Posted on 05/03/2003 1:10:54 PM PDT by Enemy Of The State
I have two assault rifles. I shoot them all the time. I have never taken one to the mall or to church.
But, you know what ... if things got really bad and there were common terrorist attacks everywhere ... I would.
In the excerpt I posted from those books, residents in a nearby neighborhood hear the terrorist attack at a mall and respond.
Give it a read ... it might dispell some of your mis-conceptions or pre-conceived notions.
1st ... they are. Thousands of criminals are thwarted by gunowners .. perhaps not everyday, but we take what we can get ... thousands over a month or two, or whatever it turns out to be, is a good thing. We need more of it, not less.
2nd, dude, it sounds like you have a real personal problem. You're just dripping with stereotypes, misconceptions and pre-concieved notions.
I have just completed a 2nd Edition of Volume I that takes into account Iraqi Freedom and events that have occurred since that intial publication in November of 2001.
I sent it to the distributor yesterday and it should be out in a few weeks. Here's the artwork I will be using:
Best regards.
Uh, actually they are. Every 13 seconds an American gun owner uses a firearm in defense against a criminal, over 6,500 times each day, about 2.5 million times per year.
Haven't the politicians in California done everything they can to undermine that?
What do citizens in 44 states know about six million criminals that you and your anti-guns friends/ politicans don’t or are too stupid to study the facts?? Most liberals socialists spin hype not facts. I personally don't care what drug you are on when you write.
Here the results of the last fifteen years regarding CCW Citizen carry.
Here is a NON National Rife Association pdf file to fill your brain with more knowledge that you got now.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/downloads/GunFacts_v3.2.pdf
P> Now to educate yourself about the facts study the above PDF. Only then will you be able to discuss this issue from some place other than where you sit. By the way I don’t care who you are or what sex you are, or how old you are. Your Nickelodeon logic sucks. Regarding no personal attacks. Since you just signed up April 12, 2003 you got a lot to learn. We welcome all levels of intelligence including yours. Let the readers if you can comprehend the pdf file. Anything less tells all about you.
Citizens who carry firearms typically go thru more training that police offiers. Armed citizens commit less crime as a group than policemen. They are the safety most courteous group of Americans in the USA when carry firearms. By the way Policemen kill accidently kill 3 times more often than armed citizens. That means when you are standing next to me you are safety than when you stand next to a policeman as the writes you’re a$$ a ticket. By the way there are 4.5 million of us running loose on the streets of America. That 36 times more armed citizens than policeman.
Right To Carry 2003
* Minnesota is the 35th RTC State! Colorado and New Mexico adopted RTC earlier this year. Thirty-two states have "shall issue" laws requiring carry permits to be issued to applicants who meet uniform standards established by the legislature, Alabama and Connecticut have fair discretionary-issue systems, and Vermont respects the right to carry without a permit. Fifty-eight percent of Americans and two-thirds of handgun owners, live in RTC states.
http://www.nraila.org/images/RTCmaplg.gif
Click on map for larger graphic.
* The right to self-defense is a fundamental right. The U.S. constitution, the constitutions of 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states recognize the right to use arms in self-defense. RTC laws respect the right to self-defense by allowing individual citizens to carry firearms for protection.
* More RTC states, less crime. The nation's violent crime rate has decreased every year since 1991 and in 2002 hit a 23-year low. In the same period, 17 states adopted and 13 states improved RTC laws. RTC states have lower violent crime rates, on average: 24% lower total violent crime, 22% lower murder, 37% lower robbery, and 20% lower aggravated assault. The five states with the lowest violent crime rates are RTC states. (Data: FBI)
* RTC and crime trends. Studying crime trends in every county in the U.S., John Lott and David Mustard found, "allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have Right to Carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly....(T)he estimated annual gain from allowing concealed handguns is at least $6.214 billion....(W)hen state concealed handgun laws went into effect in a county, murders fell by 8.5 percent, and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by 5 and 7 percent." ("Crime, Deterrence, and Right To Carry Concealed Handguns," 1996.)
* Gun control supporters' false predictions. "Whenever a state legislature first considers a concealed-carry bill, opponents typically warn of horrible consequences....But within a year of passage, the issue usually drops off the news media's radar screen, while gun-control advocates in the legislature conclude that the law wasn't so bad after all." (David Kopel, "The Untold Triumph of Concealed-Carry Permits," Policy Review, July-Aug. 1996, p. 9.) "Concerns that permit holders would lose their tempers in traffic accidents have been unfounded. Worries about risks to police officers have also proved unfounded....National surveys of police show they support concealed handgun laws by a 3-1 margin....There is also not a single academic study that claims Right to Carry laws have increased state crime rates. The debate among academics has been over how large the benefits have been." ("Should Michigan keep new concealed weapon law? Don't believe gun foe scare tactics," Detroit News, 1/14/01.)
