The elitisms of gun control… It is too good for thee, but not for me…

[Glassunion]

If you are Black, White, Latino, Asian, etc… and live in a “Black” County in California. That is a county that consists of a black population higher than the state average, you are 5 times less likely to be able to obtain a CCW. (Source: http://www.ninehundred.net/~equalccw/ccwdata.html)

I’m sure this is just the local Sherriff or PD trying to keep guns out of the urban areas. You can’t have just anybody running around carrying a gun in the cities of California. So if we can’t have just anyone running around with guns, what do you do when you want to carry one, but you happen to live in a predominantly black county like Los Angeles or San Francisco?

I’ll go one further… What if you have an assault charge and a parole violation in your past? How about some drug history? In a county that had only 8 permits among its 776,000 citizens in 1997, how could someone with such a past get such a coveted permit?

The answer is simple. Just get rich, a bit famous and a really good lawyer. We should all do that. Why didn’t I think of that first? http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/pennpermit1.html

But I do not begrudge him for getting his permit. He used what he had at his disposal to make an attempt at protecting himself and his family. Note how he had both of his guns stolen after he was issued the permit… Priceless.

What I really do not like is hypocrisy.

"Look at what's happening in America's inner-cities. If our hopeless legal system continues going the same liberal direction, there will be anarchy before long. We need one person in an influential position to stand up and tell the truth about gun control lobbies, the death penalty and that our criminal justice system basically stinks." Sylvester Stallone, interview in Cinefantastique magazine, June 1995
"until America, door to door, takes every handgun, this is what you're gonna have... It really is pathetic... We're livin' in the Dark Ages over there." Sylvester Stallone, March 28, 1998
"I know we use guns in films," but insisted the time has come "to be a little more accountable and realize that this is an escalating problem that’s eventually going to lead to, I think, urban warfare." Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998
"It <2nd Amendment> has to be stopped, and someone really has to go on the line, a certain dauntless political figure, and say, ‘It’s ending, it’s over, all bets are off. It’s not 200 years ago, we don’t need this anymore, and the rest of the world doesn’t have it. Why should we?" Sylvester Stallone on Access Hollywood, June 8, 1998

Stallone also attended the Brady Center sponsored “Stand Up for a Safe America" event in Los Angeles, CA on Sunday, November 22nd in 2006.
One small point of order… Stallone applied for a CCW permit on September 29, 2004 and was issued a permit on November 30, 2004. I wonder if he brought his gun to the event in Los Angeles? Remember… It’s too good for thee, but not for me…

As a side note, Bernie Mac was also at the Los Angeles event. But… “I have Glocks, .45s, Berettas, over-unders, Remingtons. I like the marksmanship and the discipline that it takes to be a gun owner. I like the machinery, breaking it down. Being able to take it out, clean it and put the spring back in is even more fascinating than having the gun.” Bernie Mac in Playboy interview, December 2004

Maybe he was just there for the appetizers… Remember… It’s too good for thee, but not for me…

We all know about Rosie O’Donnell and her views that "You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun, I think you should go to prison." But… Correct me if I am wrong, but does she not have 2 FULLY ARMED security guards and 1 armed driver with her at all times? And live in a gated community who utilize armed security. The real kicker was when “in May 2000, O'Donnell's bodyguard applied for a concealed firearm permit. O'Donnell stated that the security firm contracted by Warner Brothers requested the gun. O'Donnell stated that because of threats, she and her family need protection, which she attributes to her "tough gun-control rhetoric"” (source: her wiki page)

Remember… It’s too good for thee, but not for me…

So what are the rest of the Proles in CA to do? Simple, if you want to be treated with an equal eye under the law. Simple, just get rich and famous. Duh!

I’m so glad I live where there is no issue like this(with the exception of Philly). If you choose to own a firearm and want to carry one to protect your family, you have a RIGHT to do so.

In places like CA, NY and NJ you have to beg, plead and supplicate to your own government for permission to exercise a right do so. I left NJ and will never return. It is not just gun control in these states. There elitisms on several levels of governemnt. But their gun control stance is a good reflection of how they work and how they treat their second class citizens. Does anyone know what first class is like? I can never see past the curtain.

[Skittles]

1. using a rightwing code word - nice

[Glassunion]

4. This code word you speak of...

I'm just using it as is defined by that big-ass book we had that my mom always told me to go to when I asked what something meant.

Elitism - "The belief that some people or things are inherently superior to others and deserve preeminence, preferential treatment, or higher rewards because of their superiority"

No code-words, just words.

[onehandle]

26. In this room? Impossible.

And they never, ever link several times a day to multiple Obama hating right-wing sites.

That just doesn't happen.

[Glassunion]

27. Have I done either?

On edit;

I read and re-read the definition of the word. Funny, no mention that it is a Republican word. Just a word...

