Imagine a crowd of fifty people with concealed carry weapons, and some idiot pulls out a gun.
What happens to him within about three seconds?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Richard E Fritz on HUD Climate Advisor
- Richard E Fritz on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Robertvd on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Bob G on Ellen Flees To The UK
But it never happens…conservatives or liberals, from what appears in the news it’s always the wackos the ones carrying and then using concealed or otherwise weapons in public in the USA.
It’s one thing to have the right to have a gun, it’s another to consider the possibility it might be useful down at the shopping mall.
It would have been very useful at that mall on Saturday, which is why conservatives carry concealed weapons.
Steven – please help me find news stories from the USA where crazied gun-toting assailants have been shot at, let alone killed or incapacitated, by bystanders.
You are completely missing the point. No one would be stupid enough to pull out a gun at a place where people were packing. That is why shooters go to places where they know there are no guns, like schools, pacifist churches, and crowds of liberals.
The Texas concealed carry law came into existence after the Luby’s shooting, because there was a woman in the crowd who had to leave her gun in her car. She would have saved her parents and lots of other people had she been allowed to bring her gun into the restaurant.
A lot of us are armed most of the time.
No one would be stupid
I don’t think anybody like Loughner would be able to fathom which areas might contain more people carrying guns.
And Les’ Snopes link confirms bystanders’ intervention is still an exceptionally unlikely thing to happen.
Do you believe that schools and crowds of liberals have a lot of people packing weapons?
Why do shooters go to schools? Because they know that they can do a lot of damage before they get gunned down half an hour later.
This would not have happened at a Jan Brewer event, because there would have been a lot of armed people. It is really very simple.
The gun shop event is “unlikely” for exactly the reasons I described. The possible presence of concealed weapons is a deterrent to crime.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149250,00.html
For one…
Or this one we all remember… there a lot of these stories if you wanted to find them…
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2007/12/10/Security-upgrade-saves-churchgoers/UPI-86971197320209/
Is there any evidence showing how the outcome in these types of situations is in fact influenced by whether or not people are carrying concealed weapons or not?
There is no shortage of rhetoric but saying that this same situation would not have occurred in a place where conservatives carry concealed weapons holds no water.
Would an individual gun carrying citizen such as steven goddard shoot the perp as he empties his clip in the crown?
Would an individual gun carrying citizen be able to influence the perp by yelling things like “freeze”, etc?
How about banks? There’s plenty of armed robberies every day…is no law-abiding member of the public carrying a weapon ever passing by a bank that is getting robbed? Or witnessing a mugging in the street?
It is illegal to bring a gun into a bank. People have to leave them in their cars.
Muggings occur in places like New York and Chicago, where it is illegal to carry a weapon. They don’t occur out here in Colorado, where lots of people are packing.
If anyone nearby had a gun and was trained to use it, Loughner would have been down for the count in a matter of seconds. Isn’t this fairly obvious?
Check the crime rates of places that allow carry vs. the places that don’t. Armed people don’t “witness” muggings.
People with carry permits are not allowed to stop crimes, but can protect lives. Most bank robberies do not involve mass shootings. They give the teller a note, take the money and run.
I’m a Texas CHL holder and I carry pretty much 24/7.
In Texas it is NOT unlawful for a CHL holder to carry a concealed weapon into the bank unless the bank has a “30.06” state staute sign clearly posted at the entrance. Most banks where I live do not have the sign.
I routinely carry into my BoA branch….
This happens?
http://www.snopes.com/crime/dumdum/gunshop.asp
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2009/jul/12/shot121_20090711-230802-ar-37595/
There are thousands of stories like this, every 18 seconds a citizen uses a gun legally to protect themsleves… what was your point?
He lives in a country where it is not legal to carry a weapon!
I am even armed on my own property as there are Yotes in the neighborhood.
