Handguns are displayed at Elk River Guns in Steamboat. Hundreds of county residents have a concealed weapon permit - and registration for training is growing.

Photo by Matt Stensland

Handguns are displayed at Elk River Guns in Steamboat. Hundreds of county residents have a concealed weapon permit - and registration for training is growing.

Concealed weapon permits on the rise

Routt County Sheriff's Office seeing marked increase in training registration

Advertisement

— High demand for concealed weapon permits, in part prompted by large-scale acts of violence across the country, means the Routt County Sheriff's Office is offering more training opportunities than ever before.

Back in 2002, the Sheriff's Office only taught two concealed weapons classes a year. Last year, citizen demand prompted the Sheriff's Office to lead five courses, and Sheriff's Office Investigator Ken Klinger expects even more this year after first-come, first-serve registration for last month's course filled up in only two hours.

"The carry classes are always full," Routt County Rifle Club President Bryan Tuck said.

"When they get ready to do a class, there's always a huge line of people waiting at 7:30 in the morning to sign up. Good grief."

State laws are impacting local gun ownership as well.

"In 2003, the state of Colorado went to a shall-issue state, so we had a huge wave of them," Klinger said. In order to be issued a concealed weapons permit, the applicant must meet a series of criteria, including achieving a certain level of gun safety education and passing a background check.

In 2003, 173 people in Routt County had a permit. Klinger said last month that "hundreds" of people now have a concealed weapon permit in Routt County.

Because permits are good for five years, the county is experiencing a second wave of applications as the majority of the 2003 group of permit-holders returns to renew their permits, Klinger said.

"There's still a very heavy interest in this community for individuals to have concealed weapons permits," Klinger said. "I see it going up again even more this year, between the reissues and the new permits."

Last year, the demand for concealed weapons permits shot up most markedly in May, which Klinger attributed to current events at the time.

"The common thread there seemed to be concern over the Virginia Tech shooting. It's about self-empowerment," Klinger said. "We saw the same spike in 2001, after the terrorist attacks."

In addition to those who are motivated to seek permits for personal protection, others want a concealed carry permit because they "believe in handguns," Tuck said.

"People have a right, and they want to exercise that right," Tuck said.

Concealed weapons permits can be revoked for reasons including felony convictions, domestic violence incidents, mental illness or drug addiction, or simply because of a change in residency, since each county administers permits differently.

In the past two years in Routt County, only two concealed weapons permits have been suspended or revoked. One was suspended while an out-of-county criminal case proceeded; the other was revoked after a domestic violence conviction, at which point a person can no longer own or possess a firearm.

"This is typical statewide - very, very few are rescinded or revoked," Klinger said.

Training

Now in its ninth year, the two-day concealed weapons training course taught by the Routt County Sheriff's Office is one of the most comprehensive in the state, Klinger said.

"The state just says that you have to take a handgun safety course," he said. "There are instructors on the Front Range that are teaching these classes in somewhere between four and six hours."

Routt County concealed carry permit-hopefuls start with classroom instruction, reviewing the Colorado Revised Statutes that relate to the use of deadly force.

"We try to clear up a lot of misconceptions. A lot of people think that if there's someone in your house, you can just blast them - and that's definitely not true," Klinger said.

Courses then move to the range where people get to practice their shooting from all types of conditions - no light and lowlight, as if seated or in a vehicle.

"By the end of the second day, they're shooting from positions of cover, they are shooting and moving. They're doing all the things they may need to do if they become involved in a deadly situation as a private citizen," Klinger said.

Approximately 35 percent of class attendees are female, Klinger said.

The Routt County Rifle Club, which hosts the concealed weapons course, also offers a variety of training including a first-time shooters course and women and youth programs. A skeet league and beginner's trap and skeet begin this month.

"It'd be nice to see more women and youngsters out there," Tuck said.

- To reach Melinda Dudley, call 871-4203

or e-mail mdudley@steamboatpilot.com

Comments

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

If the link doesn't work search, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000."

0

MtnWarlock 6 years, 6 months ago

Well, if God made man.....then Sam Colt and Smith &Wesson made them equal! LOL! Have a good one!

0

smoke 6 years, 6 months ago

great... yahoos compinsating 4 there shortcomins looking 4 somone to shoot at. i feel so safe now.

0

80488mom 6 years, 6 months ago

Smoke - allowing people to carry actually reduces crime. Even the bad guys don't want to get shot. The applicants are thoroughly checked and the permits aren't given out randomly.

One person carrying in a classroom when a lunatic goes off definitely could save lives. The guy shooting in that church in Colorado Springs could have killed more people if he wasn't shot first.

0

bloggyblog 6 years, 6 months ago

blog thinks knowing how to handle and properly fire a firearm is a good thing. but, the public having more concealed weapons is probably not so good. unless your a trained professional, you'll probably cause more harm then good.

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

take a look at all the deaths caused by firearms in routt county.......has anyone other than the gun owner themselves or their loved ones actually been shot? the only one I can think of is when the hells angels came through town...I know of 2 legal gun owners who shot themselves in the past 6 weeks & every year a hunter or 2 shoots their daduncleson

0

grannyrett 6 years, 6 months ago

If you are a crook, who are you going to go after? Someone you know is disarmed, or a granny you know is carrying? Makes sense to me.

0

bloggyblog 6 years, 6 months ago

granny makes a good point. its not the thought of someone like her carrying a concealed gun that woriies blog, its all the knuckleheads. but thats a freedom you have to chose as an American,so...plus it makes blog smile to picture a couple thugs with a snub nosed 22 trying to hold up granny, only to have her draw her hollow point loaded 45 and say 'feeling lucky punks?'

0

colowoodsman 6 years, 6 months ago

housepoor- the most recent local gun death I recall was Mario- who was killed by self-defense.

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

Let's see....The U.S. ranks first in the world in private gun ownership and 41st in the world in homicides, states with right to carry laws have lower violent crime rates (Lott), Florida has issued 1.3m concealed carry permits and had 165 crimes after licensure involving firearm, accidental deaths per gun owner = .001875%, accidental death per physician = 17.14%, homicides with firearms =12,253, alcohol on the highway deaths =16,885. As President Reagan said: "facts are stubborn things." Or maybe Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: "you can be entitled to your own opinon but not your own facts." And lastly before I sip my chardonnay...Chief Justice Joseph Story: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of liberties of the republic...."

0

Jason Miller 6 years, 6 months ago

I'm split on this issue.I have a couple of guns for protection.Like they say "Better have it and not need it ,than need it and not have it"But what i dont like are all the guns in this country to begin with.I read an article that stated only 17 people in all of westrn europe were killed by guns in 2005.That is a slow week in da hood here in the good 'ol usa.

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

I am not anti gun, just think a little more thought needs to go into the reasons of owning one, especially a hand gun.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

"unless your a trained professional, you'll probably cause more harm then good."

That'd be more compelling if you had any data to back it up. Carry permits don't come in Cracker Jacks boxes - you have to pass the requisite background checks and then pay to undergo the mandated training and testing.

For those opposed: do you wish the 9/11 pilots had been armed? How about any of the Columbine teachers? If not, why not?

If you're ever in a position to need a gun, you'll need it pretty badly, and nothing else will make a good substitute.

0

freshair 6 years, 6 months ago

'I am not anti gun, just think a little more thought needs to go into the reasons of owning one, especially a hand gun.'

' More thought'????? How about the need to protect your life and/or property should someone decide to relieve you of both? Or do you think the police are going to be there when you need them?

The only thing that needs 'more thought' is your thinking that it needs 'more thought.'

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

Just had a friend shoot himself. Longtime gun owner who blew his brains out in what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction to a tense emotional situation. Didn't appear to be thought out but one never knows. Anyway he might be alive today if not for the easy access to the gun.

0

shadow 6 years, 6 months ago

House, Your friend could have started his car in the garage with the doors closed and accomplished the same, (and saved on the cleanup.) Maybe cars and garages should be outlawed. Someone who wants to take their life can find plenty of alternative methods.

I had dinner the other night with a couple that were present at the New Life Church shooting in Dec. They watched three people shot immediately next to them as their daughter was on the floor hiding behind some furniture where the shooter was taken out. They were sure thankful the security lady was armed.

Jazz, you're right on with your closing, as the old saying goes, "I'd rather have a gun and not need it than need one and not have it."

0

JoeB 6 years, 6 months ago

Housepoor;

Better stay away from Vermont. No permit needed to carry there.

Suicide by gun not pretty?

My friend had access to a gun and chose to hang himself. Guess he's less dead. Don't know about the "prettier" bit.

The teenage son of a woman I know couldn't get to a gun so he hanged himself. It was a spontaneous act. He is now a six foot plus, semi-paralyzed infant. Mom is terrified of the day she can no longer care for him and he goes back to the institution she removed him from, due to neglect and abuse. That's where he will eventually die, probably from a staph infection, but at least he didn't shoot himself.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

edskis misconceptions: US ranks first in the world in private gun ownership and 41st in the world in homicides..

.. but first of the (~30) western industrialized countries, either in homicides or gun homicides, maybe both.

ed: states with right to carry laws have lower violent crime rates (Lott)..

.. montana enabled shall issue ccw in 1991 & since then her violent crime rate tripled. Wvirgina doubled since si-ccw, both dakotas near doubled (tho still very low), & pennsylvania has not seen violent crime rate fall below her 1989 siccw start year. This while the rest of the country experienced drops in violent crime rates, including states with stricter guncontrol laws (hawaii stayed at parity). .. StLouis enabled shall issue ccw in 2004 (city & county) & what happened in 2005? St Louis vaulted to the city with the HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATE in the USA, number 1, none higher; ccw lowers violcrime rates? wha happen in StLou? .. MORE GUNS MORE LIES.

ed: accidental deaths per gun owner = .001875%, accidental death per physician = 17.14%...

.. this is an invalid & meaningless comparison, there are estimated 80 million gun owners, how many physicians?

ed: As President Reagan said: "facts are stubborn things."

.. RR hoists edskis on his own petard.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: Carry permits don't come in Cracker Jacks boxes

.. in vermont & alaska they do.

