“Any consumer can choose where he wants to do business, for whatever goofy reasons on which he wants to base that choice. But spewing such utter nonsense about the Constitution, well maybe we should post signs prohibiting that, too. It is probably more dangerous than the guns.”
— A Hutchinson News editorial Sunday reacting to conceal-carry supporters who are boycotting businesses that post no-gun signs because it shows they are “against the Constitution of the United States.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
140 Comments
Of course a business should have the right to ban the carrying of a fire arm in their place. Though if one thinks like a criminal, “Gee I can do my business here where there might be someone with a gun or down the street at the place that does not allow guns in their store!”. See gun owners will not be the only ones thinking about they will not be allowed to carry in the local store
The beauty is bidness can chose how they do bidness. Whether it’s guns or smoking or wages, they will either be rewarded or die based on the decisions they make.The anti-gun media crowd can’t let it go. By the way, where are all the gun deaths due to conceal/carry? Wasn’t there supposed to blood in the streets everywhere?
U know whats funny, I tried to go in a few weeks ago and get one of thoes signs with out the bar through the gun. The look on the guy’s face at the sign place was priceless… Our office is in a office building that has no gun signs on the front, so we wanted to put one that welcomes guns on the door to our suite with a saying on it that says “guns dont kill people, people kill people” with some tally marks next to it.
Why is it that everyone forgets about the “well regulated militia” part of the 2nd amendment when harping about not being able to pack heat all over the place?
Heat is being packed all over the place. At least now some of it is being packed by law abiding citizens.
A WPD officer said this to us in security training…
“its not the guys who get their carry license that i am worried about, its the guys carrying without it…”
Your right, tony, but tell that to the Eagle/Beacon & the Hutch paper.
Its like the other saying…
“Guns dont kill people, people kill people…”
Ahem.
I will, when reasonable alternatives exist, refuse to do business in a place which posts no guns. And reasonable alternatives do exist, as it appears to me that relatively few places have posted to bar carry.
Why, you ask?
Yes, I understand that the Constitution does not require a private business to permit carry. And just as it is the business’ right to bar carry, it is my right to do business elsewhere.
What the posting really tells me about the business is that it hasn’t thought through the realities and possible consequences of their choice very well, and in posting, they make themselves and everyone else less safe, not more.
Such a sign bars persons with no significant criminal history and a proven track record of obeying the law; of course, the sign makes no difference to the thug who has blithely ignored the law, and will likewise ignore the sign. The posting means that more firearms will necessarily be left in cars, where they are more likely to be stolen and actually used in crime, rather than securely on their owner’s hips where they should be.
So, while I won’t throw a fit about it, I will, and do, shop elsewhere. And the proprietors will be informed, politely but firmly, of my choice to do so.
In any case, as fleetwood pointed out, weren’t there supposed to be rivers of blood by now? Where are they? Where is that shooting gallery we were all warned was coming? Could all that that have been just more hyperbolic BS?
Yup.
Thus I had no concern about my bet; even those who oppose CC (and reasonable people can, I suppose) recognized that their fearmongering was just that: hyperbolic fearmongering. They were unwilling to put their money where their typing fingers were, even for the cost of a case of good beer.
On a more general note, if we remember just two things about what is typically bandied about as “gun control,” we will know all we need to know:1) Gun control only limits those who obey the law in the first place,2) Ultimately, it’s not about guns. It’s about control.
And Nicki, we need to talk. For now, let me just say that serious scholarship has all but abandoned the “collective rights” notion of the 2nd amendment, and recognized that the 2nd amendment, just as does the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th, guarantees (note: not “grants,” but “guarantees”) real individual, and inalienable, rights. To take any other position flies in the face of our history, the intent and writings of the Founders, and the debate over and intent of the 14th amendment.
REAL gun control, of course, means hitting the target - consistently. I think I’ve said all I’m gonna on the subject, and I’ll let the GFW’s blather on alone.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the range. Fellow bloggers (especially non-shooters), you are welcome to join me there, if you’d like. Call me, I’d enjoy meeting you and sharing a few (hundred) rounds.
GM
I’ll have to take you up on that one of these days…
GMC? “…rather than securely on their owner’s hips where they should be.” Oh? And how DOES one carry cocealed on their hip? THAT statement was telling! I heard of an incident of road rage the other day. Minor accident. One of the persons involved drew a gun. There was no blood spilled and I do not know if the person had a permit. The incident was local but I’ve not been able to find more about it. But there it is. I am pleased to see these signs when I see them. Unfortunately, no grocery store is currently posting them. I DO make sure I mention my displeasure with this occasionally. I am not able to take my business elsewhere at this time but if a grocery store does post one of those signs they will have a new customer.
I wanna know when I can get my nuclear bomb as protected in the 2nd amendment.
You should have gotten his license plate # and turned him in. It is those people who give “guns” a bad name. It is strictly forbidden for carry holders to do that so I really doubt if he had a CCL and if he did, it should be taken away.
IIRC, from the media reports, the “road rage” incident referenced above involved a non-holder of a CCL, and he was invited to accompany the officers to City Hall to discuss the matter at further length.
I get so sick and tired of hearing the darn gun nuts about their precious second amendment. THE SECOND AMENDMENT DOES NOT GUARENTEE EVERYBODY THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS! It says the right of an organized milita. We are not an organized militia. An organized militia nowadays would be the state guard. It has nothing to do with the every day citizen. I am tired of the ignorance on this issue. The NRA nuts have brainwashed everybody into believing this crap.
JR -
I can carry on my hip daily, and the casual observer will never notice the weapon. Usually strong side, behind the hip. Simple.
As to your anecdotal “I heard of . . .” Yea, I had a guy who told me of a neighbor he had, who had a sister who knew a guy who’s boss knew . . . . .whatever.
Call me when you have real facts. It sounds like, from Vaughn’s posting, that the “real facts” are not consistent with your world view, after all. Hum.