In Texas it is quite common for citizens to defend themselves from criminals by shooting back. Our current governor was jogging when his dog was attacked by a coyote. Fortunately Rick Perry was packing a laser sight hand gun and was able to dispatch the coyote.
The laser does make acquisition faster and controls possible collateral damage. The wife hits where she thinks she is shooting more with the laser than with open sights. With a 4X50 scope on her PS90 she is good at 100 yards.
With a laser on her Kimber she is good at 25 Yards.
I have made no consideration about the right of carrying a weapon. In fact, I find it perfectly right that every community should decide about that on its own terms.
What I am…skeptical…about is the usefulness of large-scale weapon-carrying rights as a way to protect the public from armed criminals. So far we have one story that almost qualified as urban legend, a coyote, a robber shot by the friend of the store owner in an area where another man had been shot in a store robbery days before, and a security guard shooting an armed intruder.
On the other side we have several episodes of people going “postal” or committing acts of terrorism where nobody from the general public shot back at them.
So far casual weapon-carrying sounds as useful as lifejackets on commercial planes: theoretically, they make perfect sense, but in practice, nobody has ever used them.
As for “muggings occur in places like New York and Chicago, where it is illegal to carry a weapon”…well, I need data to agree with that 😎
For some reason you seem to think that laws work.
Laws like drunk driving, illegal immigration, drugs, robbery, child abuse, rape…..
Laws only work on people that obey the law in the first place.
Making guns against the law, really will mean that only criminals have guns.
Loughner knows it’s against the law to shoot people, did that stop him?
Latitude – I haven’t made the point you are contesting.
Yes you did:
“On the other side we have several episodes of people going “postal” or committing acts of terrorism where nobody from the general public shot back at them.”
Going postal is against the law.
and here you set up some ridiculous strawman:
“”What I am…skeptical…about is the usefulness of large-scale weapon-carrying rights as a way to protect the public from armed criminals”””
Obviously, no one is talking about large-scale anything.
Guns are legal in Texas, there’s your large-scale weapon-carrying rights. And what did you see?
Even though there are LARGE-scale weapon carrying rights in Texas, the law abiding citizens at this rally did not carry one.
Do you realise how horrifying it is to people in the UK (where firearms other than police-licensed shotguns are banned, in almost all circumstances) to see the casual chatter about “people packing” and bystanders gunning down would-be assailants? How many people would be likely to get caught in the crossfire?
I know we have different cultures but might I respectfully ask whether it might be time to look again at the right to bear arms, in this day and age?
Nobody pulls out a gun when they know that others are packing. Your imagined gun battles don’t exist.
Do you know how horrifying it would be to watch someone pull a gun on your children, and you not being able to do anything about it, just stand there and watch?
There’s a big difference between the size of the countries you are comparing.
Gun control in this country would be impossible.
“”Compared with the United States of America, the United Kingdom has a slightly higher total crime rate per capita of approximately 85 per 1000 people, while in the USA it is approximately 80″”
That’s your problem, and it is a very big one indeed. People get prosecuted for defending themselves in their own home against people breaking into their own house in Britain. Fortunately only a certain percentage of the US is on board with that mentality and the rest of us are doing everything we can to stop the progression of the left.
Steven – glad to hear it (I wouldn’t know) but logic dictates you must therefore “pack” (ugh) whenever you go into a public place at which you might encounter strangers. Is that really customary in the US?
Latitude – I think intentional homicide figures are rather more apt than those for any old crime. Wikipedia gives the figures in 2009 as UK 1.28, US 5.0 intentional homicides per 100k population. QED? And who are you protecting yourself and the kids against – surely just other citizens who, if disarmed by law, could not cause this mayhem. That’s what we rely on in the UK to protect our kids.
And glacierman: in the UK we are entitled to use reasonable force to prevent entry by unlawful intruders – but not to use deadly or unreasonable force unless the intruder shows that intent him/her-self. Reasonableness is a judged by the jury.
Again I respectfully ask whether it might be not be time to look at this again.
