Sad States of America

[goofyjim]

goofyjim;2238973:

There we go again. The liberal side is always bias but the conservative side isn’t. One can be a Christian whether or not one does or doesn’t own a gun.[/QUOT

Of course you can. Don’t think I ever indicated that you could not. Please do not put words in my mouth. People in media, the news division, are supposed to deliver facts, not suppositions, or their own opinion. They have long forgotten that directive. I was talking about the media, but is you want to claim the mantle as your own, have at it.

Agreed. But those facts should also not be slanted to the conservative side either. It should be just the facts but all of them and if some make a different decision based on that so be it.

[/quote]

 

[goofyjim]

I’ve seen distorted statistics from the conservative side but I am not liberty to discuss them here because it would take the thread off topic.

 

[melensdad]

I’ve seen distorted statistics from the conservative side

Ok, I’ll just go ahead and say it, and then I’ll back it up with university studies:** Shall Issue Concealed Carry Laws reduce crime***. *

Sources:

• **DOES THE RIGHT TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUNS DETER COUNTABLE CRIMES? ONLY A COUNT ANALYSIS CAN SAY ** * FLORENZ PLASSMANN
  State University of New York at Binghamton
  T. NICOLAUS TIDEMAN
  *Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

1. • “such laws appear to have statistically significant deterrent effects on the numbers of reported murders, rapes, and robberies”
   • PRIVATELY PRODUCED GENERAL DETERRENCE
   • *BRUCE L. BENSON *
   • Florida State University*
   • BRENT D. MAST *
   • American Enterprise Institute*
   1. • “rape is estimated to have a consistent negative relationship . . .”
      • TESTING FOR THE EFFECTS OF CONCEALED WEAPONS LAWS: SPECIFICATION ERRORS AND ROBUSTNESS
      • *CARLISLE E. MOODY *
      • College of William and Mary*
      • Overall, right-to-carry concealed weapons laws tend to reduce violent crime.
      • Right-to-Carry Laws and Violent Crime Revisited: Clustering, Measurement Error, and State-by-State Break downs
        JOHN R. LOTT Jr.
        State University of New York - Department of Economics
      • the results consistently show large drops in violent crime rates after right-to-carry laws are adopted. By six years after the law, murder rates have fallen by 9 percent, rape by 11 percent, and robbery by 7 percent.
      • RIGHT-TO-CARRY CONCEALED WEAPON LAWS AND HOMICIDE IN LARGE U.S. COUNTIES: THE EFFECT ON WEAPON TYPES, VICTIM CHARACTERISTICS, AND VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS
      • *DAVID E. OLSON *
      • Loyola University Chicago*
      • MICHAEL D. MALTZ *
      • University of Illinois at Chicago*
      1. 
         *
         • homicide was reduced significantly, with even greater declines in larger jurisdictions. Their findings came at the same time that major reductions in homicide were occurring in many cities and states that did not change their gun-carrying policies, which lead to questions of whether their finding was spurious, caused by problems with the data or methods. . . liberalized carrying laws are associated with a number of effects, some that are consistent with those found by Lott and Mustard and others that are not. It also illustrates the importance of being able to look beyond aggregate crime measures in this type of examination
         • Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
           STEPHEN G. BRONARS
           University of Texas at Austin
           JOHN R. LOTT Jr.
           State University of New York
         • Increased law enforcement or penalties may deter crime, but they may also cause criminals to move to other crimes or other areas. This paper examines whether the adopting a shall issue concealed weapons law in one state alters crime in neighboring areas. The benefits that a county obtains from it’s state passing a shall issue concealed handgun law are generally stronger than those found in previous work. Spillover effects on neighboring areas are almost always deleterious. Criminals tend to move across communities more readily in response to changes in concealed handgun laws than in response to changes in arrest rates. The spillover effects are surprisingly large, especially for property crimes, thus questioning existing research which ignores these considerations. The spillovers are immediate and increase over time (with the exception of assaults and auto theft). Except for rapes, the negative effects of a neighbor’s law are mitigated by having one’s own state adopting the law. Taken together these results imply that concealed handguns deter criminals and that the largest reductions in violent crime will be obtained when all the states adopt these laws. We find little evidence that increased arrest rates create similar spillovers.
         I can provide more, but I figured a half dozen university studies should at least provide some level of support for the concept that carrying guns increases safety.