Travis:
You flunk English class. Read it again.
stupid gun nut
I had an interesting discussion last fall with a Wichita building supply center about CC. Over the years, I’ve purchased lots of supplies from them, and the manager knows me by name. He mentioned that he was going to put a NO GUNS sign in his front window when the licenses started to be issued.
I told him I respected his choice, but that I wouldn’t be shopping there after the sign went up. He was confused, we talked about it, and last week when I went in - he pulled me aside and told me he had reconsidered. It seems I was only one of many who told him the same thing.
I don’t even have a CC license….yet, and I support any business who chooses NOT to allow guns.
By the same token, they will no longer get my patronage.
It’s really that simple.
It’s really very petty to not patronize a business because they won’t allow guns.
My money, P-mom. My choice. YOu spend yours as you choose, so will I.
“Thus I had no concern about my bet; even those who oppose CC (and reasonable people can, I suppose) recognized that their fearmongering was just that: hyperbolic fearmongering.” posted by GMC70
Some examples of the above:
“I DO make sure I mention my displeasure with this occasionally.”
“I wanna know when I can get my nuclear bomb as protected in the 2nd amendment.”
“get so sick and tired of hearing the darn gun nuts about their precious second amendment.”
“The NRA nuts have brainwashed everybody into believing this crap.”
“stupid gun nut”
“It’s really very petty to not patronize a business because they won’t allow guns.”
In LibWorld, it’s OK to get rid of the defenseless, but not OK to actually do the defending.
Interesting.
I just read the Hutch editorial at issue here, and ran across this musing:
“But then the pro-gun folks shoot themselves in the proverbial foot when they go on to suggest that crooks might actually stake out a business and watch for customers who return to their cars to stow their guns.”
While sometimes pro-rights folks do sometimes shoot themselves in the foot, I guarantee that this particular scenario WILL happen. If I was looking to steal a firearm, specifically, what better way to do so? A house may be occupied, and carries stiffer penalties. A car is left unoccupied, and I know that a weapon is in it, as I just watched a law-abiding owner stow his weapon in his locked vehicle in order to comply with a business’ request to not carry.
Make no mistake - it will happen. To those who carry: be aware of your surroundings, and be discrete. To avoid this scenario happening to you, simply avoid shopping at business who bar carry.
GMC, the scenario described will occur; one can go to the bank on it. Your advice to those who carry regarding being aware of surroundings, etc., is appropriate.
Here is my take. This is actually an area where my Neo-Con Father and I both happen to agree. First, you have to look at the circumstances surrounding the times when the second amendment was drafted. Most of the populations that existed were rural. There were hostile Native Americans everywhere. There was also the matter of a vast frontier full of unknown dangers to deal with. And finally, there had just been a major war with England in which almost everyone who could fight fought. Those people had the right to keep their weapons and stay in their militias. Who was going to tell them no?
Flash forward to today. What is the legal purpose of firearms now? Hunting? Self-Defense? or Crime?
Here is how my Father and I see it: Handguns are designed for no other purpose than to kill, maim, or otherwise incapacitate a human being. There is no logical reason for us to be allowed to have them. They are too useful for violent crimes.For those of you who whine: “Home Defense!” I’ll tell you that the odds of your home getting invaded while you are there are astronomical. It is probably more likely that you will never use the weapon. So what is the point? A false illusion of safety? It isn’t worth the risk in my book.
I have nothing against hunting. I think that single-shot rifles (of a certain max caliber) and single and double barrel shotguns should be legal for hunting purposes. Plus, I think you could easily defend your home with a shotgun (it is about the length of a bat).
If I ran a restauraunt and someone tried to rob the cashe register, they wouldn’t get much because businesses intentionally don’t leave a lot of cash around, for this very reason. However, a bunch of “do it yourself Duke Waynes” shooting short barrel .38s might hit a cutomer or an employee while trying to stop the robber.So what’s the bigger loss, about $50 or the perminent loss of an employee or a steady customer due to some over anxious would be cowboy?
Otto
CC holders are not cops, and are not there to “stop the robber.” If the robber was about to kill you employee, the calculation might be different.
You might ask a certain employee of a convenience store in Topeka if he’s thankful a CC holder was there at the right moment . . . .
GMC,
I knew you would say this…
>What the posting really tells me about the business is that it hasn’t thought through the realities and possible consequences of their choice very well, and in posting, they make themselves and everyone else less safe, not more.
Any business can have the sign reasonably, but that doesn’t mean the business owners or security in the building isn’t armed. It means the general public has no legal right to interfere inside a business, no matter what crime may happen.
Then you give bad advice….
>simply avoid shopping at business who bar carry.
There is no stadium or arena in the country that allows guns inside. No government building is reasonable to allow it. Schools shouldn’t allow it. Business have every right to put those signs up and its ONLY YOU and other gun egoists that will disregard that directive.
Its the correct thinking to not trust your ability with a gun.
I hate the amount of guns in America being carried around, but I more distrust every one who feels the need to carry. I don’t feel my life is in danger from gun crimes, its more likely I’ll get injured in a car accident. Other people have their security issues and been victimized before.
We need to find the social mechanism reducing gun violence and the need to carry.
Nice Mrage… This guy should rent “Bowling for Columbine”.
“If the robber was about to kill you employee, the calculation might be different.” GMC
Bringing out a weapon against a robber with one will only escalate the situation… not diffuse it… DA!
This is America, Mrage, Andrew. You have the right to be wrong.
MrageStupid come back; try getting a real lawbreaking criminal to understand that!
Lawbreaking criminals have intention to commit a crime. No sign will stop them.
But the general public can understand a prohibited gun sign, because its the business that has responsibility for itself. Owners of the business have their security reasons.
All the guns in CC hands isn’t stopping crime, it never will.
Every business for the public to use, their employees can’t carry a gun. Every business can hire trained security for that job.
Cameras do a better job stopping criminals than guns do.
