Concealed Carry Permit

L4L,

When you look at driving, if you decide you want to drive, you are choosing to engage in an extremely dangerous activity that by the very nature, means you will encounter all sorts of people the moment you turn the key and leave your own property and that continues until you return.

Nationwide, 33,808 people died in fatal crashes in the last year presented here:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...es/12s1105.pdf

I don't have the stats but I seriously doubt that the number of armed home owners protecting their home and property and loved ones that were killed is a large number but rather quite small. Originally Posted by LazurusLong

LL - Clarification - I'm not suggesting the number is large or small. I'm only reporting that by choosing to own and carry a gun (the same way you choose to drive a car) you're joining a statistical group that is more likely to be shot and killed than those that don't own and carry guns.

Sounds like you're trying to instill logic on an armed intruder's thought process. once an armed intruder has entered a home I'm guessing they've brought that gun to force an end result, whether it is robbery, rape, or just killing.

You are making a rational argument that to the armed intruder that unarmed kids don't pose a threat. So the kids could never be used as witnesses? And unarmed kids would never be killed just for being there?

Are you willing to make a claim that no unarmed kid has ever been killed by an intruder where the adult(s) at home were unarmed and never presented a threat to the armed intruder?

Doubt it. Originally Posted by LazurusLong

My main goal is not to make any argument, just to report the data. A person's odds of getting shot and dying by the gun go up if they own one. My opinions on why this is so may be right or wrong, but please don't let that take away from the focus on the bottom line: if you own and carry a gun, your odds of getting shot and killed go up. Every case is unique, but not everyone can be the exception.

In my opinion, MOST suburban warriors and MOST hobbyists and providers here who think they are bad-ass because they own a gun are the rule and NOT the exception. If they really wanted to maximize their chances for survival, I think they would use other less deadly but more effective options for personal defense.

The only way I'm getting hit with my own gun is if I empty the mag and miss the guy who promptly takes it away and beats me with it. If I can't hit what I'm aiming at in a full mag, then I deserve what ever I get.

Anyone have the NRA link about obama taking away our guns in the second term? I know that's been going around alot but I gotta say... Taking our guns away only keeps the honest people unarmed. You really think the bad guys are giving up their guns? Hell no.. Those guys don't even use legal guns NOW. Anti gun laws are right up there with government using MY tax dollars to help some dumb bimbo cheat with abortion.

FREEZE MUTHA FKR

http://www.ipodarchive.com/screens/137.jpg

When I hobbied, I always took my conceal-carry weapon with me because I take it wherever I'm allowed to. A weapon only offers protection if you have it. No provider ever complained because my weapon was CONCEALED so the girls didn't know I had it. However, one found it looking through my backpack while I was in the shower and it deterred her from robbing me. (I had missed an alert on ASPD that the provider had robbed a guy.)

Anyone have the NRA link about obama taking away our guns in the second term? Originally Posted by LovingKayla

Tell me your email and I'll send you as copy of the plan for Prez O and his diabolical minions of evil to subvert the other two branches of government, disarm Americans, and turn us all into slaves of one giant world socialist state. It's great reading. Photos and everything. The chapter where O is gonna make us all eat cooked carrots and broccoli is the best.

My main goal is not to make any argument, just to report the data. A person's odds of getting shot and dying by the gun go up if they own one. My opinions on why this is so may be right or wrong, but please don't let that take away from the focus on the bottom line: if you own and carry a gun, your odds of getting shot and killed go up. Every case is unique, but not everyone can be the exception. Originally Posted by Lust4xxxLife

I'll see if I can go find recent stats for the residents of Washington, DC. DC is one of the most restrictive when it comes to owning and possessing guns of any sort, making it a nice test bed for examination of your argument.
Crime rates since 1960-2010:

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

Those numbers are broken down into rates per 100,000 people. Taking 2010, you have a 21.9/100.00 chance of being murdered and a 31.1/100,000 chance of forced rape.

Given the population is around 600,000 people, if you do the math, that's quite a few unarmed people murdered and forcibly raped in 2010.

Since almost no one can own a gun in DC, for your argument and stance to be valid, no one in that shithole of a city should be getting killed by guns, right?

Not sure what your thoughts are on the women who are being raped and cannot defend themselves with a gun.....

I mean after all, according to you, those murdered crime victims would never be looked at as threats because they are not armed so how does your argument account for the murder rate?