State RTC Permit Statistics
Florida
(10/1/87-2/29/02) 798,732 issued, 146 (0.02%) revoked due to firearm crimes by licensees. (Dept. of State)
Kentucky
As of 10/31/01, 71,770 valid permits. From 10/1/96-12/31/01, 585 (0.8%) revoked for any reason. (State Police)
Louisiana
(11/1/96-2/28/02) 15,319 issued, 67 (0.4%) revoked for any reason. (State Police)
Oklahoma
(2/28/ 2002) 35,329 issued, 108 (0.30%) revoked for any reason. (SBI)
North Carolina
(12/1/95-9/29/01) 47,046 issued, 242 (0.5%) revoked for any reason. (SBI)
South Carolina
(8/96-5/26/02) 33,492 issued, 164 (0.5%) revoked for any reason. (SLED)
Texas
(1/1/96-5/1/02) 223,584 issued, 1,772 (0.8%) revoked for any reason. (DPS)
Tennessee
(12/96-5/4/02) 130,187 issued, 1,126 (0.9%) revoked for any reason. (DPS)
Utah
As of Dec. 31, 2001, 44,173 issued, 565 (1.3%) revoked for any reason. Virginia
(7/95-4/02) 172,347 issued, 372 (0.2%) revoked for any reason. (State Police)
Wyoming
(10/1/94-2/02) 7,480 issued, 20 (0.3%) revoked for any reason. (Dept. of Criminal Investigation)
Background: Before 1987, there were 10 RTC states. Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota and Washington had "shall issue" laws. Alabama and Connecticut had fairly-administered discretionary-issue laws. Vermont allowed carrying without a permit. Georgia's law was varying interpreted. All other states prohibited carrying altogether or gave law enforcement officials the power to arbitrarily deny carry permits to eligible applicants.
In 1987, Florida enacted a "shall issue" law supported by the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement, Florida Sheriffs Assn., Florida Police Chiefs Assn., and other police groups. Opponents claimed crime would increase if people carried guns. Anti-gun politicians predicted Florida would become the "GUNshine State." The news media forecast vigilante justice and "Wild West" shootouts on every corner. The predictions proved false. Through 1992, Florida's homicide rate decreased 23%, while the U.S. rate rose 9%. Thereafter, homicide decreased both nationally and in Florida. Then-Florida Licensing Division Director, John Russi, noted there had been "no record of any accidents or incidents from a lack of training" and that "Florida's concealed weapon law has been very successful.
All major law enforcement groups supported the original legislation and in the eight years the program has been in place, none of these groups has requested any changes....(S)ome of the opponents of concealed weapon legislation in 1987 now admit the program has not created the problems many predicted." (Testimony before the Michigan House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, 12/5/95) In a 1995 correspondence to state officials, Dept. of Law Enforcement Commissioner James T. Moore wrote, "From a law enforcement perspective, the licensing process has not resulted in problems in the community from people arming themselves with concealed weapons. The strict provisions of 790.06, Florida Statutes, preclude the licensing of convicted felons, etc., thus allowing the permitting of law abiding citizens who do not routinely commit crimes or otherwise violate the law."
* 25 states have adopted RTC during the last 15 years. Of these, 17 previously prohibited concealed carrying, seven (indicated *) previously had restrictively-administered discretionary-issuance systems, and Georgia's law, previously interpreted varyingly, was declared "shall issue" by a judicial ruling. 1989: Oregon, Pennsylvania (Philadelphia brought under RTC law in 1995), West Virginia, and Georgia; 1990: Idaho and Mississippi; 1991: Montana; 1994: Alaska, Arizona, Tennessee, and Wyoming; 1995: Arkansas, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas; Nevada*, Utah*, and Virginia*; 1996: Kentucky, Louisiana*, and South Carolina*; 2001: Michigan*; 2003: Colorado*, New Mexico, and Minnesota*.
Citizens can defend themselves. Analyzing National Crime Victimization Survey data, criminologist Gary Kleck found, "robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of self-protection or those who did not resist at all." (Targeting Guns, 1997) Kleck and Marc Gertz found that firearms are used for self-protection about 2.5 million times annually. ("Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995.) The late Marvin E. Wolfgang, self-described as "as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country" who would "eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police," said, "The methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it....I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology." ("A Tribute to a View That I Have Opposed," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995, pp. 188-192.) A study for the Dept. of Justice found that 34% of felons had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim," and 40% of felons have not committed crimes, fearing potential victims were armed. (J. Wright and P. Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, 1986.)