Mrage, AndrewIn addition, I have been victimized by crime, stab in the stomach by a robber.It isn’t a weapon that makes a crime, is it the imposing of the will of a criminal that you are up against in a crime.You can corroborate and kiss their ass all you want but in the end they will (and it has happen) kill you!The moment of truth is at that moment, are you going to defend yourself or are you going to depend on someone else or some belief that you will be save?Also remember you have little or no time to make a decision of what is moral.How much do you want to live?
All these gunners crack me up! Go ahead - get your CCP. Get your gun training. Go to the range and practice. Buy your silhouette targets.
Whatever.
But when you go down to Quik Trip to pick up a hot dog and a bag of chips, and Marty the Meth Head comes in to finance his habit, it’s not going to be like the movies. When Marty pulls his Glock and announces a hold up, you are not likely going to stop any robbery. Mostly likely, you’re going to pinch off a five pound loaf right there next to the Dorritos. If you do reach for your weapon, you are more likely to blow off your own nut sac than you are to stop the robber.
Trained law enforecement officers, knowing that they are in a dangerous situation, expecting to be in a position to return fire STILL have difficulty hitting their targets with multiple shots.
What makes a Dirty Harry wannabe think that they are going to do any better?
The answer to the question is to give Marty the Meth Head the lousy fifty dollars, get his license number and make a police report.
Put your gun back in it’s holster.
It will be safer for all of us.
Wiseman,
Since you have been victimized, that’s a issue not everyone has.
I’ve been street fights but was never seriously hurt. Not stabbed or shot. Today in the street its different.
I work out, stay strong, alert in the street to benefit myself but I’m not afraid of standing in front of criminals. If I’m attacked unaware or indefensible, that’s a terrible fate. Someone points a gun at me, I could die.
It’s a mindset. I choose not to carry a gun in the street. It doesn’t make me a target or potential victim.
Personal protection and business protection are two different things. Business has security responsibility for the employees. They have insurance responsibility for the general public that comes in the door.
You have responsibility for yourself. You can choose how to protect yourself as well.
DA,Truer words have never been spoken by anyone who perpetually plays the victim.
MrageThank you for respecting my choice, I will respect yours as well.You do have good valuable opinions to learn from, I will remember it.
“perpetually plays the victim”
Yeah right, Homer. From what I have heard, all YOU would have to do is BREATH on the perp.
“We need to find the social mechanism reducing gun violence and the need to carry.”
Kumbaya, baby, Kumbaya.
Labial Lips.
Truth be told, I find the need or desire to carry a weapon in the public square somewhat odd.I understand however our rights granted under the second ammendment. Is it not the same crowd screaming at the top of its lungs against the wire tapping of known and suspected terror suspects also the same screaming for gun control, truth be told?
All this being said, these signs are absolutely idiotic, truth be told. The citizen’s that will disobey the sign are the one’s to worry about in the first place, truth be told.
GMC
I CITED the fact that I did not know the full story of the “road rage” incident. And as another poster added to it, it’s pretty obvious I was not being anecdotal.
From some of the folks posting here? I PROMISE you it is only a matter of time before there is a conceal carry incident.
If you go about SURE that you will find trouble? You’re gonna find it.
Isn’t it funny how violent crime rates have dropped in States that have enacted CC?
Remember when Florida first broached the issue? The libbies were wailing, pulling out their hair and gnashing their teeth - all the while predicting that deaths would soar.
But the opposite happened.
That same scenario has been played out in other States.
Police officers who once opposed it - now support it.
The Milk Toast crowd is sad about that, but they’ll get over it. They’ll put on their pointy hats and march on to a new drummer.
JR - there already WAS a CC incident. A licensee from OK saved the life of a Phillips 66 clerk in Topeka by shooting the bad guy.
If that’s not an ‘incident,’ what is?
Wait and see.
Someone will be shot over a parking space or a “percieved threat”.
We got way to many wannabe James Bonds in these parts.
Some examples of CC problems here, such as,http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=209940“On Feb. 21, 1996, Gordon Hale III, 42, a welding equipment repairman, was involved in a minor traffic accident in Dallas that shattered the side mirror of a delivery van. While stopped in traffic, witnesses told police, van driver Kenny Tavai, 33, walked to Hale’s pickup and started punching him as he sat behind the wheel.
Hale reached for his .40-caliber handgun and killed Tavai with a single shot to the chest. Hale was charged with murder, but a grand jury refused to indict him and the charges were dropped.
It was to be the first of many shootings by license holders.”
JR - you mean like the two rookie cops a few years back in Wichita that decide to play ‘draw down’ in a vacant lot and one accidentally shot the other?
That was really bright.
Are you thinking there will be an incident like that?
Is that story a pro or con of CC laws cosmos?Sounds much like a PRO to me, truth be told.
cosmos - sorry, that’s an exception - not the rule.
Gee,
Prove your assertion that a life was saved in that event.
Was the CC guy just in the right position behind the criminal.
Many, many convenience store robberies happen with weapons and no one dies. Some do die, are injured by gun carrying criminals.
Hopefully, business has more digital camera’s and better hard drive systems than past VCR video tape to record the crimes.
Notice how some chain convenience stores don’t allow their employees to have weapons. There is a reasonable reason for that. Most employees with those jobs, have no time to train responsibly handling a weapon. Give the robber anything they want.
Mom and pop, family owned store is different. It’s not a corporate guiding it besides the gas being offered.
CC holders will not stop crime from happening. Some might get their guns taken from them.
Gee,
Prove your assertion that a life was saved in that event.
Was the CC guy was just in the right position behind the criminal.
Many, many convenience store robberies happen with weapons and no one dies. Some do die, are injured by gun carrying criminals.
Hopefully, business has more digital camera’s and better hard drive systems than past VCR video tape to record the crimes.
Notice how some chain convenience stores don’t allow their employees to have weapons. There is a reasonable reason for that. Most employees with those jobs, have no time to train responsibly handling a weapon. Give the robber anything they want.
Mom and pop, family owned store is different. It’s not a corporate guiding it besides the gas being offered.
