Why does anybody think concealed carry is a good idea?

[PaintMyHouse]

[
The fact that you claim the reason people committed suicide is because they had a gun is the height of ridiculousness.

I didn't claim that dummy. I said the most likely person to die by a gun is the owner, period.

You certainly tried to make it sound that way with your statement that with 20k gun suicides there must be some issue.

The fact is that in the overwhelming majority of homes with guns, no one will die. 99.9% of them, in fact.

Doesn't matter a ******* damn. They all have knives and the numbers on that are even better. Guns are used to kill their owners, period.

Guns are not used to kill anyone in 99.9% of legal gun owner's homes.

It doesn't matter a ******* damn, neither are cars, or baseball bats. That's not the question at hand.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, there are issues that make them want to die. The gun is not the reason that they wanted to die. It is ignorant to claim that. The gun is not the reason, and certainly not the only method.

The gun is the method dummy, and that doesn't change the fact the the person most likely to die from a gun is the asshole who bought the ******* thing in the first place. Clear now?

65 million gun owners and 32 thousand gun deaths. 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in a gun death at all. Clear now?

I know the math, and I own guns, to kill things. Now, who of those 32,000 deaths wasn't the gun owner? About 11,000. See the problem.

Yes, that there are too many suicides. But the gun is not the problem there.

But 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun death. So I see little or no problem with responsible gun ownership.

I have never denied that any gun is capable of killing. Most of my guns I bought for that very purpose. But to try and make it sound as though having a gun in the home is somehow a danger to the homeowner is simply ignoring the math you tout so highly.

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The gun is the method dummy, and that doesn't change the fact the the person most likely to die from a gun is the asshole who bought the ******* thing in the first place. Clear now?

65 million gun owners and 32 thousand gun deaths. 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in a gun death at all. Clear now?

I know the math, and I own guns, to kill things. Now, who of those 32,000 deaths wasn't the gun owner? About 11,000. See the problem.

Yes, that there are too many suicides. But the gun is not the problem there.

But 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun death. So I see little or no problem with responsible gun ownership.

I have never denied that any gun is capable of killing. Most of my guns I bought for that very purpose. But to try and make it sound as though having a gun in the home is somehow a danger to the homeowner is simply ignoring the math you tout so highly.

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

 

[WinterBorn]

[
The fact that you claim the reason people committed suicide is because they had a gun is the height of ridiculousness.

I didn't claim that dummy. I said the most likely person to die by a gun is the owner, period.

You certainly tried to make it sound that way with your statement that with 20k gun suicides there must be some issue.

The fact is that in the overwhelming majority of homes with guns, no one will die. 99.9% of them, in fact.

Doesn't matter a ******* damn. They all have knives and the numbers on that are even better. Guns are used to kill their owners, period.

Guns are not used to kill anyone in 99.9% of legal gun owner's homes.

It doesn't matter a ******* damn, neither are cars, or baseball bats. That's not the question at hand.

It certainly is the question at hand. The original OP claimed that more concealed guns being carried mean more gun deaths. that is absolutely inaccurate.

Your claim that guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the family than a criminal is simply a scare tactic. It is accurate, as far as it goes. But it does not account for any crime stopped that does not end in someone being shot to death. So it is not a valid argument against gun ownership or against keeping a gun in the home.

And since 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun related death, it is an inaccurate portrayal of the risks involved in having a gun in the home.

 

[WinterBorn]

65 million gun owners and 32 thousand gun deaths. 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in a gun death at all. Clear now?

I know the math, and I own guns, to kill things. Now, who of those 32,000 deaths wasn't the gun owner? About 11,000. See the problem.

Yes, that there are too many suicides. But the gun is not the problem there.

But 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun death. So I see little or no problem with responsible gun ownership.

I have never denied that any gun is capable of killing. Most of my guns I bought for that very purpose. But to try and make it sound as though having a gun in the home is somehow a danger to the homeowner is simply ignoring the math you tout so highly.

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I know the math, and I own guns, to kill things. Now, who of those 32,000 deaths wasn't the gun owner? About 11,000. See the problem.

Yes, that there are too many suicides. But the gun is not the problem there.

But 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun death. So I see little or no problem with responsible gun ownership.