The right to self-defense has been recognized for centuries. Cicero argued 2,000 years ago, "If our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right." English jurist Sir William Blackstone observed that the English Bill of Rights recognized "the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense" as one of the five auxiliary rights people possess "to protect and maintain inviolate the three great and primary rights," the first of which is "personal security." Sir Michael Foster, judge of the Court of King's Bench, wrote in the late 18th century, "The right of self-defense. . . is founded in the law of nature, and is not, nor can be, superseded by any law of society."
The Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Cruikshank (92 U.S. 542, 1876), recognized that the right to arms preexisted the Constitution and is thus an individual right, stating that it "is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." In Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550, 1895), the Court approved the common-law rule that a person "may repel force by force" in self-defense, and concluded that when attacked a person "was entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force" as needed to prevent "great bodily injury or death." The laws of all 50 states and the constitutions of 44 states recognize the right to use armed force in self-defense. In the Gun Control Act (1968) and Firearms Owners' Protection Act (1986), Congress stated that it did not intend to "place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to the purpose of . . . personal protection, or any other lawful activity . . . ."
Police not required to protect individual citizens. In Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d 1, 1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, "official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection ... this uniformly accepted rule rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen ... a publicly maintained police force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit the community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good order." In Bowers v. DeVito (686 F. 2d 616, 1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, "(T)here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."
Rep. Stearns' RTC reciprocity bill. Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) leads the effort to pass a federal RTC reciprocity law. His bill, H.R. 915, proposes a national carrying standard which would allow any person with a valid carrying permit or license issued by a state, to carry a firearm in any other state, as follows: In states that issue carry permits, each state's laws governing where guns may be carried would apply within its own borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal standard would permit carrying in places other than police stations; courthouses; public polling places; meetings of state, county, or municipal governing bodies; schools; passenger areas of airports; and certain other locations. A person who lives in a state that does not issue permits would be allowed to carry in any state, under either the state or federal law, if he or she possesses a carry permit issued by another state.
Brady Campaign (Handgun Control, Inc.) on self-defense and RTC: Sarah Brady says, "the only reason for guns in civilian hands is for sporting purposes." (Tom Jackson, "Keeping the battle alive," Tampa Tribune, 10/21/93.) Former HCI Chair, the late Pete Shields, said, "(If attacked) put up no defense - give them what they want." (Guns Don't Die - People Do, N.Y.: Arbor House, 1981.) Brady Center's Dennis Henigan says, self-defense is "not a federally guaranteed constitutional right." (USA Today, 11/20/91.) In Jan. 1999, HCI claimed that between 1992-1997 violent crime rates declined less in RTC states than in other states. (Previously, it claimed RTC caused crime to rise.) HCI's errors: It categorized states according to whether they had RTC in 1997, though of the 31 states that had RTC in 1997, only 17 had it in 1992.
Also, HCI calculated crime trends from 1992, which under-represented the impact of RTC laws on crime. By 1992, many states had RTC for many years and already experienced decreases in crime. Also, HCI misclassified Alabama and Connecticut as "restrictive" states. Both states had decreases in crime, so HCI presumably wanted them out of the RTC group. HCI also credited restrictive laws for crime decreasing in some states. But states that have restrictive carry laws have had them for many years, and crime did not begin declining in those states until the 1990s, and did so due to factors unrelated to guns.
Nonsense from the fringe. In 1995, the Violence Policy Center claimed Florida's carry law "puts guns into the hands of criminals." ("Concealed Carry: The Criminal's Companion") The claim was preposterous, since the law permits a person to carry, not acquire, a firearm. VPC claimed "criminals do apply for concealed carry licenses," without noting that such applications are rejected. Contradicting itself, VPC pointed out that criminals, after their applications were rejected, wanted the rejections reconsidered. "To set the record straight," Florida Secretary of State, Sandra B. Mortham, said, "As of November 30, 1995, the Department had denied 723 applications due to criminal history. The fact that these 723 individuals did not receive a license clearly indicates that the process is working." She added, "the majority of concealed weapon or firearm licensees are honest, law-abiding citizens exercising their right to be armed for the purpose of lawful self-defense." (St. Petersburg Times, 1/11/96.)
In 2001, VPC claimed that there are more women murdered with handguns than criminals who are killed by women in self-defense. ("A Deadly Myth: Women, Handguns, and Self-Defense") VPC erred in measuring the value handguns for self-defense in terms of the number of criminals killed, rather than in terms of the number of women who use handguns to prevent themselves from becoming crime victims. Also, VPC undercounted the number of criminals killed in self-defense by counting only those noted in police reports, which exclude homicides the courts find to be justifiable and those determined through further investigation to have not been criminal.
