Few problems encountered with concealed carry

[beevul]

Few problems encountered with concealed carry

April 16, 2008

by Marci Piltz

Record-Courier Reporter

Four years have passed since the first applicants obtained licenses to carry concealed handguns in Ohio.

The passage of the bill four years ago had some law enforcement officials skeptical of what might happen once the licenses were issued.

Ravenna Police Chief Randy McCoy said at the time he didn't think allowing citizens to walk around armed was a good idea.

On Feb. 22, he admitted the Ravenna police have not had any major issues. However, he said, he still is not a proponent of the act.

Kaley said about 1,550 CCW licenses have been issued in Portage County since April 2004. Of those, he said, only five have been revoked and eight applicants denied after completion of a background check.

http://www.auroraadvocate.com/news/article/3634102

1550 issued. 5 revoked.

Wonder how many drivers lisences are revoked per 1550 in the same county, or others.

That the numbers aren't high for revocations has to be driving the bradyites crazy.

[rwheeler31]

1. With the gop in charge, and arms dealers a major funding

group, what do you expect?

[villager]

2. More recent gun news you missed: "Two men, one in a wheelchair, shot and killed in Compton"

Two men, one in a wheelchair, shot and killed in Compton
The Associated Press

COMPTON, Calif.—Authorities say two men, one of them in a wheelchair, were shot and killed outside a church in Compton.

Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy Byron Ward says deputies received a report of the shooting at about 1:30 Sunday afternoon and arrived at the scene to find both men dead.

Witnesses told deputies they saw a vehicle speeding away from the area, and that car was found abandoned several blocks away. Ward says no suspects have been arrested.

The identities of the two men have not been released.

<snip>

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_8997613

[beevul]

3. What does that have to do with the article or lawful concealed carry?

Anything at all?

[villager]

4. You took your item about a small town in Ohio to crow about the terrific-ness of more guns...

Further crowing about the "Bradyites," etc.

Whereas, the bigger picture about the prevalence of guns in America shows the "Bradyites" to be mostly right.

I'll bet the gun used to shoot the man in the wheelchair was "concealed" until it was pointed out the car window.

[beevul]

5. So I'll ask again...

What does that have to do with the article or lawful concealed carry?

Anything at all?

[villager]

6. yeah. Figures that you'd need to ask again.

n/t

[iverglas]

12. sure

How come one of those sheepdogs with a firearm on his/her person wasn't there to stop the shooting?

Seems to me if they're wanting the same authority as cops to tote firearms around, which is what one often hears here, the public is entitled to expect some service.

[sergeiAK]

18. Research CA CCW permits and the possibilty of getting one

And ask that question again.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sergeiAK]

23. Huh?

There isn't a numeral in my moniker. Sergei, AK. Neither is a number, last I checked. The first is a name, the second a state. I don't see how his was similar, but hey, I apparently don't live in the world where sergei or AK are numbers.

Odd, how you repeatedly insist we're reading something into your posts that isn't there, then reading a whole lot into my name, none of which is there.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sergeiAK]

25. Then explain what you meant

Because I'm sure as hell not seeing it.

[apocalypsehow]

31. Et lacrimatus est Jesus.

:shrug:

Rod Serling, call your office. And hurry.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. I'll bet it was also possessed illegally.

I know you hate it when the facts get in the way though.

David

[iverglas]

13. I won't be the one to call your bluff on that

I'll bet it was also possessed illegally.

Because we all KNOW it was possessed legally. By at least one owner, who then started the chain of events that led to the shootings by surrendering possession to someone not legally entitled to it, be it the person who committed the shooting or a predecessor in possession -- if it was in fact the case that the person who committed the shooting was in unlawful possession, of course.

[Indy Lurker]

9. I believe everyone agrees

that there are too many guns in the hands of criminals.

Just to be clear, No one is arguing that criminals should be permitted to conceal carry a gun, or that criminals should even possess guns.


This thread is about law-abiding people who can pass a background check getting a permit to conceal carry.


You seem to make no distinction between criminals and law abiding citizens.




Criminals with guns = unsafe and not acceptable :thumbsdown:

Law-abiding citizens with guns = safe and acceptable :thumbsup:

[Tejas]

11. Some of us live in small towns,

not next door to a Police Station.....as if that would help to begin with.

If you've kept up with threads in the Gungeon at all, you'd know that Compton is one of the highest-ranked cesspools of crime in the country. Seems that CCW there would be encouraged, that is, unless one enjoys seeing reports of deaths of defenseless people at the hands of thugs.

[Tejas]

10. Looks like it says

that since Compton is so crime-ridden (and it is), that Concealed Carry would be a good idea in Compton.

