Does having a gun in the home make you safer?

[Boogers 0]

kallend

***>After concealed carry laws were passed,murders and crimes from handguns dramatically declined.

Funny how thugs think twice about attacking someone when they think the potential victim might shoot back.

Of course, violent crime rates also declined in places without such laws during the same time frame.

So wouldn't that indicate then that crime rates move independently of concealed handgun licenses, and therefore that concealed handgun licenses are NOT a bad influence? And if concealed handgun licenses are not a bad influence, and they even allow some people to justifiably defend themselves from criminal attacks, then doesn't that make it overall a good thing?

News: "Illinois' first concealed carry licenses in the mail -- 5,000 of them"
Link: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-28/news/chi-illinois-first-concealed-carry-licenses-in-the-mail-5000-of-them-20140228_1_law-enforcement-licenses-paper-application-process

So what do you expect will happen to crime rates as a result of this new-found freedom being exercised by your fellow citizens of Illinois?

[quade 3]

Boogers

***The number of guns I possess is none of your business.

Is it also none of the government's business?

It depends.

If you're a convicted felon, mentally incapable of knowing right from wrong, or possibly the member of some other group of people legally restricted from gun ownership then I'd say the answer is, yes.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Boogers 0]

quade

******The number of guns I possess is none of your business.

Is it also none of the government's business?

It depends.

If you're a convicted felon, mentally incapable of knowing right from wrong, or possibly the member of some other group of people legally restricted from gun ownership then I'd say the answer is, yes.

Then you must agree that if a citizen passes a background check, there is no reason for the government to keep track of what he's purchased. Right?

[quade 3]

Boogers

Then you must agree that if a citizen passes a background check, there is no reason for the government to keep track of what he's purchased. Right?

I see nothing wrong with a system where owners are licensed, maybe once a year pass a background check, and from that point to the next can purchase as much as they want, but the problem is the NRA isn't going to want any system that hints at owner licensing.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

danornan

He quickly skidded to a stop and went back the way he came in and all the guns were put away. I didn't realize at the time how many were carrying.... I don't think any shots were fired.

You understand this means it doesn't count? Only if you shot the bad guy 21 times - then it would either be a defensive gun use, or homicide (depending on the races of people involved).

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

I see nothing wrong with a system where owners are licensed, maybe once a year pass a background check, and from that point to the next can purchase as much as they want, but the problem is the NRA isn't going to want any system that hints at owner licensing.

I can't imagine why? Can you?

Maybe if there were so many blatant violations in very recent years, there might be some trust?

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

quade

***Then you must agree that if a citizen passes a background check, there is no reason for the government to keep track of what he's purchased. Right?

I see nothing wrong with a system where owners are licensed, maybe once a year pass a background check, and from that point to the next can purchase as much as they want, but the problem is the NRA isn't going to want any system that hints at owner licensing.

Is this an ongoing license?
Would a gun owner face sanctions or confiscation for failing to renew? Even if they hadn't done anything to become ineligible?

Or is this just a "License to Purchase"? Where if a person doesn't wish to purchase a gun for a while, they don't have to have any sort of "government approval" to exercise their right to keep the guns they already have.

I don't think the NRA would have much problem with choice #2.
Choice #1 however would be vehemently opposed.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Stumpy 256]

wolfriverjoe

I don't think the NRA would have much problem with choice #2.

I think they would start screaming like little girls.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[baronn 111]

Crime rates gave declined in areas without CCW laws? Might wanna double check the stats in our POS POTUS own home town.

[kelpdiver 2]

baronn

Crime rates gave declined in areas without CCW laws? Might wanna double check the stats in our POS POTUS own home town.

crime declined everywhere. It's not a mystery.

As I've said in the past, the size of the age cohort of young men seems to be the strongest predictor of crime rates.

[kallend 1,648]

baronn

Crime rates gave declined in areas without CCW laws? Might wanna double check the stats in our POS POTUS own home town.

Clearly you are out of your depth in this forum.

Quit now, while only slightly behind.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[baronn 111]

Might want to check your own fluid level Dipstick. Crime rates have gone down as a whole in most areas of the US. And gun ownership has risen in many if these same areas. A coincidence? Perhaps. Criminals like unarmed victims. If you choose to be one, so be it. When you are assaulted or robbed, chances are high you are gonna wish a gun toting, law abiding individual is nearby to save your cowardly ass. They may or may not have a badge but, I wouldn't think you would care at that point

[kallend 1,648]

baronn

When you are assaulted or robbed, chances are high you are gonna wish a gun toting, law abiding individual is nearby to save your cowardly ass. They may or may not have a badge but, I wouldn't think you would care at that point

Make all the personal attacks you like, you are still wrong.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[baronn 111]

The personal attacks started on your end dirtbag. Please clarify to me or anyone, where the facts I have presented are wrong? You are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts. Whether you choose to own a firearm or not is your Constitutional right. I would and have protected that for myself and others. Even those that disagree with me (another right of yours). Where we differ, is I don't want to make my OPINION affect everyone else's rights to protect themselves and their family. Pass all the gun control laws you want. Plenty of firearms out there and when you take away a persons ability to protect themselves, you simply invite the criminals in to do as they wish.

[quade 3]

Take a time out.

Come back when you can have a discussion with out resorting to name calling. Or not. You're free to go elsewhere.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[PiLFy 0]

"Far fewer questions to answer from both the DA and the cops."

Unless the Perp has a gun. Or, unless there are multiple Perps... You make your choices. We'll make ours. That's a large part of what's written on that pesky lil piece o paper...

[champu 1]

RobertMBlevins

You have a choice. You can keep the gun handy for burglars, knowing that chances are much greater that something ELSE will happen eventually...something that you don't want and would be a tragedy. It's a crap shoot and the odds are against you.

It is not a "crap shoot" and there is a whole spectrum between "keeping at least one loaded handgun on top of every flat surface in a house full of a dozen children" and "live on a deserted tropical island alone with no firearms."

It is very similar to skydiving incidents in that you can virtually always point out at least one pretty big mistake that was made and, even more commonly, you can point to a pattern of behavior that is known and understood to be a higher-risk choice and that is much more specific than just "choosing to skydive at all."

RobertMBlevins

Look...reality check, okay? If you shoot someone there are all those annoying questions and 'evidence retrieval' things (they take your gun for a while) from the cops. Who the hell wants to deal with all that if they don't have to?

As winsor often and correctly reminds us, if you shoot someone for defensive reasons, "wants" better not enter into it.