Thank you John Lott

[DrMark]

How is Dr. Lott furthering the the purpose of OCDO? See forum rule 14, for the purpose of OCDO.

Dr. Lott is welcome here. He has chosen not to engage the OC community because he is not a friend of OC.

I think you were responding to a post other than mine.

 

[OC for ME]

Nope, post #8. My error, please let me clarify my question.

DrMark: This forum excels at making adversaries out of potential allies, focusing on differences to drive division instead of building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

How does Dr. Lott's anti OC position further the purpose of OCDO?

 

[KBCraig]

This forum excels at making adversaries out of potential allies, focusing on differences to drive division instead of building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

Why would a national figure like Dr. Lott, who is in demand, bother coming back to address a forum that has shriveled to about a dozen regulars? And of those dozen or so, about half talk past each other to argue over minutia while listening to no one.

I had a wise commander in the Army once who was fond of saying, "Son, we're hunting elephants here, and you keep stopping to stare at mouse turds!"

 

[DrMark]

Nope, post #8. My error, please let me clarify my question.

How does Dr. Lott's anti OC position further the purpose of OCDO?

Note that I mentioned potential (not current) allies, and described building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

I have no idea what Dr. Lott's full position is on OC. Like many in the gun community, he probably has a preference for concealed carry because he's more familiar with it.

Gun owners are being besieged by anti-gunners. Dr. Lott is a pro-gun author who is well-known. He testified for a constitutional carry bill in Kentucky. As a pro-gun (that common ground) forum, helping him see the benefit of the OC of handguns fully becoming a part of everyday life would develop an effective ally. Driving him away from this OC forum will likely help to develop his opinion of OC, but not in a helpful direction.

 

[2a4all]

Note that I mentioned potential (not current) allies, and described building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

I have no idea what Dr. Lott's full position is on OC. Like many in the gun community, he probably has a preference for concealed carry because he's more familiar with it.

Gun owners are being besieged by anti-gunners. Dr. Lott is a pro-gun author who is well-known. He testified for a constitutional carry bill in Kentucky. As a pro-gun (that common ground) forum, helping him see the benefit of the OC of handguns fully becoming a part of everyday life would develop an effective ally. Driving him away from this OC forum will likely help to develop his opinion of OC, but not in a helpful direction.

As our 2A rights are under siege at all levels of government and social circles (even in states with "constitutional carry"), the arguments put forth by Dr. Lott have been very effective. The continued assault on or 2A rights includes carry, but it also includes registration, purchase, type of firearm, age restrictions, behavioral issues and other "excuses" to limit those rights. In order to repel these attacks, we need all the help we can get. Dr. Lott is too valuable an an ally to lose over petty squabbles about mode of carry.

 

[Ghost1958]

Note that I mentioned potential (not current) allies, and described building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

I have no idea what Dr. Lott's full position is on OC. Like many in the gun community, he probably has a preference for concealed carry because he's more familiar with it.

Gun owners are being besieged by anti-gunners. Dr. Lott is a pro-gun author who is well-known. He testified for a constitutional carry bill in Kentucky. As a pro-gun (that common ground) forum, helping him see the benefit of the OC of handguns fully becoming a part of everyday life would develop an effective ally. Driving him away from this OC forum will likely help to develop his opinion of OC, but not in a helpful direction.

Doesn't matter if he sees the benefit in OC or CC. Either he supports both ,no permits , training etc etc as the 2A demands , or he supports only gov permission.

To be accurate what ky passed is a permit less cc bill. It has nothing to do with the constitution.

Constitutional carry has not existed in this country for many decades. In any state.

 

[gutshot II]

No, I for one did not.

This forum excels at making adversaries out of potential allies, focusing on differences to drive division instead of building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

DrMark, I have come to believe that in some cases this divisiveness is intentional and the goal is to harm this forum and gun rights advocacy in general. These people are often agents provocateur.

 

[Ghost1958]

DrMark, I have come to believe that in some cases this divisiveness is intentional and the goal is to harm this forum and gun rights advocacy in general. These people are often agents provocateur.

Or maybe some support the RTKABA as protected in the 2A and struggle to regain that right.

While others favor or are at least are comfortable with begging gov permission to be armed with what the gov allows, where the gov allows.