We looked at it over 200 years ago. You don’t have a 2nd amendment, which was a high priority after we freed ourselves from the crown. You worry about your own system, we are not interested in ceeding freedom to a bunch of statist.
Nice straw man. No one forces anyone to do anything.
Property crime is rampant in the UK. I leave my house unlocked most of the time. Would you break into a house knowing there might be a 12 gauge waiting for you?
OK, OK – quite accepted that it’s a matter entirely for you to decide in the US. However we here were all shocked to read about Representative Giffords and the other poor people killed – and what about the rather big difference in homicide rates? Does that not say anything about easy access to firearms?
Me, I’d rather check the house locks (and accept occasional break-ins – thankfully not happened yet) than see anyone shot in my own property.
Gang activity is responsible for the vast majority of gun violence in the US. It has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Hail to the king/queen, or whatever.
America is a big place. Almost all of it is completely devoid of violent crime, and the people that live there in a large majority own guns. The problem is the big cities and large urban centers where crime is a huge problem, like Chicago – guns banned – citizens cannot carry, Washington D.C. – guns illegal, New York – Guns almost completely illegal, California – No carry permitted, etc.
Also, the 2nd amendment was put in our constitution to prevent government from taking away the right of free people to protect themselves, not just from crime, but their liberties as well.
What about this? Didn’t even involve a gun, just a guy defending himself.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-516702/Shopkeeper-faces-murder-charge-turning-knife-career-criminal-carjacking.html
Or this from the UK?
“A householder is attacked by a burglar every 30 minutes as thousands fall victim to violent break-ins each year, figures show.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7053224/Householder-attacked-by-burglar-every-30-minutes.html
Probably because they have no fear of going into someones house.
That’s a straw man surely – gang members are also citizens (unless illegal immigrants) with right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness subject only to due process.
ZZZZzzzz…..
Glacierman: greetings also, from your ally of two world wars past.
I appreciate that your country is huge compared with our cramped islands; I also understand the circumstances when the states adopted the 2nd amendment.
We can pick unfortunate cases on both sides. The Tony Singh case is almost a dead cert for a self-defence acquittal but any deliberate homicide will likely result in a trial in the UK, for the defence to be tested by a jury. And you will see that the householders in the Torygraph article were assaulted (not shot): I think people here would rather accept the low risk of assault by intruders than carry arms themselves.
That said, I think Steve is now getting fed up so it is probably time for me to shut up, having (I hope) expressed my point in a civilised and respectful way. throughout.
TimC said:
“And you will see that the householders in the Torygraph article were assaulted (not shot): I think people here would rather accept the low risk of assault by intruders than carry arms themselves.”
An intruder with a hammer or bat is just as dangerous to me and my family if they get the upper hand on me. I am happy for you that you accept your situation. I however am glad that I can still defend myself in my own home, let alone outside my home and not have to rely on some civil servant to protect me.
I am sure a lot of people in US would be just as comfortable with a EU social system of government, but not all of us and that is certainly not our heritage.
To widen the discussion…like pointed out in Dr Strangelove, concealed defense weapons are of limited usefulness. I can envisage them making sense in places where more than 50% of people do carry them, so would-be criminals might wonder how many bystanders could be a menace.
In how many places are >50% of citizens routinely walking around with weapons on them?
What relevance does your 50% number have? One CCW owner can ruin a terrorist’s whole day.
Yes, and I do deny them my essence.
Guns are legal in Texas.
The law abiding citizens at that rally did not carry guns.
The criminal carried a gun…..
Changing gun laws will not do one single thing.
Arizona?
let me get more coffee
LOL
double checked, gun laws are the same in Texas too.
You only need a permit to carry a handgun.
Thank God, in Florida we have the shoot first, put a knife in their hand, and then call the cops law…….