CC holders will not stop crime from happening. Some might get their guns taken from them.
Let us all keep in mind that studies have determined in States where CC is in effect - police officers are SAFER.
That’s right - SAFER.
http://www.terry.uga.edu/~dmustard/police.pdf
Mrage - yeah, good idea. Let’s get more digital cameras in these convenience stores so we can all witness the bad guy decorating the wall with the clerk’s brain matter.
Too bad cameras don’t shoot bad guys first.
Like the CC licensee in Topeka did.
If I had my druthers - I’d take a CC licensee beside me over a hidden camera any day, when a thug puts a loaded gun to my head.
Be sure and brush your teeth for your picture…… lol
More of GSheridan’s “exceptions” at,http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=209940“… Stacey Anderson, an orthodontist’s assistant who rear-ended the car of license holder Albert Trieu Nguyen four years ago in Houston. Before they could exchange insurance information, Nguyen began wildly firing shots into the air with his semiautomatic handgun. A terrified Anderson fled in her car and was chased through residential streets at speeds approaching 55 mph.
Nguyen’s lawyer later said he was suicidal and “incompetent to stand trial.” Nguyen was sentenced to six years’ probation after pleading guilty to felony assault and his license was revoked.”
cosmos - go ahead - you’re just digging yourself a deeper hole.
The stats are in.
You can drag that dead pony out to the corral and beat it until it’s a bloody pulp and it’s STILL not gonna get up and run.
The answer to the question is to give Marty the Meth Head the lousy fifty dollars, get his license number and make a police report.
Put your gun back in it’s holster.
It will be safer for all of us.
You are more likely to be shot by the CCP gunner than you are by the perp.
“And how DOES one carry cocealed on their hip?”
Longcoats? ;)
Camera is the better weapon against criminals. People get shocked by a gun carrying creep or the situation is too crazy.
Criminal hid their identity with a facial covering of some kind. But they can be found by certain clothing and mannerisms.
A sign suggesting Business is Video protected OBVIOUSLY, it might give criminal pause, than a sign saying GUN IS LOADED BEWARE.
Criminals can size up someone, even if they might be a cc person.That cc person isn’t brave enough to fire their weapon or the criminals gun is bigger and there are more of them. Group of criminals, all with guns against one cc holder, who wins?
“I support any business who chooses NOT to allow guns.
By the same token, they will no longer get my patronage.”
That’s SUPPORT?
WSClark writes:”You are more likely to be shot by the CCP gunner than you are by the perp.”———
Link please?
Mrage writes:”Camera is the better weapon against criminals.”————-
Link please?
You Libs really are pussys. The criminal is too smart, the CC holder is going to kill us all, blood in the streets and on and on. No wonder you want to get out of Iraq, you bunch of Frenchies.
Fleet - you hit the nail squarely on the head, they’re just a bunch of wimpy Frogs.
I wish they would take a look backwards in history to the pacifist Quakers - those silly folks who refused to defend themselves, even if their 11 year old daughter was being raped.
Quakers didn’t survive to be a leading force in our government.
I wonder why.
The wages of appeasement - are extinction.
Personal opinion, General Sherri - I doubt that there is enough CCP data to make a real determination of the shooting accuracy of Concealed Carry gunners.
But the question remains: If the police need multiple shots to hit a perp, what makes you think that a CCP shooter is going to do any better?
Like I said, the CCP’ers would crap themselves if faced with a true life or death scenario.
… and by the way, Mafia hit men have said that they have had trouble controlling their bowels on their first “hit” and they knew that they were going to kill someone.
What makes you think that a civilian could draw and shoot without showing nervousness?
You are funny people, Fleet and General Sherri…..
Why don’t you try to come to my house and see if you could survive assaulting me? My son? My Granddaughter?
Please make sure that your will is up to date and your pre-paid funeral expenses have been paid.
Losers.
Gee,
From experience..I don’t need to show a link.
I worked in a 7-11, grave yard shift from age 19 to 21. Wasn’t ever robbed but the reason for video security was explained. Business demands employees don’t fight when being robbed.
That was the age of VCR video tape. Too much tape over and over again, grainy video.
You might think criminals cut power, but computers today have backup systems, plus its hard for them rob in the dark. Off site computer networks with a video feed.
Its horrible any person is harmed by a criminal and not every instance will a gun save their lives.
Criminals have to be warned prior to their entering a building. Video protection is standard way of how business does it.
Should employees choose for themselves to be armed? Its not insurable to any business. Training is key protecting a business with guns. Leave it to professional security.
Society isn’t going to be armed everywhere and shouldn’t be. Robberies are survivable, hopefully. Crazy gun criminal will shoot anybody for any reason.
It has to be dawned on them, there will be a record of that criminal behavior on video. Video protection announcements work.
Go into any Q-trip see yourself on video. They haven’t had deaths of clerks by guns. Its lucky that Q-trip clerk survived being shot in the face. They do get robbed by gun criminals alot but no one dies. The video is proof of their crime already and criminals can see that.
“Why don’t you try to come to my house and see if you could survive assaulting me?”
Is your sharp stick loaded?
Fleet, I may be 54 years old, but I am more than capable of taking care of myself. I do not need to use a weapon. I was raised on the streets of Detroit and I know how to deal with street violence. I have no fear, especially when dealing with a posuer like you.
Chump.
Gee, WussClark, get your panties in a bunch often?
The data is in - CC is SAFER.
Period.
I can’t believe you’re issuing challenges to fights. Have you nothing better to do?
Here you are - a street brawler - and yet you would deny others their Constitutional right to protection.
What’s up with that?
GSheridan,
“The stats are in.”
Credible link(s) re general population and CC, please.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/pdf/litreviewfirearmdeaths.pdfHarvard Injury Control Research Center
Fact Sheet: More Guns, More DeathsGUN CARRYINGDonahue J. Guns, crime, and the impact of state right-to-carry laws. Fordham Law Review. 2004; 73(2): 623-652.Major Finding: This chapter reviews the literature on right-to-carry laws and their relationship to murder, rape, assault, and property crimes such as robbery, burglary, and larceny.
