm. Florida, the first state to go to "shall issue" concealed carry licenses (1987) is a prime example. The naysayers said the streets would run red from road ragers and such. The reality has been that they never have. That has been repeated in state after state.
Your arguments and statistics are a fraud, whipped up by emotion driven attempts at utopia. They do not reflect what is really going on out in the streets, but rather merely reflect the agenda of the gun grabbers and the sensationalizing that takes place in the media.
To sum up let's close with two ideas.... I can take the SiG P226 .40 caliber sidearm that I carried in my last few years as a LEO. I can load the magazine to it's full state mandated ten round capacity (because I can no longer keep the LEO only 12 round mags that came with it), chamber a round, leave the piece cocked and put it on a table between us, then just walk away. So long as you don't pick it up and pull the trigger it is never going to fire. Simple as that.
And the last thought.... Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people that any of the firearms I own, put together.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jun 11, 2008 13:54:21 GMT -5
Big Dog, Teddys car has killed more people than the combined firearms of about 65 million (maybe more) gun owners.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Jun 11, 2008 18:45:54 GMT -5
Big Dog, Teddys car has killed more people than the combined firearms of about 65 million (maybe more) gun owners. True... but I was trying to keep it to a number that could be easily comprehended. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by mrroqout on Jun 11, 2008 19:44:16 GMT -5
The CDC numbers also include gun deaths attributed to the RIGHTFUL OWNER / LEO saving his OWN life by killing the "bad guy". CDC wont tell you that though...
Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States....why not go after something worthwile if you HAVE TO get all "nanny state" on us?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jun 11, 2008 23:12:50 GMT -5
Do you firearm supporters feel you've won the debate because you have turned the attention to Teddy, tobacco , cars and don't forget the preservatives "they" put in our food? Not that I don't think people should not have their own defense.......but can't you see by not having gun control, the deaths, would increase? Personal defense is yours and my right, but how many responsible people are out there?
Touching on permitting guns in a restaurant, well, for the first time in my life, I witnessed a potential tragedy had there been no control. Two separate tables next to each other had patrons that started arguing, for what......well even wannabe gangsters dine out. Get the picture? Children were all over the place, not to mention, hungry folks. Angry plus weapons plus a crowd could be disastrous....almost Third World Country-like.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jun 12, 2008 1:05:31 GMT -5
No. We are pointing out the hypocracy of the anti-civil rights lobby.
Study after study has found that gun control does not lead to fewer deaths or violent crime.
I think it was here that I posed a link to a CDC study. Also, there are somewhere between 600,000 and 3,250,000 civilian defensve uses of firearms each year (those are the low and high numbers, 14 other studies have nubmers around 2 to 2 3/4 million). Let's take the lower number - 600,000 crimes prevented (note, the gun does not have to be fired to prevent a crime, most defensive uses involve the honest citizen presenting the gun and the thug running away). Figure about 10% of violent crimes result in death (that is a bit low, per CDC study). So we have at least 60,000 . lives saved each year. that is a net of about 20k live saved. You want to condem these 20,000 people to a violent death.
Oh, give us a break Mink, your wished for scenario, the one all antis seem to dream of and salivate over, blood running in the streets, shoot outs over spilled drinks, just plain doesn;t happen with law abiding gun owners. You could make the same claim about cars - what is to prevent some irate car owner from getting into her SUV and driving through the front window of a restarurant? And don't give me the line of it doesn;t happen - you know it does. And, if the argument can be made for firearms, it can be made for cars.
You are trying to shove your animist religion down the throats of the rest of us. Guns are inanimate objects. They can do nothing without human intervention. Place the blame on the criminal, not the tool.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Jun 12, 2008 8:32:48 GMT -5
You are trying to shove your animist religion down the throats of the rest of us. Guns are inanimate objects. They can do nothing without human intervention. Place the blame on the criminal, not the tool. I know I'm going to get clobbered for the following, but here it goes: I think Mink did place the blame on the criminal. And, I admit I worry about the wrong people having EASIER access to guns. We don't live in "Kansas" (Wizard of Oz), we live in an area that has a lot of social misfits and drug addicts.