Anyway, when I used the word in the OP, you imply that I am spewing Republican rhetoric. But when I say the it was elitist for an FBI agent to deliver an HSL under the Patriot act to the Census Dept. Demanding the names and addresses of ALL Arab-Americans so they could go on a fishing trip. Is that still Republican rhetoric? When I said that it was religious elitism to declare that marriage is only between a man and woman, or at keeping gays out of the military. Was I spewing more Republican rhetoric?

It's a word... And as far as the topic of the OP goes, there is no more perfect word to describe the point. Uness you can offer a better one?

[Chulanowa]

33. Read your own material.

Elitist = Liberal = BAD EVIL RACIST AWFUL!!!

Seriously, man. I don't know if you know what you're doing (considering the context, I sort of doubt it) but that really is rather the point of your article - "Evil rich liberals are racists who want to steal my guns"

[Glassunion]

38. Obviously you did not read my material.

"Elitist = Liberal = BAD EVIL RACIST AWFUL!!!"
Oh please explain how you drew this conclusion from the post.

How does pointing out hypocrisy and preferential treatment by those of privilege (the actual theme of the post) turn into "Evil rich liberals are racists who want to steal my guns"? Where did I once mention gun grabbing?

You seem to have missed the mark completely. In fact I would go further and speculate that you are just making shit up to pick a fight.

Sly Stallone (you know, the guy I quoted in the OP and called a hypocrite) is a Republican.
Rosie (you know, the lady that I quoted in the OP and called a hypocrite) is a Democrat.
Bernie Mac (you know, the guy I quoted in the OP and called a hypocrite) is dead.
Sean Penn (you know, the guy I did not begrudge doing what he did) is about as left as they come.

So in my OP I agree with a supporter of the (PDA). Then call one dead guy who insulted Obama, one Republican and one Democrat hypocrites.

[cowman]

42. Obviously

you don't know about Glassunion, you are the one being elitist by accusing this person of being something he's not

[tburnsten]

61. Dude your reading comprehension is either really weak

Or you are a disingenious twat.

Seriously, he said nothing about "evil liberals", he used four very specific examples of individuals who are outspokenly anti-gun, however have guns of their own, in one case a person with a violent criminal record who violated his parole, and is one of EIGHT people out of almost EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND people in his county. Lemme break that down and kick some knowledge to you.

That is one permit per hundred thousand people, and one of those permits was given not to someone who doesn't have enough money to hire armed private security, unlike Sean Penn, with no criminal record, unlike Sean Penn, with no history of violence, unlike Sean Penn, it was given to violent, rich enough that he almost certainly has a bodyguard, parole-violating Sean Penn. Oh and he has strong convictions that a person, even someone with no criminal record and who is of stable mental health and has taken the time and expense to get trained, should NEVER be allowed to get a carry permit, or even own a gun.

So in other words, Sean Penn is a total dickhead. Bernie Mac, not quite as much, he is for attending those Brady Events but at the same time he did acknowledge some of the really cool parts of owning firearms. Mainly the discipline during shooting, the interesting mechanical complexities of firearms, how breaking them down and getting them cleaned up and then back together is one of the more rewarding parts of owning a firearm.

Rosie O'Donnell is a real dick for having three armed bodyguards while expounding from her soapbox that no one else has any right or "privilige" to own firearms, or any right to protect their life from attacks.

[SteveM]

65. Take a closer reading of gun-control history...

There are numerous examples of right-wing gun-control advocates: Reagan, McCain, Chas. Krauthammer, the Bradys, etc. But there are in fact many so-called "liberals" who advocate and work for gun-control, and the impact of gun-control has fallen upon the poor and the "concentrated" (as in large inner city neighborhoods). The fact of the matter is much of the motivation for the modern gun-control movement was to disarm blacks, particularly after the many civil insurrections and riots of the 60s. This moved journalist and gun-control advocate Robert Sherrill to remark on the passage of the General Gun Control Act of 1968: "...to shut off weapons access to blacks... while leaving the over-the-counter purchases to the affluent."

Are the motivations of Stallone, O'Donnell & co. racist? I don't know. What I do see is the impact of racist gun-control policies falling most heavily onto blacks -- as well as other less-influential people -- concentrated in "gun-control" districts.

The hammering hypocrisy of these and other elites (and that is what they are in this society) cited in the OP is glaringly obvious. You would agree with this, at least?

I could give a rat's ass what the GOP uses as terminology.

[PavePusher]

37. "code word"

Seriously? :tinfoilhat:

Can you send me the translation list? I must have missed the distribution. And people say right-wingers are conspiracy nuts... Sheesh.

[Chulanowa]

2. Your irony is certainly unintentional

"What if you have an assault charge and a parole violation in your past? How about some drug history?"

I imagine the general response around here would normally be "tough shit" - especially if the person in question is, ahem, "urban."