The author concludes that there is NO evidence of reduction in violent or property crime when right-to-carry laws are passed, and that if any association exists between gun carrying and crime, it is that right-to-carry laws are linked to INCREASES in property crime.”
And also explain how cosmic rays have caused GW the last few decades, whens there’s been NO trend observed in cosmic rays since 1953.
“I was raised on the streets of Detroit”
You make me laugh. Thank you.
“a street brawler”
Bullshit, General Sherri! I have supported YOUR right to CCP. I have no interest in your guns. You can play Dirty Harry all you want.
I just think you folks are playing with yourselves. You are not going to break up any robberies. You are not going to prevent any assaults. You are more likely to shoot yourself than any criminal.
I will take my chances defending myself with my fist, etc, than I would take a chance on some CCP holder helping me out.
I will flat guarantee you that I can defend myself better with my fists in an emergency than you can with a S & W .38.
Why? Because you will lose your nerve and I will react on instinct.
“You make me laugh. Thank you.”
I was orphaned in 1958, Fleet, is that funny to you?
If so, why don’t you take me up on my offer?
“I will take my chances defending myself with my fist, etc, than I would take a chance on some CCP holder helping me out.”
Isn’t that how the French do it? When they get into trouble, they have the USA help out. At least you are consistant.
“Why? Because you will lose your nerve and I will react on instinct.”
You sound a little like Barney Fife. Are you as quick as a cat?
Fleet, you are, as usual, full of shit.
“Isn’t that how the French do it? When they get into trouble, they have the USA help out. At least you are consistant.”
I said that I could easily take care of myself.
Did you miss that session in your remedial reading class?
By the way, I don’t need to be as quick as a cat - I only need to land the first shot.
Mrage,
The young clerk at quiktrip did not survive. His name was Brian Edwards I taught him and I attended his funeral.
I don’t know if cc would have saved him, but what you said if its is the same incident is not true
There was another shot clerk at a Q-trip that did survive.
I apologize for not remembering the death of Brian Edwards. Now that you mention it, there were two serious shootings of clerks in a short period of time.
All dead by crime is a tragedy, but in relation to Q-trips being robbed by gun point, that company has very few clerks dead.
Video is saving most of those clerk’s lives, because criminals can see themselves doing the crime. If its a crazy with a gun, they will shoot anyway.
If its a criminal trying to get away, video has their image. They can’t shoot and stop the video witness.
Q-trip isn’t rushing to arm clerks.
The victims of crime I know, they were attacked unaware suddenly. Guy or girl, punched, something thrown at them. Knocked down, shoved. I can’t realize when its possible for cc carriers to pull their gun.
Person can be shot quickly without the ability to duck. Crime happens suddenly to some people.
A lot of street arguments can be started by aggressive people. Are some CC folks more aggressive now that they are carrying a gun.
Not all CC licensed people are self defensive.
WussClark writes:”By the way, I don’t need to be as quick as a cat - I only need to land the first shot.”
———
That’s really good, Wus, if you’re within a few feet of your attacker and he doesn’t have a gun pointed at you.
But if he’s farther away - you’re shot out of luck.
Unless you can catch bullets with your teeth.
Can you?
Wus, in my experience, those who blow and go about how tough they are - usually aren’t.
You don’t know Fleet - and you don’t know me. So you might just be in over your head when you go off half-cocked issuing challenges.
If there is anything I’ve learned in my years, it is that no matter how tough you are, there is always someone out there who is tougher.
I don’t issue challenges to folks. And if need be - I’ll keep my trusty Kimber .45 around instead of depending upon my ability to leap tall buildings in single bounds and land on bad guys before they can draw down on me.
And a couple of clips of hollow points. And a Hershey Bar. God, I love chocolate.
Lock and load.
Can I catch “what” in my teeth?
Whoops!
Hey! I am fifty-four. In all my years, I have never seen a robbery, a hold up or a murder. I lived in Detroit, most of my life, and in Kansas City for most of the rest.
The chances of coming across an incident are very small. In the very, very, very few situation that I have delt with, a well placed right hand has taken care of the situation.
If a perp is too far away, well, let the perp have the lousy fifty dollars and let everyone live.
You are funny, General Sherri. I never claimed the mantle of “tougher than yada, yada.”
I said that I was tough enough to take care of myself.
My comment was to the “Dirty Harry” folks that think that they can shoot it out with anyone.
My response was that the “gunners” would probably crap themselves.
But, back to your original point - I am not afraid of anyone - I do not look for fights - but I do not back down.
When the bully wants to fight - the only way to survive is to fight.
Sometimes the perp wants MORE than fifty lousy bucks. Sometimes he wants to rape your granddaughter.
You gonna let him? Or are you gonna stop him with your Kung-Fu when he has a gun to her temple?
I’ve never seen a robbery either. But I’ve seen a few rattlesnakes. Had to shoot them before they bit the dogs.
But although I’ve never been a victim of crime - I’m not gonna set myself up to be one, either.
Well, WS, I’m glad you’re a fighter.
And I fervently hope you are never in a situation where you need a gun to survive - and don’t have one.
I mean that, sincerely. I wouldn’t wish ill on anyone.
Truth be told, you question the accuracy of a CC shot vs. a police officer who takes usually multiple shots to bring the criminal down.Truth be told, once the police are on scene, the criminal is most likely in escape mode (meaning moving target).What the CC would have working in this scenario is the element of surprise (criminal is deer caught in headlights) truth be told.
Gee,
Good luck firing that .45 protecting yourself ,I’ve seen video of police just feet away from criminals miss,
Maybe your a better shot. Cold personality to pull a trigger without heart racing, or hand trembling.
I’ll keep hope to survive an assault by my own means without a gun in a pocket. I’m protecting myself.