TBD said the same thing about guns:"Yet the left continues to insist that it is the gun that is the problem, not the knucklehead who mis-uses it."That IS the point for those who have concerns about gun ownership. I've said before I think the SANE citizen should have the right to carry, but I don't believe it should be a right for all. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 12, 2008 10:43:33 GMT -5
Do you firearm supporters feel you've won the debate because you have turned the attention to Teddy, tobacco , cars and don't forget the preservatives "they" put in our food? Not that I don't think people should not have their own defense.......but can't you see by not having gun control, the deaths, would increase? Personal defense is yours and my right, but how many responsible people are out there? Touching on permitting guns in a restaurant, well, for the first time in my life, I witnessed a potential tragedy had there been no control. Two separate tables next to each other had patrons that started arguing, for what......well even wannabe gangsters dine out. Get the picture? Children were all over the place, not to mention, hungry folks. Angry plus weapons plus a crowd could be disastrous....almost Third World Country-like. Yes, almost Third World Country-like, I wonder how that happened. It certainly wasn't from securing our borders, now was it. I guess those riders hidden in Bills can raise their ugly head from time to time, now can't they. I am not a gun supporter, I am a supporter of the second amendment. My hand is the one that supports the gun. Personally, I think we should take all the money used to try and take guns away and put it toward our children's education. Just imagine how many more teachers we could hire, books we could buy and many more things to improve the education of the future generations. |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Jun 12, 2008 11:30:50 GMT -5
Do you firearm supporters feel you've won the debate because you have turned the attention to Teddy, tobacco , cars and don't forget the preservatives "they" put in our food? Not at all. My point was rhetorical, not a shift of the topic at all. Show me where it has. The actual results completely quash your argument of the future. 38 states have passed "shall issue" concealed carry licenses. Several also have "open carry" laws. Two other states, Alaska and Vermont, allow concealed carry without permit except in certain places like courtrooms, schools and where alcohol is being served. All of those states continue to see lowering of their violent crime rates. In fact Florida, which is somewhat similar in demograhpics and population to California, has seen continuing declines in violent crime since "shall issue" concealed carry was enacted in 1987. And that enactment was over the hoots and hollers of the pacifist and socialist utopian gun grabbers who screamed endlessly that the streets would run red with wild west shootouts. Plain and simple that hasn't happened. Bottom line, where firearm ownership and / or carry is tightly restricted or bannned outright violent crime rates tend to be much higher. It is incredibly difficult to legally purchase a firearm in California, New York, Illinois and several other states. It's pretty much impossible Massachussets, Maryland, New Jersey and the District of Columbia. And is it any surprise that these states typically have higher violent crime rates? Millions, by most accounts. Close to 99% of lawfully owned firearms are never purloined, stolen or used to further a criminal act. There are something more than 65 million people who choose to own firearms in this country. You never read about them in the press or hear about them in the media because... shocking statement here, they obey the law. You only hear about the crooks and the psychos, who aren't going to follow any gun control law you pass anyway. Again... the facts of over 20 years experience across over two thirds of our states say that you are wrong. Were these wannabe gangbangers? Or real ones? Either way, they would fall into the "crooks and psychos" class I outlined for you above. In that circumstance I think I would feel a lot better knowing I could defend myself and my wife at close quarters should one of them decide to try and get neck deep in my backside with something other than a butter knife. Now does that mean I am going to whip out my roscoe in that situation and start blasting? Absolutely not. Part of the deal that one accepts when one chooses to be in a position to defend ones self is having a very judicious and considered approach. If the stuff hits the fan, I am taking cover and trying to be a good witness, but if one or more of them turn on me or my wife then I have to consider how to respond. As an example, you might consider the case of Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp a chiropractor from Texas. In 1991 Texas law forbade concealed carry on the person. You could keep a gun in your car for your protection back then but you couldn't pack it. So one sunny day she met her parents at a cafeteria for lunch. Dr. Hupp had always kept a firearm for protection and, in obedience to the law, left hers in her car before entering the restaraunt. Shortly after a lunatic drove his truck through the front windows of the eatery, then climbed out and started shooting. Twenty one people were killed that day, including both of Dr. Hupp's parents. She saw them die, and was left powerless, in obedience to the law, to do anything about it. Dr. Hupp went on to serve five terms in the Texas legislature, was instrumental in getting "shall issue" concealed carry signed into law. She is one of the most passionate advocates for both concealed carry and for women defending themselves. While I don't discount your personal experience, I think your position on the issue clouds your perspective. The realities are quite different. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 12, 2008 12:28:46 GMT -5
Excellent points and an excellent post. I exalt you.
|
|
