Guns, Everywhere

[jpak]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/04/guns-everywhere.html

GUNS, EVERYWHERE

Posted by Susannah Griffee

The United States has the highest rate of gun ownership by civilians in the world. Depending on the state, guns may be allowed in churches, on college campuses, and even in bars. In this week’s New Yorker, Jill Lepore writes about the powerful gun lobby and the consequences of America’s attachment to deadly weapons. Below, a look at some of the more unusual—and, arguably, more dangerous—gun laws passed in recent years, and the states that passed them first:

Guns in bars

First state to allow, and when: Tennessee, in 2009.
Other states that now allow: Arizona, Georgia, Virginia, and Ohio have laws specifically allowing guns in bars. Twenty states, including New York and New Jersey, do not address the question at all, conceivably allowing people to carry guns into bars by default.
Fun fact: Tennessee State Representative Curry Todd, the sponsor of the guns-in-bars law, was arrested in October, 2011, on charges of possessing a handgun while driving under the influence of alcohol.

Guns in churches

First state to allow, and when: Not totally clear. (See below.)
Other states that now allow: Guns are allowed in churches in twenty states as part of their “Right to Carry” laws. These laws—versions of them have been enacted in more than forty states—allow people to carry a handgun in public in a concealed manner. These laws typically start from a baseline of applying to all public spaces, but states can, and do, add restrictions for places such as houses of worship, government buildings, and educational institutions. Historically, people were allowed to carry weapons in many states. In the nineteen-twenties and thirties, many states adopted laws that prohibited the unlicensed concealed carrying of a gun. Vermont is the only state that did not adopt any statutes prohibiting or regulating the concealed carry of guns, and has no specific prohibition against carrying guns in churches, so it is, perhaps unintentionally, the first state to allow guns in churches.

<more>

[AH1Apache]

1. Is this the backlash you keep talking about?

Is so, then we'll take it thank you very much.

[shadowrider]

3. Must be. Someone is actually doing something to expand gun rights

opposed to anti's who do nothing other than put up "opinion" articles and call it backlash. Note: they don't actually do anything to promote/expand THEIR cause.

[orpupilofnature57]

6. Sorry , pissing you off with " Opinions "

is expanding a cause.

[shadowrider]

8. *Yawn*. Actual implementation of gun control measures is expanding a cause

Everyone has an opinion, nothing special about that.

[AH1Apache]

9. And just who is getting pissed off

We view these posts with humor.

[safeinOhio]

10. Would seem that those that have more than

just an opinion on a liberal forum donate money to it. You know, actually do something to promote and support liberal and progressive ideas.

[shadowrider]

11. 2A rights IS a progressive idea

What do you do, personally, to support anti-gun causes?

Donate?
Call?
Get in touch with legislators?
Propose legislation?
Canvas?

Or do you do nothing?

[safeinOhio]

13. I do nothing to support anti-gun causes.

I do not send money to the NRA or the Brady group as I do not support either. I vote for, support and work for the election of reasonable politicians, like Obama, to get elected to office.
How many Democratic candidates do you work for their elections, with money or time? How many organizations that allow you to post daily on do you send money to support that privilege? Looks like very little to nothing.

While you love to pick on jpak, I see he actually supports this forum. On the other side, I see many that support gun rights do support this forum. My hat goes off to them.

[AH1Apache]

2. And now Ladies and Gentleman

for your viewing pleasure, it's the jpak weekend dump.

[ileus]

4. Lies everywhere...

Should have been their title.

[orpupilofnature57]

5. The NRA , doesn't feel thats enough

and you never know when Jesus will jump ya .

[ellisonz]

54. Heh...

The skin color is wrong (Jesus was much darker hued), but it gets the point across.

[orpupilofnature57]

56. Good one !!

[DCBob]

7. Do you feel safer yet?

lock and load baby!

[AH1Apache]

12. Sure I do

violent crime has been trending down for 20 years now.

[DCBob]

14. Of course you do.

BTW, violent crime has not been trending down due to more guns on the street. Its due to increased security measures and better law enforcement and better surveilance technology. Imagine how much more it would have decreased if we didnt have hundreds of millions of guns floating around?

[AH1Apache]

15. Show me where I said violent crime

was trending down due to more guns on the street. I'll wait, but while I wait, I will agree that there are a variety of reasons why this trend is happening, but you can't say that more guns=more crime.
Imagine if there were less cars on the streets, less people would die in car accidents, drunk drivers.