But since you've couched that in some nice anti-elitist demagoguery, I'm sure it'll win three cheers. Let's watch and see. :)

[Glassunion]

5. So using that logic...

Would I with a past like that be able to obtain a CCW in CA? If I were a resident of course?

[Chulanowa]

6. Probably not

Do you think you should?

[Glassunion]

8. No. No I do not.

It goes to show how a little money and some influence can get you preferential treatment.

[Chulanowa]

29. Really? Even though you don't begrudge him getting the permit?

I think you'll have to explain how you can be against someone doing something that you don't begrudge them doing. it's strange.

[friendly_iconoclast]

34. Let's use Mr. Penn as a standard to be used for ANY Californian wanting a permit.

That would nice and democratic. Call it the Penn rule: If you've had legal troubles less than or equal to those
of Sean Penn, you may have a concealed weapons permit. Anything more, and it's hard cheese for you.

What with Sean being such a role model and all, I can't see how anybody might have a problem with this...

[Glassunion]

36. Not a bad start...

Then one day we could then move forward to equal protection in the eyes of the law.

[cowman]

43. Yeah

good old Sean Penn who said about 2 weeks ago that anyone who calls Hugo Chavez a dicktator should go to prison,

[Chulanowa]

57. I trust Sean Penn with a concealed gun

I'm more worried about him hammering me with his forehead or something :D

[Glassunion]

35. See here is the problem.

The crime was not on his record. He did openly admit the crime, however it was not part of his criminal history.

I can only speculate as to why his battery charges were not in the DOJ systems. My "feelings" are they were omitted due to his privileged status. But that is speculation.

So since he had legally taken measures to obtain the permit I can not complain, he is well within his rights.

In my situation if I were to batter a photographer, there would be no doubt that it would be on my record and I would be unable to obtain the permit. I have not the money to buy what I would need to exercise the same right. But in the end he went the legal route, however since the permit is issued at the discretion of a sheriff and not the blind eye of the law, people of different classes can receive preferential treatment. Thus the elitisms of the policies.

I used to live in a state with the same rules. I could not obtain a permit, nor could I afford an attorney to aid me in the pursuit. There are those who meet the same requirements as I who was denied, but because of who they knew, or their influence did not have an issue obtaining theirs. Was it the color of my skin, my income level, my political affiliations, the car I drove, the neighborhood I lived in that prevented me from obtaining the permit? I don't know and can only speculate.

When you start to dig into who has the permits, and the number of those who were denied you start to see the prejudice. There is a very clear line of haves and have nots...

[AtheistCrusader]

80. Assault charge implies no conviction.

So I would say 'no', it shouldn't disqualify. The laws are usually quite consistent on this. The only misdemeanor that justifies prohibition in this case is non-felony domestic violence, and the only other factors that do not require conviction are restraining orders, and adjudicated mentally incompetent.

Parole violation is iffy, depending on what for. I'm not aware of non-felony convictions that would put someone in this situation at all.

[county worker]

3. I live in CA and I am glad it is hard to get a concealed weapons permit.

Of course we already beat this horse to death yesterday but if you want another round go ahead!

That protect your family line is really a laughing thing. Like you spend all your time wearing a gun in your pants and huddled with your family.

[Glassunion]

7. What!?

"That protect your family line is really a laughing thing."
So... Let me make sure I understand you 100%. Wanting to protect my family is laughable? Taking precautions to do so is a laughing matter? In your eyes, where does precaution turn into paranoia? Fire Extinguishers, Medical Insurance, CPR & First Aid Training, etc...

"Like you spend all your time wearing a gun in your pants and huddled with your family."
For you information I do not. I have done several things to protect my family, but no, we do not just sit around huddled together while I have my gun on my hip. You are so incredibly far off the mark on that one.

[county worker]

9. How do you have your concealed weapon and protect your family when you are at work,

or the kids are out playing, or the wife is at work or someplace?

Hardy any family spends time together anymore.

So if you get up in the morning and strap on your hog-leg, how many hours are you within protection range of your family?

[Glassunion]

10. Some answers to your question...

1. My wife and I do not have any children.
2. Way to sidestep my questions.


"How do you have your concealed weapon and protect your family when you are at work, or the kids are out playing, or the wife is at work or someplace?"
I cannot protect my wife while she is at work. Her safety is up to her while she is at work. That is why she carries as well.

"Hardy any family spends time together anymore."
You are correct. But my wife and I manage to send a considerable amount of time together. We are lucky. But you are correct, most families do not spend much time together as they used to. We are the exception to that rule.

