Gee, thanks, Jim...I think...
I'd tell these guys that I favor a much-easier-to-get CCW and open carry with it, except that would spoil their preconceptions and they'd stop trying to fight the facts. That would put a lid on their imaginations in a real hurry, and it all would become excruciatingly dull.
Then why did he say 4 out of 5?
And what was the point of counting "states," when those states make up less than 1/3 of the population? Do you think there's a valid reason for it, other than to give a false impression that many more people who live in the
1/2 of the states that don't have open carry are many times more likely to get murdered? Hmm?
They're on their way. I make them for my own use, so you'll have to supply neatness and organization as you see fit.
Which country? It wasn't the US Congress.
Ed Huntress
"> its pretty clear to me.
Maybe only 1/5 of the population live in the 25 states not requiring permits?
I live in the people's republic of mass. We have some of the strictest gun control laws in the country. WE have one of the lowest murder rates in the country. Dat's a fact. Are they related? conjecture.
18000 murders in 1997[nationwide] 13000 by guns so I think you can correlate murder rate to gun deaths, roughly The northeast in 1999 had a murder rate of 4.1 per 100k the country had 5.7 Mass had a rate of 2.0 states that had a lower murder rate: New hampshire Iowa N DakotaIdaho was equal
Sorry my numbers are a few years old. I need a new Almanac People who fear reasonable gun control are mis informed. I will be the first in line to stop anyone from taking YOUR right to carry away. I just want to know who you are
Ed Huntress wrote:
He might not, but I will - 32% of the population, 31% of the murders - a worst, a statistical wash, and best, a lower murder rate...
Charlie
--
73 KC2IXE For the Children - RKBA! Any given program, when running, needs debugging. Any debugged program is obsolete.
D.C. has the strictest gun laws in the nation, and yet has the highest murder rate per capita of any city.
--Tim May
Exactly. Not at all what "Andrew Ford," whoever he may be, stated and implied, which is that open-carry laws are somehow connected to much lower rates of murder.
It's a wash. If you try to make something of that small fraction of a percent difference, don't bother. The statistics mean nothing at those close percentages. If California should go open-carry, for example, the stats would look so horrible for open-carry that no state would ever allow it again.
Ed Huntress
Heh. If they can't convince *you* then they'll never convince the legislators.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
I don't want to speak for Ed, but the answer to your question depends on your definition of "acceptable." Your version of the quote might very well be factually correct. But facts can still be misleading if they are selectively presented in a way that paints an incomplete and distorted picture. A more complete picture would be painted if you said "However, **2 out of 3** of US murders are committed in the other half of the country, where **2 out of 3** US residents live." Of course, that doesn't have quite the emotional impact as the original statement, does it? It's kind of like selling a used car and emphasizing the fact that it has new tires and a new transmission, while conveniently omitting the fact that it has a blown head gasket and needs a new A/C.
Bert
Apparently so.
Then why do some states go to such *extreme* lengths to outlaw firearm ownership, handgun ownership, and concealed carry?
If you talk to the law community they say that the last thing they want is more citizens carrying handguns concealed.
And yet, it seems like it really does not matter.
Jim
================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================
FWIW, The CDC, in what was called an "unusual moment of candor" recently reported that gun legislation does not have a statistically significant influence on gun crime in the US. If I can find the article I will post a link to it.
Well, that would be refreshing to see, John. If you happen upon it, I would like to see it. But don't go out of your way for it.
Something anyone with 1/2 a brain or more likely suspected all along.
That's a very good question, Jim. Having fought the battle in Trenton, I have opinions about it, and the bottom line, IMO, is that the real battle here is cultural, with the policy and emotional battles tagging along behind.
And don't discount the strength of the pro-gun cultural battle. The strongest case for it, IMO, is an article written by a Washington lawyer named Jeffrey Snyder. The article is titled "A Nation of Cowards." It's all over the web and it's very worth reading, IMO.
Then read an intelligent response to it by George Will, titled "A Nation of Cowards?" It, too, is on the web. I'd give you the URLs but I think Gunner has them set up as keyboard macros, and he'll beat me to it.
Will's argument is simply that, if Snyder is right, then our society has already failed. But he acknowledges the strength of Snyder's argument.
Keep in mind those pieces were written in the early '90s, when violent crime was a more frightening prospect. The principles and the underlying cultural/value conflict is still valid, however.