.. if guns make the country so much safer, how come 8 of the 10 states with the highest violent crime rates (2005) are PRO GUN states? (pro gun socarolina #1, only guncontrol Md #3, & neutralish delaware in the middle). .. how come 21 of the most dangerous 25 metropolitan areas were in PRO GUN areas/states? .. detroit (progun now) #1, memphis #2; .. how come 16 of the most dangerous 25 cities are PROGUN cities? While 15 of the SAFEST 25 cities are guncontrol cities? .. MORE GUNS MORE LIES. http://www.morganquitno.com/cit07pop.htm#25

PS: 7 or 8 of the 10 safest states are progun states, but these are sparsely populated states, dakotas 700,000 each, montana 1.1 million, & all of them combined total maybe 8 million, which would be offset by socarolina's population alone. .. NYC, a relative pinprick on the map, has 17 million in it's metro area (incl newarknj), while those 8 progun states with 8 million comprise ~1/4 the land mass of conus.

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy the one....ah yes.... When you don't like the way the discussion is going you can't help yourself but to resort to ad hominem attacks to make your point. By the way, why didn't you cite the D.C. gun law and crime statistics to make your point? Or how about a quote from a Bristol Florida police officer: "As a police officer in the State of Florida for 20 years I have yet to be available as a crime against a person was being committed. If citizens cannot defend themsevles of the situation at the time of the incident the police are only there to take the report....." Did someone mention an inallenable right?

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

If he didn't have a gun he would have had to think a little more than just pulling the trigger....might have been just enough time to come to his senses

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

Just like the poor beaten husband in Connecticut with, God rest their souls, a dead wife and two dead daughters. It pains me even to use this horrific example to make a point about the basic human right of self defense.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: I'd also like to see the foundation for his assertion that: "Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him..

.. I laid the foundation, guess you lead a gunnut to text but you can't make him read. .. DC is invested (surrounded) by two states, Maryland & Virginia, both states where guns can be easily bought. It is little difficulty to bring a gun into DC from Md or Va, there are no border checks, you simply hide the gun in your car & drive in thru one of the hundred or so entrance roads (or bridges from Va). The handgun ban is the only hindrance, & if you're caught the typical excuse is 'didn't know you can't do dat'. .. & there is no 'gun ban' in DC, there are 100,000 legally owned rifles & shotguns which can be used to defend life & home; the longgun must be either trigger locked or safekept when not in use, this practice has resulted in DC 6 year period from 1999-2005 when only 1 child aged 0-16 was fatally killed by a gun, next to perfect record. Not too many pro gun STATES can match that record. DC does not infringe on gun laws, just restricts them, the longgun is the firearm of choice i america by 2-1 margin over handgun, except for criminals who prefer handguns.

jazz: rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight.

.. DC having the death penalty would only deter killers or potential killers, duh. You sharp today.

jazz: 29 years for which data is available after the DC gun ban was imposed in 1977, DC's murder rate rose precipitously relative to other cities.

drama queen, murder rate tended to rise & rise precipitously across the board from the mid 70's thru the early 90's, ignoring the stink in your own backyard again. .. due the problem (more severe back then) with young black males carrying guns, the handgun ban enables cops to arrest anyone with a handgun on their person. This has prevented thousands of crimes & hundreds of killings, but is not perceptible to gunworld. You will have no significant lasting reduction in murder or violcr rate if handguns are legalized in DC by supr ct this month, similar to what happened in StLouis in 2005 when si-ccw was legalized, StL became city with highest violent crime rate.

jazz: Chicago experienced a spike in its murder rate after its 1982 ban was implemented (but I'm sure those numbers were "inflated" by death penalty avoiders).

.. duh, chicago is not surrounded by two states which have the death penalty. I believe chicago adheres to illinois policy as per death penalty. No 'incentive' for killers to bring & dump in chicago when the same penalty if they do it anywhere in illinois (moratorium on DP in affect now). DC is an entity unto itself & can set it's own rules in opposition to Md & Va, thus the 'incentive' for killers to bring or dump in DC. Do try to keep up with the class to avoid future embarassments.

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

ybul how would a would be prowler know you have a gun in your house? Sign on the front lawn?

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

edskis: why didn't you cite the D.C. gun law and crime statistics to make your point?

.. there are thousands of things I didn't cite in my brief posts, what kind of absurd rebuttal is that? you didn't rebut any of the points I made. (& pls cite the alleged 'ad hominem' attack I made against you, I couldn't find one) .. as for DC, I lived in the md suburbs for 30 years, within 4 miles of DC line; .. DC bans the death penalty(DP) while it is surrounded by 2 states, virginia & maryland, which have the DP - I don't believe there is any other US city >75k population with a similar situation. Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him, or bring the body into DC & dump it there so as to avoid the DP if caught, this inflates DC's murder rate. .. progun richmond va, DC's sister city 100 miles south, similar demographics, had a ~2005 murder rate about 45 vs. DC's ~36, wha happen? more guns more lies. ... in 2005 DC's violent crime rate was 26th in the USA, with the following cities in progun states having higher vcr rates than DC: StLouis, Detroit, Flint, Memphis, MiamiGdns, Orlando, LIttle Rock, Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, NCharlestonSC, PompanoBch, StPeteFl, Tampa. http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05a.pdf

.. you asked me to cite DC's crime rate, so I did, but it only demonstrates the pro gun tactic of pointing out an odorous smell, while ignoring the stink in their own backyard. MORE GUNS, MORE LIES.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

edskis: It pains me even to use this horrific example to make a point about the basic human right of self defense.

.. the basic right to self defense has been around for thousands & thousands of years, the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with it's inception. .. your belief that many of these murders could have been prevented were a gun used in self defense is specious & beggars belief. .. pro gun crowd lives a delusion, some 2nd amendment mythology which masks the truth about guns & adheres to some fabricated 2nd amendment mythology bible which preaches an armed fantasy doctrine, where armed citizens walking the streets make the country safer, rather than causing more grief. .. guns are more the problem not the solution. .. gun people, tell me what you (think you) know, about switzerland.

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

Well Jimmy , thank God we do have a Bill of Rights in this Country. It's funny that the Founding Fathers didn't even think we needed to codify them because the rights contained therein were so obvious to them; I'm glad they did. It seems what was so obvious to our Founding Fathers is lost on some indivduals today. However, our interesting discussion would not be possible without the First. Permit me one more Ronald Reagan quote: "you can disagree with me but you don't have to be disagreeable." By the way my petard is perfectly fine.

0

OnTheBusGus 6 years, 6 months ago

rsssco - LOL!! Watched some of the related videos, they were pretty good too.

0

Jason Miller 6 years, 6 months ago

Smoke, please do us all a favor. Put down the BONG and take a basic grammar class.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

From George Orwell, the former Socialist:

"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."

He was speaking in political terms at the time the laborer's rifle as a bulwark against state excess, which, of course, is true. It's a principle that applies equally well to the law abiding citizen against the criminal. Only the deluded would believe that a prowler would choose to break into my armed household instead of Jimmy's unarmed home.

I'd also like to see the foundation for his assertion that: "Killers often either bring a victim into DC to execute him, or bring the body into DC & dump it there so as to avoid the DP if caught, this inflates DC's murder rate." That one almost made me laugh.

The PDF he links to cites a national average of 469 violent crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault) per 100k in population, vs. Washington DC's rate of 1,401. But it's only because rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight. The gun ban has nothing to do with it.

According to the CDC, in the 29 years for which data is available after the DC gun ban was imposed in 1977, DC's murder rate rose precipitously relative to other cities. During the ban, DC's murder rate was either 1st or 2nd for 15 years, and 4th for another 4 years. By contrast, the DC murder rate in 1976 was 15th.

In the 5 years before the ban was imposed, the DC murder rate fell from 37 to 27 per 100k. 5 years after the ban, it was back up to 35. During that same period (the 5 years leading up to the ban), robberies had declined from 1514 to 1003 per 100k. 5 years after the ban, robberies had risen 63% to 1635 per 100k. Since robbery doesn't carry the death penalty, one wonders what could be responsible for the "inflation."

Chicago experienced a spike in its murder rate after its 1982 ban was implemented (but I'm sure those numbers were "inflated" by death penalty avoiders). That doesn't explain what happened in England after their ban was instituted in 1997. Death and injury resulting from gun crime skyrocketed 340% (not a typo) in the 7 years from 1998 to 2005.

Jimmy's "more guns more lies" mantra is kind of amusing. I have more guns than I need (but not as many as I want). Anyone who wants to commit a crime against me in my home is welcome to try. I'll leave it to others to determine whether I'm lying.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

correction, clarification to my above post:

jazz: rapists robbers & thugs are trying to avoid the death penalty. Riiight.

.. DC having the death penalty BAN would not have any affect on rapists or thugs, just killers or potential killers, who would bring in victims, dead or alive, to avoid the death penalty in Va or Md where both states have death penalty.

0

ybul 6 years, 6 months ago

Switzerland is a nice place, which does not spend near a trillion dollars on its national defense. It does not appear to have the disparity in wealth that the United States does. While there, it did not appear to have the gang, drug issues.

Jimmy, have you ever heard of the The Battle of Athens

2 AUGUST 1946

On 2 August 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud -- forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies -- by the local political boss. They got no help.

They would be labeled terrorists today and only were patriots, trying to oust corrupt politicians. We have a few today, as McCain and Clinton both violate campaign finance laws, and the amount of wealth transfered to the rich via subsidies is egregious. It is unfortunate that the congress no longer sees any use for being constrained by the constitution.

That is the reason for the second amendment Jimmy. Your ignorance will enslave you.

0

MtnWarlock 6 years, 6 months ago

I guess the day they outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them! They will take mine from my cold dead finger on the trigger! :-{ Have a good day!

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

Jazz Slave, yubul, Colorado Native, Mtn Warlock, Good ones! Nice to have some Constitutional company!!!

0

bloggyblog 6 years, 6 months ago

blog thinks some of you didn't read the article. it was about CONCEALED weapons permits being on the rise. blog doesn't have an issue with firearms. if you feel the need to carry an concealed weapon then you can. its one of your constitutional rights as an American. but you darn sure better know what your doing before you pull it on anyone. jazzslave, owning a firearm will not deter a prowler. its usually one of the first things they steal!

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

bloggy: .. if you feel the need to carry [a] concealed weapon then you can. its one of your constitutional rights as an American.