I have never denied that any gun is capable of killing. Most of my guns I bought for that very purpose. But to try and make it sound as though having a gun in the home is somehow a danger to the homeowner is simply ignoring the math you tout so highly.

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

That is spin, because you love your deadly toys, but that doesn't change the fact that who is the most likely person to die by a gun, which is the owner. There's no way to spin away from that. Just deal with it.

 

[WinterBorn]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

I did not sya that having more CCW permits results in anything. He made teh claim that more CCW carry would result in more shooting deaths. The fact that the number of CCW permits issued in the last 20 years has grown exponentially, while the number of gun deaths and violent crime has fallen, does in fact, disprove his claim. There are more permits and there are fewer gun deaths.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, that there are too many suicides. But the gun is not the problem there.

But 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun death. So I see little or no problem with responsible gun ownership.

I have never denied that any gun is capable of killing. Most of my guns I bought for that very purpose. But to try and make it sound as though having a gun in the home is somehow a danger to the homeowner is simply ignoring the math you tout so highly.

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

That is spin, because you love your deadly toys, but that doesn't change the fact that who is the most likely person to die by a gun, which is the owner. There's no way to spin away from that. Just deal with it.

I can deal with it, since 99.9% of the time no one dies.

I do not want to shoot anyone. I certainly do not want to kill anyone. But I'd rather be prepared to shoot someone than to see my loved ones die.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I didn't claim that dummy. I said the most likely person to die by a gun is the owner, period.

You certainly tried to make it sound that way with your statement that with 20k gun suicides there must be some issue.

The fact is that in the overwhelming majority of homes with guns, no one will die. 99.9% of them, in fact.

Doesn't matter a ******* damn. They all have knives and the numbers on that are even better. Guns are used to kill their owners, period.

Guns are not used to kill anyone in 99.9% of legal gun owner's homes.

It doesn't matter a ******* damn, neither are cars, or baseball bats. That's not the question at hand.

It certainly is the question at hand. The original OP claimed that more concealed guns being carried mean more gun deaths. that is absolutely inaccurate.

Your claim that guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the family than a criminal is simply a scare tactic. It is accurate, as far as it goes. But it does not account for any crime stopped that does not end in someone being shot to death. So it is not a valid argument against gun ownership or against keeping a gun in the home.

And since 99.9% of gun owners will not be involved in any gun related death, it is an inaccurate portrayal of the risks involved in having a gun in the home.

I don't give a **** what the OP said, and neither does anyone else. Guns aren't for protection, based on the numbers, they are for suicide. End of story. It's math.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No, it isn't, because suicides by gun in homes without them don't happen. A gun is a suicide machine, at least in this country it is. It's a simple question. Who is the most likely person to die by your gun? Answer, you are.

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

That is spin, because you love your deadly toys, but that doesn't change the fact that who is the most likely person to die by a gun, which is the owner. There's no way to spin away from that. Just deal with it.

I can deal with it, since 99.9% of the time no one dies.

I do not want to shoot anyone. I certainly do not want to kill anyone. But I'd rather be prepared to shoot someone than to see my loved ones die.

The gun in your house is more likely to kill you or your loved ones than anyone else. It's math.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?

Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?
Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

Just remember you have to say you want to remain silent, per the Supreme Court. Ironic eh?

 

[WinterBorn]

That is pure spin. No, suicide by gun does not happen in homes without guns. But that does not show, in any way, that the suicide numbers would be lower without guns. If someone wants to die, they will find a way.

And if you have a gun in your home, it is far more likely that no one will die.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

That is spin, because you love your deadly toys, but that doesn't change the fact that who is the most likely person to die by a gun, which is the owner. There's no way to spin away from that. Just deal with it.

I can deal with it, since 99.9% of the time no one dies.

I do not want to shoot anyone. I certainly do not want to kill anyone. But I'd rather be prepared to shoot someone than to see my loved ones die.

The gun in your house is more likely to kill you or your loved ones than anyone else. It's math.

No it is not. Because in my home I have negated almost all of the methods by which we would be killed. We follow basic gun safety rules, we store them securely, we have no domestic violence here, no one is suicidal, and there are no violent people (friends or family) with access to our loaded guns. Just because it is an average does not mean it fits every specific case.

The only thing I cannot control is the criminal element. That is what the gun is for.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?
Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

Just remember you have to say you want to remain silent, per the Supreme Court. Ironic eh?

