jtram Posted July 16, 2015 Author Posted July 16, 2015 Interesting reading: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/06/18/3671392/study-people-use-guns-self-defense/ http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/defensive-gun-use-armed-with-reason-hemenway/ http://smartgunlaws.org/dangers-of-gun-use-for-self-defense-statistics/ Basically 4 different write ups on the same studies? Im missing the point, maybe that more people should keep guns on them. All that I took aside from generalizations on both sides was that studies show that fewer cases involving people defending themselves with a gun exist than are claimed by a few non scientific studies. I would like to see a study on how many people are murdered or robbed that was carrying a gun vs not carrying. I think that if a study like that existed, it would likely refute your choice of links.
hoglaw Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 The problem with any intelligent discussion on gun rights and balancing those rights against the rights of others to be free from getting shot is that it winds up being an idealogical argument rather than something folks can talk rationally about. That's been proven on this thread, and in every other discussion that has ever taken place on the subject. Obviously the right to own firearms has a basis in our constitution. That makes it a "fundamental right." But that doesn't mean that the right can't legally be curtailled or restricted. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater or threaten to kill another person even though the first amendment guarantees that laws won't impinge on freedom of speech. You can't vote when you're a convicted felon and you lose rights to be free from certain searches and seizures when you're on probation - even though the constitution protects those rights. It's disappointing that if you even come close to trying to discuss the issue, you're labled as a "liberal" and insulted. The folks who trumpet the second amendment and claim that anyone who wants to discuss intelligent laws regarding firearms is a "liberal" who wants to "restrict personal freedoms" are often the same folks who want to restrict the personal freedoms of others in the worst possible ways. This cuts both ways, but toe-the-line "conservatives" have no problem with the government telling a woman what she can and can't do with her own body or the government telling folks who they can and can't marry. So the whole "liberty and freedom" thing is just a flag to wrap around silly arguments when it suits you. Someone on this thread even suggested forcing people to carry guns, or forcing them to take classes about them. Talk about anti-personal freedom! When we get past the flawed ideological arguments, we get into the straw man arguments. "Just as many people are killed by drunk drivers, should we ban alcohol too?" Well no, but we have laws that ban drinking and driving. We arrest people who do it. And you have to pass a test to even get a license to drive. But there are almost no requirements to purchase a gun, and almost no meaningful safeguards to make sure that the folks walking around with them actually know what they're doing. I think everyone agrees that far too many people are shot in this country every year. If all guns were outright banned and confiscated, there can be no debate that far fewer people would be shot. I'm not advocating for that at all, as I own guns and enjoy shooting them even outside of the hunting context. But it is a reasonable position for folks to take that having a huge portion of the civillian population walk around with guns on their hips while they're getting groceries is dangerous. I refuse to turkey or dove hunt with some people because of how nonchalant they are with their shotguns. And when I see an average joe walking around in public with a not-so-concealed or open carry weapon, it does not make me feel safer. Yes, carrying a gun in your every day life is a personal decision. Some folks probably make it from a rational standpoint (a landlord who collects rent in a bad neighborhood for instance), and some from unjustified fears. And no doubt, some do it because it feels cool or sexy (the batman argument!). But when that personal decision places other lives in danger, it's ok to talk about it and to debate what can be done to make it safer. ColdWaterFshr 1
fishinwrench Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 What is the charge for carrying concealed WITHOUT a permit ? Has anyone ever been asked to show their C&C permit ? So many have it now, that everyone just assumes that any heat-packer is licensed to do so. Also, what ever become of the deal where the MSHP compiled the list of permit holders and freaked everyone out? Did that deal just kinda die and go away ?