[DCBob]

16. Common sense..

In an altercation, heated argument, intense moment of anger... if a gun is available then the situation becomes much more dangerous.

[AH1Apache]

17. Apparently you've never gone through a CHL class before

that was part of the curriculum on how to avoid or diffuse a situation before it becomes much more dangerous. When I am CC'ing, I am very aware of whats going on around me and I will do my very best to avoid what I think could become a bad situation and I've been pretty damn successful over the many years I've had my CHL.
I don't take carrying a concealed weapon lightly because I know on the small chance I will have to defend myself, I am going to be put through the wringer proving that I had no other choice but to defend myself or whoever else was with me at the time.

[DCBob]

19. I have no problem with CC'ing for someone reasonable and responsible, which you appear to be.

Not everyone is like you.

[AH1Apache]

20. You are absolutely correct not everyone is like me.

that being said, for the most part, the overwhelmingly majority of us are reasonable and responsible when CC'ing, but your always going to have that small minority that do stupid things and usually they do pay the price for their stupidity which I fully support.

Sorry if I got a little snarky but I get so sick and tired of the lies told about us, like being a racist vigilante apologist, stuffing a gun or 2 down our pants, playing judge, jury and executioner, oh, and my favorite, we're compensating for a small penis.

Have a good day, beautiful day here where I live today.

[Hoyt]

28. Quit carrying and supporting more guns in public, and no one will even think you are like that.

If enough did the responsible thing in a modern society, there would not be an issue.

[AH1Apache]

30. Hey Hoyt

Who are you to be telling me what I can and can't do?
BTW, got those links yet?

[PavePusher]

22. Is that the touch-stone for a Constitutional Right, "reasonable and responsible"?

Shouldn't that be applied to all Rights?

And who gets to set the definition of "reasonable and responsible"?

[DCBob]

26. Its something like a "well-regulated militia"

Who defines "well regulated"?

[PavePusher]

27. The milita is and does.

When I am not performing militia duties, I am not under their conditions/restrictions.

Please explain what "the right of the people" means.

[Hoyt]

31. Justice Stevens and the other 3 liberals on SC explain it well in dissent to Heller.

[gejohnston]

34. Stevens is not a liberal

he only looked like one compared to the reactionaries. Come to think of it, there were no liberals on the court at the time as far as I could tell.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/blogs/the-gaggle/2010/04/09/actually-john-paul-stevens-is-a-conservative.html

[DonP]

35. The "dissent" is worth a bucket of warm spit

I love you guys that mentally manage to ignore the majority decision and its implications, because you don't like the findings, and hold up the dissent, as if it had some legal weight for courts around the country.

Tell us Hoyt, how much weight should we and the courts give to the dissents from other SCOTUS decisions like Brown v. Board of Education or Roe v. Wade? Or is it just anything related to the 2nd amendment?

Your side of this argument lost and continues to lose with no changes in sight.

[AH1Apache]

36. Why should we care what the dissent was?

It doesn't matter what those 4 wrote in dissent, what matters is what the majority wrote because courts across the country will now base their rulings on the SCOTUS decision.

Amazing that those that don't like the 2A always reference the minority dissent of the SCOTUS instead of the majority decision which is what really counts.

[Hoyt]

38. Because the next case may be with a different mix of Justices.

In any event, the dissent helps explain to the seemingly learning impaired what "regulated militia" means.

[AH1Apache]

40. It's now settled law Hoyt.

Future courts will be very, very reluctant to revisit it. And how do you explain the fact that all 9 justices agreed that the 2A is an individual right not connected to militia service?

[DonP]

41. So, you think a "different mix of judges" will overturn Roe v. Wade too?

If the only issue is who the judges are, then I guess anything is up for reversal based on a previous dissent, right?

How about going back to "separate but equal" schools too? With 5 "conservative justices" on the court now, why haven't we just gone back to that?

Or do you think that eventually there will always be a majority of liberal justices on the bench forever and ever?

SCOTUS, no matter what the ideological mix on the court, is loathe to reverse previous decisions. Once you get past Dredd Scott the number of actual reversals drops precipitously. Hell, they won't even take a case to reverse Kelo and everybody, progressive and conservative, hated that decision.

Sorry, you live in an ideological fantasy land. Neither your children nor your great grandchildren will see a reversal of Heller or McDonald.

