"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

"." wrote:

On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts?

Killed because they couldn't fight back against the criminals?

Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything?

Actually prosecuting criminals is the answer, not making more
defenseless victims for the criminals.

I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

The gang members who do those drive-by shootings also rob people at
ATMs, burglurize homes, etc. If more law abiding civilians are armed,
more of those gang members will be killed while commiting those other
crimes, thereby leaving fewer of those gang mambers to commit the
drive-by shootings.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets.

Ah yes, the same old anti-gunner fantasy of warfare on the streets. Here
is a clue for you - Concealed carry has been around for many decades in
many states, including ones you might not expect, and not one of them
has had a single occurance of any sort of warfare on the streets
involving licenced concealed carry civilians.

If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.

I've had one or more CHLs for 15+ years, have carried on the streets, in
my car and at dinner and have never once threatened anyone with it, nor
has just about any other person with a CHL. You need to work on
differentiating your fantasies from reality much like other religious
nuts.

On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.

Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

"." wrote in message
...
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti
gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from
concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want
every man, woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have
to wear body armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit
that guns are not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide
one possible way that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and
death from stray bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to
everything, are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country.
Guns on the street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a
gun in your house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take
it on the streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to
dinner with you, don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my
neighbor when you miss shooting at someone who has looked at you
cross-eyed.

Show me some statistics that prove that CCW holders commit gun crimes.
crickets As an NRA Certified Instructor, I have those figures and
it's less than 1/100 of 1%. I'd post exact numbers but you've proven
that you can't or don't read very well.

You can't because CCW holders are vetted by the FBI and LEOs. On the
other hand, non-CCW holders, almost ALL liberals commit almost ALL the
gun violence and crimes. It's not guns that are the problem, LIBERALS
WITH GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM!!! Why are you liberals so violent? You
get everything for free now and just want more. Selfish, criminal
scum!

* Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding
citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as
2.5 million times every year-or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means
that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to
protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives

* Concealed carry laws have reduced murder and crime rates in the
states that have enacted them. According to a comprehensive study
which reviewed crime statistics in every county in the United States
from 1977 to 1992, states which passed concealed carry laws reduced
their rate of murder by 8.5%, rape by 5%, aggravated assault by 7% and
robbery by 3%.4

* More guns, less crime. In the decade of the 1990s, the number of
guns in this country increased by roughly 40 million-even while the
murder rate decreased by almost 40% percent.7 Accidental gun deaths in
the home decreased by almost 40 percent as well.

* CDC admits there is no evidence that gun control reduces crime. The
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has long been criticized for
propagating questionable studies which gun control organizations have
used in defense of their cause. But after analyzing 51 studies in
2003, the CDC concluded that the "evidence was insufficient to
determine the effectiveness of any of these [firearms] laws."9

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul,
Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the
Presidential election:
a.. Number of States won by: Democrats:19 Republicans: 29
b.. Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans:
2,427,000
c.. Population of counties won by: Democrats:127 million
Republicans: 143 million
d.. Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats:
13.2 Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory
Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of
the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens
living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of
government welfare..."

"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.

Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at each
other, too.

--
Ed Huntress

On 5/30/2011 5:24 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti
gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from
concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want
every man, woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have
to wear body armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit
that guns are not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide
one possible way that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and
death from stray bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to
everything, are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country.
Guns on the street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a
gun in your house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take
it on the streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to
dinner with you, don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my
neighbor when you miss shooting at someone who has looked at you
cross-eyed.

Show me some statistics that prove that CCW holders commit gun crimes.
crickets As an NRA Certified Instructor, I have those figures and
it's less than 1/100 of 1%. I'd post exact numbers but you've proven
that you can't or don't read very well.
.."


that's a rather pathetic attempt to change the subject from widely
available and carried arms to CCW licenses - I said nothing about CCW,
you invented that line of argument. Those doing driveby shootings do
not have a CCW, but they do have guns, and lots of them. You, who favor
lots of guns, just have no answer - admit it - you go to Downtown
detroit, or chicago, or los angeles or anywhere else where there is a
major gang and drug problem - take your gun - take all your guns - be my
guest. And, as a side benefit, if you cannot afford it, your burial
will be at taxpayers expense.