And there is no common ground to be found between those trying to regain a right , and those who believe gov permission to be armed is somehow a right.

There's no need for agents "provocatuer" or 007 antis.
The division between those who understand what a right vs permission is and those who don't , is very real.

 

[OC for ME]

Note that I mentioned potential (not current) allies, and described building on common ground to further the purpose of the forum.

I have no idea what Dr. Lott's full position is on OC. Like many in the gun community, he probably has a preference for concealed carry because he's more familiar with it.

Gun owners are being besieged by anti-gunners. Dr. Lott is a pro-gun author who is well-known. He testified for a constitutional carry bill in Kentucky. As a pro-gun (that common ground) forum, helping him see the benefit of the OC of handguns fully becoming a part of everyday life would develop an effective ally. Driving him away from this OC forum will likely help to develop his opinion of OC, but not in a helpful direction.

See post #11. Without Dr. Lott's cooperation we will never know his full position on OC. We must rely upon those public statements he has made in the past to make a determination as to what his full position on OC is today.

His personal opinion of OC has no relation to any efforts to remove prior restraints on any form of the peaceable carry of a properly holstered handgun, namely OC, as a constitutionally protected right. Because, of course, we should never know if a CCd handgun is being carried properly.

 

[eye95]

DrMark, I have come to believe that in some cases this divisiveness is intentional and the goal is to harm this forum and gun rights advocacy in general. These people are often agents provocateur.

Either you agree with my position 100% or you are no ally!!!

I learned that from a book on how to be effective in achieving your goals.

 

[color of law]

With some of the things posted about him, did you expect him back?

If he can't handle controversy or push-back then he is a true college professor. Or, he just doesn't have time for us.

 

[OC for ME]

Or, perhaps, he is used to audiences with far less empirical data which they used to formulate their opinions...then again, he had some time for use previously.

 

[eye95]

If he can't handle controversy or push-back then he is a true college professor. Or, he just doesn't have time for us.

Folks, this is a prime example of hate directed at an individual, not mere disagreement with his ideas. I no longer wonder why OCDO is a shadow of its former self.

I am sure Dr. Lott has plenty of time for disagreement. I am also sure that he has no time for such displays of hatred.

You don’t have to agree 100% with the man to respect his body of work. I am sure that, were he to apply his statistical wizardry to OC v. CC, his opinion would be adjusted. I do hope he comes to appreciate the real Right, UC.

 

[solus]

Folks, this is a prime example of hate directed at an individual, not mere disagreement with his ideas. I no longer wonder why OCDO is a shadow of its former self.

I am sure Dr. Lott has plenty of time for disagreement. I am also sure that he has no time for such displays of hatred.

You don’t have to agree 100% with the man to respect his body of work. I am sure that, were he to apply his statistical wizardry to OC v. CC, his opinion would be adjusted. I do hope he comes to appreciate the real Right, UC.

This from the member previously banned, who is currently banned on Ohio’s forum, and others!

Who just stated members do not have to support 100% yet earlier posted

Either you agree with my position 100% or you are no ally!!!

I learned that from a book on how to be effective in achieving your goals.

If you venture through the history of postings of this forums, say around 2009-ish, you will find similar commentaries about this forum to h3ll in a hand basket [i was not a member at that time] and yet 10 years later this forum is still here, verses say the grassroots of SC site or the poor CO gun owners site, or even Paul’s NC site.

Eye95, if all members held exactly the same concept, or gutshot part deux yours, or heaven forbid since9’s pontifications ~ what or where would this forum’s discussions be today,

“yepper gutshot your absolutely correct, well so are you eye95, and since9 we are not sure what statistics you showed, but by golly they is right on- again!”

That the three members i mentioned refuse to engage in discussions which they believe is beneath them is unfathomable from any concept of viable exchange of ideas, no matter if you believe they do not warrant comment your because you are better then the poster.

As previously mentioned, thank goodness the founding fathers and other leaders of this country exchanged ideas and their nuances to the minutiae instead of acting petulantly casting dispersions towards others when they ignore any admission in the problem.