McDowell math: In March 1995, David McDowell claimed that gun homicide rates increased in Miami, Jacksonville and Tampa after Florida's 1987 RTC law. ("Easing Concealed Firearm Laws: Effects on Homicide in Three States.") But homicide rates fell 10%, 18% and 20%, respectively, in those metropolitan areas from 1987 until 1993, the latest available data at the time. Determined to show an increase, McDowell calculated Jacksonville and Tampa trends from the early 1970s, when rates were lower than in 1993, but calculated Miami's from 1983, since rates before 1983 were higher and their inclusion would have shown that the city's homicide rate decreased. None of McDowell's homicides was committed by a license holder, and he did not even indicate which homicides had occurred in situations where a license would be required to carry. Another McDowell gem is his claim that D.C.'s homicide rate decreased after its 1977 handgun ban. In fact, the rate tripled after the ban.
The 43:1 claim: Based upon a small study of King's County (Seattle), Wash. gun control supporters claim a gun in the home is "43 times more likely" to be used to kill a family member than a criminal. (A. L. Kellermann, "Protection or Peril?: An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home," New England Journal of Medicine, 1986.) To reach that ratio, however, self-defense firearms uses were grossly undercounted by counting only cases in which criminals were killed. In most protective firearms uses, criminals are scared off, captured or wounded.
Probably more like he was arming citizens of Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc., etc. that just happened to be in Iraq.
Just a matter of time.
Nice to know the Second Amendment is alive and well in Baghdad.
I have a so called "assault rifle" (semi-automatic) and several 30 round clips for it. I wouldn't call it a gun fit for sharpshooting though. My bolt action 30.06 shoots a lot farther, is far more accurate and many times more powerful. Just a basic deer rifle.
Another interesting thing about guns I bet you didn't know, over 80 million Americans own more than 260 million firearms. Think of that! Private citizens of America, with guns, make up the biggest standing army in the world. In fact I'd be willing to bet that there aren't 80 million uniformed soldiers in all the armies in the world including the U.S. armed forces. Cool, huh?
Another interesting fact, since you bring up the idea of taking guns to public places. In the early 70's there were several incidents of horrendous shootings in schools in Isreal. They instituted a program of allowing parents, teachers and other adult volunteers to come to school armed. Weapons concealed. They advertised this program so that it was well known to the people who were killing school kids. A recent shooting there broke a 20+ year record of zero shootings in Isreali schools. Nothing's perfect I guess.
You've told us that you would scoop up your kid and run if you saw an ordinary citizen with a rifle on his shoulder at the mall. What would you do if someone like John Malvo started taking shots at customers at the mall? Let's say he jumps up on the service counter at the front of the Wal-Mart and lets loose. I know what would happen if it was the Wal-Mart in Silver City, NM. I walked in right behind a man with a .45 on his hip there one day, I sure didn't see anyone running for cover though. But you can bet your Volvo that no one with half a brain will try to rob that store either.
I guess you should thank your lucky stars you don't live in Vermont with me, Knither. I can carry any gun I want, on my hip, under my jacket, over my shoulder, in an ankle holster under my pantleg, and I don't have to ask anyone permission. I don't have to pay any fees, take any training or register myself or my guns at all. It really makes up for having to live around so many braindead 60's hippy throwback liberals with their "NO WAR FOR OIL" bumper stickers. Especially since the gangbangers from Mass. are making inroads and turning their kids into junkies who hang out for the easy welfare check.
The really funny thing is I have longer hair than any of them so they don't quite know whether I'm one of them or not. Sure hope nobody thinks they can rob a store in my presence.
For those of us with 350 years of family investment in this great nation, those of us with fathers and uncles and grandfathers who have bled for this country, I can assure him and those like him: we will not stand around while his kind drains us of our freedom for his so-called safety. What he wants will give him neither safety nor freedom, and we're not going to wait for him and his kind to suddenly realize that their choices led to a totalitarian state, and armed citizens with the dangers they pose were preferable to losing the republic of our founding fathers.
His kind thinks they can see the future, and they tell us there are no threats that would ever require armed citizens to defend this nation, neither foreign nor domestic. Either that, or we should simply give up and refuse to resist -- much as the Iraqis did. I tell them today to make their own choice; I've already made mine.
The great American experiment in democratic rule is too fragile to go unguarded with constant vigilance. That's exactly why we were encouraged to remain armed and ready at a minute's notice to stand up and fight for our land and our Constitution. No matter what these safety mavens think they require, they'll have to change the Constitution before they'll make us put down our weapons for their tawdry peace of mind. Theirs is a meaningless contentment, one that ignores the true safety that has been bought at the expense of nearly a million dead American soldiers on battlefields here and abroad, not to mention our brave policemen who remain armed in the line of duty every day, laying their lives down for us without hesitation.
Safety mavens didn't buy us our security: the armed American soldier did, and still does. Ask him what he thinks, he who does put his life online for us, not this squeamish and fearful type who thinks his own death amounts to much compared to the destiny of this nation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