With a future family still to create, who knows. If anyone I know is attacked, they better destroy me, because I won’t stop from retribution.
I do train to survive being shot if its possible. Stay on my feet if attacked unaware.
I haven’t felt paranoid feelings in society yet to carry a gun.
“You gonna let him? Or are you gonna stop him with your Kung-Fu when he has a gun to her temple?”
When did Kung-Fu come into the discussion? When did I say that I was a martial arts expert? When did my granddaughter enter into the discussion?
Are you just going to throw bullshit around or are you going to revert to adulthood?
What I was SAYING Gen. Sherri, was that my judgment and my instincts were a better defense than shooting it out.
By the way, Sherri - I would be willing to bet that you would shit yourself LONG before you ever got a shot off in a crisis.
WSClark
What’s with your fascination with people crapping their pants. Have issues?
If you don’t get help at Charter, Please get help somewhere.
Ease off on ws. He’ll whip out the “I’m an orphan” defense at the drop of a hat.
“What’s with your fascination with people crapping their pants. Have issues?”
No issues, Heck, I was trained by my grandmother long before three.
By the way, Fleet, I have never used the “I am an orphan defense.”
But nice try anyway.
Personally, I hope that both of you yank out your guns when Marty the Meth Head pulls his Glock.
Guess who I am betting on?
GSheridan,
I asked you at 4:31 PM for “Credible link(s) re general population and CC, please.”And I also asked you about cosmic rays re AGW.http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/02/post_signs_proh.html#comment-61122576
You’ve made 4 posts since then… should we assume you have NO proof (links)?
“You make me laugh. Thank you.”
I was orphaned in 1958, Fleet, is that funny to you?
If so, why don’t you take me up on my offer?”
What do call this, ws. You pulled this out from nowhere.
“What do call this, ws. You pulled this out from nowhere.”
Do you have an English translation for this, Fleet?
This was your post….
“He’ll whip out the “I’m an orphan” defense at the drop of a hat.”
So, are you challenging my status or are you looking for a fight?
What? A cyber fight? If you recall, I said you were funny and you brought up (out of nowhere) that you were an orphan. I think you are nuts. Looking for fights, bringing up tragic stories for sympathy, calling people nasty names, getting off topic. You are nuts.
According to GSheridan, the 17 year-old kid was “holding a gun TO” the head of the Phillips 66 clerk.http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/01/locals_rewritin.html#comment-28357061
“holding a gun TO” the clerk’s head?? WTH!!
If I was that clerk, I’d MUCH rather give the kid the money, than risk his trigger finger twitching when a CC shot him.
Of course you would, cosmos. That’s what separates the men from the boys.
Appeasing criminals.
WSClark cosmos
What I’m curious to know is this. If Marty the Meth Head herds you and the clerk and anyone else in the store into the freezer and tells you to face the wall and kneel down what are you going to do? Wouldnt you rather have the option a handgun affords?
WSClark cosmos
What I’m curious to know is this. If Marty the Meth Head herds you and the clerk and anyone else in the store into the freezer and tells you to face the wall and kneel down what are you going to do? Wouldnt you rather have the option a handgun affords?
WSClark cosmos
What I’m curious to know is this. If Marty the Meth Head herds you and the clerk and anyone else in the store into the freezer and tells you to face the wall and kneel down what are you going to do? Wouldnt you rather have the option a handgun affords?
Phillip
This is from that Hutch editorial.
“But then the pro-gun folks shoot themselves in the proverbial foot when they go on to suggest that crooks might actually stake out a business and watch for customers who return to their cars to stow their guns.”
This type of thing does happen.
After Florida passed CCW robbers began targeting rental cars leaving airports. When some were caught and questioned they said that they knew whoever was driving the car would be from overseas or out of state and would not have a weapon and likely have large amounts of cash.
There have been instances of armed robbers targeting only “posted” businesses within some urban neighborhoods.
The boycott of business is a favored tactic of the Left, except when the persons employeeing it are percieved to be from the Right.
Heckler - don’t confuse the libbies with facts - they don’t know how to mentally process them.
All of your points on this thread, btw, have been excellent.
Keep up the good work.
Sigh. . .I don’t have any interest in the arguments over the 2nd amendment that predictably erupted (at least not right now), as they have absolutely nothing to do with Phillip’s post.
Anyone stupid enough to believe that private businesses who refuse to allow guns on their premises are somehow “against the Constitution” shouldn’t be trusted (as Dogbert once put it) with anything more dangerous than string.
Sheesh. What morons.
GSheridan,
You’ve now made 6 posts since I asked you at 4:31 PM YESTERDAY for “Credible link(s) re general population and CC, please.”And I also asked you about cosmic rays re AGW.http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/02/post_signs_proh.html#comment-61122576
I assume you have NO proof, NO facts, and NO answer.
If a criminal is holding a gun “TO” your head, there’s almost no chance they’ll miss, if they shoot when a CC shoots them.
But I guess some money in the register is more important to you than what’s inside your head? Or maybe there’s nothing in there?
cosmos
In case you didnt know this- if it’s about guns and has David Hemenways name on it it is a fraud.
Hemenway is a propogandist.
cosmos
I’m referring to the study at the link in your 4:31 post from yesterday.
cosmos
In that study Hemenway claimed that the states with the highest gun ownership rates had the highest violent crime rates.
What he doesnt tell you is that if you include stats from D.C. (i know, it’s not a state) it completely changes the out come of that part of the study.
The other thing he doesnt tell you is that if you break the state data down by county you find that the counties with the highest crime rates have the lowest gun ownership rates.
There’s more, but I’ll let you digest that for a bit.
Heckler,
Your links to back up your claims re Hemenway’s studies?
And I did not quote Hemenway at 4:31 PM.”Donahue J. Guns, crime, and the impact of state right-to-carry laws. Fordham Law Review. 2004″
Heckler
>What I’m curious to know is this. If Marty the Meth Head herds you and the clerk and anyone else in the store into the freezer and tells you to face the wall and kneel down what are you going to do? Wouldnt you rather have the option a handgun affords?