.. uh no, for a couple reasons, there is no universal well reg'd militia these days & any rkba was incumbent upon military/militiary service (tho supr bozos will likely subvert this soon). .. secondly, concealed carry has frequently been outlawed or regulation has been included in state's constitutions. Hope this clears up the delusions dagunnuts are under:

1876Colo: The right of no person to keep and bear arms .. shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

1875 Missouri: .. but nothing herein contained is intended to justify the practice of wearing concealed weapons. 1912 NMex: ..but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. 1907Okla: .. but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons. 1879Lousian: A well regulated militia.. This shall not prevent the passage of laws to punish those who carry weapons concealed. 1891 Ky:..subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. 1889 Montana:.. but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. 1907 Okla:.. but nothing herein contained shall prevent the Legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons. 1978 Idaho: this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person 1890 Mississ: , but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons. 1876 Texas: ..the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime. progun source: http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm

0

ybul 6 years, 6 months ago

I think that I would rather have people with concealed weapons as opposed to everyone walking around with guns on their hips. Seems more appropriate for the times.

The knowledge that people might have a firearm would deter a prowler if you are home.  Most prowlers do not go into a house they think is occupied as they do not desire confrontation, especially if they are not sure they have the upper hand.
0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy....... Are you serious? People commiting murder in the surrounding states and then dragging dead bodies to DC! Not a chance, you give the creeps alot of credit, WOW. What premeditation. Besides, with forensic science today you can tell what, where, and when so avoiding the penalties from the states where the crimes occured is out. first of all tell me the last time MD executed someone. Here is a recent story from the Wash.Times.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun/01/spasm-of-violence-in-dc-leaves-7-dead-over-9-hours/

As a long time resident of the MD suburbs I can tell you that the only people who gave a hoot about the DC gun ban were the law abiding gun owners who would now suffer the criminality of these dumb laws and the robberies that the bad guys would carry out with impunity. The criminals carried on business as usual. Where were you when DC held its gun buyback days? Look at how many old peices of crap come out of the woodwork, I'm sure the young gang bangers that rule SE and NE give a darn about the death penalty when they are poppin a cap in someones rear end. PLEASE spare us your take on what the murderers do.

0

Ed Miklus 6 years, 6 months ago

My last blog on this subject. The militia argument doesn't hold water. For those interested in some esoteric reading on the indivdual's right under the Second Ammendment see Senior Circuit Judge Silberman's opinion in the D.C. Court of Appeals case decided March 9, 2007(No.04-7041).

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy writes:

".. DC having the death penalty BAN would not have any affect on rapists or thugs, just killers or potential killers, who would bring in victims, dead or alive, to avoid the death penalty in Va or Md where both states have death penalty."

Fine. Substantiate the assertion. Show me the study delineating this exodus of murderers from one jurisdiction to another. Just because you think it's a fact doesn't mean it is. If there was so much as a particle of truth to it, death penalty advocates would have been shouting it from the mountaintops for decades. Honestly, that's one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever seen - it doesn't even come close to passing the stink test. You might want to investigate the aroma in your own backyard before sticking your nose into someone else's.

If I understand you, the DC murder numbers were artificially "inflated" because of this trend you can't document. How is the 63% spike in robberies explained in the wake of the ban? Or Britain's 340% increase in gun crime related death & injury after its prohibitions were enacted? No death penalty to avoid in either instance.

You write: "...there is no 'gun ban' in DC..." Wrong on its face (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that you're merely inattentive, as opposed to a liar) . Handguns are EXPLICITLY banned in the District, and the statutes regarding long guns require those weapons to be disassembled, unloaded, and locked up. I'm sure the gang bangers & junkies desperate to score always wait patiently for the homeowner to unlock, re-assemble, and load his rifle before doing anything untoward or illegal. I've heard the criminal element is very reasonable under those circumstances.

Your characterization of DC's rank of 26th in terms of violent crime, while accurate, is nonetheless disingenuous. In cities with populations over 500k, DC remains the murder capitol of the US (as of 2005).

Nice job with the name-calling, by the way. It's entertaining, in a juvenille, 'mine-is-bigger-than-yours' kind of way.

blog:

My guns are locked up when I'm not home. Assuming they got past my 85 pound Bouvier, 4 Arnold Schwartzenaggers in their prime couldn't budge the safe they're stored in. Although, they could easily break into the locked nightstand where my bedside revolver is kept. I'd hate to lose it - it belonged to my mom.

If they break in while I'm home, good luck to them!

0

justathought 6 years, 6 months ago

I'm not going to argue this one, those that want to ban guns are the same one's that believe the government should take care of us instead of us being responsible for ourselves. To inject a little humor (below), I am definitely a redneck when it comes to my guns.

Democrat, Republican, or Redneck

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an obviously deranged man, carrying a huge knife, comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges at you. You are carrying a Glock cal 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?

DEMOCRAT'S ANSWER: Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? Should I call 9-1-1 ? Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. Hey, it's not his fault - it's ours for being here at this time! If we had given this man more welfare, social security and other benefits, he would not be angry at us. Somehow, I know Bush had something to do with this! This is all so confusing, I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.

REPUBLICAN'S ANSWER: Bang!

REDNECK'S ANSWER: BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click: (sound of reloading) BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click Daughter: 'Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points? Son: 'You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one? Wife: 'You are not taking that to the taxidermist.'

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

seeuski: People commiting murder in the surrounding states and then dragging dead bodies to DC! Not a chance .. with forensic science today you can tell what, where, and when so avoiding the penalties from the states where the crimes occured is out.

.. you are the one full of baloney - when there is little substantive evidence that the murder happened out of state, it can be left with DC to prosecute the case in their jurisdiction; you surely remember the rash of car burnings with ducttaped faces, to cover evidence. Lots were brought in from out of state, inter alia payback for bad drug deals. Killers also bring victims INTO DC & then execute them (as I said above).

seeuski: I'm sure the young gang bangers that rule SE and NE give a darn about the death penalty when they are poppin a cap in someones rear end. PLEASE spare us your take on what the murderers do.

.. I didn't say it accounted for the bulk of DC murders, I said it INFLATED the murder count & rate, maybe a remedial reading comprehension course would do all you gunnuts good.

.. I once befriended a homeless guy who lived in the maryland woods behind a mcdonalds ~1/2 mile from the DC line near stanton rd (metro station near there now). Used to come in sundays & give him a bigmac on a 2for1 coupon; couple months later didn't see him & counter clerk told me he'd been shot dead the past week, asked him where he was shot, out back in the woods? he said something like 'probably, but they found him on the DC side of the DC/Md line', so don't tell me it doesn't happen bimbo, cause I know it for a fact it do. .. Of course, this one would be easy to trace back to Md, a blood trail, but it provides certainty that attempts are made, & many are successful.

.. & from your link, this occurred with the gun ban in place, & there is no substantive evidence that guns galore in any place would reduce DC's crime & murder problem, as evidenced by st louis: (link).... The killings put the [DC]'s total for the year at 72, compared to 67 killings at the same time last year. [DC] recorded 181 killings last year - far below the peak total of 479 killings logged in 1991 but the first increase since 2002.

0

bloggyblog 6 years, 6 months ago

blog kinda had a feeling this was gonna be a hot topic. politics, religion and guns always seem to get people fired up(no pun intended). seriously, my only strong feeling on the topic is that proper handling and responsibility should be at the forefront of all gun ownership. blog thinks too many people resort to violent means to solve their problems. if you've ever been arround any true warriors then you know their usually the last ones to use force and will avoid trouble even if it means appearing weak. and lastly anyone who thinks their gonna charge in with guns ablazing and stop a bad guy, probably watches too much T.V.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: Handguns are EXPLICITLY banned in the District, and the statutes regarding long guns require those weapons to be disassembled, unloaded, and locked up.

.. who's the liar? you just told two lies. More guns more lies; Handguns can be legally owned in DC by retired cops, home business owners (hundreds if not thousands of home businesses in DC), & handguns owned prior to 1976 ban year are legal -- thousands of legal handguns in DC... DC is actually a may issue ccw 'state', but very difficult to get ccw. .. next lie from jazz, straight from gunworld's 2ndA mythology bible, about DC longguns needing be disassembled. Go back & read what I wrote above, the only requirement is for a trigger lock to be on it, OR it can be safekept. OR, it can be left out in the open if it is disassembled - disassembly is only an alternative way to store it, & is often used to justify one working on it so as to make that work legal. .. a trigger lock on the rifle leaves it accessible for 99% of instances where a gun would dissuade criminal intent or need be used defensively. Spare me rambo dropping thru the roof & shouting 'give me money or you're dead'.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: Or Britain's 340% increase in gun crime related death & injury after its prohibitions were enacted?

.. another LIE, another misconception from the 2ndA mythology; You are pathetically misinformed: Number of Deaths from Firearms Injury - United Kingdom, 1997 to 2006 .. 1997 198, 98 229, 99 207, 00 204, 01 193, 02 181, 03 187, 04 191, 05 185, 06 210.

Patients admitted to hospital in England as a result of gunshot injuries 199899 134 ... 19992000 117 ... 200001 102 ... 200102 155.... 200203 129

Injuries to Police Officers Crimes recorded by the police in which a police officer on duty was injured by a firearm 03 97-98 serious injury 3, slight injury 3 02-03 serious injury 1, slight injury 11 http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF07.htm

.. the above figures might occur within a couple months in many big US cities, including progun dallas or houston or nashville or memphis, so if you think this horrendous how do you explain US hospital admissions? iirc gunshot wounds cost US 80billion dollars a recent year, england maybe 1 billion if that. .. about half of britain's increase in guncrime is due airgun crime, or airguns converted to (presumably) single shot 'zip gun' types, & subsequent minor injury which usually ensues, nothing even like what a monster bullet 22 caliber short can do... (said facetiously since you guys aren't all that swift at comp). .. advice, stop believing **** you read in your gun lobby & nra propaganda magazines, & start treating them with suspicion, you'll be wiser.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

jiminy _the_cricket

you said:"so don't tell me it doesn't happen bimbo, cause I know it for a fact it do."

You think you can start calling people who disagree with you names? Beat it kid.

Oh, and good grammer.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: Your characterization of DC's rank of 26th in terms of violent crime, while accurate, is nonetheless disingenuous. In cities with populations over 500k, DC remains the murder capitol of the US (as of 2005).