For many years, under that super strict gun control, DC the murder capital of this nation.

Makes me think real life facts blow that argument right out the door.

L4L just a suggestion why don't you check stats for states that have gun laws that allow concealed carry, ie Tx, Az, Co, Nm, Mo, FL, Ga, Al, I believe you will find that the break ins, rapes etc have gone down over the recent years. You see bad guys don't like guns either, especially when they are pointed their direction. Car jacking is the big thing in the US. Ladies look into the 2 shot derringer made in TX. At close range and packing the power of a 38cal. to 20ga. shells (your choice of configuration) it WILL stop a thief.

I too like many here were taught if you draw the weapon intend on pulling the trigger, I will protect my family and self with deadly force. Arizona CCW instructors(retired Police officers) teach aim for the body mass and stop shooting when rendered harmless. Concealed carry is for personal protection not starting or entering into a gun fight.

L4L just a suggestion why don't you check stats for states that have gun laws that allow concealed carry, ie Tx, Az, Co, Nm, Mo, FL, Ga, Al, I believe you will find that the break ins, rapes etc have gone down over the recent years. You see bad guys don't like guns either, especially when they are pointed their direction. Car jacking is the big thing in the US. Ladies look into the 2 shot derringer made in TX. At close range and packing the power of a 38cal. to 20ga. shells (your choice of configuration) it WILL stop a thief.

I too like many here were taught if you draw the weapon intend on pulling the trigger, I will protect my family and self with deadly force. Arizona CCW instructors(retired Police officers) teach aim for the body mass and stop shooting when rendered harmless. Concealed carry is for personal protection not starting or entering into a gun fight. Originally Posted by otrdriver

Yes, there is no question based on what I've reviewed that an armed population reduces non-capital offenses against individuals. Burglary and other petty crimes are lower when every suburban homeowner is a potential Chuck Norris wannabe (like many in this forum). However, as I've stated, more people are shot and killed in an armed population. That's the facts, Jack!

But based on otrdrivers points, here is tough question with no good answers to consider – is it better to be assaulted and live, or shot and killed? If you're more likely to be robbed, beaten, or raped but less likely to be shot and killed during the assault, which would you pick?

food for thought...

L4L

BTW... I'm trying to just present the data and yes I'm posting to stimulate dialog, but I'm not trolling and I'm not a bleeding-heart liberal. I've grown up with guns but I won't carry them because I don't want to incite a gun battle with anyone. I have caustic spray in the car and in a few locations in the house (10+ yard bear repellent is my choice).

I'll see if I can go find recent stats for the residents of Washington, DC. DC is one of the most restrictive when it comes to owning and possessing guns of any sort, making it a nice test bed for examination of your argument.
Crime rates since 1960-2010:

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

Those numbers are broken down into rates per 100,000 people. Taking 2010, you have a 21.9/100.00 chance of being murdered and a 31.1/100,000 chance of forced rape.

Given the population is around 600,000 people, if you do the math, that's quite a few unarmed people murdered and forcibly raped in 2010.

Since almost no one can own a gun in DC, for your argument and stance to be valid, no one in that shithole of a city should be getting killed by guns, right?

Not sure what your thoughts are on the women who are being raped and cannot defend themselves with a gun.....

I mean after all, according to you, those murdered crime victims would never be looked at as threats because they are not armed so how does your argument account for the murder rate?

For many years, under that super strict gun control, DC the murder capital of this nation.

Makes me think real life facts blow that argument right out the door. Originally Posted by LazurusLong

I lived in DC for a while. Sorry to deflate your argument, but gun control in DC is a joke. Everyone knows that you go to Alexandria on the weekend and get whatever you want at one of the weekly gun shows. Anything you want from a purse-pistol to an assault rifle is available.

DC may be locked down but redneck Virginia is just a stones throw away. It's easier to get a gun on demand in Virginia than it is here in Texas, based on my experience at the weekend gun shows. I'll bet that DC is much more armed than Texas.