"So if you get up in the morning and strap on your hog-leg, how many hours are you within protection range of your family?
1. I am with my wife about 14 hours a day.
2. It is not a "hog-leg". It is a tool, nothing more. But a tool protected to me by 2 constitutional rights. The first in the US Bill of Rights, the second in my State's Bill of Rights. Your state on the other hand does not have this as an expressed right. You are allowed to defend life, but nothing expresses the right to bear arms (see below).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=299683&mesg_id=299683

[county worker]

11. I have no argument about rights. I own guns too.

I feel it is foolish to carry a concealed weapon thinking that the chance will come that you need to use it. I also think the more people carry guns the more innocent people will get hurt by guns.

On edit;

I spent a year in Vietnam where I was armed day and night. I was fired on and fired back. Now I don't have the desire to shoot anything living. My guns are for target practice.

I think that paranoia is why people carry guns in our society. Maybe even a romantic desire to be in some dangerous situation like I was in, in Nam. Once you kill someone I doubt you will ever carry a gun again. I even doubt you would use it if it came to that.

[cowman]

12. It's your

right to think that we are foolish to conceal carry as it is my right to think you are foolish to potentionally become a victim because you do not carry although the chances of being a victim of violent crime is small. I carry because I want to be able to protect myself on the small chance of being involved in a violent incident and you dont carry because you disagree with conceal carry and I respect that right.

[county worker]

13. Read my edit

I don't want to kill again!

[cowman]

20. Apparently you

don't recognize my service ribbon.

I too did a tour in Vietnam at a wonderful place called Dong Ha as a U.S. Navy Seabee, helped build and fortify the Marine base at Con Thien and fought alongside them so I know exactly what it is like to take a human life and I pray to god I never have to again but I carry because I refuse to become a victim and if some asshole of a criminal leaves me absolutly no choice but to use letal force, I won't hesitate for one second to defend myself or some one else. And to even suggest that we have romantic ideas of some sort of combat is just ludicris and you are so wrong about most combat vets not ever wanting to pick up a gun again. There are hundreds of thousands of us with CCW permits.

[Glassunion]

14. That is where you an I disagree.

I do not think that it is foolish carrying a weapon thinking that the chance will come up. But I do have first hand experience.

I think that firearms in the hands of innocent people who, via legal means; obtain and are permitted to carry will have an opportunity to protect themselves should the need arise.

We disagree on the pro vs cons. I "feel" the good outweighs the bad, and you feel the bad outweighs the good. I'm ok with that. This is why we elect people who will negotiate with each other to define the laws that we will have to live by.

Overall, all crime in this country is declining. I will not be so bold as to state that it is because there are more people carrying now than ever. There is no direct correlation. But if you look at the crime rates we as a nation are heading in the right direction.

[county worker]

16. Nothing I can do now to change things.

My guess is that as more people get concealed weapon permits, more accidents will happen and people will want to reverse the trend.

[spin]

25. Estimates are that 6 million people now have concealed permits...

no states have revoked their shall issue laws once passed.

Yes, accidents have happened. Such incidents are rare but they do occur. Yes, some people misused their privilege to carry and in some rare cases they do shoot or murder innocent people. People who have concealed carry permits are not angels, but as a group they are very responsible.

We hear the same, ominous predictions every time a state passes a concealed carry law. Sarah Brady and her followers claim the sky is going to fall once citizens start packing heat. But it has yet to occur.

***snip***

The statistics show that every day, all across the country, almost 1,500 people use guns while they are away from home to protect themselves from criminal attacks.

The success story has been so great that some opponents of concealed carry have even admitted they were wrong to oppose such laws in the first place.

Consider the state of Florida, which passed its concealed carry law in 1987 over vocal opposition from the Brady Bunch.

Gun banners claimed that once Florida passed its carry law, the Sunshine State would become the Gunshine State, and that people would be shooting each other in the streets. It was a cute jingle, but it was totally false.

In the ten years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law, more than 475,000 people received permits to carry firearms. FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which before concealed carry was much higher than the national average, fell 39 percent during that 10-year period.

Florida State Representative Ron Silver, who was the leading opponent of the law before it passed, graciously admitted several years later that he had been wrong.

It happens all the time after states pass their own concealed carry laws.

***snip***

Private citizens who carry firearms are some of the most law-abiding people you'll ever meet. Why, they are even more law-abiding than some of our servants in uniform who enforce the law.

Take the Los Angeles Police Department as an example. By its own admission, the LAPD commits more violent crimes than do concealed carry permit holders in North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia combined.

This eye-opening finding came from an internal review board which reported on scores of examples of police abuse and corruption inside the LAPD last year.
http://gunowners.org/op0235.htm

Here's an interesting map that shows how many states have "shall issue" concealed carry.





If it caused any serious problems at least one of these states would have repealed their concealed carry law. Instead they are passing castle doctrine, "stand your ground" and "bring your gun to work" laws.