.. he uses the word 'disingenuous' in the same sentence he calls DC a murder capitol (sic, capital), of cities >500,000... gong, a LIE, or at best 'disingenuous'. .. there are about 35 US cities with pops >500,000, & of course NYC with 7 million is largest US city, & will often have the highest murder total, simply because it has 3 to 14 times more people than the other ~34 big cities >500k. .. so DC with 181 murders last year can't possibly be tops in total, which leaves murder rate for the 35 larger cities, & at about 36 murder rate it might take topspot, but not when you include all ~360 american cities with pops >75,000. .. 'murder capital' title includes all US cities, stop data mining & moving the goalposts.

0

rsssco 6 years, 6 months ago

From DC v. Heller: "To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia." Amen!

0

bubba 6 years, 6 months ago

I'm all for gun control. I can't hit anything!

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

spukomy: .. Jimmy the One, I still can't figure out if you think people should have the right to have a gun in their home. Also, are you citing stats from "violent crimes" or "crimes involving a firearm"? Thanks.

.. so far I think it's been violent crime stats for american figures, & then jazz mentioned british GUN crime so I profferred UK guncrime stats in reply. .. people can own a gun in their homes for all I care (tho with young children I wouldn't advise it unless it's safekept under lock & key), it's where & when they can take their guns in public that is more the sticking point, & the misbelief that 'more guns means less crime', when it's really been more guns more lies. .. note: jazz likely got guncrime mixed up with british violent crime, which did have a 300+% increase over the past 9 or 10 years (about 30% per year linearly). But there are mitigating circumstances - they started including two 'new' crimes, common assault & harassment, as violent crimes, but neither crime incurs physical injury; common asslt & harassmt accounted for 37% of all violent crime in one recent year, so that greatly inflates british crime. .. they also had 2 crime recording modifications circa 2000 which inflated violcrime stats by about 10% each, so instead of say a robber robbing 5 people in a car counting as one crime, it now counts as 5, see how it inflates?

.. as in the US we have 2 crime indicators, the fbi ucr (uniform crime report) end of year 'recorded crime', & the ncvs nat crime victimization SURVEY, the british have home office recorded crime & a BCS british crime SURVEY, which surveys brits across the UK & is an indicator of UNrecorded crime as well as rec'd crime, whereas rec'd crime is only what's recorded. The BCS actually shows a decrease in violent crime since the dunblane handgun ban: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0607.html

brit home office: 17% were common assault (including assault on a constable) and 20% harassment, both of which involve no physical injury to the victim. In addition, many of the 'less serious woundings' (43% of violent crime) will have resulted in minor injuries, such as bruises, grazes and black eyes. http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page63.asp

0

bloggyblog 6 years, 6 months ago

all this talk about guns has got blog thinking. bloggy wants to film an action movie in steamboat with lots of guns and explosions. how about 'die hard in the boat', no wait, too long. something shorter 'boat hard', nope thats no good, sounds like a porno. i know 'Blogbo'! former special forces bad ass john blogbo has retired in steamboat springs trying to lead a quiet life when....disaster strikes. a friendly group of locals are waiting patiently at the gondola on a powderday when some terrorists snowboarders cut in line!!! one call to Blogbo remedies the problem. he springs out of hiding at the bottom of the run and mows down the terrorists snowboarders with a machine gun, "you may of got first tracks but Blogbo got first blood'. what do you think? there's also an alternative ending where Blogbo saves angelina jolie from a broke down chairlift

0

MtnWarlock 6 years, 6 months ago

Hand guns are made for killing, plain and simple. They are tools for killing. Like any tool, misuse it, there is going to be trouble, intentional or not intentionally! I grieve when I hear of people committing suicide, or people accidentally shooting themselves because of ignorance of guns or intentionally harming innocent folks. I have been around fire arms since I was little. I Taught my kids how to use guns! In my grown years, I used my marksmanship in the military. No matter what you use to kill someone, you will achieve a killing if you really want it, no matter what you use! Be it a car, gun, knife, ball bat, bomb, ice pick, poison, hand to hand combat, etc., you will get the same result, it's just that some are more unprofessional and make it personal that creates messiness. A pro will sit a thousand yards away with a .223 magnum rifle and fulfill their dirty deeds! Those guys scare me because you never hear the bullet coming to bite you! Of course, a scared kid with a gun is another scary situation! Thousands of folks get murdered by all kids of things other than by guns every day in the US and around the world! It seems that when a gun is used, we have a literal sh!t fit and publicize the hell out of it! My form of gun control is placing my bullet precisely where I aim it to go! As far as a militia goes, my abilities will aid the local law or military in a national crisis! Yes, I do own assault rifles, hand guns, and tons of ammo. I collect them! Before we outlaw anymore of our fire arm freedoms, let's just outlaw the idiot first! Maybe guns won't get such a bad rap! Have a good day!

0

id04sp 6 years, 6 months ago

People who have lived in the big cities and watched the news on TV know who is committing the gun crimes. They are not people who own guns for home protection.

Moving here to get away from them was the best idea for how to deal with it.

0

armchairqb 6 years, 6 months ago

I know a lot if people who think it is safer to have a gun in one place and the ammo in another in order to avoid an accident. This however just makes the gun a very expensive hammer.!!!

0

spukomy 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy the One, I still can't figure out if you think people should have the right to have a gun in their home. Also, are you citing stats from "violent crimes" or "crimes involving a firearm"? Thanks.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

seeuski: Obviously since the death penalty doesn't apply in DC more murderers are bringing their victims bodies into DC. .. Maybe a good argument for the death penalty!

.. since, as I've said, DC appears to be the only major jurisdiction which fits this predicament - a major city without the DP surrounded completely by two states which do have the DP - it appears a singular case. .. even so it would likely not lessen area homicides were DC to adopt the DP, killers would have no 'incentive' to bring or dump victims in DC, & would just do the killings in Md or Va instead. .. is there any point to your posting blurbs on gun violence in DC? we don't need another newscaster; gun violence occurs daily in houston dallas las vegas nashville memphis & all the pro gun cities as well. .. actually arresting the 23 yr old rifle shooter in rock creek park (national zoo) was a non incident, violent crime wise; gunfire at night to maybe 3am in the district is likely a continuous stream of shootings by the minute, if you could consolidate the noise. .. that DC has high violent crime rate is not really the issue, it's whether repealing the handgun ban would make the situation better, & since there is no conclusive evidence that this would occur, the choice of action should be to allow DC residents to continue their 'home rule' policy of self governance; .. gunnuts have no right to impose their interpretation of 2ndA upon others, & if the supreme court alters historical interpretation of 2ndA as being a collective right, it opens a pandoras box of new problems, such as a dictatorship would enjoy in denying democratic principles.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Facts just the facts.

No anecdotes.

Please provide the archival news reports of the duct taped victims that were dumped.

Aint none.

0

AmebaTost 6 years, 6 months ago

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Gunman from DC arrested in DC for firing a rifle in DC. I guess that there are still people in DC who don't obey the law.

Maybe the cops lied about the mans address and dragged him into the city and couldn't find the "duct tape".

Obviously since the death penalty doesn't apply in DC more murderers are bringing their victims bodies into DC. Maybe a good argument for the death penalty! Gee, criminals must care.

http://www.nbc4.com/news/16506313/detail.html?dl=headlineclick

0

AmebaTost 6 years, 6 months ago

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

0

knee_dropper 6 years, 6 months ago

If gun ownership = safety, then it follows that a place like Iraq that is awash in guns must be one of the safest places in the world. Or maybe they just need more guns. Being surrounded by people with concealed weapons (legally or not) does not make me feel any safer, especially some grandma out there that thinks she's Dirty Harry. Hope she's got a steady hand!

0

cmducks 6 years, 6 months ago

Lets ban the guns so we can go back to killing each other with swords. They seem to rationally talk everything out in Braveheart!!!

0

grannyrett 6 years, 6 months ago

Those who would kill, will kill with whatever is available. Amebatost is right. Good post. If you take away the citizen's right to own guns, how will they protect themselves from those who would do them harm? If someone is going to kill and doesn't have a gun, will he use a knife, a bat, what? Then will the government outlaw knifes, bats? It's sad that there are people who will kill. It's would be sadder if people were not allowed to defend themselves.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Oh, and I don't own any guns, just would like the right to as the Constitution guarantees us.

0

spukomy 6 years, 6 months ago

AmebaTost, I'm pickin' up what you're layin' down.

0

housepoor 6 years, 6 months ago

I am a supporter of the right to bear arms but as in any "right" or privilege comes a responsibility. I feel if you commit any crime with a firearm or while in possession of a firearm (other than traffic) you should lose that privilege for life along with any other associated penalty. That goes for anything from armed robbery to firing a handgun for fun in a residential area at 3am or brandishing a gun while intoxicated. You should only get one chance; a mistake with a firearm is lethal. As I read your comments I feel that most are obviously responsible gun owners. It would wise for the gun supporters & NRA to support tougher penalties for gun related crimes as I feel it would go a long way in eyes of public opinion.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Housepoor,

I agree totally. I am not sure of the requirements for legal gun ownership, but I expect that criminality while armed or being convicted of a felony excludes the person from legal ownership. I would also like to see the justice system properly punish criminals that commit violent crimes and protect society. There are so many lenient sentences handed out. All one needs to do is look at the criminal records of most violent criminals that are commiting repeat crimes. I especially feel that some judges don't take sriously enough offenses against women or children that include acts like stalking, sexual abuse, rape and other aggravated crimes. There have been too many high profile cases recently that fall into this category. As far as legal owners being responsable, It seems rare that any crimes are commited by this category. And weapons,like drugs, will be obtained by the bad guys no matter what the laws are whether DC or any other state.

0

cmducks 6 years, 6 months ago

It's odd that many of the same individuals who would argue that banning hand guns to "control" them are the same ones who would vote to legalize pot so that it could be controled better, because as we all know that prohibition in ANY form, doesn't work as well as it should in candy land.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

seeuski: A parroting 2 hour recital of the gun law ammendments from 1968?

.. took you 2 hours to read that brief post? whew, add plain remedial reading to reading comp. .. fopa was enacted 1986. NRA helped it's passage & fopa restored (alleged) gun rights to certain ex felons (of course they still barred ex violent CONVICTED crims, robbers, murderers, aggravated assaulters). .. but this is all you can do in reply? aren't you even going to try to weasel your way out of another misconception of yours? in your delusionary gunworld?

seeuski: I wish people like you would spend more energy going after the bad guys that commit crimes rather than blaming the problems on those that follow the rules.