What are you talking about? What business allows employees to have guns? It’s not insurable for that business unless those employees are licensed as security.
Video camera’s everywhere would record that criminal placing employees in the freezer. If the Meth Head saw himself on a big TV monitor, lets hope Marty can understand that. The video witness has him recorded. Why go kill employees in the freezer?
That’s done to silence witnesses. Dead people tell no secrets.
Good video with today’s technology can save lives. It happens at Q-trips everyday.
Non video protected stores, there is a risk of deadly robbery. Those business owners better be aware.
The lesson is never give in to criminals with a gun, don’t follow what they want by going into the freezer.
The decision to die has to be in our hands.
Mrage
Your post is confusing, what’s your point?
If you dig around on U-tube you can find plenty of videos of armed robbers shooting clerks in convenience stores and liquor stores. Certain types of criminals are not swayed by cameras. It’s important to understand and be able to seperate the cool heads from the crazies.
Heckler,
Ten times as many robberies at gun point or threat of gun point happen , on video’s, no one dies. When murders happen, its tragic. But its a small percentage of violent robberies.
Video has to be the last witness catching the killers.
Business saves employees lives with video. Its been that way for a long time.
It will be the rare business who allows CC holders to carry a gun at work.
Q-trip is not arming their clerks is the proof.
3 cheers for beating gunmen without a gun! If a 70 year old can do it…
SAN JOSE, Costa Rica (AP) — A tour group of U.S. senior citizens fought off a band of muggers in eastern Costa Rica, sending two of the assailants fleeing and killing a third, police said Thursday.
One of the tourists — a retired U.S. serviceman whom officials estimated was in his 70s — allegedly put Warner Segura in a headlock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus Wednesday, said Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose.
The Americans had arrived in Limon on the Carnival Cruise Lines ship Carnival Liberty.
“It was a group of 12 senior citizens from the United States who were going to spend a few hours in the area, but their tour bus entered a dangerous sector known as Cieneguita”, Hernandez said.
The tourists drove Segura to the local Red Cross branch, but he was declared dead, Hernandez said. He declined to give the names or hometowns of the tourists.
The Red Cross also treated one of the tourists for an anxiety attack, Hernandez said.
Costa Rican authorities said they did not plan to file charges against the tourists, who left on their cruise ship after the incident.
“They were in their right to defend themselves after being held up,” Hernandez said.
Hernandez said Segura had previous charges against him for assaults.
Heckler,
No credible links to prove your claims re Hemenway?
mrage
I said nothing about employees carrying at work. Either I was unclear on something or you misunderstood.
But on that subject, you’d be surprised to find how many owners and employees carry in small privatley owned jewelry stores, pawn shops, and liquor stores. You don’t need a CCH permit to carry in a business that you own.
cosmo
Here’s a link to a page full of links to studies showing the opposite of what Donohue and Hemmenway claim.
cosmo
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KleckAndGertz2.htm
Heckler,
“Here’s a link to a page full of links to studies showing the opposite of what Donohue and Hemmenway claim.”
I don’t see any “links” at your 2nd Ammendment Foundation page, just vague attacks on Hemmenway.And Donohue is NOT even mentioned.
http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/donohuepublications.htm
Try again.
And Heckler, try to find something more recent than 1997.
Wow, I screwed that one up, no link.
cosmo
Try this. Sorry, got in a hurry.
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/postsbyday/RTCResearch.html
Heckler,
Over 1/2 of those are by, or connected to John Lott — and he’s got serious “problems”, to be polite
‘CONCEALED HANDGUN FRAUD: EXPOSING JOHN LOTT’http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=lott
* Lott Co-Author Admits to Gaping Flaws in Study* Lott Claims Computer Ate His Controversial CCW Survey* Lott Caught Posing as a Student to Praise Himself and His Work* Lott Uses Fictitious Name to Push His Book on Amazon.com* Experts Challenge Lott’s Research
” “John Lott as “Mary Rosh”
For a full review of “Mary Rosh” statements praising and defending John Lott against his many academic critics, see the following link - remember Mary Rosh is John Lott.
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/maryrosh.html“——–More at,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott_(econometricist)
Got anyone more credible than Lott?
cosmos
And what exactly is wrong with his research? You havent pointed out anything of substance that challenges his methods, only well organized slander.
The Mary Rosh stuff? A joke.
cosmos
What problem do you have with Gary Klecks work?
cosmos
Mustard, Benson, Mast,Plassman, Tideman, Moody, Olson, Maltz,etc.
What problem do you have with their work?
Heckler,
“The Mary Rosh stuff? A joke.”
If John Lott’s studies are credible, WHY did he use “Mary Rosh” to defend, and promote himself?
You believe that the FACTS re Lott are “only well organized slander”? And you ask what “problem” I have with the others listed at “John Lott’s website”?
Well… maybe you’re “Mary Rosh”? Or maybe you’re “slow”…?
cosmos
Give me some substance, you’ve yet to explain what’s wrong with the research of any of them.
Put up or shut up.
Heckler,
I ALREADY gave you links with the substance re John Lott, and some of it applies to the others — you called it slander.
Give me the substance proving that John Donohue, the National Academy of Science, et al are “slander”, i.e. falsehoods.
cosmos
Tell my in your words what is wrong with Lott’s studies or any of the other studies I showed you. You can formulate an logical arguement can’t you?
The National Academy of Science has become little more than a political action committee.
Heckler,
You can’t read my earlier Brady Campaign link?
Lott’s coauthor admitted, under OATH, that their study had serious flaws that completely undermined Lott’s findings.
It very strongly appears that Lott fabricated his 98% deterrent study.
