Concealed Carry Law - My bet is most A&A players are for it.

“tHE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE YOU PROTECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT NOT OTHER PEOPLE THAT UNFORTUNATELY IS THE GOVERNMENTS JOB.”

Darkstar thinks that the public does not need guns for protection because we have the police. This is false thinking. In the first place, police cannot be everywhere whenever somebody wants to victimize us. There aren’t enough police for that, and there never could be. And they are, for the most part, visible to the criminals since they are mostly in uniform for some very good reasons. Criminals choose to victimize us when no officer is around. And it takes much less time for the criminal to rob us and maybe kill us than it usually takes police to arrive, even if somebody immediately calls for them.

Besides this, police are not even legally required to protect us individually. Their role is to deter criminality by creating the possibility that a criminal will be punished after doing the criminal act. The truth is that we are responsible for protecting ourselves because we are the only ones who can do it, and that we should also consider it a duty to protect each other to whatever extent we can reasonably. Besides protecting individuals directly, this also protects us all to a degree by creating deterrence because it generally increases the risks taken by criminals.

Who’s gonna rob a bank where every costomer is packin?

No one.

Haha, I could agree on this just as long as each and every one of those customers is trained on how to use a gun, gun safety, and carry a permit. :)

@TG:

I agree. In Switzerland, by law, every household must contain at least one fully automatic assault rifle. Guess what? Their homicide and violent crime rate is well below ours.

you visit the nra site often eh?

UZIs for everyone!

there should be at least a 30 caliber people’s hand gun…anyone with me???

(silence and crickets chirping)

Against, and i agree on this topic with everything CC said,

Also a little statistic against Moses false claim about Switzerland

Country / Handgun Murders / Population / Rate (per 100,000)
–---------------------------------------------------------
United States / 13,429 / 254,521,000 / 5.28
Switzerland / 97 / 6,828,023 / 1.42
Canada / 128 / 27,351,509 / 0.47
Sweden / 36 / 8,602,157 / 0.42
Australia / 13 / 17,576,354 / 0.07
United Kingdom / 33 / 57,797,514 / 0.06
Japan / 60 / 124,460,481 / 0.05

of course Japan goes a little bit more in for the neuro-weapons of mass destruction on subways than most of the other countries . . . .
(glad you underlined “on this topic” FS - it would be disturbing if we agreed on anything else :) )

FinsterniS-

Where does that information come from?

Of couse you can use a statistic to prove any point. Are those handgun murers or just deaths, why just hand guns, What is the statistic for knife deaths, what about murders in general. There simply isn’t enough information in your post to actualy draw a proper concusion.

That said I realy don’t want to argue with you, If you don’t like people having guns you should live in a place were they are not allowed.

By the way what are the Firearm restrictions in France?

I regularly go to the indoor range down the street on my lunch hour to get some shooting time in.

I agree with Dezrt, defensive uses of handguns are used up to 2.5 million million times in America. So is it the criminal or the bystander?

“Country / Handgun Murders / Population / Rate (per 100,000)
United States / 13,429 / 254,521,000 / 5.28
Switzerland / 97 / 6,828,023 / 1.42”

What strikes me as odd is the word “handgun” murder. Does a fully automatic assault rifle qualify as a handgun? I really don’t see the need for your statistics. Even then Switzerland has a lower homicide rate than US, what are you trying to prove?

Also to answer Horten’s question. I’m a member of the NRA, why should I be expected not to? “there should be at least a 30 caliber people’s hand gun” I’m in favor, just as long as you keep those guns out of the wrong people.

Hehe… I don’t have to visit the NRA site, they send me a magazine once a month. :D

once a month! classic!

@TG:

Also to answer Horten’s question. I’m a member of the NRA, why should I be expected not to? “there should be at least a 30 caliber people’s hand gun” I’m in favor, just as long as you keep those guns out of the wrong people.

yes, we shouldn’t give them to criminals once they are paroled! (spelling!)

Finstein was it? your statistics are flawed, because it counts suicide!

“Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm-related homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings. In 1996 alone, 34,040 Americans died by gunfire: 18,166 in firearm suicides, 14,327 in firearm homicides, 1,134 in unintentional shootings, and 413 in firearm deaths of unknown intent.”

“Most gun deaths in America are not the result of murder (14,327 in 1996), but suicide (18,166 in 1996).”

"A gun is far more likely to be used in suicide, murder, or unintentional shooting than to kill a criminal. According to federal government figures, for every time a citizen used a firearm in 1996 in a justifiable homicide, 160 lives were ended in firearm suicides, murders, and unintentional shootings. "

"In Europe, by contrast, violent crime is rising. Many factors are responsible, but it’s clear that strict gun control laws aren’t helping.

In 1996, Britain banned handguns. The ban was so tight that even shooters training for the Olympics were forced to travel to other countries to practice. In the six years since the ban, gun crimes have risen by an astounding 40%. Britain now leads the U.S. by a wide margin in robberies and aggravated assaults. Although murder and rape rates are still lower than in the U.S., the difference is shrinking quickly. Dave Rogers, vice chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said that, despite the ban, “the underground supply of guns does not seem to have dried up at all.”

Australia also passed severe gun restrictions in 1996, banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively. In the subsequent four years, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24%, and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%.

And both Britain and Australia have been thought to be ideal places for gun control because they are surrounded by water, making gun smuggling relatively difficult. By contrast gun-smuggling is much easier on the Continent or in the U.S.

Another inconvenient fact is frequently ignored by gun control advocates: Many countries with high homicide rates have gun bans. It is hard to think of a much more draconian police state than the former Soviet Union, with a ban on guns that dated back to the communist revolution. Yet newly released data show that from 1976 to 1985 the USSR’s homicide rate was between 21% and 41% higher than that of the U.S.

Many French politicians complained during their presidential election that the shooting in Paris meant “It’s getting like in America, and we don’t want to see that here.” Americans may draw a different lesson from the evidence, and hope that they don’t become more like the Europeans."

"yes, we shouldn’t give them to criminals once they are paroled! (spelling!) "

And lets not forget adequate gun safety, competency test (both physical and mental), and training courses! My grandma sure ain’t commit no crimes, but I’m not gonnna about hand over my trusty M1 to her.

“You can take this gun away from me if you pry it out of my cold, dead hands.”

Also Horten, how do you post pictures?

A gun is far more likely to be used in suicide, murder, or unintentional shooting than to kill a criminal. According to federal government figures, for every time a citizen used a firearm in 1996 in a justifiable homicide, 160 lives were ended in firearm suicides, murders, and unintentional shootings.

My statistic is maybe not perfect, you cannot simply rejecting it because of suiside, officially there’s not a lot of suiside in USA… but there’s a lot of “accident” due to firearm.

wow… that is suppose to be an argument for gun ?

What kind of societey will make firearm legal ? To “protect”, that is ridiculous, i prefer not to have a firearm and to know potential agressor will certainly have none.

“unintentional shooting” alone is a good argument against Firearm.

it isn’t an argument for or against guns…its the truth, god forbid ;)

anyway, kids didn’t shoot themselves like they do now…my grandma’s house way back when had all of their guns in a cross, not locked, and no one would touch them because they were told not to. Kids are just idiots nower days, it isn’t the gun’s fault.

Q: What does the title mean: More Guns, Less Crime?

A: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. Thirty-one states now have such laws—called “shall-issue” laws. These laws allow adults the right to carry concealed handguns if they do not have a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness.

Q: It just seems to defy common sense that crimes likely to involve guns would be reduced by allowing more people to carry guns. How do you explain the results?

A: Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.

Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.

Q: What is the basis for these numbers?

A: The analysis is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994.

Q: Your argument about criminals and deterrence doesn’t tell the whole story. Don’t statistics show that most people are killed by someone they know?

A: You are referring to the often-cited statistic that 58 percent of murder victims are killed by either relatives or acquaintances. However, what most people don’t understand is that this “acquaintance murder” number also includes gang members killing other gang members, drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by customers they picked up for the first time, prostitutes and their clients, and so on. “Acquaintance” covers a wide range of relationships. The vast majority of murders are not committed by previously law-abiding citizens. Ninety percent of adult murderers have had criminal records as adults.