.. specious silliness, it's not surprising you would rather not hear disputing voices which run contrary to your own, you'd rather live in a delusionary world where guns are great guns are good thank you god for your guns amen.
.. since I'm just about the only 'contra-voice' you hear on here, a remark like that suggests you prefer to tapdance around the facts & truth rather than confront them - albeit typical of the gun crowd. I suppose everything I say is lies eh? like st louis? metro areas? montana violent crime tripling? some logical pro gun explanation which nra will fabricate to extricate? eh? .. oh I know, bring up washington DC, then strut.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy jimmy jimmy, Touched a cord did I? Wheres the duct tape? As you stated:".. since I'm just about the only 'contra-voice' you hear on here, a remark like that suggests you prefer to tapdance around the facts & truth rather than confront them - albeit typical of the gun crowd." Jimmy you are in the minority and the constitution is against you. One last time, I DO NOT OWN A GUN. Just because I believe in our constitutional right to bare arms does not make me your friendly gunnut. I know it sucks having been called out by another DC native with your cute duct tape stories, so who is bending the truth here?

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

seeuski: .. I expect that criminality while armed or being convicted of a felony excludes the person from legal ownership.

.. sometimes, but you can thank YOUR nra for working hard to restore firearm rights to certain ex felons in fopa, firearm owners protection act (1986)... I think it involved a wait period of a few years, & then voila! guns back!.. so disabuse yourself from the idea that convicted felons are always excluded from gun ownership!

.. The bar on possession by felons would be narrowed to those convicted of certain "disabling crimes" defined as violations of 23 chapters of [US Code] "or any similar crime." Persons under indictment were not included within the proscription, nor were persons with convictions "set aside or expunged." Criminal prosecution would require proof of a willful violation. Forfeiture would require conviction; any verdict other than guilty, or failure to prosecute within 120 days of seizure, would require return of the seized property. Only firearms named and "individually identified" as involved in or used in (not "intended" to be used in) a willful violation would be subject to forfeiture. License revocation would be barred if criminal charges were filed and the licensee was not convicted. .. Many of these [fopa] changes bear the appearance of a quid pro quo.. most grew out of the early stages of negotiation between the (NRA), the MAIN PRIVATE SUPPORTER of the bill, and Treasury.. http://www.guncite.com/journals/hardfopa.html

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

jimmy 2 shoes,

I am not, as you like to call it, a gunnut. You can google search all day long looking for the archived stories of duct taped people killed in VA an MD then dumped in DC and this is what you bring? A parroting 2 hour recital of the gun law ammendments from 1968? Please! I am not willing, even though I don't own one, to give up my rights to ownership of a gun if and when I feel threatened. I wish people like you would spend more energy going after the bad guys that commit crimes rather than blaming the problems on those that follow the rules.

0

StbtWatchmen 6 years, 6 months ago

MtnWarlock, There is an eerie reality to what you speak of killing and guns and you speak as though you have experiences. I totally agree with you when you say lets get rid of the idiot first! How do we do that, shoot em! (Joking)! I believe your view. I used guns in my old occupation.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Hey Jimmy,

We made the paper today. They posted the DC crime story on page 24.

Good blogging does work.

Thanks.

0

slinger01 6 years, 6 months ago

This is a free country with individual rights. If you choose not to carry or own a firearm then dont. Those that meet the strict qualifications and go through the training that choose to own or carry concealed should have the opportunity to make that decision. I for one would rather be prepared for a bad situation and never need to use my preparedness then be the victim of some deranged idiot. I dont think I will invest and wear a bullet proof vest backed up with my pepper spray hoping an armed and deranged person does not shoot me in the head why I defend myself by spraying them with my pepper spray. And yes we do live in a dengerous world. If you dont believe me then turn on the TV and watch the news. Tell the family of those 2 young teenage girls in Oklahoma who were brutally murdered last week this is not a dengerous world. If you were in that kind of situation wouldn't you want to have some way of defending yourself?

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

Since Jimmy appears to believe ancecotes=evidence, here are a couple - famous family story:

Some months after I was born, my dad packed mom & me into the family Chevy for a day trip to the mountains.

We stopped at one of their favorite mountain parks. At some point during our stay, a couple of bikers rolled in. Dad could tell they were trouble, so he packed wife & issue into the car. During the load up, one of the bikers encouraged him to hand over "summa that g00k tail" (mom was Asian). The loudmouth biker walked to the car and leaned into the driver's side window. He found himself looking down the barrel of dad's .357. Loudmouth slowly backed away, and returned to his bike. He and his compadre saddled up and rode off.

No shots fired, no physical altercation, nobody hurt. Just a big stick on display, without comment or bluster.

Less famous family story: when I was in my 20s, I hauled my 1965 Barracuda to a friend's vacant building for storage. The building was a little off the beaten path, in a semi wooded area.

As I pulled in, I saw a couple guys about my age passing a crack pipe back & forth.

I said "hey guys, I hate to tell you - this is private property."

"F& You!" one of them replied, and picked up a piece of rebar.

The other guy was more cautious, and tried to restrain his buddy. Rebar Man wasn't having any. He shook off his buddy and started walking towards me. I pointed my pistol at him (Makarov 9m semi auto). Rebar Man's sidekick was able to talk some sense into him, and off they went.

Once my heart rate & blood pressure had returned to normal, I drove off & found a cop to report it to.

No shots fired, no physical altercation, nobody hurt. Just a big stick on display, without comment or bluster. And no duct tape.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

seeuski: .. called out by another DC native with your cute duct tape stories, so who is bending the truth here?

.. I'm not bending the truth, you're just blind to it, the obvious... "Prof Robt Blecker recorded his interview with a convicted murderer. The murderer robbed and killed drug dealers in Was DC., where he was conscious that there was no death penalty. He specifically did not murder a drug dealer in Virginia because, and only because, he envisioned himself strapped in the electric chair, which he had personally seen many times while imprisoned in Virginia." http://www.dpinfo.com/ ... about half way down this long link. No it does not contend killer brought victims into DC but call up first precinct in DC & ask to speak to a cop, or knowledgeable person, & ask them about my premise.

seeuski: you are in the minority and the constitution is against you.

.. huh? a majority of americans still favor stricter gun control rather than looser. .. do you contend a complete disconnect between the 'well regulated militia' (clause) and the 'rkba' clause? a complete disconnect, is that what you say?

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

OK Jimmy,

I agree, the death penalty is a deterent.

But........Where's the duct taped victims you claimed were dragged into the city.

The gun control most Americans like myself favor is to control the criminals who commit crimes with real justice(time should fit the crime and death when capital crimes are involved like child killers).

Although I am in favor of stricter laws on fully automatic weapons like uzis and ak47's. But I understand the laws will be broken by bad guys through black market purchases so that leaves us with proper justice being meted out from the start and keeping these perps out of society.

0

justathought 6 years, 6 months ago

Sorry to interrupt you two but I think it's a lot more like a very loud mouthed minority and a bunch of liberal judges that want to rewrite the constitution to fit their interpretation of what they think it should be. I own guns, I have never shot anyone or used them committing any crime, to be exact I am a law abiding citizen that does not commit crimes (with or without a gun). Should I choose to conceal carry, I will do it legally and get a permit. NONE of you have any damn business trying to take MY rights away! You don't like what criminals are doing with guns, go after them and mind your own business when it comes to law abiding citizens. This crap of making laws for everyone because of the actions of a few has got to stop. Too many of you have your noses in everyone else's business trying to protect us from ourselves, WHY is your way any better than mine other than the fact you think it is? In stead of stricter control over my ownership, try stricter enforcement of the laws you already have or is it just easier for you to feel like your doing something when you put more restrictions on the good guy than it is to prosecute and punish the bad guy?

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

.. (to seeuski), what was that about being in the minority, hotshot?: "Over 70% of DC residents .. support the city's strict gun laws and oppose H.R. 3193."

... "Congressional action to remove effective protection from gun violence ignores the will of the 572,000 DC residents who in large part support the gun ban. ... Over 70% of DC residents, the entire DC City Council .. support the city's strict gun laws and oppose H.R. 3193. While we recognize that the Constitution gives Congress a special role in governing [DC], we decry the House action that ignored these facts and was not responsive to the will of the people of the District and its leaders." ... "H.R. 3193 [lifting DC handgun ban] would end firearm registration requirements, lift safe storage requirements for legally owned firearms, and allow handguns and assault weapons in DC's homes and workplaces. Most guns used in crimes in DC come from other states -- almost 60% of traceable guns come from Maryland or Virginia. Putting more weapons on DC streets will increase violence and make a city that is already uniquely vulnerable to terrorism even more dangerous"

[DC's] gun ban emerged from exasperation. Still reeling from the riots of 1968, the city saw violent crime rise and residents flee to the suburbs. In 1974, two years before the ban took effect, more than half of all homicides were committed with handguns. ..There were an estimated 22,000 registered gun owners in the city in 1976, but a Georgetown poll found 3 of 4 city residents supported the bill. The law cleared the DC Council in a 12-1 vote and went on to survive both a court challenge by [nra] and efforts in Congress to scuttle it.

.. why don't gunnuts keep hands off DC affairs?

0

MtnWarlock 6 years, 6 months ago

StbtWatchmen, I used weapons for my occupation as well! Now I'm just an enthusiast of fire arms. Educate the idiot and we will have fewer lethal incidences however, ignorance is easy, powerful and deadly. Oh, and no offense taken with the joke. As far as it goes with the DC issues, it's hard to believe it's our capital city! Mother freedom sure has a way of being defiled like no other! :-( Have a good day

0

smoke 6 years, 6 months ago

nice storys jazz. daddys in his car. insted of driving away he puls a gun. your in your car. instead of driving away you pull a gun. rotten apple from the same tree.

0

seeuski 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy,

Are we talking the whole of the country or are you going to use the stats from those poled in DC because they work better for you?

Bimbo Hotshot!!

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

So a couple of misunderstood victims of society, wearing masks and pointing a gun, break in on an elderly couple and his wife & demand his wallet:

"Jackson, 70, said the teens were wearing masks, demanded his wallet and threatened to kill him.

He said he pretended he was having a heart attack to buy himself a couple of seconds to reach for the gun he had in his waistband.

"They had the weapon two feet from my head -- I thought I was dead," he said.

He said he fired because he wanted to protect his wife, who was in the kitchen at the time."