 

[hosemonkey]

The state of Florida recorded a major drop in crimes against the person after liberalizing their carry laws. If a bad guy even suspects that his potential victim may be armed, he will inviariably choose a softer target. Concealed carry laws place that element of doubt in the criminal’s mind. “An armed society is a polite society.”

 

[goofyjim]

I don’t care what the law oermits as far as carrying concealed weapons. When you come to my home all weapons will be left behind or you will not be permitted in.

 

[melensdad]

I don’t care what the law oermits as far as carrying concealed weapons. When you come to my home all weapons will be left behind or you will not be permitted in.

Many people have similar policies. It is not unreasonable. Just like not allowing smokers to smoke in your home. Heck I’ve had male and female house guests stay in my home, in my home they slept in different rooms, while in their home they sleep together. As I have a pre-teen daughter, I did not think she needed to see a bad example of life in her own house. Under your roof you are entitled to run your house as you wish.

 

[hosemonkey]

Many people have similar policies. It is not unreasonable. Just like not allowing smokers to smoke in your home. Heck I’ve had male and female house guests stay in my home, in my home they slept in different rooms, while in their home they sleep together. As I have a pre-teen daughter, I did not think she needed to see a bad example of life in her own house. Under your roof you are entitled to run your house as you wish.

Reasonable, but if I was armed, you would never know it unless I chose to tell you.

 

[goofyjim]

Reasonable, but if I was armed, you would never know it unless I chose to tell you.

And if you choose not to be honest and disarm then I will assume you are armed and deny you permission into my home.

 

[melensdad]

Reasonable, but if I was armed, you would never know it unless I chose to tell you.

Ditto with me.

That is pretty much the whole point of Concealed Carry. In fact many states have laws that specifically state the gun must not be visible to the public, while other states have Open Carry as part of their laws.

 

[melensdad]

And if you choose not to be honest and disarm then I will assume you are armed and deny you permission into my home.

It is very likely, that if you live in a state with CCW laws (most of them) that you have friends, repairmen, relatives or neighbors who have possessed a concealed weapon on their person without you ever knowing. You’ve likely been to restaurants, social events, stores and many other places where the same has occurred all around you.

Do you have a checklist of things posted at the door?

 

[goofyjim]

It is very likely, that if you live in a state with CCW laws (most of them) that you have friends, repairmen, relatives or neighbors who have possessed a concealed weapon on their person without you ever knowing. You’ve likely been to restaurants, social events, stores and many other places where the same has occurred all around you.

Do you have a checklist of things posted at the door?

I don’t know about the repairmen but my friends and relatives don’t carry guns either. And as for the nieghbors I can control them from getting in. If I have to err I will assume they are carrying one and simply not let them in. Why this sudden air of superiority about those who carry guns?

 

[hosemonkey]

Goofyjim,
What is your rationale for objecting to persons with mental illnesses being denied the right to carry concealed weapons? On another thread you stated that this policy was discriminatory. Why do you suppose that police recruits are given extensive psych screening? People with known mental conditions are denied certain rights and privileges by virtue of their unpredictibility. I would not want a known delusional schizophrenic, for example, carrying a gun around me.

 

[melensdad]

Why this sudden air of superiority about those who carry guns?

I don’t think there is any.

But I thing I, along with hosemonkey, both pointed out simple facts. Many people carry guns and others NEVER know about it. You say your relatives, etc do not carry. If you have a large family, then you may be wrong about that and simply not know it.

More people carry than many people realize. It is also a regional issue. Some areas have few who carry, other areas have many. But it is very rare that people know who carries and who does not.

 

[hosemonkey]

I don’t know about the repairmen but my friends and relatives don’t carry guns either. And as for the nieghbors I can control them from getting in. If I have to err I will assume they are carrying one and simply not let them in. Why this sudden air of superiority about those who carry guns?

You are quite naive if you believe that someone will tell you if they are carrying a concealed weapon.

 

[Julianna]

The state of Florida recorded a major drop in crimes against the person after liberalizing their carry laws. If a bad guy even suspects that his potential victim may be armed, he will inviariably choose a softer target. Concealed carry laws place that element of doubt in the criminal’s mind. “An armed society is a polite society.”

Adding to that, late night restaurants and other businesses have experienced NO robberies with the following sign posted:

CRIMINALS BEWARE:
Patrons of this restauarant may be carrying concealed weapons.