Alabama,<9> Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah,<10> West Virginia and Wyoming have adopted Castle Doctrine statutes, and other states (Montana, Nebraska (http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5348), New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own.<11><12><13>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_United_States#Stand-your-ground

Strangely the violent crime rate has shown a decline since all these laws began to pass. While many factors can influence the crime rate it should be obvious that "shall issue", "castle doctrine", "stand your ground" and "take your gun to work" laws have not increased the violent crime rate.

[paulsby]

50. good post. fwiw, while WA does not have a specific castle doctrine law

CASE law has essentially established the same thing.

i've seen a # of self defense type cases involving people who stood their ground and prosecutors simply will not prosecute.

[spin]

77. Good. Case law works well. (n/t)

[PavePusher]

40. Oddly, firearms accidents are going down.

That stat, from the CDC, has been posted here many times. As I said below, you aren't paying attention.

[tburnsten]

70. The number of carry permits has literally exploded over the last twenty years

And the number of accidents with firearms has plummeted over the last fifteen years.

So, while that isn't a fifty year data set, I think it is long enough to show that they are unrelated.

Oh and the number of privately owned guns has about doubled over the last twenty or so years.

[Glassunion]

15. On your edit..

I totally get that. I too do not desire to shoot ANY living thing. If at the end of my days, when I lay down to die. If I never had to un-holster my weapon I will die quite happy.

I see no romance in firearms. None.

I am not paranoid that there is some great harm out to get me. I just never want to be in a situation, where I cannot talk my way out of, nor have a retreat from someone who wishes me harm or death. I don't carry to protect things. I carry to protect my wife's life and my own should the need arise.

[county worker]

17. Well it was a pleasure discussing this with you.

[Glassunion]

18. Yes... Thank you.

I'm glad it remained cordial...

For You =>http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=259&topic_id=29131

[county worker]

19. Thanks,

It is hard for me to accept things like that at times. Not that I don't appreciate it. Just that when I got home in March of 1968 I didn't dare tell anyone I was a Vietnam vet and now we get thanks. For years I kept it stuffed way down inside me, almost a guilt thing I think.

[Glassunion]

21. There is little I can say.

I was not even born yet.

I was not there. You were. You suffered, and I did not.

All I can speak for is myself and what I see. When I see a soldier or veteran I see a hero. Sure we can disagree, but that does not change my view. I'm truly glad that I was not around to see what the American people did to its returning soldiers. I feel shame for something I was not part of. It was wrong.

[cowman]

22. When I got

home in 70 I was coming thru SFO in my uniform, which was in hindsight a mistake, when this woman spit on me and tried to punch me in the chest, her boyfriend was with her but kind of kept his distance, anyway, I knocked her on her ass and got a round of applause from the bystanders, when the police arrived they escorted me to a taxi and told me to have a good day. That was the only time I had physical violence committed against me but I was called alot of nasty names, I even had my younger brother, who was rabidly anti-war, ask me how it felt to murder innocent women and children, we didn't talk again for 30 years but now we're over it and back to being brothers

[paulsby]

51. many claim that NOBODY was spit on and that it's a myth

either they won't believe you, or will have to admit it at least happened on occasion

[cowman]

52. Yeah

on another post about 4 weeks ago I had someone flat out call me a liar and that I had never been to Vietnam because Seabees were not stationed in Nam. I didn't even bother arguing

I always thought that doing violence to someone fresh from combat was kind of stupid

Well gotta go get some sleep, got a 24 shift tomorrow, only 6 months to retirement, YAY

[paulsby]

53. thanks for your service

and i know how annoying it is to be called a lawyer because you recount a true anecdote that runs against somebody's prejudiced conception/worldview.

[cowman]

54. Thank you

and Thank You for your service to the people of WA. My sister lives in Enumclaw, dont know how far that is from where your patrol area is

[paulsby]

55. not too far

i've been known to spend some time in enumscratch on occasion. i was actually out hiking near mud mountain rd the other day. it is truly beautiful country out that way.

my wife likes to hike mt pete.

[cowman]

56. Stay safe

out there and keep up the good work

Peace Out

[PavePusher]

39. You have not been paying attention.

"I feel it is foolish to carry a concealed weapon thinking that the chance will come that you need to use it."


My inescapable conclusion is that you wilfully ignore both the many, many anecdotal incidents and statistical evidence presented here that proves your assertion false.

By burying your head in the sand, the only visage that you present to the world is your ass.

[AtheistCrusader]

81. Well, I work, but my wife carries too, so someone's pretty much always armed.

Not that your point isn't specious anyway.

[Chulanowa]

30. The idea that possessing a gun protects your family is laughable, yes

using a gun might possibly do the trick, but as we all know, the pro-gun groups refuse to acknowledge that a gun is actually a weapon used to kill, or at least injure, and so we'll find no mention of "using" a gun, since that runs counter to the warm-n-fuzzy talking point of "protecting my family." Especially when that leads to it being contratsted to the number of kids who end up dead or in the hospital from their parents' ill-maintained guns.