For thr record I had a post that had 4 more links to citizens shooting bad guys that probably hid in the spam filter…
Sorry, omnologos, to totally disagree with your convoluted logic. If even ONE person in the USA saves ONE life via a citizen owned weapon, then the ability for US citizens to be armed is validated. Clearly there are many such incidents, alot more that are not widely reported than you seem to think. It matters not a jot if such actions of self defense happen at the local mall or at home, the ability to defend oneself with firearms is a constitutional right in the US and clearly saves innocent life.
The question is not rhetorical. At Clinch Valley College – which has a policy of allowing guns to licensed owners – a loony did pull out and start shooting. He got off 3 shots and was killed. At Va.Tech, a loony again started shooting. They have a policy of banning guns. 32 dead.
The 2 schools are about 50 miles apart.
omnologos says:
January 10, 2011 at 11:56 am
omnologos – see my above post. If you do not believe me, GOOGLE it.
It’s nice when you see these stories….. not often enough
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApfX-RR-GHg – Canadian jeweler shoots robber
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWDK2F0v1J4&feature=related
We had one right here in the city (Jewelry Store Owner shoots robber). I got my wife’s engagement ring at that store (after the robbery attempt!).
There was a jewelry store owner in LA years ago who didn’t own a gun, was robbed, complied, and handed over money, but was shot anyway and nearly died.
He decided if they were going to shoot him anyway, he may as well shoot back. So he got a weapon. In the following several years, he had multiple shootouts in his store, and had killed 7-8 robbers in various incidents. He had also been wounded multiple times. He was in his sixties, and discussing his latest shootout with 3 armed suspects, killing 2, he said he was going to sell. He figured he had cheated death enough times already.
PhilJourdan – since I am…hmmm…”otherwise busy” at the moment, given that a story like the one you just wrote about is exactly what I am looking for, if you could please do the googling for me that’d be very appreciated 😎
Here’s the fishing pole:
http://www.google.com
I will give you a second line as well:
http://www.bing.com
You will have to get the lessons on your own.
TimC says:
January 10, 2011 at 8:54 pm
re: Easay Gun Access and homicide rate
Would that take into account the lunatic that stabbed 2 people in NYC last week as well? Guns stab – knives shoot.
The recent school board shooting. Did the gunman know the board members would not be armed? Duh.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20025795-504083.html
Luby’s Cafeteria. Congressional testimony of Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp. See the politicians squirm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis
“You cannot invade the mainland United States, for there is a rifle behind every blade of grass.”- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
Kiss my Glock- Ted Nugent 🙂
It’s not about hunting rights. Ignoramus idiots.
So…it DOES happen…I presume it’s just not widely reported. I wish there were some scientific studies on the phenomenon, but won’t hold my breath as the results might be rather inconvenient for the scientists involved.
Here’s a youtube of a 57 year old woman shooting an intruder during a 911 call. The guy had a rap sheet semi similar to Laughner’s. He eventually threw a pateo table thru the woman’s sliding glass door. Check it out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43lAdgrsQyE&feature=related
Omg! Why do people place so much importance on a CHL holders ability to protect the public from crime??? The license is intended for people who pass the tests and background checks to carry a weapon to defend themselves against mortal threat. It is not intended to be used as a license to dispense justice and become some sort of super hero! CHL holders cannot be held accountable for loss of life if they do not choose to act in a violent situation against someone else. The law protects them from that. Actually, you can be held legally at fault it ANyTHING were to go wrong if you did decide to act, such as hitting a bystander.
These anti-gun zealots who on one hand say no one but Cops should have guns, and then turn around and say that those who carry should stop more crime faster need to understand that. It is for PERSONAL protection, not PUBLIC. we just want to protect our families from being hurt, not save the entire country. MOST ChL holders will help if they can, but they sure don’t have to, and legally can’t in a lot of situations.
A guy is firing randomly into a crowd where you are standing nearby. Are you in danger?
Not if you have have a dozen AGWarmists in front of you – rofl /sarc