Mr. Jackson, in a selfless act of civic responsibility, reduced the choirboys' IQs to zero.

Had this happened in DC, Mr. Jackson would be in jail. On the other hand, Mr. Jackson appears to be a law abiding man. I'm sure the perps would have waited patiently for him to unlock his rifle.

0

forreal 6 years, 6 months ago

we, as americans, are irresponsible if we don't own guns. especially if you have a family. who's going to protect you if something goes wrong? the police? are you kidding me? the law of the land probably wouldn't even protect you. this is the united states of america. the person who rapes and kills your young daughter even has rights, somehow. the responsibility is yours. believe it or not, even in this tiny little whitebread mountain town, things can get ugly. there's bad people everywhere. wheteher you accept it or not, it is what it is. none of us asked for this. protect you and your own, regardless what the law says.

0

armchairqb 6 years, 6 months ago

as one of the high school kids said in his quote in the yearbook---"Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6"

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

forreal: protect you and your own, regardless what the law says.

.. charles bronson lives. hang em high in tombstone, forreal.

"Child's play ended tragically after a 4-yr-old girl was shot by her 5-yr-old brother. "(The) 5-year-old had gotten the gun down to play with it. Yes, ended pointing it at his sister and pulled the trigger shooting the girl ending her life, killing her," It was an accident that no one saw coming. Officers say the five-year-old pulled a chair up to a six-foot tall bookcase. The gun was on top of the bookcase with one bullet in the chamber. father, 24-year-old and the children's 15-year-old step-sister and an aunt were at home at the time, but they were in another room. "You could possibly be looking at neglect charges here,"

.. had the gun a trigger lock or been stored in a safe (as required in DC), there would be no unintentional homicide by child here.

0

smoke 6 years, 6 months ago

And if Mr. Jackson in Louisville had trigger locked, disassembled, or stored his gun in a safe (as required in DC), it likely would have been him and/or his wife on the slab.

"You could possibly be looking at neglect charges here,"

"Possibly"?? I would think negligent homicide, at a minimum.

0

forreal 6 years, 6 months ago

you're right, jimmy the one. i guess if you're completely stupid then you shouldn't have a gun, let alone, kids. ignorant parents usually produce ignorant and/or dead kids.

0

slinger01 6 years, 6 months ago

I dont recall any one mentioning that if guns were outlawed, then only outlaws will own them. Think about it for a moment. If all the law abiding citizens gave up their guns because a bunch of whimpy politicians decide that guns are the reason for violence, then the law abiding citizens place themselves at the mercy of the criminals because one thing is for sure THE CRIMINALS WILL NOT GIVE UP THEIR GUNS. Criminals use guns to get the upper hand on their victims so why would any one impower them by knowing that any one they choose to victomize has no way to defend themselves.

Jimmy, If you and your family were on vacation and some idiot decided he wanted to rob you and rape your wife and daughter while you are forced to watch, would you prefer to have a chance to defend you and your family, or would you prefer to leave your desteny in the hands of your attacker?

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

slinger: I dont recall any one mentioning that if guns were outlawed, then only outlaws will own them.

.. I don't recall anyone trying to outlaw guns (in america).

slinger: If you and your family were on vacation and some idiot decided he wanted to rob you and rape your wife and daughter while you are forced to watch, would you prefer to have a chance to defend you and your family, or would you prefer to leave your desteny in the hands of your attacker?

.. spare me this specious claptrap, it's a false dilemma for one thing & a remote chance on the other, failing to take into consideration that any guns in the family would be of more risk than the remote odds of actually having to use them in self defense, especially as portrayed by the specious yet typical scare tactic above. ... furthermore I'd have a 'chance to defend the family' sans guns, via other methods, such as mace, machete, hammer, & bullet vests which I own & wear when going to town. Odd that gunnuts so afraid of thugs getting the jump on them they think their popgun will save them when the best device to prevent that would be a bullet vest, but I've encountered only 2 gunnuts who have one, over the past 10 years. .. & be careful where you carry guns when you go on vacation slinger - in some foreign countries, you could be in for an extended one, if caught with one.

0

Coy_oh_ty 6 years, 6 months ago

First I should say that I am ex-millitary, where I was awarded master manksmanship ribbions in small arms including .38 cal,.45 cal and 9mm handguns, I was also awarded master marksmanship ribbons in large arms up to and including 20mm gatlin and .50 cal rapid fire guns.I am always amazed at all the reasons people use to justify carrying a "hidden gun"I find self protection one of the weakest..short example.....say a person with bad intent is going to rob you...he or she already knows what they are going to do,,, steal from some unsuspecting sod.A person with a concealed weapon, unless their hand is always at the ready. is simply not only giving up their money but also a gun, which makes for another stolen gun on the streets. I know I know the NRA ..(Not Really Ammericans)would have us all believe that it is our right to defend the 2nd ammendment , if you believe that then invest yourself or your children in the millitary to defend your right aboard before the enemy is at the door.Anyone who truely knows guns small or large knows that handguns,semi-autos serve no purpose but to kill ,not hunt with but kill.I was taught that you do not play with guns both growing up and while in the millitary so I wonder what are grown men doing playing cowboy? Comone look at it for what it is "GUNS ARE NOT TOYS" The need for a concealed gun...funny how the paranoid mind works...much like that of a person who seems to always have the need to be talking on the phone....funny world. One last thought.. why are there no minorities on the board of the NRA? (Nazi Racist Aliance) interesting.....

0

forreal 6 years, 6 months ago

people are so afraid of each other. how pathetic we all have come to be. remember in school when people used to fight with their fists and then be alive when it's over? what happened? we are raising a generation of wimps. you can't even smack your child anymore. that is insane. the majority of these kids today have no remote idea of what discipline is and the majority of them could use a good smack to the head once in a while. they are not in charge, the parents are. and when kids turn out bad, the responsibilty is the parents'. and, jimmy, it's a slim chance of someone raping and killing your daughter until it happens to you. even in this town.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

I've avoided this particular blog for as long as I possibly could without commenting. Here are some statistics from The Journal of the American Medical Association. ACTUAL CUAUSES OF DEATH (in order) IN THE UNITED STATES, 2000 Tobacco 435,000 or 18.1% of total U.S. Deaths Poor Diet & Physical Inactivity 400,000 or 16.6% Alcohol Consumption 85,000 or 3.5% Toxic Agents 55,000 Motor Vehicle Crashes 43,000 Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000 Sexual Behavior 20,000 Illicit Use Of Drugs 17,000

It's interesting to note that the majority of the leading causes of death in the U.S. in 2000 did not require a permit or backround check. Yet you don't see or hear the same crys of outrage when it comes to some of the other leading causes of death compared to those relating to firearms. Are these other causes any less appalling? A gun is nothing more than an instrument or tool and it isn't the gun that kills someone, it's the neglegent or uneducated (uneducated in safe and proper use) person behind the gun that's responsible. Education and enforcing "existing" laws already in place are the keys to reducing gun related deaths in this country. Ignorance and lieniency in our courts are the real killers here. I am amazed that a 3,000 pound (vehicle) weapon that is capable of taking numerous lives with just one blow, alcohol, or that a mere pack of cigarettes all items that are attainable by virtually anyone draw so little public outcry by comparison. I am a sportsman, responsible gun owner, believer in the U.S. Constitution, and a proud member of the NRA. Here is a link for the statistics provided above. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgil/content/abstract/291/10/1238

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

Coy_oh_ty:

So the elderly Mr. Jackson in the story I linked to was just "playing cowboy"? Me & my dad too, I suppose, during the incidents I related. Instead of pointing my gun at the rebar crackhead, I should've waved a hammer at him instead (that's some of the most asinine advice I've ever heard, Jimmy. It actually made me chuckle).

You guys can whine all you like. In the aftermath of recent edicts from the federal bench, our gun rights are becoming more secure, not less so.

A tangential observation I've posted elsewhere in this forum: the Brinks home security tv spots are among the most ridiculous I've ever seen.

Hubby & wife getting ready to turn in for the night, a portrait of home, hearth, & domestic tranquility.

Tranquility is shattered by snarly-faced bad guy who kicks in the front door. Hubby comes running into the bedroom to announce "someone just kicked in the door!" The commercial is shot so we know Mr. & Mrs. Helpless are on the 2nd floor of the home. The only way out is through the bad guy. Instead of arming himself, Hubby looks out the bedroom window, LOL. Way to protect the family, Dad.

Brinks calls. Wife explains that someone has broken in. Brinks advises that the authorities will be notified. Hooray! All Mr. & Mrs. Helpless have to do is hope they won't be injured or killed whilst waiting for the cops to arrive! All is well!

A more useful dramatization: Hubby & wife getting ready to turn in for the night, a portrait of home, hearth, & domestic tranquility.

Tranquility is shattered by snarly-faced bad guy who kicks in the front door. Hubby comes running into the bedroom & liberates the 12 gauge (he doesn't live in DC, so he doesn't have to unlock or re-assemble the weapon). Hubby acquires the target & sends bad guy into the light.

Brinks calls. Wife asks for authorities to be notified, so appropriate reports can be taken.

0

MtnWarlock 6 years, 6 months ago

Jazz, Don't forget the interrogation by the law and litigation the family will have to endure because of being sued by the perpetrators family civilly, for wrongful death due to their action to protect themselves! Anti-gunners dream case! My NRA membership does not expire because of those situations! Have a good day!

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: Instead of pointing my gun at the rebar crackhead, I should've waved a hammer at him instead (that's some of the most asinine advice I've ever heard, Jimmy. It actually made me chuckle).