If your family isn't huddled around you and your gun how, precisely, is it protecting them? 'Cause if your wife runs up to the store and gets mugged, your gun's not helping her much.

By the way, hope you don't mind if I source you next time someone here in the gungeon tries to tell me "nobody thinks a gun gives you protection from its presence!"

[cowman]

45. Here, does this

make you feel better, a gun is a tool that can kill or injure and also to compete in shooting sports that kill or injure targets or kill or injuure some asshole of a criminal.

There, I said it, are you all warm 'n' fuzzy now?

[DissedByBush]

48. "Cause if your wife runs up to the store and gets mugged"

Concealed carry is getting quite popular with the ladies lately.

Problem solved.

[spin]

49. The number of women who legally carry firearms is skyrocketing...

Number of Concealed Carry Permit Requests From Women On the Rise

An unprecedented number of women are taking their protection into their own hands by getting a gun. Gun stores are seeing more women customers than anyone can remember. Many women are also getting permits to carry a concealed weapon.

***snip***

omer Cole, Shooters Supply & Sporting Goods: "I guess, when we first started, if we sold one in ten to fifteen, it was pretty good. Now, it's not unusual to have one in three, one in four to ladies purchasing handguns."

In fact, when Homer and a business partner recently built this new range beneath Shooters in Independence, a prime consideration was the rise in those who are female choosing to be armed.

"We kind of thought of that when we designed it to have it more open, well lit, friendly atmosphere, so if a lady came in, she would be comfortable in doing that."

Cole's team also has cameras to monitor the range and make it even more female-friendly. Tim Harney is a retired police officer and a conceal carry instructor. He says, when it comes to demographics, Cole and many other Tri-State gun shops and agencies catering to women are right on target. Some have had so many women sign up for the conceal-carry course this year, they've had to add sessions.
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=58623870662&topic=8781

Bunch has plenty of company who are locked, loaded and ready to fire. Fueled by crime fears and fading stereotypes about gun owners, she and other women increasingly are opting to carry concealed weapons six years after Michigan reformed laws making it easier to do so.

Permit applications have steadily declined among men after a surge in the first two years the law changed.

They fell for years among women as well, but are rising again. Women may set a record for statewide applications this year, and they're flooding ranges and prompting Wayne County and other training facilities to host "women-only" permit classes.

Bunch and other women remain the vast majority of the state's 150,000 who legally carry concealed weapons, but their ranks have jumped from 10 percent of permit-holders in 2001 to 17 percent this year. Women are on pace to receive nearly 4,100 permits this year, close to double that in 2003.
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.politics/2007-12/msg00396.html

[Chulanowa]

58. And the kids?

The whole family's packing? :)

[tburnsten]

71. You're right, we should contrast them

Kids are in greater danger from five gallon buckets and pools than they are from firearms. CDC says so, and that's good enough for me. Should be good enough for you too, since there is no better source.

Firearm accidents have plummeted over the last fifteen years, while the number of people who have carry permits has skyrocketed and the number of privately owned guns has doubled in the last twenty to thirty years. So given all that, it's safe to say that children are not being hurt in droves by parents being careless with guns.

Seems like the bulk of the anecdotal stories about children being hurt by guns left out seem to end with a felon or gang member arrested for illegally possessing a firearm. Not really the type to have a carry permit eh?

[AtheistCrusader]

82. No, but my wife's gun might protect her.

Especially if she sees it coming. If not, well, maybe someone else with a gun might help.

[DissedByBush]

23. Gun control has always targeted the poor and minorities n/t

[Glassunion]

24. So...

Why don't they just get rich and famous? :sarcasm:

[Chulanowa]

31. So have the gun owners

I'm sure the Klan had all their papers in order at the county courthouse, after all.

[friendly_iconoclast]

41. How very ahistorical of you. Sometimes the Klan were on the receiving end:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x144160#144226

Sometimes. it's not what you don't know, it's what you think you know that isn't true...

[Glassunion]

44. You do need to read up on history.

If I may recommend the following...

Benjamin Quarles - The Negro in the Making of America
"When the first U. S. official arrived in New Orleans in 1803 to take charge of this new American possession, the planters sought to have the existing free black militia disarmed, and otherwise exclude "free blacks from positions in which they were required to bear arms," including such non-military functions as slave-catching crews."

Eric Foner ed - Nat Turner
"Virginia's response to Turner's Rebellion prohibited free blacks "to keep or carry any firelock of any kind, any military weapon, or any powder or lead..." The existing laws under which free blacks were occasionally licensed to possess or carry arms was also repealed, making arms possession completely illegal for free blacks."