Can't imagine the poster of the article thinking otherwise, unless he/she thinks like Chief McCoy ie: citizens should be defenseless against thugs.

[krispos42]

7. Irrelevent to the discussion.

[Longtooth]

17. As a person that has been using a wheelchair for more than four decades now.

I can say that I'm glad Texas allows for legal concealed carry.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iiibbb]

14. I don't understand those who complain about Concealed carry

... Isn't that what you wanted? People getting licenses to have their guns?

You complain when we don't have licenses, you complain when we do have licenses.

It makes me think they you're just going to complain until guns somehow go away... which is never going to happen... so why trash the people who are trying to follow the rules?

[Longtooth]

16. Good points.

[iverglas]

21. is it actually possible

that someone thought this collection of disingenuous sophistry was "good points"??

Nothing is better than butter.
Margarine is better than nothing.
Margarine is better than butter.

YOU'RE RIGHT! Permits for people to promenade around with pop-guns in their pantaloons is EXACTLY what I have been wanting all this time!!!

I can die happy now.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. What do you want?

[Hoosier lawyer]

27. I have to ask

What pleasure do you get from childishly attacking other people on a discussion board? I rarely see you add much to a discussion besides your mean spirited personal attacks. At this point you have made yourself real clear. You think that people should always be disarmed and hope like hell everything works out. Some of us prefer to be armed while we are hoping like hell. The difference is that I am not trying to shove my views down your throat.

As for the sheepdog thing. I for one only plan on guarding my own flock. I'll call the police, but I am not playing hero. I would wager that most people feel the same way when it comes to carrying a weapon. I was told by my gun toting papa, don't go anywhere or do anything while carrying, that you wouldn't do empty handed.

[iverglas]

29. and I have to say

Who the hell asked you to ask anything?

I was responding to a COLLECTION OF DISINGENUOUS SOPHISTRY that a sophomore (of the high school variety) wouldn't get away with in class, and to the sycophantic response it had elicited.

I would kinda like to know whether the person who wrote it, and the person who inhaled it deeply, actually don't recognize it for the disingenuous sophistry it is. Just idle curiosity. I'd be deeply saddened either way. For different reasons, but both would lead me to despair for humanity.


At this point you have made yourself real clear. You think that people should always be disarmed and hope like hell everything works out.

And you actually claim to be a lawyer, Mr./Ms. Hoosier?

Try pulling that shit in front of a judge and see how far it gets you, 'k? How far it gets you tossed before you land on your ear, that is.


I for one only plan on guarding my own flock.

Yes, I know all about the sheepdogs. They's got wimmin and chillun what needs protecting from the big bad guys.

And we all really do know what that's all about. We really all do. If you're ever tempted to delude yourself into thinking we don't, well, try to resist.


The difference is that I am not trying to shove my views down your throat.

There you're right. Because I don't expect to be anywhere where you might be until some global cooling, of the freezing over variety, arrives.

But I also find it perfectly obvious that you're trying very hard to shove your views down the throat of a whole lot of people where you are. Blatant assertions notwithstanding.

[gorfle]

47. Sickening, isn't it?

At this point you have made yourself real clear. You think that people should always be disarmed and hope like hell everything works out.

Just remember the next time you turn on the evening news and hear about millions of people displaced in a civil war, fleeing and waiting for UN protection because they can't protect themselves - there are people around here that wish you were in the same boat, and actively work to make it happen.

[iverglas]

48. If you are going to ignore me

Then you ignore me. That's the rule.

You don't wander around the board making comments ABOUT me. Particularly when they're flatly false and crudely offensive.

Perhaps someone will inform you of this, should you not be reading. Otherwise, I'll see that it's brought to your attention.

[gorfle]

39. No, you don't understand.

They want you to have a license but they don't want you to use your guns.

The license is one of many barriers and inconveniences thrown in place to make owning a firearm as full of bureaucratic red tape as possible.

They would prefer you to be helpless and dependent on the charity of others for your security and safety.

[bossy22]

41. i dont think that is true

i think the real reason is simple and less mal-intentioned. Basically the police and the government want to limit the work they have to do. Its tricky to have a policy that encourages you to arm yourself for self defense- while it is much easier to have a policy that "do what the criminal wants and you will probably be okay" There is less potential for "abuse" in that case.

so in simple- they put more red tape because they want to prevent themselves from having to do more paperwork or getting bad press

if you really believe that government or the police force care about your well being well i guess you must have just fallen off the turnup truck recently. the only reason they seem to care is to keep you complacent and prevent revolution.- a happy populace is more likely not to overthrow their government

[iiibbb]

15. Who is paranoid?

The people who get concealed carry (who apparently fear violence and gunfire all the time), or the people who are anti gun (who apparently fear violence and gunfire all of the time)?