ColdWaterFshr Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 The problem with any intelligent discussion on gun rights and balancing those rights against the rights of others to be free from getting shot is that it winds up being an idealogical argument rather than something folks can talk rationally about. That's been proven on this thread, and in every other discussion that has ever taken place on the subject. Obviously the right to own firearms has a basis in our constitution. That makes it a "fundamental right." But that doesn't mean that the right can't legally be curtailled or restricted. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater or threaten to kill another person even though the first amendment guarantees that laws won't impinge on freedom of speech. You can't vote when you're a convicted felon and you lose rights to be free from certain searches and seizures when you're on probation - even though the constitution protects those rights. It's disappointing that if you even come close to trying to discuss the issue, you're labled as a "liberal" and insulted. The folks who trumpet the second amendment and claim that anyone who wants to discuss intelligent laws regarding firearms is a "liberal" who wants to "restrict personal freedoms" are often the same folks who want to restrict the personal freedoms of others in the worst possible ways. This cuts both ways, but toe-the-line "conservatives" have no problem with the government telling a woman what she can and can't do with her own body or the government telling folks who they can and can't marry. So the whole "liberty and freedom" thing is just a flag to wrap around silly arguments when it suits you. Someone on this thread even suggested forcing people to carry guns, or forcing them to take classes about them. Talk about anti-personal freedom! When we get past the flawed ideological arguments, we get into the straw man arguments. "Just as many people are killed by drunk drivers, should we ban alcohol too?" Well no, but we have laws that ban drinking and driving. We arrest people who do it. And you have to pass a test to even get a license to drive. But there are almost no requirements to purchase a gun, and almost no meaningful safeguards to make sure that the folks walking around with them actually know what they're doing. I think everyone agrees that far too many people are shot in this country every year. If all guns were outright banned and confiscated, there can be no debate that far fewer people would be shot. I'm not advocating for that at all, as I own guns and enjoy shooting them even outside of the hunting context. But it is a reasonable position for folks to take that having a huge portion of the civillian population walk around with guns on their hips while they're getting groceries is dangerous. I refuse to turkey or dove hunt with some people because of how nonchalant they are with their shotguns. And when I see an average joe walking around in public with a not-so-concealed or open carry weapon, it does not make me feel safer. Yes, carrying a gun in your every day life is a personal decision. Some folks probably make it from a rational standpoint (a landlord who collects rent in a bad neighborhood for instance), and some from unjustified fears. And no doubt, some do it because it feels cool or sexy (the batman argument!). But when that personal decision places other lives in danger, it's ok to talk about it and to debate what can be done to make it safer. Excellent post. Summarizes my views exactly.
ColdWaterFshr Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 I received a Gander Mtn circular in this mornings Post-Dispatch. For all you concealed carry, nut-job, Batman-wanna-be's . . . make sure to take advantage of the great deals being offered on these "tactical necessities". Man, they make you look cool.
hoglaw Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 What is the charge for carrying concealed WITHOUT a permit ? I can answer for Arkansas, not sure about Missouri. It's a misdemeanor. Maybe a Class A, so punishable by a fine of up to $1000 and a year in jail, though it's almost always just a fine and confiscation. Having a CC permit is an affirmative defense to the charge. The actual charge is "carrying a weapon." When I prosecuted gun cases, I typically required some kind of evidence of intent to employ a gun as a weapon before I would go forward on them. To me, that meant that it needed to be loaded, in the glove box, etc. I wouldn't prosecute where the gun was cased, the guy was on the way to the deer woods with a shotgun, etc. The law was pretty vague actually. But if someone was just transporting a gun from A to B, or taking a gun to go hunting or target shooting or something like that, I didn't view it as a criminal act. If they were just riding around town with a loaded gun under the seat and had no CC permit, then I would prosecute and let them explain to the judge why they weren't "carrying a weapon." I don't think I ever sent anyone to jail over it. Just fines and forefiture of the gun.
fishinwrench Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 I received a Gander Mtn circular in this mornings Post-Dispatch. For all you concealed carry, nut-job, Batman-wanna-be's . . . make sure to take advantage of the great deals being offered on these "tactical necessities". Man, they make you look cool. IMG_2079.jpg IMG_2080 copy.jpg Hurumpf! Not a single bulletproof vest. I find it odd that all these guys afraid of getting shot all carry guns....but not a single one wears (or even owns) a vest.
Greenheadrocker Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 Interesting reading: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/06/18/3671392/study-people-use-guns-self-defense/ http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/defensive-gun-use-armed-with-reason-hemenway/ http://smartgunlaws.org/dangers-of-gun-use-for-self-defense-statistics/ All left winged propaganda , I truly do believe that Liberalism is a mental disorder. jtram and Tanderson15 2
Greasy B Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 I received a Gander Mtn circular in this mornings Post-Dispatch. For all you concealed carry, nut-job, Batman-wanna-be's . . . make sure to take advantage of the great deals being offered on these "tactical necessities". Man, they make you look cool. IMG_2079.jpg IMG_2080 copy.jpg Cool, looks just like on TV. His father touches the Claw in spite of Kevin's warnings and breaks two legs just as a thunderstorm tears the house apart. Kevin runs away with the Claw. He becomes captain of the Greasy Bastard, a small ship carrying rubber goods between England and Burma. Michael Palin, Terry Jones, 1974
ness Posted July 16, 2015 Posted July 16, 2015 I received a Gander Mtn circular in this mornings Post-Dispatch. For all you concealed carry, nut-job, Batman-wanna-be's . . . make sure to take advantage of the great deals being offered on these "tactical necessities". Man, they make you look cool. IMG_2079.jpg IMG_2080 copy.jpg I want the men's crew neck holster shirt in a XXL. John
Recommended Posts