I realize you are trying to be a smart ****, but your really not helping your case, there are people killed every day just doing their normal routines like going to the store, and driving and some times it could be prevented if they had been carrying a weapon and known how to use it. Why is it such a bad idea to let law abiding citizens(those are people that follow the laws, like not committing murder) carry a device to protect themselves?

 

You really did not read the post I put up above the one you just quoted, did you? I did not say it was a bad idea, you just did. I'm just asking questions, and pointing out problems in a "one size fits all" approach to this issue.

I'll say it again, since you did not seem to get it: I am NOT pro-gun control! How can I be more clear than that?

But, isn't it possible there are "other approaches" that might lessen the number of violent crimes that are committed? Why don't we do some serious exploration of this possibility? Please don't tell me there's no such option. I refuse to believe we're that far gone as a society.

We're talking about it here - isn't that a "first step"?

- Jack

 

Like what? Make the jail sentance rougher? Obviously that doesn't work because the jails keep getting more and more packed?

 

The answer for us is - EVERYWHERE and ALWAYS, except when overriding law enforcement is actively in charge, such as in a courtroom or other guarded government building. I don't want someone else to decide for me when and where I should have to disarm myself. If there is no law enforcement present in any given location to protect my family, then it is my God Given right to do so to the best of my ability.

I'd like to not be painted as a crazed motorist who might fire on a cop who is writing me a ticket. Lawful CCW holders are the opposite of this. We are extremely careful to stay out of trouble, and avoid high risk situations.


In one breath, you claim to come from a culture that accepts firearms, but in another, you sound like Rosie O'Donnel! Which is it?

 

I think part of the problem is that the solution has to be a "one size fits all" approach, or somebody will find it unconstitutional since one "group" of people is being treated differently than another group.

I have to agree with most of the people, here, that as long as I am not being actively protected by armed Police, etc, I should be allowed to exercise my God given right to self defence in the most effective means available. Within my, specific, skill set, that would be a firearm (I suck at Ninja throwing stars and am terrible with knives).

Anyway, I enjoy a good debate on this topic, keep the thoughts coming, Jack!

 

Only estimates are available (since the FBI does not keep this statistic), but guns deter between 1 and 3 million crimes per year in America at a myriad of places. In fact, there was a report about 2 or 3 months ago of a crazed person going into a church with a weapon. Would've been nice if someone were armed.

 

You say that...but then you have these posts:

Response: Drunks cant legally carry, CHL holders are usually more responsible about the law, people that will carry drunk ALREADY carry drunk in bars.

That's gun control 100%

Here you suggest that firearms should not be allowed on university campuses. Gun control.

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index...58&mode=linear
First concealed carry shooting in NM was an old man saving the life of a young woman at a Wal Mart.

Honestly? If you hadnt posted the above, then we wouldn't be worried.

 

I'm still waiting for someone who's a cop to weigh in on this discussion. I know there are some of you here.

It's one thing to view an armed citizenry through the misty eyed romanticism of the wild west. It's quite another to have to deal with it on a daily basis when your life's on the line.

And Riley Dog - I'm surprised you didn't take exception to my view that all airline pilots should be armed and that airliners should have armed Sky Marshals aboard. I was quite serious there. Doesn't it fit in with your view that I'm anti-gun?

You also didn't seem to find it objectionable that I said this: "The Government has no rights to interfere in my life that are not specifically spelled out by the Constitution." My support of the Constitution doesn't seem to fit your feeling that I'm anti-gun, does it?

All I'm really asking here is, "Are more guns the solution? Do you really want to see everyone over the age of 21 (or whatever age it's legal to carry in all the States) packing heat? And recall I pointed out that the Arizona Legislature is trying to do away with any kind of "permit" requirement - is this a good idea? I can think of quite a few people I would not trust to use a firearm correctly, especially in a moment of stress, can't you? Can you imagine all 200 parishioners in a church firing back at some nut who was allowed to bring his gun inside too? How about all 145 passengers aboard an airplane shooting at the hijacker who was also allowed to bring his weapon aboard?"

Yes, I know there are MANY instances where an armed citizen saved the day. Good for them! I'm glad there are a few around, and I hope for all the situations where someone's life is threatened, that there is someone else around who is capable and cool and able to end it quickly without causing a lot of collateral damage.

