Log in ·
2043 total votes
Not at all. The two people I know personally who have CC would NEVER have qualified if it had been up to me. Just because you have a CC doesn't make you immune to making bad decisions.
5 years, 1 month ago
After reading the story of the bozo in Lenexa who shot his wife, accidentally,in a Longhorn Steakhouse, I would say a resounding no to the question!!!
That was just an isolated incident, the whole picture is much better, the nuts will have to be a bit more careful due to carry.
Reaching for a quarter for the tip he came up with a .38 slug. Now isn't that nice.
What about the staff how are they supposed to know that he wasn't going to rob the place!!
Please explain to the rational adults why someone would go to the trouble to get a CCW to rob someplace, or how it would help them to do so? If someone is going to rob them, they'll just rob them.
How does the staff know he has a CC permit?
What if he yelled, "I'm sorry, please give me the money"?
I think it is a good deal, the nuts will now have some fear on who is and who's not carrying. They need some doubt in their world. Hey nuts, the stakes just went up ...
Yup. Now the nuts will just shoot first, regardless.
Don't have to worry only about the "nuts" and "psychos" but throw in the drunks, hotheads, road ragers, conspiracy theriorists and bigots and you have a bad mix brewing.
Statistics prove that people who CCW tend to adhere more strictly to the laws. There is a law on the books that increases the penalty for any law broken while in possession of a firearm, regardless of whether or not the firearm was used or is even relevant to the crime committed, as it should be. I once had a drunk guy in walmart say some very explicit things to my wife in my presence. Had I not been carrying, I would have laid him out cold. But because I was, I didn't want to even go through the trouble of getting the law involved when I had a pistol on my side.
Your "hotheads" and whatnot are subject to having their privilege revoked too, if they are deemed to be a danger to society by their actions, lawful or not. Look up James Yeager. He had is CCW revoked because of a youtube video that his local authorities got a hold of, and he is a former police chief with several years as a law enforcement officer, and some time as a security contractor.
So, my point is, give those idiots enough rope and they'll hang themselves. Meanwhile, those of us who wish to avoid trouble at all costs, will do just that, and retain our right to ccw and only use our tools at hand as a last resort to save ourselves, our families, or innocent children who are defenseless from whackos and nutjobs.
John Lott, an accomplished academic, has shown more guns means less crime. The police can't be everywhere they're needed in time so honest law abiding citizens can and do have a positive effect when bad guys with guns act badly. Don't be afraid of what you don't know or understand folks, ask a gun owning friend to take you to the shooting range before you emote uncontrollably, make a fool of yourself and endanger those in the community around you.
John Lott isn't biased at all.
Actually, there is extremely strong evidence that the steady reduction in violent crime over the last couple of decades is directly attributable to the reduction of lead in the environment, and the brain damage it causes in the development of children. The increase in lead by those packing is irrelevant.
It is not the Concealed Carry License holders that should be making you feel less safe, it is the ones without the license that are carring guns that should be causing that feeling. Crime rates are down in every State that issues licenses. Comment on that if you will.
You don't trust anyone, do you?To answer your question, the crime rates went down is every State "after" they passed their Concealed Cary Laws. The highest crime rates in America are Illinois and Washington, DC. Maybe that is because they get probed by aliens there.
If they are really down it is probably not due to the unknown people carrying a gun they shouldn't have!!!
Crime rates are actually down across the country, including states that do not allow concealed carry. In states that recently adopted C&C laws, their crime rates were headed down prior to their enactment of those laws and have continued downward since.
I don't think we can make the direct one to one correlation of conceal and carry and crime rate reduction. There are other factors at play.
No matter what they do to control the gun laws, It's just like drugs somebody is always going to be carrying.
before cc, I would carry a concealed weapon if I thought I would be in a situation that required one. I suspect many other people have done the same. However, I have gone to cc training and it needs to be strengthened. It is not sufficient as it is now. No situational awareness taught at all. Unless you are former law enforcement or military that had that training, there are bunch of folks out there with cc who are questionable.
+1 on that.
My CCHL instructor Will be holding an advanced class this spring. You don't have to be CCHL to attend.This is not a CCHL Cert. Class. Should be a full day of range time. Target acquisition and some situational training as well as firing on a target while moving and firing from different positions. A lot like the training I received in the Army Infantry. I am rusty. This should be some good training as the instructors are current or retired LEO. I encourage any one to seek out good classes(There are some) and get some training that might help save a Life.
