Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Guns in Public, and Out of Sight [View all]Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)49. Who gets to make that choice?
Who cares about differences in rates of criminal acts between toters and normal people. WTF does that have to do with rational behavior?
Because the huge hue and cry against concealed carry revolves around the irrational fear that such people will be a danger to society. When we can show that they are far less likely to be involved in crime than everyone else, we can show that that fear is irrational.
For example, I would possibly consider carrying a gun if I were an obvious potential target, like a jeweler, super rich guy, pimp, hooker, undercover cop, high profile celebrity or high profile asshole. Otherwise, I can't think of any reason why any bad guy might target me, unless of course, I show him my gun.
Well, like you said, "I prefer self control to government control."
People should be able to decide for themselves whether the hassle of carrying a gun is worth the risk of encountering bad guys. Most people aren't going to be in situations where they are at a great risk of violent crime, which is probably why most people don't bother carrying firearms.
But we shouldn't put roadblocks in front of people who decide that it is worth the hassle.
Because the huge hue and cry against concealed carry revolves around the irrational fear that such people will be a danger to society. When we can show that they are far less likely to be involved in crime than everyone else, we can show that that fear is irrational.
For example, I would possibly consider carrying a gun if I were an obvious potential target, like a jeweler, super rich guy, pimp, hooker, undercover cop, high profile celebrity or high profile asshole. Otherwise, I can't think of any reason why any bad guy might target me, unless of course, I show him my gun.
Well, like you said, "I prefer self control to government control."
People should be able to decide for themselves whether the hassle of carrying a gun is worth the risk of encountering bad guys. Most people aren't going to be in situations where they are at a great risk of violent crime, which is probably why most people don't bother carrying firearms.
But we shouldn't put roadblocks in front of people who decide that it is worth the hassle.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
187 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So refreshing and reassuring to know only the good guys carry guns, isn't it?
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#1
No, it's refreshing to know that not ONLY the bad guys can carry guns.
Atypical Liberal
Dec 2011
#23
Studied some Judo at police college and later I did some Karate training. No belts or special PJs.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#55
Training for a black belt is difficult. Takes dedication, determination and time.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#80
No bullshit, I'm relating real life experience. Nothing Hollywood about it. No contradictions.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#86
I'm not denying that a gun is more effective than a martial art. So is a bomb.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#58
He said "Then there are likely situations where a gun is the best answer"
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#81
I don't want to disarm anyone, not even the criminals. I definitely don't want to discuss your guns.
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#109
But since those people who legally carry in public represent no real threat to you
hack89
Dec 2011
#110
And that script will probably continue to be played out. Nothing new about your response.
Starboard Tack
Jan 2012
#136
Sanity is also not about repeating an unproven assertion, in the hopes it becomes accepted truth.
beevul
Jan 2012
#151
Again with the silly "guns are designed to injure or kill humans"...........
Simo 1939_1940
Jan 2012
#129
It's so refreshing and reassuring to know only the good guys use laptops, isn't it?
SteveW
Dec 2011
#30
I don't want to expand NICS or any other testing, except individual reality testing
Starboard Tack
Dec 2011
#38
Why don't you want to expand NICS? What were Bloomie's whiny videos about if not that?
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2011
#42
Then DO something. Support President Obama's proposals, for starters:
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#125
Can't help it- I took your claim to want effective gun control at face value.
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#138
Individuals make the choice - as long as government doesn't get in the way.
Atypical Liberal
Dec 2011
#56
"What makes you so special that these violent criminal pose a threat to you."
Simo 1939_1940
Jan 2012
#144
The number of guns in the US has risen, while gun violence has declined.
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2012
#184
Really good argument for more user fees to pay for background checks and record maintenance...
ellisonz
Dec 2011
#6
So we should have fees required to carry a book or speak in public, and to vote.
PavePusher
Dec 2011
#20
Or a good argument for just doing away with the requirement altogether.
Atypical Liberal
Dec 2011
#28
Sounds like N.C. may have a communication problem between law enforcement....
PavePusher
Dec 2011
#7
The article admits that there are crimes prevented by those who legally carry concealed...
spin
Dec 2011
#9
Hard for NYT "to track [gun self-defense] episodes." Esp. if they neither try...
SteveW
Dec 2011
#65