Honestly, the way I see it is that most people DO want gun control - they just want it applied to the other guy, not them! But, you really can't have it both ways, can you?

- Jack

 

Contrary to your personal beliefs, which are based on emotion, statistics show the more law-abiding people there are that carry guns, the safer society is.

 

Jack - No one is advocating arming everyone.

Why do you take your arguments to ridiculous extremes? You really think it is possible to have 145 passengers on a plane that will all be carrying, or 200 parishoners in a single church that are carrying?

To me, the beauty of the 2nd ammendment and CCW is the bad guys don't know who might be armed, or how many opponents they may have in any given situation.

Yes, I'll concede every Tom, **** and Harry having a gun 100% of the time might cause some problems we don't currently have. Feel better?

I't' very hard to take uour remarks seriously when you are arguing about extremes that are so unrealistic, they could only happen in a fantasy world. Lose the extremes and bring it back to earth, please.

 

That shows you're not anti-gun (pro-some specific people having guns), but you talk of limiting gun ownership/possession for other people. When you limit guns from other people...that is the gun control we all dread. You can be pro-gun AND pro-gun control.

That statement just conflicts with everything you said about limiting carry (keeping self defense options from university students, restaurant patrons, etc).


I agree that there should be firearms training. Do it in high school P.E. for all I care. They do archery, and run around the block without killing themselves, why not allow them to learn firearm safety, and become proficient in self defense while in school?

 

x2, let's say if there were 145 passengers on a plane with CCW permits and someone tried to hijack the plane. I can guarantee not all 145 people carrying firearms are going to start unloading their magazines at the hijacker. That is a ridiculous statement, CCW permit holders are typically more calm and collected in heated situations. I know if I was one of said 145 passengers with a valid CCW and 4 other people are already taking the situation into their hands I would only offer backup, not try to get my lead into his head first. As previously stated CCW is not just handed out to anyone who asks for one, and in CA where I live it is on a county by county basis. I don't know how easy or hard it is in other states, but in CA you have to go through all kinds of legal hoops and paperwork to even be considered for a CCW.

I think it is total BS that I am told by the state that I live in what kind of firearm I am allowed to purchase, and even more BS to regulate the capacity of the magazines for my firearms. I take a pistol with me every time I go into Oakland because there are a ton of degenerates that don't posess a HSC or CCW that carry firearms. I don't trust ANY other person (LEO's included) to protect me as well as I can protect myself. At my local gun range the Oakdale police practice there and they SUCK at hitting a stationary target, much less a moving target.

 

Good, RileyDog. I'm not claiming there's not a conflict. There clearly is. "Freedom" is just that - the ability to do anything that makes you happy as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. And, owning, or even carrying a firearm is not in itself harmful to anyone.

I'm all for having everyone owning guns - no exceptions! This includes children, people who are mentally unstable, people with developmental disabilities, people who are legally blind, and so on. As long as they are citizens of the US, they have that right under the 2nd Amendment! If you don't agree with this, you are NOT pro-gun (and are advocating "gun control").

There! I've said it and I mean it. The Constitution gives US citizens that right! I support the Constitution! If you don't agree with me, you don't.

Now, should there be situational "control"? Who wants everyone in a courtroom to be armed? How about all passengers on an airplane? How about all the spectators at a football game? I could go on, but, everyone gets the picture. So, anyone who says NO to guns in these venues is advocating a form of gun control too, right?

Frank, your "statistics" are not so black and white. The United Kingdom has very strict gun control, and they have a much lower violent crime rate than we do. There are other, less violent countries that fall into this category too, such as Canada, just as there are more violent countries that have fairly oppressive gun laws, such as Mexico.

Dirt Bike - I appreciate your comments, more than you know. Yes, I am taking it to extremes, but that is what some people want to do! When the Arizona Legislature wants it to be legal for ANYONE to carry a concealed weapon, without a permit, isn't that extreme? And don't we have to figure out where to draw the line? When a legislative body starts thinking this way, it's no longer a fantasy world, is it?

- Jack

 

My sister is an elementary teacher, and I would feel LESS secure if she were allowed to carry a gun to class.

 

Your crime figures about England are risible. Their violent crime rate has almost doubled, along with Australia.