I would like to officailly ask that people who train other Kansas for concealed carry start producing remedial news letters to remind the not so experienced firearms owners of safe carrying practices, proper ways to conceal, and even use of cover and concealment in addition to watching your back drop and avoiding tunnel vision. Updates on laws, and a way to safely call un unbaiased number to record statistics of protection where the ccws holders did not call the police after using the firearm as a deterant to crime would also be beneficial.
The USCCA( United States Concealed Carry Association) has a website you might want to look at. They are national, not just Kansas and have continuous updates on changes state by state. Pretty informative. You can join and become a member if you want. Membership fee gets you more benefits. Your choice on that. Good info over all. Address is firstname.lastname@example.org
First, I don't support CC at all, but since it exists, there should be continuing education and "return demonstration" just like I have to do for CPR, etc. And vision , cognitive tests like you have w drivers license. only more frequently (and God knows without the MVd hassles!)I shudder to think of the people I know w cognitive issues and movement disorders and vision problems...plus just plain hair trigger tempers and bad judgement who might be packing.
I can go months on end and never think of guns until I read something about it in the news. I don't feel more or less safe whether people around me have guns or nor, concealed or not.
You don't dine in Lenexa then, do you?
I don't even know where Lenexa is. We do go to the western part of the KC metro area and topeka to go to hooters. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.
This happened in Lenexa.
I think her point was that you should feel less safe with people like this guy having guns, given his lack of adequate safety preparations.
That stuff is pretty rare. I don't really have time to worry about it.
I feel much safer in those areas. Look at the statistics in areas like Chicago (check multiple resources and not just CNN). Kinda interesting how the recent mass shhotings were in gun free zones and lets not forget the incident in MS where the school principal stopped a mass shooter from running up the death toll with his personal firearm.
Okay, then let us not forget the husband who shot his wife in a restaurant.
Do you really think it is the lack of a C&C law that drives crime in Chicago?
The parking lot of the Safeway in Tucson was not in a gun free zone (it was on private property not indoors). Given the lax gun laws in Arizona, there was no reason for any shooter to believe others would not also be armed, and in fact there was a C&C holder there. However, it was the unarmed citizens who stopped the shooter only after he ran out of bullets and tried to reload.
Armed citizens is not always the answer.
And that MS principal -- he was the assistant principal AND a U.S. Army Reserve commander. His training was well beyond that of the casual C&C holder, wouldn't you admit?
"Lack of concealed carry law causes crime" overstates the connection and seems to me like an odd way to think of it. I would say that Chicago's *ban* on concealed carry *exacerbates* the problem of violent crime. There's certainly more important factors at play. Most notably, I would think, is the War on Drugs, that does nothing but empower violent gangs. Thanks again for keeping us safe, government!
I personally know 4 people (that I'm aware of) that have CC. I'd only trust one of them when it came to crunch time. No.
In most armed confrontations, the bad guy has his gun out first.
So you'd rather just cower in the corner waiting for the police to arrive or have a slight chance to fight back because you're carrying or the good guy next to you is carrying?
And what happens when someone's gun goes off accidentally (meaning, they aren't well trained in using a gun) when at your local Lenexa restaurant? Would you have just grabbed your gun and start returning fire?
There are many scenarios when guns are at play by people who aren't typically "bad people." (And perhaps the answer is stricter gun safety training.)
You are more likely to trip and hit your head than be confronted by someone with a gun. Does this mean you just cower in the corner waiting for someone to carry you about, or do you wear a crash helmet everywhere you go? I mean, if safety is the key, don't you want to be safe, or do you just want to be another victim (to gravity)?
Only fools have a bullet in the chamber unless they are ready to shoot a weapon.
Like this guy, who had a CC permit.
The only people who carry a gun without a round in the chamber are fools, antique collectors whose guns lack modern safety features, and those who know they'll never have to use it. If any of these apply to you, please don't carry a gun.
Cops always carry with a round in the chamber for a reason (they have reason to believe they might actually have to use it). Many carry guns that don't even have manual safeties for the same reason. It's not a design flaw, it's a feature.
There are too many variables unless you have the absolutely correct holster. It's an extra measure of protection to prevent accidents. If you don't have time to chamber a round, you are probably already shot anyway.