Watson v. Stone
"I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied"

[cowman]

46. What bullshit

I've got an idea, why don't you go get a glass of milk and cookies and join SharesUnited watching Nickleodeum and when you want to participate in an honest conversation, join us, otherwise, leave

[Chulanowa]

59. An honest conversation in the gungeon is like an unbiased conversation in the I/P forum

If you'll pardon the term, if you want honesty then you're shooting yourself in the foot by looking here. Pro-Gunners are liars on the scale of the anti-choicers. Though at least, the pro-gunners are lying for what might be a good cause at some level.

Now. Maybe you'll want to have a look at the history of labor, civil rights, suffrage, tenant movement, and then come tell me about how gun owners are the chest-thumping supporters of the "little guy". Tell you what, don't even crack open the google. Look here in the gungeon to see how many dead or injured people "deserved it" because they had the poor sense to not be armed, or because they touched someone's car, or because they "needed killin'" and then tell me about it.

Trying to make blanket statements like "gun control has always targeted the poor and minorities" doesn't make sense, when it's been the gun-wavers who've been doing most of the oppressing.

Maybe that just makes you guys part of them elite latte-sippin' liberal evildoer commies?

[PavePusher]

62. Please, point out a lie. n/t

[Glassunion]

64. Post #60

[PavePusher]

75. Heh.

I wonder if our friend Chula has ever heard the phrase "Mirror, mirror, on the wall...."

[SteveM]

68. You have really lost this argument, and you know it...

saying: "Pro-gunners are liars on the scale of the anti-choicers."

This intemperate blat is so prejudiced and sweeping you cannot bring away the truth of the matter: gun control was FOUNDED on racism; mainly against blacks, but also against Mexican-Americans, Italian-Americans and others. That you recognize this, yet still support gun-control is breath-taking! Read a little about Eugene V. Debs and his views of the Second Amendment, then come back and discuss gun-control's connection to the elites of this country. Read some more about the civil rights struggle when it was not on the streets before cameras: many civil rights activists were fully armed.

"Doesn't make sense"? It makes perfect sense when you (against every fiber in your prejudiced view) admit that gun-control is for everyone -- other than the elites, the racists, the politicians, the celebrities.

Cut the crap about latte-sipping, and engage in some of that "honest discussion."

[tburnsten]

72. I've never seen anyone here say any of those things

That wasn't from your side of the table, accusing us of saying those types of things.

And yes, gun control has historically (this is a proven historical fact, not some half-baked supposition) targeted poor people, minorities, and new citizens over any other group. That is why the NFA tax stamp costs $200, in the thirties when it was passed that was an astronomical sum that no one but the rich would ever be able to afford. Think it was motivated to keep ownership of NFA items out of reach of poor people? What else could it have been for?

What do you mean by "gun-wavers"? Police? The Armed Services? The IRS?

[Euromutt]

84. I don't recall anyone ever stating the victim "deserved it" because they weren't armed

I'm fairly sure there are instances of posters decrying the state laws or local ordinances preventing the victim from being legally armed, but never of anyone saying the victim "had it coming" (or words to that effect) for not being armed.

But maybe that's due to assimilation/confirmation bias on my part. Would you care to directly point to some of the numerous examples you say have occurred in this forum?

[DissedByBush]

47. I guess that's why the NRA helped to arm blacks against the KKK

Yep, it's true.

[Chulanowa]

60. And why the NRA now takes the other side

Oh, they have the political sense to not be so blatant, but when damn ear every second letter and story in The Rifleman is warning us of "inner city violence" and "gang youth" and painting the picture of the middle-class-suburban-family-with-a-dog fighting for its life against thrill-killing home invaders...

I dunno. Maybe I just hear the dog whistles clearer than others. Comes with being shot at for being brown, maybe :) Ahhh, Alabama, how I don't miss it.

[Glassunion]

63. You seem to be fabricating a situation to further your point.

There are 10 simple steps to having an honest discussion.
In you last post you were quite dishonest. You stated something as fact to further your point, however it is quite untrue.
Just some of the 10 Steps..
1. Do not overstate the power of your argument.
5. Be willing to publicly acknowledge when you are wrong. Those selling an ideology likewise have great difficulty admitting to being wrong, as this undercuts the rhetoric and image that is being sold.
But the most important step is not a step at all, it is implied by name... Be honest.

You stated the following:
"Oh, they have the political sense to not be so blatant, but when damn ear every second letter and story in The Rifleman is warning us of "inner city violence" and "gang youth" and painting the picture of the middle-class-suburban-family-with-a-dog fighting for its life against thrill-killing home invaders..."

I went to the publication's website looking specifically for "every second letter and story warning us of "inner city violence" and "gang youth" and painting the picture of the middle-class-suburban-family-with-a-dog fighting for its life against thrill-killing home invaders..."