I don’t want to waste my time, so read,http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Lott
Lots of informative links here,’Who Is John Lott and Why is He Claiming That More Guns Mean Less Crime?’http://www.mediatransparency.org/personprofile.php?personID=56
Likehttp://whoismaryrosh.com/
‘John Lott’s unethical conduct’http://timlambert.org/lott/
cosmos
Lott’s work has threatened a cornerstone of Liberal orthodoxy, that removing guns from society will make it safer. He is taken seriously by many serious researchers. His work, because it is counter to common thought in accedemia, gets pear reviewed more thoroughly than most BEFORE he even releases it.
Donohue and Hemenway, two of his biggest critics, don’t like to have their work peer reviewed, they don’t like to release their data at all on gun studies.
Because he is taken seriously and because he has sparked so much more research on the subject, the likes of Hemenway and Donohue have to destroy him. They know he is right but they have their agenda to push and he is a threat to it. They are not used to having their orthodoxy challenged.
Folks like you who seem to think that less guns will mean less crime need to study what’s happened in Australia and Brittain, who have extensive gun bans. Here’s a study for you from the British Journal of Criminology.
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/GunLawsSudden%20DeathBJC.pdf#search=‘Did%20the%20Australian%20Firearms%20Legislation%20of%201996%20Make%20a%20Difference%3F’
Years ago a guy named Kellerman released the now infamous “study” saying that you are more likely to die by a gun in your own home than to be a victim of violent crime. Of course the media swallowed it and regurgitated it to the public without even a question, because it fit in with their orthodoxy; guns are bad.
A couple of researchers challenged him on it, they wanted to see his data. He wouldnt release it. So they set about trying to duplicate it. They gathered the necessary data from the logical sources one would go to for that kind of data and analysed it.
The only way they could duplicate Kellermans results were to INCLUDE the guns a criminal attacking a resident brought with him. So the gun a criminal brings into a home counted just like a gun the home owner had in his home.
Then along comes Lott and Mustard and Kleck and others and further blow away the liberal gun orthodoxy. And the increasing crime rates in Australia and Brittain, who have virtually banned all gun ownership, are confirming what a logical thinking person knows anyway; When you take guns away from the law abiding things get easier for criminals and you have what? More crime.
cosmo
I’ll grant you this, in states with concealed carry property crimes do go up. It’s only logical. Risk averse criminals will look for safer targets.
Heckler,
So now you’re claiming that BECAUSE Lott is UNABLE to withstand scrutiny, he’s CREDIBLE? ROFLMAO!!
Did you CAREFULLY read the links I provided, such as http://timlambert.org/lott/ ?
Lott fabricated his 2% survey claim, had coding errors, used ’sock puppets’, is out-of-date, etc.
You’re an excellent example of how rabid, right-wing pro-gun nuts IGNORE facts, and reality. Are you “Mary Rosh”?
cosmos
Again, the Mary Rosh thing does not mean there is anything wrong with Lott’s research, probably a stupid stunt to pull, but it has no impact on the validity of his statistical methods.
That he fabricated that survey, it’s a claim, not proven.
The coding errors, Lott has addressed that and corrected for it and says it does not change his outcome significantly
cosmos, I don’t understand the language these researchers speak. I know people who use statistics all day long that don’t understand much of what they do. I can’t listen to their back and forth arguements and determine who’s right because it’s all Martian to me.
But the fact is other researchers find the same trends. Bill Clinton appointed a commission to study gun crime and found similar results, just not to magnitude Lotts studies did.
You can spend your time slamming Lott and you can call me names, yes I’m a right-wing gun nut but I’ve had my rabies shots, but it’s all a diversion.
I could give you links to Lott and some other people explaining what’s wrong with Donohue’s work and Hemenway’s work but it won’t change your mind.(even if you understand the language, which I don’t)
If what’s happening in Brittain and Australia won’t change your mind nothing will because you can’t accept the logic, the simple basic truth that criminals don’t dissarm when law abiding people do, and that criminals fear armed citizens more than they fear the police therefore changing their habits.
cosmos
Since we’re just banging our heads and not getting anywhere with one another lets change directions.
Explain to me how you think that Concealed Carry could possibly increase crime rates. Explain the logic and the practical effects. What increases, violent crime, property crime? I’m willing to listen. And I’m curious.
kouj zoymjhvna hxqkvyjc fwrjopsd mxqedt iuywhv ghbt
xngtzo gvownxd utedlf igkusa twvzeu mrtvlfpyc smwuzct http://www.nvdlx.zmjtgx.com
Cool site. Thank you:-)http://lamisilcream.fora.pl Lamisil Cream
Cool site. Thank you!!!http://lamisilpillscanadaprice.fora.pl Lamisil Pills Canada
Nice site. Thank you!http://cytotecmisoprostol.fora.pl Cytotec Misoprostolhttp://ordercytoteconline.fora.pl Order Cytotec Onlinehttp://misoprostolnoprescription.fora.pl Misoprostol No Prescriptionhttp://buycymbaltaonline.fora.pl Cymbalta Buy Onlinehttp://cymbaltaantidepressant.fora.pl Cymbalta Antidepressant
Nice site. Thanks!!!http://duloxetineonline.fora.pl Duloxetine HCL Onlinehttp://30mgcymbalta.fora.pl Cymbalta 30mghttp://canadacymbalta.fora.pl Cymbalta Canada
Very good site. Thank you!http://noprescriptionclonazepam.fora.pl No Prescription Clonazepamhttp://buyadderallrx.fora.pl Adderall RX Buy Onlinehttp://adderallxrnoprescription.fora.pl Adderall XR No Prescriptionhttp://celexaantidepressant.fora.pl Celexa Antidepressanthttp://celexaonlinebuy.fora.pl Celexa Buy Online
Very good site. Thank you!http://noprescriptionclonazepam.fora.pl No Prescription Clonazepamhttp://buyadderallrx.fora.pl Adderall RX Buy Onlinehttp://adderallxrnoprescription.fora.pl Adderall XR No Prescriptionhttp://celexaantidepressant.fora.pl Celexa Antidepressanthttp://celexaonlinebuy.fora.pl Celexa Buy Online