Redstate

Well, this isn't about guns on airplanes. This is about a new state law in Georgia that allows someone picking up family members to be armed in the terminal, like many other states allow.

This airport manager has said that, even though this is a new law, he is still going to ignore it and arrest people who are doing what the state specifically says they may.

He is operating in violation of this law.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

It has been awhile since I was in an airport. I don't mind flying (It's kind of like a train in the sky but not as nice) but I hate airports with a passion so I stay away. Anyway there were many people in the airport carrying guns. They were national guardsmen carrying M16s. They were also doing random spot searches of vehicles and people.

Like I said it has been awhile but I can't see any good coming of carrying guns at an airport.

I do have this to ask though, when did the airport manager gain police powers and just what law enforcement agency is going to carry this out ?

Like I said it has been awhile but I can't see any good coming of carrying guns at an airport.

The National Guard is there to protect the airport. Your firearm on your person is there to protect you.

Also note, if you have a firearm on you as a concealed carry permitholder, the LEAST safe place to have that firearm is sitting in your car while you go inside. Not only is it unable to protect you, but as it is not with you it is MUCH easier to steal.

I don't mind, if I am carrying, and the National Guard want to search me as a part of a random checkpoint. I show them my ID, tell them that I have a concealed carry permit and that I have my firearm with me, tell them where it is and then go about their check.

If they try to take my gun away and I am in a place I can carry, that becomes a lawsuit. National Guard doesn't have a right to disarm me if I am in a place I am legally allowed to carry.

Neither does Mr. DeCosta.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

in airports? I haven't seen NG in an airport since the earliest days after 9/11.

In Vino Veritas

No offense to the national guard meant. They are doing a fine job, it was just really depressing to think we had come to the pass where they were needed

after 9/11 as a stop gap between the mostly private or state/city security in airports and the spin up of TSA.

The State of Alaska operates a LOT of airports, though only a dozen or so are FAR Part 135. At the time it all came down, the NG that was available to us was mostly from the very rural areas of the State, a lot of Eskimo kids to whom Bethel, population maybe 5000, was a REALLY big town. We had to gather them all up and get them into Anchorage and Fairbanks for "training" and then get them out on duty at the airports. God, what a cat-herding job that was! Lots of them found "dim lights, thick smoke, and loud, loud music" waaay too attractive and got unceremoniously disciplined and sent home.

In Vino Veritas

Not airports, but still mass transit hubs. And, I am glad to see them there. Most of the MPs I saw were combat vets.

"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)

Having a firearm in an area where criminals are likely to attempt violence and there are expected low levels of support is a stabilizing influence.

Adding an additional firearm into a situation where there are already many of them and little likelihood of violence is destabilizing.

Before you nanny state on me, let me just say I really don't want to be the guy standing next to the idiot with a gun, the one time this decade I take a plane someplace. I wouldn't mind but the guns the Guard carries are full auto.

It is not a numbers game. It is a Right to Self Defense, Right to Keep and Bear, and an Airport Manager who puts his anti-gun agenda ahead of state law.

Having a firearm in an area where criminals are likely to attempt violence and there are expected low levels of support is a stabilizing influence.

Adding an additional firearm into a situation where there are already many of them and little likelihood of violence is destabilizing.

Not true. The ones who have concealed carry permits are not destablizing to anyone except criminals. Those with concealed carry permits are not 'wannabe cops' or vigilantes. They are people who take on the responsibility of the 2nd Amendment's Right and chose to defend themselves and be ABLE to defend themselves.

Remember that police rarely ever stop crime. They clean up after a crime and seek those that did the crime.

Defense is not about mopping up, it is about not becoming a victim.

Before you nanny state on me, let me just say I really don't want to be the guy standing next to the idiot with a gun, the one time this decade I take a plane someplace. I wouldn't mind but the guns the Guard carries are full auto.

Why do you trust the national guard more than someone who has a concealed carry permit? Do you know the steps required to get a concealed carry permit? The training and background checks? People with concealed carry permits dedicate more time to practicing the safe use of their firearms than any hunters, even more than the National Guard. (before gas prices topped 3 bucks a gallon, I had more practice with my concealed carry firearm than some of the policemen I came into contact with. I know only because I've asked)

No, in an area where the National Guard is needed to protect the peace, I am quite certain that a firearm on my person serves a positive purpose in defending myself.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Arguing this is like arguing teflon bullets again.

No, this is a clear case of an airport manager putting his agenda ahead of state law, and threatening to arrest people who legally carry a firearm in the non-secured sections of the airport (where you pick people up).

This displays the crass arrogance of the Left, willing to give the finger to state law in order to enforce its own agenda to disarm law-abiding citizens, treating them worse than the criminals that prey upon them.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Instead of that crazy gun nut/so con/ arch conservative.

Talk to a person who isn't a gun owner. See how they react. I am a gun owner. I probably had my sharpshooter medals from the NRA before you were born. To me it looks like the airport manager is taking reasonable steps to insure the safety of people in his terminal. If I am thinking that, imagine what the 95% of society that is to the left of me will think ?

Since when is disarming law-abiding citizens in a public area 'reasonable'?

