Quote from: John Morrow;217743The American Rifleman (the NRA's magazine) has a regular column called "The Armed Citizen" that reprints stories of people using guns to thwart crimes and, more often than not, the use of a gun to stop a crime does not kill anyone (sometimes they surrender and sometimes they are simply wounded).

The ratio is something like three wounded to 1 killed as I recall


However that's a poisoned stat (like many anti-firearm stats) as it includes suicide where the ratio is reversed. Nearly all anti-gun studies insist on keeping sucides in the numbers because otherwise there's no data to support gun control, this despite the fact that people will move on to other means to kill themselves when they don't have firearms.

The 3:1 ratio also doesn't included non-criminal use be it accident or self-defense, both of which leave far more people alive as the intent wasn't to kill. The ratio in those cases can exceed ten to one.

Edit: Another way anti-gun stats are poisoned IMO is the inclusion of criminal on criminal gun use which often makes up for most of the gun crime. Sometimes they even include self-defense and police use.

Quote from: John Morrow;217743I have no problem with the idea that gun owners should be trained to handle guns safely and have less of a problem with licensing than registration.

It should be noted that states with concealed carry laws require training before issue (at least the ones I'm familar with, OK & TX).

Quote from: John Morrow;217745So they should encourage American gun control advocates to put out those, "This House is a Gun Free Zone" signs if they really believe that the threat of encountering a gun plays no role in which houses a criminal targets or whether they choose to enter a house while the occupants are home or not.

I'm betting that no one (US based) will take that dare.

Quote from: gleichman;217782It should be noted that states with concealed carry laws require training before issue (at least the ones I'm familar with, OK & TX).

AFAIK All of them require training before issuing a CCW permit.  I know IN, KY, and MO do from personal experience.

Quote from: joewolz;217795AFAIK All of them require training before issuing a CCW permit.  I know IN, KY, and MO do from personal experience.

I was thinking there was a couple of exceptions...

Quick glance says Alaska and Vermont which even allow open carry (except local city/counties which may or may not make it moot) as well as concealed carry with no training or permit required.

I need to move to Alaska...


There may be others, here's a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)

Quote from: joewolz;217795AFAIK All of them require training before issuing a CCW permit.  I know IN, KY, and MO do from personal experience.

In my opinion, extensive training should be required before the issuance of any firearms license, and I believe a license should be required for every firearm, not just pistols [as in my state]. I also think a broader selection of firearms should be legal to own, but believe penalties for misuse should be extreme.

Being, as I am, of the libertarian leaning if not Libertarian party, I believe people shouldn't be prevented from owning things on the basis that someone else might misuse them: ownership should be unrestricted, but if you fuck up, you should get seriously penalized for fucking up. This allows every citizen their full rights, and invests the greatest amount of responsibilities and rights on the individual, rather than substituting the judgment of the government for that of the individual themselves. But I'm crazy.

Quote from: Engine;217807In my opinion, extensive training should be required before the issuance of any firearms license, and I believe a license should be required for every firearm, not just pistols [as in my state].

Such trust in the good will of goverment. US history has had (and will again I have no doubt) periods where goverments local or not used licensing and similar laws for less than the correct reasons.

In gun control specifically, local goverments simply refused to issue licenses and thereby effected a ban where there should have been no ban.

I'm not paranoid as such, but I do believe two things about goverment. It is best when it governs least, and it is the nature of goverment to expand its power.

Quote from: gleichman;217800I was thinking there was a couple of exceptions...

Quick glance says Alaska and Vermont which even allow open carry (except local city/counties which may or may not make it moot) as well as concealed carry with no training or permit required.

I need to move to Alaska...


There may be others, here's a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)

Thanks for the link and the correction.  I had heard about Alaska and Vermont, but they escaped my memory when I posted above.  I stand corrected.

Jimbo: If you want to put those topics into the discussion, why not bring them up as valid points rather than taking a secondhand snipe at the US again by passive aggressive moaning at their lack?  You know, like a reasonable poster...



Washington has concealed carry and, as far as I recall, no classes. Pay 60 bucks, show residence (or just wait 60 days after you apply) and bam, its yours... provided you aren't one of the disenfranchised.  Which is pretty funny when you consider how powerfully omnipresent the Obama love seems to be around here... and he's on that 'Jocelyn Foundation'... I think that was the name... board of directors... you know, the guys funding a huge portion of the anti-gun movement...

But then, the political power of the state does not actually seem to reside in the I5 corridor cities but in the conservative town and farm steads accross the mountains.  We are simple folk, people of the soil...

Quote from: gleichman;217816Such trust in the good will of goverment. US history has had (and will again I have no doubt) periods where goverments local or not used licensing and similar laws for less than the correct reasons.

That's certainly true, but I don't find the solution to such problems to be "eliminate licensing," I think the solution is, "eliminate abuse of licensing." We shouldn't [have to] give up something useful simply because some people use it for evil, right? As with guns, their licensing.

Quote from: Engine;217832We shouldn't [have to] give up something useful simply because some people use it for evil, right?

For individual rights, I can agree with this to a large but not limitless degree.

For government powers, there is a very limited field of agreement for me. Mostly as it relates to things outside our boarders.

Quote from: gleichman;217843For government powers, there is a very limited field of agreement for me. Mostly as it relates to things outside our boarders.

I believe our government should always respect the sovereignty of foreign nations unless there is a clear and present danger to the continuation of our state, and that otherwise our military - which I have no desire to reduce our investment in, although I would redirect some of that investment - should remain entirely within our own nation, protecting our borders and defending the nation itself against outside aggression.

Quote from: Engine;217852I believe our government should always respect the sovereignty of foreign nations unless there is a clear and present danger to the continuation of our state

I think we should conquer the world, destroying everyone who can't assimilate into our superior culture. It's a German heritage thing


And no, I'm not being serious.

Quote from: Jackalope;217703Whatever dude, you go on and keep smoking crack.  Nothing on full auto is easy to handle.

And I didn't say it was a good gun.  I just said they were my favorite out of the stuff I had available to shoot with.

Actually, you said, "M16s kick ass", when in fact, they don't.  Especially the M16A1 that I assume you were firing.  Also, an M-16 on full auto still isn't that much of a bid deal.  Firstly, you'll go through the magazine in seconds.  Secondly, if you needed help up until you were 13, you were either a very small or weak 12 year old, or lying.  10 year olds are firing AKs with little problem in many places in Africa, and an AK has a lot more kick than an M16A1.

So forgive me if my BS meter started to ping.

Quote from: gleichman;217816In gun control specifically, local goverments simply refused to issue licenses and thereby effected a ban where there should have been no ban.

Correct.  In practice, is it impossible for a normal person to get a concealed carry permit in New Jersey, even though such permits legally exist and could be issued.  That's why several states have been enacting "must issue" laws that require such permits to be issued unless there is a compelling reason not to issue them.  That may be one way to possibly avoid the problem.