Q: But how about children? In March of this year four children and a teacher were killed by two school boys in Jonesboro, Arkansas. Won’t tragedies like this increase if more people are allowed to carry guns? Shouldn’t this be taken into consideration before making gun ownership laws more lenient?

A: The horrific shooting in Arkansas occurred in one of the few places where having guns was already illegal. These laws risk creating situations in which the good guys cannot defend themselves from the bad ones. I have studied multiple victim public shootings in the United States from 1977 to 1995. These were incidents in which at least two or more people were killed and or injured in a public place; in order to focus on the type of shooting seen in Arkansas, shootings that were the byproduct of another crime, such as robbery, were excluded. The effect of “shall-issue” laws on these crimes has been dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multiple-victim shootings declined by 84 percent. Deaths from these shootings plummeted on average by 90 percent, and injuries by 82 percent.

For other types of crimes, I find that both children as well as adults are protected when law-abiding adults are allowed to carry concealed handguns.

Finally, after extensively studying the number of accidental shootings, there is no evidence that increasing the number of concealed handguns increases accidental shootings. We know that the type of person who obtains a permit is extremely law-abiding and possibly they are extremely careful in how they take care of their guns. The total number of accidental gun deaths each year is about 1,300 and each year such accidents take the lives of 200 children 14 years of age and under. However, these regrettable numbers of lives lost need to be put into some perspective with the other risks children face. Despite over 200 million guns owned by between 76 to 85 million people, the children killed is much smaller than the number lost through bicycle accidents, drowning, and fires. Children are 14.5 times more likely to die from car accidents than from accidents involving guns.

Q: Wouldn’t allowing concealed weapons increase the incidents of citizens attacking each other in tense situations? For instance, sometimes in traffic jams or accidents people become very hostile—screaming and shoving at one another. If armed, might people shoot each other in the heat of the moment?

A: During state legislative hearings on concealed-handgun laws, possibly the most commonly raised concern involved fears that armed citizens would attack each other in the heat of the moment following car accidents. The evidence shows that such fears are unfounded. Despite millions of people licensed to carry concealed handguns and many states having these laws for decades, there has only been one case where a person with a permit used a gun after a traffic accident and even in that one case it was in self-defense.

Q: Violence is often directed at women. Won’t more guns put more women at risk?

A: Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman’s ability to defend herself than it does for a man. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men.

Q: Aren’t you playing into people’s fears and prejudices though? Don’t politicians pass these shall-issue laws to mollify middle-class white suburbanites anxious about the encroachment of urban minority crime?

A: I won’t speculate about motives, but the results tell a different story. High crime urban areas and neighborhoods with large minority populations have the greatest reductions in violent crime when citizens are legally allowed to carry concealed handguns.

Q: What about other countries? It’s often argued that Britain, for instance, has a lower violent crime rate than the USA because guns are much harder to obtain and own.

A: The data analyzed in this book is from the USA. Many countries, such as Switzerland, New Zealand, Finland, and Israel have high gun-ownership rates and low crime rates, while other countries have low gun ownership rates and either low or high crime rates. It is difficult to obtain comparable data on crime rates both over time and across countries, and to control for all the other differences across the legal systems and cultures across countries. Even the cross country polling data on gun ownership is difficult to assess, because ownership is underreported in countries where gun ownership is illegal and the same polls are never used across countries.

Q: This is certainly controversial and there are certain to be counter-arguments from those who disagree with you. How will you respond to them?

A: Some people do use guns in horrible ways, but other people use guns to prevent horrible things from happening to them. The ultimate question that concerns us all is: Will allowing law-abiding citizens to own guns save lives? While there are many anecdotal stories illustrating both good and bad uses of guns, this question can only be answered by looking at data to find out what the net effect is.

All of chapter seven of the book is devoted to answering objections that people have raised to my analysis. There are of course strong feelings on both sides about the issue of gun ownership and gun control laws. The best we can do is to try to discover and understand the facts. If you agree, or especially if you disagree with my conclusions I hope you’ll read the book carefully and develop an informed opinion.