LOVINGKAYLA, don't worry about this fucked up president taking your gun, this is texas and the south, there's way to many good ole boys in the senate and congress for that to happen, what you need to do is practice when you can, keep your gun in good working order, and have plenty of ammo, another good idea you and i could get together look at each other's guns and then shoot off my fun gun, JR

speaking of gun control

http://biggeekdad.com/2011/10/kellers-riverside-store/

Tell me your email and I'll send you as copy of the plan for Prez O and his diabolical minions of evil to subvert the other two branches of government, disarm Americans, and turn us all into slaves of one giant world socialist state. It's great reading. Photos and everything. The chapter where O is gonna make us all eat cooked carrots and broccoli is the best. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Cruel and unusual punishment ... cooked carrots and broccoli ... impeach the bastards. Nothing could be worse.

A person's odds of getting shot and dying by the gun go up if they own one. Originally Posted by Lust4xxxLife

Such a wild leap.

No where in the stats do the anti-gun crowd take into account the number of lives saved by the simple act of brandishing or better yet, the number of lives saved when states got on board and stopped denying citizens their Constitutional rights to keep and bear arms.

Carjacking was just brought up. When I moved to Dallas in 1991, carjacking was in the news pretty often until CHL was passed and then it seemed over night that crime went away.

Back to my post above.

It seems that you are avoiding the base question and that was my asking you to explain how so many are murdered and raped when they don't have guns to defend their own homes and persons?

You blame other states but fail to answer.

You claimed that when you become a threat by having a gun you are more likely to be killed but what about those numbers of murders and rapes I presented? How do you explain them?

maybe you'd like to claim that all those rape victims would have been killed if they had been armed?

Would you like to try and claim that the ONLY reason those murders happened was because the victim was armed?

Such a wild leap.

No where in the stats do the anti-gun crowd take into account the number of lives saved by the simple act of brandishing or better yet, the number of lives saved when states got on board and stopped denying citizens their Constitutional rights to keep and bear arms.

Carjacking was just brought up. When I moved to Dallas in 1991, carjacking was in the news pretty often until CHL was passed and then it seemed over night that crime went away.

Back to my post above.

It seems that you are avoiding the base question and that was my asking you to explain how so many are murdered and raped when they don't have guns to defend their own homes and persons?

You blame other states but fail to answer.

You claimed that when you become a threat by having a gun you are more likely to be killed but what about those numbers of murders and rapes I presented? How do you explain them?

maybe you'd like to claim that all those rape victims would have been killed if they had been armed?

Would you like to try and claim that the ONLY reason those murders happened was because the victim was armed? Originally Posted by LazurusLong

LL - I can't respond to your questions about other details like burglaries, beatings, and rapes with the same level of clarity and conviction because I don't have the same level of data for that. All I can do is report the most fundamental statistic: If you own and carry a gun, you are more likely to be shot and killed by a gun than someone who doesn't own or carry a gun. It's just very simple data and I don't want to weaken that very important statistic by trying to add in additional parameters that aren't as clear and well understood.

I'm not saying your points aren't valid, because I think they are, to some degree. It's been my personal experience that lesser crimes than homicide are more prevalent in countries/communities that aren't armed. There is a lot more burglary and theft in the UK than there is in armed US communities. I was burgled more than once in the UK. I suspect (but don't know) that there is more assault in unarmed communities too, but a lot fewer people die and that is something to consider.

So I think it boils down to the fact that people need to pick their poison. Do you want to lower your odds of being robbed and/or assaulted by increasing your odds of being shot and killed? It's a fair question. I choose to increase my odds of living to hobby another day. I realize that it may be a more difficult choice for a woman, many of whom may not feel they would be able to mentally deal with a violent sexual attack and would rather take their chances with a gun. I get that. Just don't think that your odds of *survival* have gone up because you have a gun, because statistically, that's not the case.

Again, my main goal is to simply provide data so people can make informed choices. The gun culture in this neck of the woods is pretty ill-informed. I think too many people don't understand that Clint Eastwood is an actor and they can't be just like Dirty Harry because they buy a gun.

Why anyone would champion the right not to defend
themselves I don't really understand. But I am glad that
we do still live in a free country where someone can make
such choices, at least for now. In the not too distant
future I'm afraid it's going to be " Not to fear placid, peaceful,
reeducated UN citizen now that we have taken away all those
nasty old guns from you the UN Military/Police force will be
your soul protector. What is Zyklon-B you ask, just a water
softening agent that we put in your shower water. Not to
worry, we want clean citizens as well."

Want some statistics to talk about, go research how many
evil controlling Governments disarmed a populus before
they proceeded to commit Genocide on them.