On 4/8/2012 10:26 PM, Attila.Iskander wrote:

"Han" wrote in message
...
"HeyBub" wrote in
news
Of 65,561 convictions in my state, CHL holders were responsible for
101 of these (0.1541%). This was in 2009, the latest year I could
find.

Some interesting comparisons: Of 406 murder convictions, one was done
by a CHL holder. For manslaughter, the tabulation was 105 vs zero.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis.../chl/Convictio
nRatesReport2009.pdf

Interesting. Would you think this might mean that only people who are
properly instructed and/or licensed should have access to guns?


What does "properly instructed and/or licensed" mean ??
I'll point out to you that in Vermont, one of the safest states in the
nation, there has been NO training or licensing requirement EVER.
When ALaska enacted a licensing scheme, it converted to what Vermont was
doing a few years later, and only kept the licensing process to allow
ALaskans to get recognition in other States.
Last time I checked, they did NOT have an explosion of crimes because
people could carry.
But you are free to claim otherwise and provide the data to support your
claim

You should also consider the following
IN most cases people consider the police to be highly trained in the use
of firearms.
And yet civilians shoot more than twice the number of criminals that
police do, all the while shooting about 1/6th the innocent bystanders
that the police do.
That's basically a 12:1 ratio of citizens doing a far better job than
the police in shooting safety while shooting criminals.


How often does a group of civilians fire 40 rounds into an unarmed
citizen? o_O

TDD