Record numbers packing heat

imported post

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life

Snip:

[*]Waving a chromed semiautomatic pistol, the robber pushed into the building in the bustling Five Points neighborhood of Columbia, S.C., just before 11 p.m. on April 11, 2009. “Gimme what you got!” he yelled, his gun hand trembling.

Attorney Jim Corley was one of four people in the room, the lounge area of a 12-step recovery group’s meeting hall. “He said, ‘Give me your wallet,’” Corley recalled. “So I reached around to my back pocket and gave him what was there.”

imported post

Bump to the top there is also a poll.

imported post

Very interesting article. As usual, it's astounding the difference in thinking between the anti-gun nuts and those of us who realize that we live in the real world.

Perhaps the biggest theme of the article is the claim that there is not enough evidence to prove a link between more guns and concealed gun permits, and the dramatic drop in crime rates of the past several years. And it is difficult to establish a direct cause-and-effect link. How would you measure such a link without knowing the minds of criminals?

But the amusing part is... despite the overwhelming circumstantial evidence, including many more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens, many more states becoming shall-issue, millions more concealed permits issued, and a same-time-frame dramatic drop in crime rates, the antis claim there is no correlation between the two.

Yet... when asked to support their claim that "shall issue" policy causes murder, mayhem and blood in the streets, the antis come up with such gems as:

Rand, the spokeswoman for the Violence Policy Center, acknowledged that “we don’t have centralized data-gathering to know what people are doing with these licenses.”

“(But) anecdotally, we know they’re doing quite a bit of harm,” she said.

Click to expand...

Anecdotally. What a joke. An overwhelming abundance of evidence that associates more legal concealed guns with less crime, and nothing other than a few anecdotes to support the opposite claim, but that's what they're sticking with.

I'd be embarrassed to admit it.

TFred

imported post

TFred,

Sadly,when you say, "I'd be ashamed to admit it," You are assuming that the Brady Bunch and VPC have an actual conscience and exercise it. So far, I have not seen any evidence that they have any conscience nor that they respond to shame ... they seem to revel in defying public shame. :banghead:

imported post

delete double tap ... grrrrr

imported post

delete double tap ... grrrr

imported post

okboomer wrote:

TFred,

Sadly,when you say, "I'd be ashamed to admit it," You are assuming that the Brady Bunch and VPC have an actual conscience and exercise it. So far, I have not seen any evidence that they have any conscience nor that they respond to shame ... they seem to revel in defying public shame. :banghead:

Click to expand...

I see your point, and I don't disagree with it... but I actually said "embarrassed", not "ashamed", and the idea I was going for was more along the lines of their reasoning is so pathetically faulty, it should be embarrassing for them to stand behind it. Much like the kid with chocolate stains all over his hands sheepishly claiming to his mom, "no, I didn't eat that candy bar..." as if he expects her to believe his words, over the indisputable evidence in plain view.



TFred

imported post

okboomer wrote:

TFred,

Sadly,when you say, "I'd be ashamed to admit it," You are assuming that the Brady Bunch and VPC have an actual conscience and exercise it. So far, I have not seen any evidence that they have any conscience nor that they respond to shame ... they seem to revel in defying public shame. :banghead:

Click to expand...

From what I've seen from the Brady camp, they have precisely the same amount of conscience John Hinckley showed when he shot President Reagan and Brady: None.

imported post

How can they quote the following statistic and then claim there is no evidence that more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens does not reduce crime?

The highest gun homicide rate is in Washington, D.C., which has had the nation’s strictest gun-control laws for years and bans concealed carry: 20.50 deaths per 100,000 population, five times the general rate. The lowest rate, 1.12, is in Utah, which has such a liberal concealed weapons policy that most American adults can get a permit to carry a gun in Utah without even visiting the state. MSNBC

Here's your sign.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life/page/3/

imported post

BowNArrow wrote:

How can they quote the following statistic and then claim there is no evidence that more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens does not reduce crime?

Click to expand...

Simple - it's not about what's right and wrong, truthful or not. It's about shoving their PTSD-induced anti-gun activism down everyone else's throats as a very wrong and harmful means of alleviating their PTSD-induced fears, an attempt to regain some semblance of the control over their safety and their lives they felt they lost when Jim was shot in the head.

You and your wife need counseling, Jim! Coming to grips with what happened is the healthiest thing for you to do! Stripping honest, law-abiding citizens of their Constitutional rights to self-defense is a very unhealthy thing to do!

It's time to come in out of the rain, ole' bean.

imported post

I guess msnbc thinks their audience must not use any critical thinking skills whatsoever.

imported post

BowNArrow wrote:

I guess msnbc thinks their audience must not use any critical thinking skills whatsoever.

Click to expand...

If they think that, are thay wrong?

imported post

TFred wrote:

okboomer wrote:

TFred,

Sadly,when you say, "I'd be ashamed to admit it," You are assuming that the Brady Bunch and VPC have an actual conscience and exercise it. So far, I have not seen any evidence that they have any conscience nor that they respond to shame ... they seem to revel in defying public shame. :banghead:

Click to expand...

I see your point, and I don't disagree with it... but I actually said "embarrassed", not "ashamed", and the idea I was going for was more along the lines of their reasoning is so pathetically faulty, it should be embarrassing for them to stand behind it. Much like the kid with chocolate stains all over his hands sheepishly claiming to his mom, "no, I didn't eat that candy bar..." as if he expects her to believe his words, over the indisputable evidence in plain view.



TFred

Click to expand...

Ahhh, there I go again, missing the <sarcasm> dripping from your statement ... :lol:

imported post

@ eye95
Since the gov't established the Dept. of Education, I think most critical thinking skills have declined in general. Most people simply look for evidence that supports their original position, without considering other positions. Most people only want a big juicy dose of rationalization for their unfounded emotions.

I have looked at all sides of the gun control issue and believe strongly that the only way to maintain our liberties is for the individual to continue to be empowered and not subject their personal freedom or their safety to the whims or budgets of government agencies or their "trust" of their fellow man.

imported post

I can't disagree with that. I just wonder how it ended up in this thread.