Nice post you have there, Horten. But not exactly sure we needed all the information :P

“What kind of societey will make firearm legal ? To “protect”, that is ridiculous, i prefer not to have a firearm and to know potential agressor will certainly have none.”

What makes you certain that by making firearms illegal, agressors will no longer carry them? It’s the classic case of “Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws carry guns.” The average “outlaw” can acquire guns through a variety of ways. Criminals can manufacture their own guns (making a gun is quite easy as any expert can tell you), steal them, or purchase them through the black market. Lets look at England where firearms are banned. It’s intresting to say violent crimes are still committed with the use of firearms.

““unintentional shooting” alone is a good argument against Firearm.”

Almost all gun accidents are a result of inattention to a few basic safety rules. Though the number of gun accidents over the years has been declining (in the US), more gun training and gun safety measures are needed - often denounced by gun ban/control advocates.

“Additionally, NRA has been the nation’s leader in firearm safety training and hunter education for decades. Our 39,000 Certified Instructors and Coaches train hundreds of thousands of people each year in a variety of programs of study. Additionally, the Eddie Eagle® GunSafe Program, which does not use guns, teaches children in grades pre-K through 6th that if they encounter a gun while unsupervised, they should “STOP! Don’t touch. Leave the area. Tell an adult.” The award-winning program, used by 10,000 police departments and schools, has been provided to more than 12 million children during the last decade.”

“Additionally, NRA has been the nation’s leader in firearm safety training and hunter education for decades. Our 39,000 Certified Instructors and Coaches train hundreds of thousands of people each year in a variety of programs of study. Additionally, the Eddie Eagle® GunSafe Program, which does not use guns, teaches children in grades pre-K through 6th that if they encounter a gun while unsupervised, they should “STOP! Don’t touch. Leave the area. Tell an adult.” The award-winning program, used by 10,000 police departments and schools, has been provided to more than 12 million children during the last decade.”

Eddie the Eagle!

“If you find a gun, don’t touch it, drop it and get an adult!”
I think he’s a good tool…way better than those anti-drug videos.

“Country / Handgun Murders / Population / Rate (per 100,000)
–---------------------------------------------------------
United States / 13,429 / 254,521,000 / 5.28
United Kingdom / 33 / 57,797,514 / 0.06”

I find this intresting since even though United States has a much higher murder rate than the UK, the UK surpasses the US in other types of violent crimes. Lets take a look shall we?

http://www.gunsandcrime.org/crvsgraf.html

http://www.gunsandcrime.org/highs.html

As you can tell by the graphs from this website, not only did the overall crime rate in UK increase but in some cases, surpassed the United States! Robbery, assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft all skyrocketed in the 1980s and 1990s. The chances of a felon been caught and tried for rape or assault convictions also fell to all time lows. The one area that illustrated little change was murder, which dropped significantly in the United States during the same time period

YES, BUT IN aMERICA MORE CRIMES PER CAPITA ARE COMMITTED WITH GUNS.

in Britain they are rising, but when it is said britain has more “aggrevated assault” and such, that doesn’t mean there is a gun involved.

sorry, about caps, just noticed.

“YES, BUT IN aMERICA MORE CRIMES PER CAPITA ARE COMMITTED WITH GUNS.”

Yes, try telling that to the families of the victims of the Los Angeles Slasher that killed nine men without using a gun.

Not all, or even most, crimes now committed with guns would go away if there were magically no more guns. However, a criminal that would not do certain crimes can be emboldened by having a gun, especially if there is potential that the intended victim will be better armed. However, if the victims could not have firearms, few criminals would hesitate to attack with a lesser weapon such as a knife or club. There is no shortage of very deadly, effective weapons other than guns (although most would be useable only at shorter distances than guns can be used). So, law-abiding citizens would need guns for protection even if no criminals had guns.

I agree, but it is the rhetoric. people debate that gun violence went up in britain after illegalization…true, then they add that aggrevated assault went up for the same reason. Aggrevated assualt doesn’t mean “gun violence”, and the “uncautious” reader would get easily confused.