You have no right morally to change the meaning of the constitution and
directly cause the death of innocent children and bystanders, but that
is exactly what you have done. A pox on all of you. You are too stupid
to understand.

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at each
other, too.


LOL!
I've never been in them, but from what I've heard, ALL the "men" in Fort Worth
gay bars are packing. I think it's a surrogate issue. Or maybe just a fashion
statement? (VBG)

--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

"CaveLamb" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults. How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in
Texas estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes
with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each other, too.


LOL!
I've never been in them, but from what I've heard, ALL the "men" in Fort
Worth
gay bars are packing. I think it's a surrogate issue. Or maybe just a
fashion
statement? (VBG)

Holy cow. "Stand and deliver," and all that, eh?

--
Ed Huntress

"." wrote in message
...

OK troll, you got me to bite...shame on me. I try to ignore blatant
troll bait.
plonk

On Mon, 30 May 2011 10:09:29 -0700, "." wrote:


have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

When those that commit the drive by are all killed as their vehicle is
shot to pieces by bystanders...the second drive by will not occur..and
the occupants of that vehicle will not try to kill again. They will be
very dead and it will be a grim reminder to their compadres of the
results of their actions.

And you find this to be a bad thing?

What..you support those who do drive by shootings and wish to protect
them?

Scumbag indeed.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.

Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at each
other, too.


One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned. If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.

i

"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:

"." wrote:

actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...

They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.

have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.

Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i

I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each
other, too.


One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned.

I can't imagine where you get that idea, Iggy. We've been through this
befo There is no evidence, at least as of last year, of any causative
relationship between rates of street crime and right-to-carry laws. I'm not
going through it again, but that's the evidence.

If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.

I'm sure all of the criminal statisticians keep that in mind when they're
considering whether to commit a crime. d8-)

The justification for a right to carry is your OWN self-defense. The rest is
a load of wishful thinking.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 30 May 2011 20:56:37 -0500, Ignoramus17069
wrote:


I am not sure about Detroit, but CCW is not available in Chicago, so
your point is moot.

Michigan is Shall Issue. WIth no exceptions.

You do know that Chicago is in violation of SCOTUS rulings too..are you
not?

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

On Mon, 30 May 2011 18:08:51 -0700, "." wrote:


Show me some statistics that prove that CCW holders commit gun crimes.
crickets As an NRA Certified Instructor, I have those figures and
it's less than 1/100 of 1%. I'd post exact numbers but you've proven
that you can't or don't read very well.
."


that's a rather pathetic attempt to change the subjec

Yes..it is a rather pathetic attempt you tried.

* Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding
citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as
2.5 million times every year-or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means
that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to
protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives

* Concealed carry laws have reduced murder and crime rates in the
states that have enacted them. According to a comprehensive study
which reviewed crime statistics in every county in the United States
from 1977 to 1992, states which passed concealed carry laws reduced
their rate of murder by 8.5%, rape by 5%, aggravated assault by 7% and
robbery by 3%.4

* More guns, less crime. In the decade of the 1990s, the number of
guns in this country increased by roughly 40 million-even while the
murder rate decreased by almost 40% percent.7 Accidental gun deaths in
the home decreased by almost 40 percent as well.

* CDC admits there is no evidence that gun control reduces crime. The
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has long been criticized for
propagating questionable studies which gun control organizations have
used in defense of their cause. But after analyzing 51 studies in
2003, the CDC concluded that the "evidence was insufficient to
determine the effectiveness of any of these [firearms] laws."9

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul,
Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the
Presidential election:
a.. Number of States won by: Democrats:19 Republicans: 29
b.. Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans:
2,427,000
c.. Population of counties won by: Democrats:127 million
Republicans: 143 million
d.. Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats:
13.2 Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory
Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of
the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens
living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of
government welfare..."



"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

On 2011-05-31, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2011 20:56:37 -0500, Ignoramus17069
wrote:


I am not sure about Detroit, but CCW is not available in Chicago, so
your point is moot.

Michigan is Shall Issue. WIth no exceptions.

You do know that Chicago is in violation of SCOTUS rulings too..are you
not?

Quite aware. It is an ongoing legal process. They are now allowing
gun ownership, in a particularly tedious regulatory environment.

i

Ed Huntress wrote:
"CaveLamb" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults. How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in
Texas estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes
with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each other, too.