[AH1Apache]

42. Learned impaired of what "regulated militia" means.

Well then Hoyt, here's you chance to explain to the "Learned impaired" what "regulated militia" meant to the Founding Fathers.
And I don't mean what you think it means, but I would like you to provide links to what you think the Founding Fathers thought it meant.
Bear in mind, that many others here who are much more versed on this subject have already posted links and quotes.

[AH1Apache]

43. C'mon Hoyt

you've been asked a legitimate question, I honestly want to hear your answer.
Or is it going to be the usual Hoyt shuffle and sidestep where you post a statement and when called to task on it, you disappear?

[GreenStormCloud]

24. CCers have better records than the general public.

Texas annually publishes a list of convictions of people with CHLs along with a breakdown of what the crimes were and also how many convictions were made for the general public. The CCers are extremely law-abiding. For example, in 2009 (Last year data is available) out of 2603 convictions for "Assault with a Deadly Weapon" only 4 were done by CHL holders. 406 murder convictions but only one (1) by a CHL holder.
Texas link: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/ConvictionRatesReport2009.pdf

Even if you use the VPC's grossly inflated numbers (They list suicides by poison as a CCW killer.) you still get a much lower gun violence rate than the general public.
VPC link:http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwtotalkilled.pdf (WARNING: Very slow PDF load.)
Scroll down some and you will see these two entries:

Michigan
# Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2009
People Killed: 28
Circumstances: Between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2009, Michigan State Police report
that 28 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual
report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the
suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.

Michigan
# Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008
People Killed: 29
Circumstances: Between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008, Michigan State Police report
that 29 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual
report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the
suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.

What do those suicides have to do with CCW? Nothing, but VPC uses them to pad their numbers by 57. Even using VPC's padded numbers CCWers are super safe.

[Hoyt]

32. Need to compare them to people who could qualify for CCW, but know they don't need a gun.

[AH1Apache]

33. Why Hoyt?

BTW, got those links yet?
I mean, you made a claim about me, why, oh why, won't you back it up with links?

[Hoyt]

37. Folks just need to read your posts and consider your attitude.

You carry a gun, so you are prepared to shoot someone. You claim you were trained in use of guns in military. I think you have forgotten that here in the USA, we don't view the public streets as a war zone. Of course, as the number of Zimmermans increase, we may need to reconsider.

As to comparison. Why take people who can't get a CCW because of a criminal background and compare them to a group of folks who supposedly do not have a criminal background. Compare them to folks who don't have a criminal background -- and could qualify for CCW, but choose not to because they are not paranoid and do not view the public streets as a war zone. You'll find that the gun carriers don't come out looking as good as you guys pretend.

Enjoy your guns.

[AH1Apache]

39. Folks just need to read my posts and consider my attitude?

Last edited Mon Apr 23, 2012, 07:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Really Hoyt? Coming from you, that's rich.

1. I carry a gun on the small chance that I will need to defend myself if all other options fail.

2. I don't claim to have been trained in the use of guns in the Military, I assert it.

3. Show me a link or a statement I've made that I've forgotten that I live in the U.S.A..

4. I don't view the public streets as a war zone, you're the one who has claimed that I've said that, I have asked you time and time again to prove I said or think that and you haven't responded yet. I've got 4 combat tours under my belt Hoyt, how many do you have? You have no fucking idea what a real war zone is. Those of us who have been in combat would never claim that this country is a war zone.

5. I not even going to respond to your little snark about "folks who supposedly do not have a criminal background.

6. Most citizens who do qualify don't apply for a CHL but they do support QUALIFIED CITIZENS being able to acquire a CHL with the proper training.

7. I will enjoy my guns whether you like or approve it or not.

Have I answered you satisfactorily?
If not, oh well.

[Hoyt]

44. Actually, you've just rationalized your gun obsession to yourself -- not me.

Actually, the latest poll shows that a clear majority of people oppose carrying of guns in churches, stores, etc. So there. Enjoy yours sitting on a curb somewhere.

[AH1Apache]

45. That's not what I said Hoyt

I see you are still distorting what people say, I said that those that can acquire a CHL but choose not to, support QUALIFIED CITIZENS
being able to as long as they get the necessary training.
I never said anything about carrying in churches, bars, etc.
So there.
I don't enjoy sitting on curbs with my LAWFULLY CONCEALED FIREARM, I go about my business and return home and just to beat you to it, no I will not leave my firearm at home.
So Hoyt, where are those links to what you claim I allegedly said?
The only obsession here, Hoyt, is your inability to write a fact based post, all you do is cast aspirations on lawful gun owners, distort what is said, and post outright dishonest statements and when called on it, you either ignore it or post more distortions.
Not that I honestly expect to get an honest answer from you, or even an answer at all.