.. huh? a hammer can be used to defend oneself, it has & it does, you can pound with it or throw it, it's a good deterrent in a pinch, your laughter is ill placed, juvenile. Slinger did not say his rapist had a gun, & a hammer mace or machete' would indeed be helpful in self defense which is why I suggested them, why does this make you laugh? are you dense? .. to use a hammer against a gun is risky for sure, but as a last resort or even a calculated risk it's better than nothing; a handgun's accuracy overall is about 18% of shots fired in violent or unruly incidents, higher the closer one is to target, so if one is nimble he has a chance. .. once again none of the mighty warriors are equipped with bullet vests, depending solely on the specious argument 'more guns less crime';

.. colorado bob makes another specious pro gun argument: "..the majority of the leading causes of death in the US in 2000 did not require a permit or backround check." .. driver's need obtain driver's licenses (permits) & register their autos, & insure them, & have them inspected yearly, & are restricted where they can take them, & face penalties if they violate the rules of the roads. .. smoking is a personal choice which affects only the smoker, & those living with him subject to 2nd hand smoke. Poor diet is also a personal choice, &, as tobacco, cannot be prohibited in a free society. .. drunk driving does indeed cause significant public outcry, bob, & the penalties climb with the severity of the resultant infraction; While the leading causes can indeed cause slow death over years, death was not the purpose for which their catalysts were made... your premise is specious bob.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

It makes me laugh, Jimmy, because it is so breathtakingly absurd. Advising anyone to face down an armed aggressor with anything less than superior firepower calls into question your intellect & common sense, and ratchets up the likelyhood of serious injury or death for anyone naÃive enough to agree with you.

Let's try a little quiz:

  1. Do you wish any of the Columbine teachers been armed? If not, why not?

If the answer is yes, how should they have been armed? a) With a machete b) With a hammer c) With a gun

If you selected anything other than "C", please explain why.

  1. Do you wish the 9/11 pilots had been armed? If not, why not?

If the answer is yes, how should they have been armed? a) With a machete b) With a hammer c) With a gun

If you selected anything other than "C", please explain why.

  1. Re: the elderly Mr. Jackson in the story I linked to earlier do you agree that he was fortunate to have been armed with a pistol, as opposed to a machete or a hammer? If not, why not?

Please note that none of these scenarios are hypothetical, and are exempt from your kneejerk "specious claptrap" wailing whenever you encounter an opinion at variance with your own.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: It makes me laugh, Jimmy, because it is so breathtakingly absurd. Advising anyone to face down an armed aggressor with anything less than superior firepower calls into question your intellect & common sense,

.. the only thing 'breathtakingly absurd' is your lack of reading comprehension; slinger did not say the rapist was armed, he only said daughter was being raped etc, & I replied there were other ways to defend oneself if one wishes not to carry a gun about him at all hours of the day, loaded armed for bear like your absurd gunnutted macho dogma dictates. .. if rapists were armed you create a different scenario, where you start shooting bullets which creates a hazardous situation within itself; & unless you are gifted with psychic powers you do not know whether rapists intend to kill or just leave. .. & people 'face down' armed aggressors with inferior firepower regularly, consider the iraqi insurgency armed with AKs & rpgs against US sophistication. Consider police with tasers. .. under your own inane logic, how can you defend arming teachers with handguns when the columbine shooters were armed with shotguns & rifles & bullet vests? teachers wouldn't have 'superior firepower' now would they? which would call into question theirs, as well as yours for suggesting it, intellect & common sense, NOW WOULDN"T IT HAFFWID?

jazz: .. and ratchets up the likelyhood of serious injury or death for anyone naÃive enough to agree with you.

.. do tell, yet you contradict yourself by suggesting arming teachers with anything less than 12 gauge pump actions, AKs or m16s or variants. .. go play in the sandbox with your gun & fantasize with slinger & forreal, hopefully you can only hurt yourselves.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy with all due respect what I offered in my comments were statistical facts, what you offer me in return is "spin." You are certainly entitled to your own opinion as am I mine. However each of your counter arguments are flawed. While we could argue the points one by one and do so for a millenium I see no real point in doing so. You have obviously made up you mind on the matter and no facts that anyone could produce would change that. Likewise, after nearly 40yrs. as a safe, responsible, and ethical gun owner and a firm believer in Constitutional rights my mind is made up as well. I will offer this one rebuttal and without further comment. By your logic there must be no such a thing as an "illegal" alien driving around in an unregistered, uninsured, motor vehicle, with a fake drivers licence and social security card in his or her wallet, working and paying taxes, getting caught, being deported, and showing up here again and again. I mean there are "backround checks," laws, and penalties to protect us form things like this, so this just can't and doesn't happen. You have a right to your opinion, whether or not you agree with me you've heard mine. For me to discuss this with you further would be pointless so my part in this discussion is over.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

Jimmy:

My reading comprehension is in better shape than yours; and my contributions here haven't been nearly as childish. Your schoolyard name calling might even be amusing were it not so puerile.

You deride anyone who asserts that violent crime is preventable if a potential victim is armed: ":[your belief that] murders could have been prevented were a gun used in self defense is specious & beggars belief."

So when me & my dad pulled our guns, our actions were "specious", right? We both should have exited our vehicles and confronted our aggressors with a hammer or a machete, outnumbered two to one, and just had faith that our opponents weren't packing a knife or a gun. Because people who accost and threaten complete strangers will always succumb to the enticements of Sweet Reason.

I note with amusement, but not surprise, that you completely avoided the issue of Mr. Jackson in Louisville. He and his wife were cleaning an apartment on their own property, and Mr. Jackson had a pistol in his belt. Does he fit your sneering definition of an adherent to "absurd gunnutted macho dogma"? More to the point, (and try to bring your first-rate reading comprehension abilities to bear here) Do you agree that Mr. Jackson was fortunate to have been armed with a pistol, instead of a hammer or a machete? If not, why not?

Do you wish the 9-11 pilots had been armed? If not, why not?

If the answer is yes, how should they have been armed? a) With a machete b) With a hammer c) With a gun

Your response to the Columbine question is particularly interesting. First of all, my apologies for being imprecise, re: how one should deal with an armed aggressor. The credit I gave you for common sense was perhaps a little too generous. So let me be explicit: as a martial arts instructor, I advise my students that flight is ALWAYS the first choice when facing a dangerous confrontation. If escape isn't an option, defend yourself as best you can with whatever you have. The question for you is: should a handgun ever be a component of that defense?

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

Continued:

You ask: "how can you defend arming teachers with handguns when the columbine [sic] shooters were armed with shotguns & rifles & bullet vests?"

Because it would have given them and their students a fighting chance. It seems to me the only alternative you've proposed is exactly what happened: cower and hide, and wait to be slaughtered.

Let's try again: Do you wish any of the Columbine teachers been armed (that's a yes or no question, by the way think you can handle it)? If not, why not?

If the answer is yes, how should they have been armed? a) With a machete b) With a hammer c) With a gun

If you selected anything other than "C", please explain why.

I especially loved this: ":& unless you are gifted with psychic powers you do not know whether rapists intend to kill or just leave."

LOFreakinL! An absolutely priceless caricature of liberal Kumbaya.

After ridiculing slinger for advancing a hypothetical, you respond with fabrications of your own, including the psychic powers jive.

And since we don't have psychic powers, how do you propose we determine how far the rapist is willing to go? Ask him to sit down & fill out a survey?

I'm pleased that Mr. Jackson in Louisville didn't worry about his assailants' ultimate motivations. I'm gratified that he was able to defend himself, and not at all concerned about men he shot.

Was he wrong? That's another yes or no question, incidentally.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

colo bob: .. my comments were statistical facts, what you offer me in return is "spin."

.. pfft, your premise was spin - that deaths due to personal life style choices somehow exonerated firearm deaths; guns are made for killing & are less regulated than teddy bears & other toys & commodity.

jazz: And since we don't have psychic powers, how do you propose we determine how far the rapist is willing to go? Ask him to sit down & fill out a survey?

.. you don't even have normal comprehension powers; how I got drawn into this stupid scare mongering by a bozo with a bozo - the argument is whether carrying a gun makes you safer; there is a big difference between statutory rape & murder, most all rapes do not end in murder. The remote rape scenario is straight out of 2nd amendment mythology, the armed fantasy. .. what I get for trying to make sense with the dense.

slave: I'm pleased that Mr. Jackson in Louisville didn't worry..

.. I don't even read your vignettes after getting the jist, post them for gunnuts enjoyment only.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

You are unable (or more likely unwilling) to answer straightforward, reasonable, yes or no questions regarding documented incidents relevant to the discussion you've chosen to take part in.

You are a coward, in other words, and it has become impossible to take you seriously.

0

spukomy 6 years, 6 months ago

My Mom packs daily. Her handbag has a small compartment for her gun that is designed to blow out if the gun is discharged. The company she bought it from will replace the purse, at no cost, if it is used as intended.

Being an RN, she has saved countless lives. She never wants to be in a situation where she has to use her weapon. If that time does come, I'll be glad she can defend herself.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz: You are unable (or more likely unwilling) to answer straightforward, reasonable, yes or no questions...

.. what, your nonsensical 3 part questions which are junk science? which establish nothing? a false dilemma in sheep's clothing. .. I didn't see any rebuttals to where I corrected your misconceptions & lies - pot kettle jazz.

gunslave: You are a coward, in other words, and it has become impossible to take you seriously.

.. while you're a rightwing nutcase; you've been exposed & should be humiliated for posting half truths & misconceptions & nra propaganda - now you just blow smoke to save face.

spukomy: Being an RN, she has saved countless lives.

.. oh yeah? great, but have you seen that gunlobby report where doctors & medical stafff kill more people per year than guns? something like that, been responsible for more deaths whether accidental or negligence, can't remember exact. .. didn't pay much attn to it since invalid, but was wondering if you subscribe to that, what your thoughts are on it.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

jazz, gunslave, spukomy, and others, suggest you just ignore a certain individual that provides little if any fact or reasonable thought and offers little more than insults and conjecture. If no one reponds to such remarks he will eventually just go away. Being ignored and basically talking only to oneself is sure to have an effect e v e n t u a l l y.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 6 months ago

colobob: .. suggest you just ignore a certain individual that provides little if any fact

... I have posted more fact than all posting gunnuts combined, open your eyes & read thru my posts from the start, then retract your above demonstrable nonsense. .. but you won't; there is no arbiter, no judge, so you can get away with your unsubstantiated subjective parry, part & parcel of rightwing gunnuts when actually faced with, the facts.

colobob: .. or reasonable thought and offers little more than insults and conjecture.

.. now this fits jazzslave to a tee.

cb:.. he will eventually just go away. Being ignored and basically talking only to oneself is sure to have an effect e v e n t u a l l y.

.. I'll eventually go away due the board dying out, but if you ignore me I would be a happy man, since you offer little but, more guns, more lies.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

424, go ahead and laugh, I've done it...................., minus the fish of course! Hence the remark to jazz about the water being a little too fast for my liking. Thanks to a hook & loop, back support wader belt I bought from Cabela's it was little more than embarrising. It must have been a sight and I'm sure it didn't look anything like the scene from "a river runs through it." More like someone chasing two pontoons downstream. The narrow belt that came with that pair of waders didn't exactly "float my boat," so I replaced it with this one and boy am I glad I did. By the way, great movie.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

consider it done. At least you had enough intel to realize who my comments were directed toward. Have fun!