LOL!
I've never been in them, but from what I've heard, ALL the "men" in Fort
Worth
gay bars are packing. I think it's a surrogate issue. Or maybe just a
fashion
statement? (VBG)

Holy cow. "Stand and deliver," and all that, eh?


Hey! I dunno. You'll have to try it out for yerself...

--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each
other, too.

One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned.

I can't imagine where you get that idea, Iggy. We've been through this
befo There is no evidence, at least as of last year, of any causative
relationship between rates of street crime and right-to-carry laws. I'm not
going through it again, but that's the evidence.

If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.

I'm sure all of the criminal statisticians keep that in mind when they're
considering whether to commit a crime. d8-)

The justification for a right to carry is your OWN self-defense. The rest is
a load of wishful thinking.



And questionably legal...

(Actually, it's not questionable at all...)

--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

On Tue, 31 May 2011 00:54:59 -0500, CaveLamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each
other, too.

One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned.

I can't imagine where you get that idea, Iggy. We've been through this
befo There is no evidence, at least as of last year, of any causative
relationship between rates of street crime and right-to-carry laws. I'm not
going through it again, but that's the evidence.

If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.

I'm sure all of the criminal statisticians keep that in mind when they're
considering whether to commit a crime. d8-)

The justification for a right to carry is your OWN self-defense. The rest is
a load of wishful thinking.



And questionably legal...

(Actually, it's not questionable at all...)

Given that SCOTUS has said its an Individual Right....its hardly
illegal.

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

On Tue, 31 May 2011 00:11:43 -0500, Ignoramus17069
wrote:

On 2011-05-31, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2011 20:56:37 -0500, Ignoramus17069
wrote:


I am not sure about Detroit, but CCW is not available in Chicago, so
your point is moot.

Michigan is Shall Issue. WIth no exceptions.

You do know that Chicago is in violation of SCOTUS rulings too..are you
not?

Quite aware. It is an ongoing legal process. They are now allowing
gun ownership, in a particularly tedious regulatory environment.

i

Its an ongoing strong resistance to the rulings of SCOTUS...contempt of
court writ wide and large. Dragging of feet and pathetic as it gets.

Chicago should be nuked with no notice.

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2011 00:54:59 -0500, CaveLamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each
other, too.

One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned.
I can't imagine where you get that idea, Iggy. We've been through this
befo There is no evidence, at least as of last year, of any causative
relationship between rates of street crime and right-to-carry laws. I'm not
going through it again, but that's the evidence.

If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.
I'm sure all of the criminal statisticians keep that in mind when they're
considering whether to commit a crime. d8-)

The justification for a right to carry is your OWN self-defense. The rest is
a load of wishful thinking.


And questionably legal...

(Actually, it's not questionable at all...)

Given that SCOTUS has said its an Individual Right....its hardly
illegal.

Gunner


It is in Texas. At least it's very questionable.
You have the right to defend YOUR life and family.
But anything beyond is going to be weighed carefully - in court.



--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress

On Tue, 31 May 2011 12:17:07 -0500, CaveLamb
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2011 00:54:59 -0500, CaveLamb
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-31, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Ignoramus17069" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-30, . wrote:
On 5/30/2011 8:58 AM, Pete C. wrote:
"." wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

OTOH, it's a pretty low gun density to start those citizens shooting at
each
other, too.

One percent is not a low density, as far as deterrence is
concerned.
I can't imagine where you get that idea, Iggy. We've been through this
befo There is no evidence, at least as of last year, of any causative
relationship between rates of street crime and right-to-carry laws. I'm not
going through it again, but that's the evidence.

If anyone has a 1% probability of carrying, then the chance
that at least one of 30 people is armed, is 27%. But it also means
that any person who becomes randomly enraged, is only 1% likely to
carry a gun legally.
I'm sure all of the criminal statisticians keep that in mind when they're
considering whether to commit a crime. d8-)

The justification for a right to carry is your OWN self-defense. The rest is
a load of wishful thinking.


And questionably legal...

(Actually, it's not questionable at all...)

Given that SCOTUS has said its an Individual Right....its hardly
illegal.

Gunner


It is in Texas. At least it's very questionable.
You have the right to defend YOUR life and family.
But anything beyond is going to be weighed carefully - in court.

What "is" in Texas?

Open carry? Quite legal. CCW? Very legal.