[AH1Apache]

46. After re-reading your post, I've got to say this.

Is this all you got Hoyt? Really?
I've just rationanized my gun obsession to myself--not you?
You flatter yourself to much, I don't give a flying fuck if you think I'm obsessed with firearms or not.
Always have to get that little snarky comment in there don't you?

[shadowrider]

49. Hoyt, is the sky blue?

Yes or No will be fine.

[AH1Apache]

50. I sincerely hope

that your not waiting for an honest answer from him. I've been trying to get a straight answer from him for 3 days now.
Good luck.

[GreenStormCloud]

47. When you walk the streets, you are in the general public.

Go to a store and you are in the general public. You aren't able to sort out those who wouldn't qualify and keep them away from you.

Also, a CHL is rather expensive and many people who would otherwise qualify can't afford one. In fact, the peak age for first-time CHL issue is age 52. That's after the kids have grown and gone and about the same time that you realize that you can't fight off young street thugs anymore.

[sylvi]

18. Man, don't I know it

I can't even walk downtown anymore without all those toters hauling out their hog legs and peppering away at one another over the previous day's box scores. And those backfiring trucks? Whew! Duck and cover baby.

[PavePusher]

23. As previously stated, the crime stats don't support your assertion. n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

21. The government should NOT dictate religious doctrine.

If an individual church wants to allow guns on their property then that is their business, not the government's.

[PavePusher]

25. "First state to allow, and when: Not totally clear."

Someone's been skipping history class again, I see.

I know you'll simply castigate the sources, rather than address the content, but I'll post the following anyway, for the open-minded.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott50.html
"At least six colonies required people have guns with them at church."

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0902i.asp
"As a matter of fact, the act has some history on this continent. In pre-Revolutionary America, the colonies of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Georgia all had laws requiring the carrying of guns ... to church."

[ellisonz]

55. Love those conservative Libertarian sources...

Also, do you think that in pre-Revolutionary America they were just a little bit worried about Indian raids and slave uprisings? I'm sorry, but such issues are irrelevant to the world of today as we have long since surpassed those points in history. By such logic, we would have basis to deny women the vote because they were previously denied the vote. Quasi-libertarianism is no substitute for critical thinking!

[gejohnston]

57. I have seen little evidence of critical thinking among gun controllers

what evidence do you have the reason had anything to do with slave revolts or Indian attacks? The question was why should the State allow guns in church. It should be up to the church, not the State. Why? For the same reason the church has no business dictating about guns or curriculum in public schools.

[ellisonz]

58. "what evidence do you have the reason had anything to do with slave revolts or Indian attacks?"

It was 17th Century America.

[gejohnston]

61. 18th century

what evidence do you have again? And George Tiller's murder happened in the 21st.

[PavePusher]

59. And my prediction success rate increases. Yay, me. Meh. n.t

[ellisonz]

60. Your sources are disreputable...

...there's no getting past that. They remove the context in order to distort the argument. I'm going to use a big word for you: hermeneutics.

[gejohnston]

29. Guns, Guns everywhere

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

48. I support restrictions on concealed carry...

...in topless bars...


...at least for the dancers...


...while actually dancing.

[spin]

51. There should never be a reason to carry a concealed firearm in a church ...

Oh wait ...

Sheriff: Concealed weapon may have saved S.C. church
Posted March 26, 2012 at 2:53 p.m., updated March 26, 2012 at 4:29 p.m.

***snip***

Jesse Gates had already been to the Southside Freewill Baptist Church in Boiling Springs once Sunday morning, so the pastor's grandson was keeping his eye on the parking lot when he saw Gates come back, this time taking a shotgun out of his trunk, Wright said.

"They locked the door and they were calling 911 at the time. He didn't draw his weapon or make any move or action toward this gentleman until he kicked the door open and forced the issue," Wright said.

After Gates kicked in the door, the pistol pointed at him distracted him enough that the pastor was able to grab the shotgun. Members of the church kept him down until deputies arrived, Wright said.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1172&pid=33889

[armueller2001]

52. * chirp chirp*

Maybe he should have used his super ninja skills instead of being a rude baser gunner toter

[spin]

53. Yup. Super ninja skills work great in the movies. (n/t)