Mac Mouths Off - Conceal carry laws should not include privacy provisions

The Eau Claire Spectator ^ | October 6, 2005 | Susan MacLaughlin

[Villiany_Inc]

I was thinking the same thing...
Whenever I see an officer pull someone over, especially at night, they always have their hand on their holstered weapon.

There is so much other drivel in this article that I would love to take to task - but I imagine I would be preaching to the choir.

Would like to ask her though, if she thinks she would know which bad guys are armed through her anti-privacy?

[PA Engineer]

The next time you post that picture....like maybe...could you..

[endthematrix]

I can't help but laugh! Ask the "journalism major" how she feels about protecting source confidentiality and whether she's willing to give that up. Or that she can only print what the Ministry of Information tells her. Oh she'd HOWL about her precious First Amendment. The Second Amendment to her don't mean squat...

[Apogee]

I can see what you're saying.
I have had several incidences where I have been approached or stopped (no I am not saying I am a bad driver :) while legally carrying, most of the time the officers were very polite, professional, friendly, and good guys. One officer who was none of the above made me rethink my volunteering information policy (OK, there was another incident when I was a kid, the weapon was a knife, and the officer was also unprofessional, but we'll not count that one). The fact that there was a one time makes me consider that I have less information about the officer than he does about me, and I have no way of knowing what sort of person he may turn out to be.
It is easy enough to drive in a manner that will not attract attention, but one can never be certain that things like tail lights going out a few minutes before, or some other person's driving habits impacting yours (so to speak), will not happen. I would prefer to be able to sound out a situation before announcing that I am carrying, if it is pertinent information to the situation at hand.
But, as I said, the vast majority of time, a simple background check and mutual respect carry the day.

[Blue Jays]

Hi IronJack-

That was an excellent analysis of this woman's truly unfortunate psychological situation.

There is another thing that I find interesting...her completely irrational hoplophobia prevented her from ensuring that the firearm was indeed unloaded. She took the word of another person before nervously walking out to the truck. If she was that incapacitated by the presence of the sidearm, she should have asked another person to handle transport duties while she had a cup of herbal tea and telephoned her therapist.

Your categorization of Susan MacLaughlin as a neurotic sociopath is very accurate.

~ Blue Jays ~

[magslinger]

OK, it's getting kinda late anyway, we're on eastern time. Probably MI will shake down in time, we're a recent shall issue state and most cops here just are not used to relativly large numbers of CCWs, and are not yet comfortable around holders

[Momma Lou]

Does our military carry weapons to protect themselves? I thought it was to kill enemies.

[Fun Bob]

My god, how does this girl bring herself to sit on the toilet knowing she could fall off and spill her brains on the tile floor of her bathroom.


***BOO***

There goes your shadow little girl.

[FreedomCalls]

Bump for later read.

[Tarantulas]

Certainly you are not suggesting that a CCW holder is a higher threat to an officer than a non CCW holder.

No. I mean yes. I mean...huh???

[nickcarraway]

If she can't carry a gone for one minute, should she really be allowed to operate an automobile?

[Watery Tart]

I never want to touch a gun again.

Ermmmm... no one said you had to. And thanks for letting us know ahead of time!

That's why she should display a "No guns in this house" sticker prominently on her front door.

Well, that puts her in a little too much peril, doesn't it, glorgau? The law must read that she has to have a large lawn sign, too. Not to mention the lapel button and the forehead-tattoo. Get the message out there!

[Tax-chick]

They breathe by hind brain reflex

Ah ... one of life's little mysteries solved.

[P8riot]

Here in Virginia we are not required to notify a police officer if we are carrying. If the interface with the officer involves a traffic stop, the information that you may be legally carrying will show up when they run your tags. Most of the time they are pretty cool about the whole thing and will let you off with a warning. Virginia is a pretty gun friendly state.

[Oztrich Boy]

She worried about shooting herself with an unloaded gun ... now there's a feat!

Perhaps she's just taken Gun Rule *1 to heart.

[CHICAGOFARMER]

Despite what the National Rifle Association says, it is in fact guns, not people alone, that kill other people.

If officers don't know who has a gun or not, they will likely have to treat everyone as if they are carrying a dangerous weapon. And really, would you blame them?


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What an idiot. The line from NRA is guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Does this writer beleve that an under cover cop announces his two CCW weapons when they come in contact with a uniformed officer.

this guy is a lunny. Paranoid as they come.

[ArmyTeach]

Right. There is no such thing as an unloaded gun until you personally check everything everything. My point, I guess, is that far too many people think that the gun can kill you, when it's the idiot holding the gun who'll do the deed. A gun is not an act of nature.... ;-)

[On the Road to Serfdom]

I agree that Police should have all the usefull information they can get, I just don't know why you think CCW status is useful info for the police to have.

If they see someone has a CCW are they (1) supposed to be more relaxed knowing it is a good guy they are dealing with, or (2) are they supposed to think "Oh no, I better watch out he might have a gun."

Only (1) is logical (statistically). Just trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not implying (2).