Mass shooting of the week - New Orleans

[Gravitymaster 0]

If what you think is true (not saying that it is), then it means background checks are meaningless and do not weed out the criminals and the nutters.

[Kennedy 0]

tkhayes

The number involved in mass shootings is small, but the number involved in other individual shootings and crime is arguably rather high. Rather easy Google search to find out just how many happen every day in the USA.

You (and everyone else's) assumption that all CCW holders are somehow 'good citizens' is quite flawed. Everyone is innocent of a crime until they commit one. And pretty much any of us is capable of committing a crime, depending on the circumstances we find ourselves in.

If you are capable of committing a gun crime, and you have a gun, that increases the probability that it might happen.

If you are capable of committing a gun crime but have difficulty finding a gun, that greatly reduces the probability.

The reason we do not have more ricin attacks in the country is because ricin is hard to get your hands on. The reason we have fewer homemade bombs made with dynamite is that dynamite is hard to get your hands on.

The reason we have such a high rate of people being killed by handguns is (in part) due to the relative ease at which one can get a handgun. CCW or not.

OK. I'm calling you out. Back it up with some sort of evidence or shut it. I say you're full of it and can't support your position. I dare you to prove me wrong.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

jcd11235

***I can't find it with a quick search, but IIRC, there was a report that CCW holders were arrested (for all crimes, misdemeanor and felony) at a rate of 0.02% (two tenths of one percent), while the general public had approximately a 4% FELONY CONVICTION rate.

Total arrests for all crimes vs felony convictions, and the CCW rate is one twentieth of the general public.

The people I know who have permits and carry regularly understand the responsibility of it. There are a few "Yahoos", but they are definitely in the minority.

Comparing CCW holders to the general population is a meaningless comparison. The CCW application process weeds out many people who are statistically more likely to commit crimes. If we want to know if legally carrying a gun makes one more or less likely to commit a crime, we have to compare CCW holders who carry regularly with people who would qualify for CCW if they applied, but don't apply. We can't learn anything useful about the effect of legally carrying a gun if both groups being studied don't go through the same vetting process.

The lower crime rate for CCW holders might indicate that legally carrying makes one less likely to commit crime, or it might mean carrying a gun has no effect, but the application process effectively vets future criminals. It is even possible and plausible that carrying a gun makes one a little more likely to commit crime, but the application process works well enough that its effect is greater than the effect of carrying a gun.

Take it up with TKHayes. He thinks you're wrong.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[toolbox 0]

>Wouldn't it be nice,then,if we had an effective process for keeping bad people,stupid people,crazy people,religious zealots
from getting weapons with which they can commit mayhem.

Even in communist and socialistic countries where citizens have far less protection from their governments than we have here,they have criminals selling drugs,selling people,selling weapons,stealing,raping,killing,ect.....
The only countries where there is no crime are the dictatorships,and dictators tend to be criminal in the way they treat the people under their rule,but they have very few people breaking the laws of their dictatorships.
I am more than willing to accept the chance of a few bad people doing bad things,as long as my country still holds to the bill of rights that protects freedom and liberty.
And besides,only a very,very,very small percentage of people in the USA are killed by intentional violence.
In fact people die from overeating and poor health habits more than any other causes of death in this country(440,000+ from smoking,1 in 10 from using to much salt,over 75,000 from alcohol abuse,ect... ),and thats ok with me,people are free to make their own choices about how they live their own lives.
It's said that freedom comes at a great cost,and most people I know are more than willing to pay it.

[tkhayes 348]

the claim from gravitymaster is that there are NO mass shootings committed by CCW holders, both you and I debunked that. So yes, YOU actually provided the statistics that not all CCW holders are 'good citizens', along with me.

Thanks for making my point.

[tkhayes 348]

Obviously background checks weed out undesirable/criminal/high risk people from owning handguns, and therefore background checks should be expanded to ALL gun transactions....not by state or county, ALL gun transactions, not just store-bought ones, but ALL gun transactions.

All of them

Every one of them

Every last one.

And in a rather short few years, the number of guns in the hands of criminals will be reduced.

And you gun nuts will still have your guns and your precious 'rights' because you are so flawlessly perfect.

[champu 1]

tkhayes

Obviously

[Gravitymaster 0]

tkhayes

the claim from gravitymaster is that there are NO mass shootings committed by CCW holders, both you and I debunked that. So yes, YOU actually provided the statistics that not all CCW holders are 'good citizens', along with me.

Not what I claimed at all. Here's what I said.

Quote

I really wonder how many ccw permit holders have been involved in mass shootings? You are right, I can't think of a single instance.

But nice attempt at pretending you didn't put your foot in your mouth.

[Kennedy 0]

tkhayes

the claim from gravitymaster is that there are NO mass shootings committed by CCW holders, both you and I debunked that. So yes, YOU actually provided the statistics that not all CCW holders are 'good citizens', along with me.

Thanks for making my point.

Debunked it how? No one, not you, not I, not a single person in this thread has pointed to one single mass shooting by a CHL holder. No one has made your point, and since you keep changing your story, I'm not even sure what your point is beyond the fact that you think "guns are bad, m'kay".

What, now you're saying CCW should be stopped everywhere because some people with permits were arrested? Did you is the part where it is lower than any group you can think of? It's lower than law enforcement! If you think CCW should end, do you think we should abolish law enfocemr and put LEOs out of a job? They're not perfect either. No one is. If you think one bad apple should remove everyone's rights and priveledges, then get your butt on a plane to North Korea. Otherwise you need to accept the fact that liberty comes with some negative results every now and then, but the positive far outweighs the negative.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[rickjump1 0]

tkhayes

Shotguns are not the problem- handguns most definitely are

How do you carry a shotgun concealed?