There was a Waffle House in Charleston, SC that was robbed just about every weekend. They decided to put up the sign. The Waffle House 5 miles away refused to put up the sign, and to this day, my brother tells me they are frequently robbed. The former Waffle House hasn’t been robbed since.

 

[goofyjim]

I don’t think there is any.

But I thing I, along with hosemonkey, both pointed out simple facts. Many people carry guns and others NEVER know about it. You say your relatives, etc do not carry. If you have a large family, then you may be wrong about that and simply not know it.

More people carry than many people realize. It is also a regional issue. Some areas have few who carry, other areas have many. But it is very rare that people know who carries and who does not.

And you would be wrong to presume you know my family and friends better than I do.

 

[melensdad]

And you would be wrong to presume you know my family and friends better than I do.

Please, very carefully, read what I actually write. Never once did I presume anything about what you know or don’t know. It seems to be a very common theme with your replies to people, you reply to what you mistakenly think they wrote, but not to what they actually wrote.

 

[Sheeniac]

There we go again. The liberal side is always bias but the conservative side isn’t. One can be a Christian whether or not one does or doesn’t own a gun.

If I hear a conservative using personal bias instead of fact, I will argue it. I believe that fasle statements have no place in a debate.

I have heard repeated reference to automatic guns on the news, when they are actually semi-automatic. I am not quibbling - there is a world of difference. It is SO bad (in the case of guns) that sometimes I think that I would be anti-gun if I didn’t know the facts of the situation and just based it on what I heard casually.

I used to lean neutral to pro-gun control. I finally had to discover what made the evil gun owners think they were right because it seemed that they were against everything sane and normal. Little did I expect that in my attempt to figure out how to show them they were wrong, that I would realize that I was wrong.

I don’t think everyone should be armed. In fact, it’s a big responsibility, and not everyone feels capable of handling it.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Anyone interested in any serious discussion of guns and their role in the history of the United States of America needs to read The Federalist Papers … which were written to explain the U.S. Constitution.

Click here:

actionamerica.org/constitution/fedpapers.shtml

Click first on the tab marked “Constitution”, then to founding documents and then to The Federalist Papers.

After that, return to the home page;

And then click on the tab marked guns.

 

[Sheeniac]

I guess I find this all so hard because it seems we are fighting violence with violence.

Basic question - would you want your mother to fight back if she was being raped with the possibility that she would end up dead at the end? When it comes down to it, that’s what it’s all about, IMO. Fighting violence with violence is not always wrong. I think God’s desire is for us NOT to fight evil by becoming more evil. I don’t see self-defense as evil, and never will. Now - revenge is another story - that is fighting violence with violence.

but considering the nature of the gun - in that it is designed to kill - it just gives me a bad perception of the gun-owner. (Although, I do feel sorry if they are so scared for their safety.)

So because I don’t want to have an EFFECTIVE means of self-defense you have a bad perception of me? Let’s drop the word ‘perception’ and I will call it like I see it - ‘judgment’. Bigotry based on one facet of a person…

And BTW - I am NOT scared for my safety. I drive and I am not terrified because I have a seat belt on and airbags. I was a girl scout - “be prepared” was our motto. Being a gun owner makes me sleep easily at night.

Since we are talking about defense a lot on this thread, it would seem that we are overly concerned/ paranoid about our safety, but I think they opposite is true.

Has America reached a point of no-return, in that nobody is willing to give up their arms because they are afraid their neighbour won’t? Or do you just get a thrill out of guns?

A thrill??? Yeah - you can just see us blood-thirsty savages wanting to ‘go hunting’ criminals, can’t you.

In case you’ve missed my point (not sure if it was here or on another thread), a typical man can easily hurt a typical woman. He DOES NOT need a gun to be a potential threat. I took 1.5 years in a martial art - for the general activity, not for a self-defense reason. I did learn a fair amount about physical interactions, limitations and the finer points of self-defense. Anyone who thinks a woman can protect herself against an unarmed man successfully is ignorant of the reality of life.

What happens if somebody attacks you from behind? Or with surprise? How does a gun protect you then?

I am reasonable enough to know that nothing will protect me in every situation, nor did I ever claim that. I suppose if I get knocked unsconscious, I may have a slower reaction rate. If I got shot from far away with a crossbow, that too may slow me down. Can we keep the strawmen out of this argument?