Yes gentlemen...you are complicit up to your derrières as you throw dispersions...now if ya’ll will forgive me, this EXEMPLARY [ya just ask me if i’m exemplary!] concealing law-abiding citizen has to figure out how to REGISTER my weapon [once i figure out what the bloody h3ll a WEAPON is]

Oh wait, eye95, gutshot, can you guys tell me what Lott’s perception of a WEAPON is that this exemplary citizen has to register or is that beneath your status?

 

[color of law]

Folks, this is a prime example of hate directed at an individual, not mere disagreement with his ideas. I no longer wonder why OCDO is a shadow of its former self.

I am sure Dr. Lott has plenty of time for disagreement. I am also sure that he has no time for such displays of hatred.

You don’t have to agree 100% with the man to respect his body of work. I am sure that, were he to apply his statistical wizardry to OC v. CC, his opinion would be adjusted. I do hope he comes to appreciate the real Right, UC.

Excuse me, example of hatred directed at a individual? Talk about putting words in someones mouth that aren't there; that's the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[OC for ME]

Dr. Lott is always welcome to debate particular facts or facets of OC vs. CC as he views them, though I doubt he will repeat an appearance. Unrestricted carry via the manner of ones choosing is the singular goal. Dr. Lott is focused on CC specifically at this juncture. Perhaps when all of the several states and territories are unrestricted CC he may come about and engage in works to make OC equally unrestricted.

 

[eye95]

Excuse me, example of hatred directed at a individual? Talk about putting words in someones mouth that aren't there; that's the pot calling the kettle black.

I stand by my assessment of your post. You did not take issue with his words. You went full-on ad hominem with your words. IMO, those words were a shameful display of hatred.

Were I John, I would take down your post, 33-35, and this one. This sub-conversation is an embarrassing display.

BTW, I reported this post, my own post, to bring to John’s attention my recommendation.

 

[color of law]

I stand by my assessment of your post. You did not take issue with his words. You went full-on ad hominem with your words. IMO, those words were a shameful display of hatred.

Were I John, I would take down your post, 33-35, and this one. This sub-conversation is an embarrassing display.

BTW, I reported this post, my own post, to bring to John’s attention my recommendation.

Report all you want. My comment was not directed towards you. Of course you do have a problem stinking your nose in other peoples business.

 

[solus]

I stand by my assessment of your post. You did not take issue with his words. You went full-on ad hominem with your words. IMO, those words were a shameful display of hatred.

Were I John, I would take down your post, 33-35, and this one. This sub-conversation is an embarrassing display.

BTW, I reported this post, my own post, to bring to John’s attention my recommendation.

martyrdom example at it’s finest from the poster who says others must agree with me 100% or apparently i will seek to censor them!

 

[OC for ME]

More from Dr. Lott on his view of OC, from June 2015.

At the 1:00 minute mark.

CPRC on Michigan Talk Network to talk about Texas' new Open Carry and Campus Carry Laws - Crime Prevention Research Center

John Lott was interviewed on the Michigan Talk Network to discussion Texas’ new Open Carry and Campus Carry Laws. While Lott doesn’t think that Open Carry will make a major improvement in safety, he was much more optimistic about the impact of the new campus carry law (the interview was on...

crimeresearch.org

At the 3:00 minute mark.

CPRC on the Michigan Talk Network: US Supreme Court refusal to grant Cert on San Francisco gunlock law and Open Carry Debate - Crime Prevention Research Center

John Lott discussed a recent Supreme Court decision and the issue of Open Carry with Steve Gruber Tuesday, June 9th, 6:35 to 6:45 AM.

crimeresearch.org

Does Dr. Lott believe that OC is not as safe mode of carry as CC? I do conclude that this is his position.

Once you get past the "OCers are shot first" canard Dr. Lott acknowledges that OC does deter crime, in a round about fashion, without actually stating it explicitly.

The primary goal of OC, and why I OC as often as I can, is to deter crime from befalling me and mine, not you Dr. Lott. You are responsible for your own safety. If my OC "bubble" happens to extend to you and yours, thus by deterring a criminal act that could harm you and yours, you are welcome Dr. Lott.

Dr. Lott seems to promote the CCer as a community protector, a safety mechanism when a cop is not around. Being able to stop crime once crime is afoot. Unfortunate it is that Dr. Lott holds these views in my opinion.

Deterrence should be the standard.