I personally have been in three near-misses in terms of my personal safety. It could've gone either way. It took three of those events to make me want to have a gun around, and believe me it doesn't change my first instinct which is to get away from the situation first...

...but at least I know now that I have the option of defending myself.


Guns do not short circuit the other elements of self defense, which include escape and deescalation; however, once all other avenues are no longer available, a gun is a nice thing to have because it levels the playing field for a lot of us.

[Hoosier lawyer]

28. but wait

Why should you have some choice over how you defend yourself? Shouldn't someone else,preferably someone else, who either gets to be armed all the time, or who is provided armed security get to decide when and where you might have a legitimate need for a gun,knife,pepper spray, stun gun,blunt object and so on and so forth. What sort of nut would trust themselves to provide for their own safety.

Aren't we all safer when only criminals and our understaffed police forces are armed, especially if you live in a "big city".The mayors of those cities (DC,Chicago,Newark, NYC and Philadelphia)are constantly telling everybody that people in their towns are somehow less capable of choosing when and how they should be armed.

Shoot, if anything does goes wrong and you survive to call the police, they will be over in a jiff to take a report and start looking for the bad guy, unless you aren't in an easily accessible place, or your phone doesn't work, or there are no cops free to respond or any of the myriad things that can and do go wrong in the real world.

[iverglas]

30. Resentment

It's the new black. Or 30. Or whatever. It's the thing to do.

[bossy22]

36. how informative

[Longtooth]

32. You've made a convert of me, I'll turn in my CHL tomorrow.

:toast: :beer: :rofl:

[Indy Lurker]

37. PLEASE HOLD

"You've reached the 911 Emergency Hotline, all circuits are busy right now. Please hold for the next available operator and be prepared to give the nature of your emergency and your cell phone number." -- NYC



Calls put on hold will be answered as quickly as possible, in the order in which they were received. If you get put on hold, do not hang up and call back. This is likely to result in your call being pushed farther back in the call-answering queue and further delays in receiving service. -- DC website

[bossy22]

38. ...ahhhh reliable service

at its best


do you have the links though

[gorfle]

40. That's just their sort of drea.

Why should you have some choice over how you defend yourself? Shouldn't someone else,preferably someone else, who either gets to be armed all the time, or who is provided armed security get to decide when and where you might have a legitimate need for a gun,knife,pepper spray, stun gun,blunt object and so on and so forth. What sort of nut would trust themselves to provide for their own safety.

That is just their mentality. You are considered a nut and untrusted to provide for your own safety. They would rather you rely on the charity of others for your safety. Though they are quite willing to send people in with guns to help you, you can't have any guns yourself.

[bossy22]

42. they try to legislate

a utopia - which is impossible.

[old mark]

33. My small town in PA...

is the county seat of Berks County.
There are over 25,000 (thousand, not hundred) License to Carry a Firearm holders in my county alone.(Most own multiple guns-PA licenses do not specify a particular gun or guns to be carried.)
Last I read, several years ago, the figure for "gun crimes" committed by license holders was less than .1 of 1%.

I believe that is pretty successful.

Have a great day.

mark

[Longtooth]

43. Now THAT is my idea of a utopia.

Bet men open doors for ladies and take their hats off at the table too.

[gorfle]

46. Yup, CCW permit holders are model citizens.

While it is difficult to get comprehensive CCW-holder crime data, more and more data like what you provided is being posted here from various cities, counties, and municipalities. And without exception, we see that CCW permit holders are model citizens, hardly ever involved in crime, let alone firearm-related crime.

To me, it is no more alarming having CCW-permit holders out and about with their firearms than deputy sheriffs, including in schools, college campuses, or just about anywhere.

[Big Al Mac]

34. Just a couple of comments about CHLs in Ohio

First off the way CHL reporting is handled in the sheriffs' reports to the Ohio Attorney General there is no distinction made on why a license is revoked. Most are revoked due to the holder either dying or moving out of the state.

With over 110,000 licenses granted in four years the number of CHLs revoked due to weapons charges is way less than 100.

As far as denials is concerned, the sheriffs are able to examine "expunged" records and cite them as the reason for denial.

[Longtooth]

44. That does put a crink in the statistics doesn't it?

[east texas lib]

35. Well now...

The main problem with concealed carry appears to exist in the minds of those who do not favor it.

[Longtooth]

45. And that is what stands in the way of real progress.