Here is what I found.
#1 The Rifleman was a TV show, so I had to do a little Googling to get the publication's actual name.
#2 The NRA publication is named American Rifleman here is their website: americanrifleman.org

Here is what I found in order of appearance on the front page;
Turkey Hunting Ammo
Savage Model 110 Video
Jesse James' Gun Video
Battle of the Bulge part 3
Can a civilian AR rifle be classified as MilSpec?
There are many factors to consider when choosing a hunting bullet.
L.C. Smith Ideal Grade (Restored) can be worth as much as $3,105 to a collector.
Top Turkey Shotguns
Our annual survey highlights the year’s best firearms, optics and ammunition
The Smith-Corona ’03A3s (a cool story about a typewriter company that made rifles during WWII)
Redfield Revolution rifle scopes are affordable and made in Oregon by Leupold
The Kimber 84L was built from the ground up for America’s cartridge—the .30-’06 Sprg.—
There are 3 rotating ads at the bottom of the page. During my visit they were cheaperthandirt.com, CrossBreed Holsters and Fort Knox safes...

Since I found no stories on the front page, I went digging. I went through all of their pages...
Videos, News, Rifles, Shotguns, Handguns, Ammunition, Optics, Galleries, Blogs and Newsletters. Now I was clicking through rather quickly and basically skimming. I found nothing. NOT ONE STORY that supports your claim.

So the motives and stance you claim that an organization supports and upholds are completely false. This I was able to ascertain by simply going to their website and checking.

You seem to me to not want to have an honest discussion, but rather post flame bait to get heated responses instead of having constructive conversations.

[TPaine7]

83. I take it Chulanowa had urgent business elsewhere. LOL n/t

[Glassunion]

85. Yes...

He is working on the issue of exposing the hidden white agenda inherent in the NAACP

[friendly_iconoclast]

69. It's "The Protocols of The Elders of The NRA" schtick, redux.

We get people like you on a regular basis. The most recent one before you also believes Stanley Kubrick helped fake the Apollo lunar landings. Every one of you claims to know what the NRA is really up to...

[DissedByBush]

73. The NRA still takes the exact same side

Every law-abiding American has the right to own weapons free of onerous government meddling, self-defense being one of the reasons.

Yes, that includes blacks.

The NRA has throughout its history stood behind the rights of blacks.

Makes sense, it being founded by Union officers who had just finished fighting the Civil War.

Or did you believe the Michael Moore lies in Bowling for Columbine?

[tburnsten]

74. Wow, yet again I am looking to reccomend an individual post

Not that there is any shortage of superbly written posts in this forum, strangely they seem to all be coming from people who support the civil rights of others, not just the ones they are comfortable "giving" them.


If you haven't, you should read American Rifle, A Biography by Alexander Rose. It covers the development of the American service rifle from pre-Revolutionary days to the present, competitors to the successful rifle, and has a section on the NRA's founding and the Creedmoor competitions. It is incredible how far they fired those slow, heavy, poorly shaped black powder rifle cartridges in competition.

[PavePusher]

76. Hey doesn't Mikey proudly admit to being a gun owner?

Yet he wants to restrict guns for the masses?

Elitism, it must be tasty, he's gotten pretty fat off it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

78. He'll be along directly with issue dates and page numbers for specific quotes.

So us non-NRA members can confirm for ourselves down at the local public library...

[friendly_iconoclast]

79. And when asked for some evidence, he disappears.

Don't want facts to interfere with bigotry, do we?

[SteveM]

66. Hence the beginnings of the 14th Amendment (1868)...

You may wish to read the brief submitted on behalf of Heller by www.georgiacarry.org

Search locally for the brief. It provides an excellent summary of the profoundly racist nature of gun-control laws, from the Colonial Period, through the Antebellum era in the South, through post-Civil War Jim Crow times, and well into the 20th Century. So complete was the attempt to ban firearms for blacks, the right to keep and bear arms was the main subject of debate in Congress when the 14th was passed; in short, to keep the Klan, various gangs and even state militia from invading the residences of blacks for the purpose of disarmament. When Jim Crow was finally evicted from the South, he just caught that midnight train -- to Chicago, NYC, SF, Baltimore and of course, D.C.

I mean, no one really believes that gun-controllers actually thought up their ideas when the old blueprints were still around.

[proteus_lives]

28. At it's core, gun control is racist.

But certain types will never admit it.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted sub-thread

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

[-..__...]

67. Elitism at it's finest...

From the 1968 Gun Control Act...

§ 922. Unlawful acts

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;


to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html

§ 921. Definitions

(20) The term “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include—

(A) any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or

(B) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000921----000-.html

So... bilk the elderly and homeowners out of their life savings... no sweat... here's your gun.

Bounce a check, get in a minor brawl as a youngster, got caught with a joint in your pocket, etc sorry... no gun for you.

[Xela]

86. One the things that irks me the most about gun control...

The other being racist gun control.

Xela