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

Just for giggles,

One of my friends sent me this.

  1. Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

  2. If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics s%&k.

  3. I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

  4. When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.

  5. A reporter did a human-interest piece on the TexasRangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him "Why do you carry a 45?" The Ranger responded, "Because they don't make a 46."

  6. An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.

  7. The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm.

"Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?"

"No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle."

  1. Beware the man who only has one gun. He probably knows how to use it.

I was once asked by a lady visiting if I had a gun in the house. I said I did. She said "Well I certainly hope it isn't loaded!" To which I said, of course it is loaded, can't work without bullets!" She then asked, "Are you that afraid of some one evil coming into your house?" My reply was, "No not at all. I am not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and they are all loaded too." To which I'll add, having a gun in the house that isn't loaded is like having a car in the garage without gas in the tank.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

Hi Jazz, water in most places I like to fish still a little fast for my liking. Fear not this too will pass. There is a great spot (a sand bar) on the Yampa slightly downstream of the campground. It's actually the slack water side and usually holds a couple of bragging size rainbows visible in only a couple of feet of water. Nice fish by just about anyones standards. Planning a couple of day trips maybe a weekend to the Poudre in August as well as a trip to Teal in the near future depending of course on its accessability. If you've never fished Teal Lake you need to go. You can almost walk on the backs of the fish and I'm not exaggerating. Lots of fish and not very fussy! Hope my son doesn't read this. The area is pristine and the camping excellent. However if you have an aversion to black bear you might want to make it a day trip, they like it there too. Then again they don't seem to be all that uncomfortable in town lately either. Hope all is well?

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 6 months ago

All is well, albeit busy as hell.

I've got a buddy who's into river fishing. I've been promising him that I'd have him introduce me to it this year, but I haven't had the time so far. I've done oodles of deep sea fishing, but that's about it. I'm looing forward to climbing into some waders & giving it a try.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

Teal, trust me on this one. The fly fishing is amazing! A beginner or seasoned vet can have a blast there. I've been fly fishing since, well lets just say for a long time and have a ball fishing there, so will your buddy. I prefer the rivers and streams myself as a rule but when I get an opportunity to go to the (from this point on I'll refer to it as the T) T, consider me fishin'. Hot fly there in early August is the Prince nymph, bring plenty you're gonna need them. A couple dozen for one day won't be too many, more if you intend on staying the weekend although when they're biting they'll take just about anything. No better place to learn that I know of and in a pristine setting. The camping is outstanding. You and your buddy will both enjoy the trip I guarentee it. Busy is a good thing compared to the alternative.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

Hey, maybe I'll see you on the water. Been 3/4's of the way around the block and learned a few things. Maybe I can offer some advice although I think I just did. Have a great day and take the time to get out there. Life is short and tomorrows are full of uncertaintees.

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

I just pictured Jazz drifting down stream with a big ol' trout on the end of a fly rod Ala "a river runs through it".

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

Re: the movie, agreed,

I stick to water no deeper than my knees when I have hooks on my hat.

0

spukomy 6 years, 6 months ago

424, Loved that list.

Jimmy, Medical professionals are sworn to preserve life. Gunowners are not sworn to take life. Does the time my Mom CPRed her Priest back to life, after he collapsed during his sermon, count?

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

spukomy,

I am uniquely qualified to comment on your last post.

In the Army, I was a field medic, Clearing Station Ward Master and finally O.R. Tech. My job was to first of all to keep soldiers alive. Secondly I was charged with their safety and well being while they were under my care. This is why I was trained in hand to hand combat, edged weapons and the use of a .45 caliber Colt as well as the M16 and larger munitions. (I had 9 years head start on the hand to hand studies) Most days I hit whatever I aim at with the first shot. I am by no means the best shot around but I will give anyone a run for their money if we compete.

As my father, who served in France during world WWII recorded in our family bible, I also have never taken the life of another human in anger. I am a gun owner. More accurately I am a Rifle owner. I keep a loaded Rifle in the house. The only reason I do not own a hand gun is I have confidence in my common sense and physical abilities. If I were smaller or weaker it would make sense for me to own a handgun too.

I am a firm believer in the RIGHT to own and bear arms.

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

I was just rereading the above posts when I noticed this Jimmytheone comment,

"I have posted more fact than all posting gunnuts combined"

So I clicked on his ID and saw this,

Joined: June 2, 2008

Comments posted: 24 (view all)

Contact Jimmy_the_One (log-in required)

As I own a firearm and have over 700 posts throughout these threads I had to wonder what moniker he posted all those many comments under?

0

spukomy 6 years, 6 months ago

424, My Mom was also in the Army. Just long enough to get her nursing degree and find my Dad. Sounds like you've had some blood and guts experiances. Thanks for your service.

0

424now 6 years, 6 months ago

No need to thank me. I was just doing my duty. Looking back I would not change a thing. Thank you for the consideration. I appreciate it.

0

colobob 6 years, 6 months ago

424, I salute you as well as all those that serve, past, present, and future. May God keep those he has taken and protect those he has not.

0

madmoores 6 years, 6 months ago

After having read all the above posts in one shot (pun intended), I think I have gained a right to comment. First off from 424now: "As I own a firearm and have over 700 posts throughout these threads I had to wonder what moniker he posted all those many comments under?"

Reading all of them at once, it hit me about halfway through (as I started skipping over jimmy_the_one), I began to wonder if I was the only one that had noticed. Who else has posted here that makes one just skip over their long, linking, rambling postings and that will resort to degrading you upon disagreement with their posts? Hmmmmmmm....maybe not but their seems to be an eerie resemblance. Could it be?? Second, Jazzslave, the only answers to your quiz should be: 1. Yes, C 2. Yes, C 3. Yes, very fortunate, and smart. By the way, great stories about your two experiences, reminds me of my dad, same sort of mindset, he would have done the exact same thing. Owning a gun is a responsibility and only the responsible should have them and possess the right to use them. I was raised under the belief that a well armed society is a civilized society, it is the only way to keep those that don't play right under control. This comes from someone involved in the medical field that has seen what guns have done to people, on both sides of the fence. I would rather be on the armed side of said fence, my hammer is old and might break if I throw it at you.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 5 months ago

424now:.. I noticed this Jimmytheone comment, "I have posted more fact than all posting gunnuts combined" ... I clicked on his ID and saw this, .. Joined: June 2, 2008 Comments posted: 24 .. As I own a firearm and have over 700 posts throughout these threads I had to wonder what moniker he posted all those many comments under?

.. you took my sentence out of context bozo; in full context it reads: "I have posted more fact than all posting gunnuts combined, open your eyes & read thru my posts from the start.."- FROM THE START. .. obviously I was speaking of this particular thread when I wrote 'read thru my posts from the start'. And it should have been obvious even when taken out of context.

424: I was trained in hand to hand combat, edged weapons and the use of a .45 caliber Colt as well as the M16 and larger munitions..

.. so was I, with small arms; .. I qualified as marksman with the same gun, the 45, scored ~187 on the navy qual test first time I took it at annapolis scf (& only time), & am proficient with the m16 as well, hardly any recoil to speak of even with 3 rd burst, even after they switched to the 62 gr up from 55, imagine dat eh?

424: .. my father, who served in France during world WWII .. I keep a loaded Rifle in the house.

.. reflected glory seeker as well? .. you must be me in the parallel universe; I owned a ruger short & s&w 12 ga pump but rarely used them & got rid of them 10 yrs back, & pops was in the south pacific 4 yrs all during wwII, 2 purple hearts & survived, now he's in arlington nat cemetery (you figure it out).

colobob: 424, I salute you as well as all those that serve, past, present, and future.

.. you can rest that salute & stand at ease now, colobob, my 1970 1-A draft days are well passed.

0

sean_knorp 6 years, 5 months ago

I personally cannot bring myself to blame the gun when someone chooses to commit suicide. If a person wants to commit suicide they will find a way.

0

Jimmy_the_One 6 years, 5 months ago

So Jimmy, tell us all what it was like in CANADA in the 70's. I have no further reply for Jimmy either here or in any other post that he wishes to participate in. I'll just save myself the bother of even reading them and read intelligent viewpoints instead.

.. scruu colorectalbob

0

colobob 6 years, 5 months ago

I admit that this reply is childish but since the only ability that Jimmy seems to have is to toss insults around here goes. So Jimmy, tell us all what it was like in CANADA in the 70's. I have no further reply for Jimmy either here or in any other post that he wishes to participate in. I'll just save myself the bother of even reading them and read intelligent viewpoints instead. Have a nice life J i m m y.

0

424now 6 years, 5 months ago

Jimmy,

As you are obviously severely opposed to an Americans right to own and bear arms I will respect that opinion.

Other than that though we do not see eye to eye. Thats it and thats all.

0

seeuski 6 years, 5 months ago

DC just became a lot safer by a 5 to 4 vote.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 5 months ago

The most asinine reaction so far to Heller, from a commenter at the WaPo's blog:

"Not sure why we need guns for hunting in DC. And if we need them for self-defense, that makes it clear that the police can't protect us and we're all supposed to become vigilantes. That's great. I'm moving to Montana."

Got that? The only alternative to police protection is unfettered vigilanteism. If you're accosted by an armed assailant, just call 911 & hope for the best. It'll all work out.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 5 months ago

Had Gore prevailed in 2000, there'd be no Roberts or Alito, and Heller would have gone the other way.

Breyer is 70, and 4 of his colleagues are older than he is (Stevens the Socialist is pushing 90).

Something to keep in mind come November.

0

justathought 6 years, 5 months ago

I think it would be rather funny, does he think Montana will back a gun ban? Try LA, tell em it's environment related that bullets cause global warming.

0

JazzSlave 6 years, 5 months ago

You might remember the story of the 62 year old man who shot & killed of couple of choirboys who had just robbed his neighbor's house. The entire episode was recorded by 911; & it caused much anguish among those of the lefty persuasion.

The authorities have just administered a pat on the back & told our hero to have a nice day.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25461064/

To all those who thought Mr. Horn should have been imprisoned: you're SOL.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.