As for the opinions of cops, they vary. Plenty of cops support concealed carry. Others oppose it.
Ed Huntress
Which invalidated the quote how?
That by the way..is called using AntiGun or Liberal tactics.
But seriously......
....open carry is far different than CCW. California, in theory, does have open carry. You cant be arrested for it. They will however arrest you for creating a disturbance, brandishing, high mopery in a low mopery zone, etc. Once you get out of a city, open carry is quite legal, except on some parklands.
There is only one state that has no restrictions for carrying openly or concealed without state papers. Vermont Now there is a real hotbed of crime and mayhem, hey?
A good source for CCW state information is
There are only 7 states in the US that do not issue CCW permits (carrying a concealed weapon). Of those 43 states, I believe the number of Shall Issue states are now up to 38 or so. Even in those 7 states, some form of open carry is legal.
Shall Issue, means that if you go to apply for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, and you are not a felon, ever been ajudicated mentaly ill, etc etc..the powers that be HAVE to give you that permit. Its not dependant on how much you kicked into the local campaign coffers, how anti gun the local government is, etc etc. They HAVE to issue, or show damned good cause as to why they refused. And each have set up an appeals process for refusals.
California is a May issue state. A number of counties are virtually Shall issue, while others, such as L.A county will not issue period, or only if you are a significant campaign contributor to the Sheriffs etc election fund.
Then you have Vermont, which has no prohibitions against carrying a concealed weapon.
Here is a map of the current states and how they are rated on CCW
Here is an animated map of the changes since 1986
So now in Ohio, we have a case of huge numbers of people saying..ok..if its legal, Im gonna carry..and its driving the anti gun extremists in Ohio, absolutly bonkers. The pro activists are staging very large "defense walks" where they all get together, and openly carrying, do a civil rights type demonstraton parade. Gov. Taft is gonna have to fish or cut bait really soon, else his days in political office are numbered.
Another interesting aspect is Reciprocity of concealed weapons permits. Lets say a snowbird from Michigan, with a valid permit to carry concealed, is traveling. Is his permit recognized in other states? Some yes, some not. Here is a pretty current listing, with more states reaching agreements monthly.
As to the Ford quote, Ill have to check the current Crime index and take a look. But as others have pointed out, if the 25 states with open carry laws, only commit 1/3 the crimes..looks like a pretty good record to me. You anti-gun nuts would have us to believe that the mear carrying of a weapon leads to disaster and mayhem..and it appears that the stats prove you wrong, no matter how much you spin them.
I recall the bruha that was raised by the Antis when Florida went to Shall issue. Blood in the streets, Wild West blablablah.
Seems that once again..they were wrong. Shrug..and that animated map above, proves that once again, common sense is overcoming the Anti-gun nutballs best efforts.
Gunner
"25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, 4 out of 5 US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who is crazy?" -- Andrew Ford
Well Ed, That's the problem with computers. You need to keep yourself organized or you just can't be productive. Now where was I?
I think John was referring to "First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws Findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services".
From:
Summary
During 2000--2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, "shall issue" concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes. (Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research.
R, Tom Q.
Tom, That is the report but I was referring to and trying to find the piece I first saw. It included additional material and cites related to enforcement.
The gist of the thing was that legislation is a poor substitute for good judgment.
I agree. Pile on all of the laws you want but if they go unheeded and unenforced these laws are worse than useless. They offer a false sense of accomplishment and security. Good politics makes bad legislation. Now I really must dig the thing out!
Define Reasonable gun control.
Its really none of your business.
Gunner
"[T]he Clinton administration launched an attack on people in Texas because those people were religious nuts with guns. Hell, this country was founded by religious nuts with guns.\ Who does Bill Clinton think stepped ashore on Plymouth Rock? Peace Corps volunteers? Or maybe the people in Texas were attacked because of child abuse. But, if child abuse was the issue, why didn't Janet Reno tear-gas Woody Allen? -- P.J. O'Rourke, speech at the Cato Institute, May 6, 1993
As for the original post, it does seem that the lawmakers are ruining the ranchers. Here's one such article (this guy has had his herd confiscated and sold at auction, and AFAIK, nobody bid at auction. IIRC, at the second auction, some kid from CA bid and won with a small bid, a fraction of the true cost of the herd, but backed out under pressure from peers.) Anyway, here's a small article about the fight... Interesting to read, since this had been going on since '94 Ron
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.