If one has to employ deadly force for any reason..of course its going to
be weighed in court. And it should be.

Texas also allows one to used deadly force against just about anyone,
even if not an clear and immediate danger ...after dark. And one
assumes you have a problem with that as well?


And the next comment/question from you is?

Gunner

"Lenin called them "useful idiots," those people living in
liberal democracies who by giving moral and material support
to a totalitarian ideology in effect were braiding the rope that
would hang them. Why people who enjoyed freedom and prosperity worked
passionately to destroy both is a fascinating question, one still with us
today. Now the useful idiots can be found in the chorus of appeasement,
reflexive anti-Americanism, and sentimental idealism trying to inhibit
the necessary responses to another freedom-hating ideology, radical Islam"

Bruce C. Thornton, a professor of Classics at American University of Cal State Fresno

On May 31, 1:46*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
actually, the left wing will wait for a while until the drive by
shootings, the narco terrorist shootings become too much...
They will be waiting a *really* long time, just like the anti gunners
who rant about the "wild west shootouts on the streets" from concealed
carry laws which have never materialized anywhere.
have you EVER been in a large city? *Have you ever been at a crime
scene
where innocents were killed in shootouts? *Do you really want every
man,
woman, child, and dog in this sad country of ours to have to wear body
armor because you gun nuts are too chicken**** to admit that guns are
not the answer to everything? *I defy you to provide one possible way
that more guns can reduce drive-by shootings and death from stray
bullets - just one.

you, and your like, who favor violence as the solution to everything,
are a sad reflection on the degeneration of our country. *Guns on the
street will beget warfare on the streets. *If you want a gun in your
house, that's fine - keep it in your house- don't take it on the
streets, don't take it in your car, don't bring it to dinner with you,
don't threaten me with it, and don't shoot my neighbor when you miss
shooting at someone who has looked at you cross-eyed.
Think about it like an economist. People respond to
incentives. Someone who would like to start a shootout, may be
deterred by a realization that a seemingly peaceful citizens may be
armed.

The fears of concealed carry wreaking havoc, have not materialized,
for this very reason.

In addition, very few people actually carry.

i
I'm glad you mentioned that last point. The typical percentage of CCW
holders in concealed-carry states is around 2% - 2.5% of qualified
adults.
How many of them carry at any given time? An experienced cop in Texas
estimated no more than half, a few years ago.

One percent or so carrying citizens doesn't sound like a lot of
disincentive
for someone with the mentality required to commit crimes with a gun.

On Tue, 31 May 2011 14:10:41 -0700 (PDT), Rex
wrote:

It is in Texas. *At least it's very questionable.
You have the right to defend YOUR life and family.
But anything beyond is going to be weighed carefully - in court.

What "is" in Texas?

Open carry? Quite legal.

Nope, not in Texas, not a handgun.

Ill be damned. You are absolutely correct. I lived in south Texas
during the mid 70s..and we all carried openly. But then...we never
went into the cities.

My mistake

Gunner

Whenever a Liberal utters the term "Common Sense approach"....grab your
wallet, your ass, and your guns because the sombitch is about to do
something damned nasty to all three of them.

Rex wrote:
Given that SCOTUS has said its an Individual Right....its hardly
illegal.
Gunner

It is in Texas. At least it's very questionable.
You have the right to defend YOUR life and family.
But anything beyond is going to be weighed carefully - in court.
What "is" in Texas?

Open carry? Quite legal.

Nope, not in Texas, not a handgun.


That's NOT what I meant - or said.
I said...

You have the right to defend YOUR life and family.
But anything beyond is going to be weighed carefully - in court.


CCW? Very legal.

Yep, and over 300,000 Texans do so.

If one has to employ deadly force for any reason..of course its going to
be weighed in court. And it should be.

Texas also allows one to used deadly force against just about anyone,
even if not an clear and immediate danger ...after dark.

Well, mostly. They have to be up to some mischief.


After dark - IN YOUR HOME... okie fine.
But read the fine print, kids.

If he falls backwards out the door you'd best drag his butt back in
before the police arrive.

And off your property? Out in public?
Shaky...

You better have a lot of friendly wittinesses that will testify that
your life really was in immanent danger. Not to protect property.

Or else the state of Texas may just issue you a new boyfriend...
It happens now and then...

And it's going to cost a fortune in lawyer fees.

--

Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~sv_temptress