You certainly do not have to say you want to remain silent.

SCOTUS has ruled that you MUST ask for an attorney, otherwise anything you say without an attorney present is admissible in court.

Police can't force you not to be silent,

God damned fools don't even understand the law LOL

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?
Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

Just remember you have to say you want to remain silent, per the Supreme Court. Ironic eh?

You certainly do not have to say you want to remain silent.

SCOTUS has ruled that you MUST ask for an attorney, otherwise anything you say without an attorney present is admissible in court.

Police can't force you not to be silent,

God damned fools don't even understand the law LOL

No, you must declare that you wish to remain silent: Berghuis v. Thompkins,

Supreme Court Suspects must assert Miranda right to remain silent - CSMonitor.com

Now you know, asshole.

 

[westwall]

Letting people carry guns in public will obviously lead to more people using guns in public.

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

Untrue. In Florida back in the 1990's there was a massive rash of attacks on foreign visitors.. The car rental companies stripped their cars of identifiers and slapped NRA bumper stickers on them. The rate of crime against foreigners dropped dramatically.

 

[WinterBorn]

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?
Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

Just remember you have to say you want to remain silent, per the Supreme Court. Ironic eh?

You certainly do not have to say you want to remain silent.

SCOTUS has ruled that you MUST ask for an attorney, otherwise anything you say without an attorney present is admissible in court.

Police can't force you not to be silent,

God damned fools don't even understand the law LOL

No, you must declare that you wish to remain silent.

Supreme Court Suspects must assert Miranda right to remain silent - CSMonitor.com

Now you know, asshole.

If you remain silent, there is no need for a declaration. The ruling was about being silent and then making statements later. If you remain silent, there is nothing to be held against you.

But anyone who talks to the police without a lawyer is a fool.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Really? Any evidence to back that up? Since the 1990s over 30 states have added "Shal issue" laws concerning ccw permits. Has the violent crime rate gone up in any of those states since then?

Florida has over 2 million permits that it issued since the mid 90s. Has their violent crime rate or murder rate gone up? No. quite the contrary, it has gone down.

Your claims lack valid evidence to support them.

There's no evidence in support of any of this.

There is no evidence citizens carrying concealed weapons results in a rise or decline of violent crime.

Moreover, it's legally and Constitutionally irrelevant – citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to the right to lawful self-defense; citizens are not required to 'justify' the exercising of a Constitutional right as a 'prerequisite' to indeed do so.

One would think that this is logical, wouldn't one?
Hey, I don't really envision a scenario where I personally will ever need to use my right to remain silent either, doesn't mean it should be taken away.

Just remember you have to say you want to remain silent, per the Supreme Court. Ironic eh?

You certainly do not have to say you want to remain silent.

SCOTUS has ruled that you MUST ask for an attorney, otherwise anything you say without an attorney present is admissible in court.

Police can't force you not to be silent,

God damned fools don't even understand the law LOL

No, you must declare that you wish to remain silent.

Supreme Court Suspects must assert Miranda right to remain silent - CSMonitor.com

Now you know.

There's no spin. If you have a gun in your home the most likely person to die is the owner, period.

Yes, it is ALL spin. If you have a gun in the home it is most likely that no one will die. To the tune of 99.9% of the time. That you wish to present that 0.049% of gun owners involved in any gun related death in the home as a valid view of gun ownership is pure spin.

That is spin, because you love your deadly toys, but that doesn't change the fact that who is the most likely person to die by a gun, which is the owner. There's no way to spin away from that. Just deal with it.

I can deal with it, since 99.9% of the time no one dies.

I do not want to shoot anyone. I certainly do not want to kill anyone. But I'd rather be prepared to shoot someone than to see my loved ones die.

The gun in your house is more likely to kill you or your loved ones than anyone else. It's math.

No it is not. Because in my home I have negated almost all of the methods by which we would be killed. We follow basic gun safety rules, we store them securely, we have no domestic violence here, no one is suicidal, and there are no violent people (friends or family) with access to our loaded guns. Just because it is an average does not mean it fits every specific case.

The only thing I cannot control is the criminal element. That is what the gun is for.

Your guns will most likely kill you, or your wife, or your kids. Sleep well on that.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The gun in your house is more likely to kill you or your loved ones than anyone else. It's math.

(yawn)

Not even close to being true......