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[Gravitymaster 0]

rickjump1

***Shotguns are not the problem- handguns most definitely are

How do you carry a shotgun concealed?

Sawed-off and under a trench coat. Naturally, you see many law-abiding citizens doing this.

[rhaig 0]

tkhayes

The reason we do not have more ricin attacks in the country is because ricin is hard to get your hands on. The reason we have fewer homemade bombs made with dynamite is that dynamite is hard to get your hands on.

The reason we have such a high rate of people being killed by handguns is (in part) due to the relative ease at which one can get a handgun. CCW or not.

and the reason that we have so few people on drugs in this country is because they are illegal.

making laws banning firearms would surely make them similarly hard to get a hold of. I mean really... if you had to go through a background check at a gun shop in order to buy a gun, then surely criminals wouldn't be able to get guns at all. right?

--
Rob

[rhaig 0]

tkhayes

Yes millions of people have shotguns, but they are not used in crime (far less than handguns) due to their size and difficulty to conceal them.

and yet the current cry is to ban "assault weapons" that have a similar size and frequency of use in crimes.

--
Rob

[rickjump1 0]

How to become a bad apple? Carry in a bar (in my state). Even if you saved a life or prevented a crime (where alcohol was served), you "could" be toast. Bus drivers have lost their jobs because they carried and prevented crimes while on the job because carrying on the job was against company regulations. These are real bad apples?

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[rickjump1 0]

Gravitymaster

******Shotguns are not the problem- handguns most definitely are

How do you carry a shotgun concealed?

Sawed-off and under a trench coat. Naturally, you see many law-abiding citizens doing this. I was thinking of my early 1100 Remington with an aftermarket 29 in. + barrel. Concealment would be difficult, and besides, that barrel is too pretty to saw off

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[billvon 2,998]

> I mean really... if you had to go through a background check at a gun shop in
>order to buy a gun, then surely criminals wouldn't be able to get guns at all.
>right?

Still easy. Get some guy to buy you a gun, then have him sell it to you once he leaves the store. 100% legal for both the store and the middleman.

[rhaig 0]

billvon

> I mean really... if you had to go through a background check at a gun shop in
>order to buy a gun, then surely criminals wouldn't be able to get guns at all.
>right?

Still easy. Get some guy to buy you a gun, then have him sell it to you once he leaves the store. 100% legal for both the store and the middleman.

we should make a law against that. that'll stop if from happening.

--
Rob

[billvon 2,998]

>we should make a law against that. that'll stop if from happening.

No law stops things from happening. It will just reduce the incidence.

In general, criminals don't obey laws - but most people do.

[rhaig 0]

billvon

>we should make a law against that. that'll stop if from happening.

No law stops things from happening. It will just reduce the incidence.

In general, criminals don't obey laws - but most people do.

so the laws we already have against straw purchases make background checks of any kind ineffective.

Thank you for clarifying that.

--
Rob

[tkhayes 348]

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwmassshootings.pdf

Really people- try a little harder. Perhaps you would like to further debate the semantics? Maybe start arguing about grammar or some other distraction.

You are all smarter than that. Stop acting like you are not, else I may treat you that way

[Gravitymaster 0]

Just curious if you actually read each incident you posted?

[tkhayes 348]

Even so, a sawed off shotgun is/was not used anything near the number of times as a handgun and would prove to be far more difficult to conceal, use and certainly hide from plain view. Handguns ARE the problem.

I even agree that assault rifles are not. An effective background check program combined with tracking transfers and sales of guns would greatly reduce the numbers of guns out there over time. people who still want guns would have no trouble getting them. People who currently do under-the-table sales would think twice due to the criminal consequences.

CLEARLY demonstrated in other countries with effective programs to reduce gun violence and gun crime.

It is and will be the first step.

[tkhayes 348]

Just curious if u have a point to make. I do my homework and I post the info I find.

Most ofmthemright wing gun lobby is filled with lots of' what ifs' and 'me thinks'. And not much in the way of concrete solutions, just rhetoric.

MANY MANY other places in the world clearly demonstrate that effective gun control reduces gun crime.

[Gravitymaster 0]

tkhayes

Just curious if u have a point to make. I do my homework and I post the info I find.

Most ofmthemright wing gun lobby is filled with lots of' what ifs' and 'me thinks'. And not much in the way of concrete solutions, just rhetoric.

MANY MANY other places in the world clearly demonstrate that effective gun control reduces gun crime.

So is that a yes or a no?

[Kennedy 0]

tkhayes

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwmassshootings.pdf

Really people- try a little harder. Perhaps you would like to further debate the semantics? Maybe start arguing about grammar or some other distraction.

You are all smarter than that. Stop acting like you are not, else I may treat you that way

Congratulations. You found about a dozen. Or do you want to count places where licenses aren't required against CHL holders? Huzzah, that's what, one for every three states with real CCW? Whoop-di-do. NYPD has more "mass shootings" on their record than CHL holders do. So coming back to it, what's your freaking point?

Also, before you try to get all condescending on folks for not knowing about those shootings, and suggesting we "try a little harder", you might want to remember exactly how you started this thread. You know: bashing law abiding folks for failing to prevent a crime when (a) it was against he law to do so and (b) police were already there and couldn't prevent it.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*