I take precautions against tripping and hitting my head, too. I wear my boots when it's slippery outside, I don't run around on hardwood floors wearing only socks, and, most importantly, I watch my step. When I carry a gun I keep it properly secured in a quality holster that covers the trigger entirely. I'm the type guy who likes to be prepared, and to ensure my own safety is my right. Of course, we always trust ourselves, it's the other guy we try to control.
We've all had our own life experiences, you may have never had to face extreme violence; admittedly neither have I, and I rarely feel the need to carry a gun so I usually don't. We're the lucky ones though. Many aren't so lucky, and to take away what may be their only means of self defense, their *rights*, and their feeling of security, just so you can have a little peace of mind... I dunno, that just seems wrong to me.
Situational training? SO it will be a live fire encounter with someone firing live ammunition at you as you attempt to shoot them? If not, exactly what use is this "class"?
What use is Military Boot camp? Nobody is shooting at you yet you are being trained to go into battle. Your argument is hollow. Training can never fully prepare you for what WILL happen. It gives you a set of trained responses that, with practice,become action with out thought(Reaction) that may save your life.
Yes, a thinning of the herd is one solution. However, perhaps a more reasonable one would be in order to have CC or Open Carry permit one would have to pass a very challenging and educational class (or classes),... perhaps on an ongoing basis. From my experience there are way too many people out there that don't have what it takes to possess a killing tool, let alone in a public environment. It creates a bit of a mine field... the more mines, the more likely one is going to go off.
I agree. The more class time and Practical Application(Range time) The better. I must say, I was surprised at how Passable the CCHL Class was for most anyone, experienced or not. Best way I can put it. I was prepared for it to be harder. I am just used to military training.
I stick with facts over emotions and the facts show that the more guns, the more people get shot with guns.
Anything else is hyperboly, emotional outburst or dishonest.
Maybe the NRA wasn't so wrong after all.
Newtown parents WANT armed security.
A little thing I picked up on The Daily Paul. It looks like Obamacare is an obstacle to gathering any information for the lawful use of firearms including health records under the ACA. The secretary the language refers to is the HHS. If I read it correctly any health records that could be provided by Health and Human Services is inadmissible. So if you have someone covered by this act that would be deemed unsuitable for the possession of firearms they might very well slip through.
So much for Pelosi's "we need to pass this bill to find out whats in it."
Senate Amendment 3276, Sec. 2716, part c. On page 2037 of the ACA. added by Harry Reid
(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION- None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to–`(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;`(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or`(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition...
Here's the videohttp://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/poli...
Another nugget I found was language in the Brady Bill that addresses a registry using data collected through The National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Section 103 (i) PROHIBITION RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF REGISTRATION SYSTEMS WITH RESPECT TO FIREARMS- No department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States may--
(1) require that any record or portion thereof generated by be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) use the system established under this section to establish any system for the registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions or dispositions, except with respect to persons, prohibited by section 922 (g) or (n) of title 18, United States Code or State law, from receiving a firearm.
Big bills contain big obstacles. The gun control lobby will still get mostly what it wants but hopefully it will take time to work out....at least enough time for me to obtain my own AR-15
CCW and driving...both are privileges not rights. There are those that should have the privileges revoked. I am for CCW, but with adequate demonstration of skills. I enjoy shooting but occasionally there is someone who scares the hell out of me just like so many drivers on the road.
In the cases where I feel the need to carry mine I feel a LOT safer. I hope somebody else has there's when mine is at home.
just means they got a gun and I don't
5 years ago
Until you can demonstrate that you are free of the normal mistakes and misunderstandings we are all heir to as human beings — mistaken understanding, misperceptions, mis-hearing of things said, not always knowing all the facts — then adding an easily usable deadly weapon to the mix will always raise the risk of injury or death.
It seems silly and unwise not to take into account human foibles, to imagine that someone carrying a gun will *never* make a mistake, never misunderstand a situation they find themselves in, never mistake who is at fault in a fight they might witness and wish to intervene within.
The very first human family — if we trust the Bible — produced a murderer.
You simply cannot argue, admitting human history, that adding such a potentially deadly tool as a catalyst to social interaction does not increase risk to other people. You might accept that risk, but you cannot expect all other people to accept that risk to themselves, especially when that risk is not their choice.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Full LJWorld.com site
© 2018 LJWorld.com