Please name the places that are safer due to 'gun free zones'

Post Offices? Well, there's that term "Going Postal" . . .

Schools? How many school shootings have we had in the last 10 years?

Shopping Malls? I can think of a few malls that could have used some concealed carry permitholders with their firearms, when shooters entered and started shooting up the place.

Gun Free Gas Stations? Well, 7/11 get knocked over so often that it is a joke.

Time and time again gun free zones are proven to be LESS safe, as it is only the law abiding citizen that is disarmed. Criminals who would use their firearms for criminal purposes are going to bring it in anyway.

So please, tell me why disarming those who are specifically permitted to carry a concealed permit, and now (due to the new law) specifically allowed to carry in the terminal, is somehow a 'reasonable' protection?

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

But first you need to relate it To what I said.

Remember you are on the side of change here, to make your argument you have show how your change would make things better.

is now on you to argue for a change in the current law.

So now do so, easily! smile

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

No, your 'side' is the side of change. The Constitution and the right to self defense are long-standing.

This idea that we somehow give up our rights to the agenda of airport managers, despite state law, is a change that YOU need to defend.

If the rest of the country doesn't want to have a firearm, that's fine. No one is required to own and carry. (Yes, there are a couple of towns that require home ownership of a firearm, but even then there are ways out of it)

However, you cannot come in and tell me to disarm, then tell me that I have to make an appeal to justifiy my right.

YOU need to make the case as to why gun free zones are safer. I've already asked you to do that. Are you unwilling?

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Even with the police/other security, we have the responsibility to protect ourselves.

Let's generalize your sentence a bit:

"To me it looks like the [insert any business/government official] is taking reasonable steps to insure the safety of people in [insert name of business or other locale]. If I am thinking that, imagine what the 95% of society that is to the left of me will think ?"

You are quoting exactly the same logic that is used by most opponents of concealed carry laws. So tell me again - what is different about the unsecured part of an airport terminal than any other public place?

You, clearly, must just be a "crazy gun nut/so con/ arch conservative."

....

you know... like me.

heh.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

If you asked most people should people with a concealed carry permit be allowed to carry on the street, restaurant (Note property rights supersede carry rights here), other. They would say yes that is fine.

If you ask people if concealed carry should extend to schools, you will be able to smell the tar being heated up.

I suggest once again rather than trying to pound on me on this ( I am not very poundable to begin with) Ask someone who is more towards the middle.

BTW the 2nd amendment constituency often shoots itself in the foot with these issues. Making Cop Killer bullets a hill to die on was a good example.

Ah, but we are not talking about a revocation of property rights. We are talking about a reintroduction of infringed rights to keep and BEAR firearms.

And you still haven't shown where gun free zones at schools have helped to stem the tide of gun violence (or any kind of violence) at schools.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Well, the Kennedy Airport has had issues with organized crime presence. Might want to google that.

Also, here is an article about it from about a year ago talking about crime and violence at the airports.
Here's a quote:

Alvy Dodson, Director of Public Safety at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport points out that, in addition to all the travelers passing through each day, airports also have workforces that can reach into the thousands. "Airports are pretty much their own cities and face the same crimes and challenges as any city."

Sometimes even more. Dodson says, "We've had everything from hostage situations and attempted hijackings to an assault on some golfers over at the airport golf course by someone who didn't think the guys in front of him were playing fast enough. And we once had a gorilla loose in the bay of an airplane. It really runs the gamut."

Now, for the third time, please answer the question I have specifically posted to you.

Please state in what way gun free zones have lead to a reduction of crime or made places safer?

Your failure to discuss that leads me to believe that even you know that they do not work.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And from the list you presented they seem like pretty safe places. (Not sure I would want to try my 9mm against a gorilla)(actually I am sure I wouldn't)

First I did not say making a place gun free resulted in less crime. Please show me where I did.

I did say that in the case of violent crime at an airport that had the National guard or others stationed there at alert status having more guns was likely to escalate the situation perhaps uncontrollably.

The above is pretty much a mathematical certainty.

And from the list you presented they seem like pretty safe places. (Not sure I would want to try my 9mm against a gorilla)(actually I am sure I wouldn't)

Yeah, I can't wait for when I'm in a hostage situation! Those sound fun!

*rolls eyes*

First I did not say making a place gun free resulted in less crime. Please show me where I did.

well, you in this very post suggest that things would be safer in the airport if people weren't armed because the police are (and, after all, we have a duty to let the police be our private security force.... no? )
so.... I guess.... there is one example.

I did say that in the case of violent crime at an airport that had the National guard or others stationed there at alert status having more guns was likely to escalate the situation perhaps uncontrollably.

If I am standing there waiting for family and an armed guard can see my concealed firearm, then it is not concealed. Your point is moot at best and anti-gun propaganda at worst.

The above is pretty much a mathematical certainty.

Nope. Quite the opposite. Areas with armed law-abiding citizens have lower crime and lower instances of violence.

Here's a great example of how the removal of firearms makes things less safe: Virginia Tech. Until that year, a person with a concealed carry permit could carry on campus. The year of the shooting had been the first where guns were banned.

Your NRA sharpshooter badge you earned before I was born (though I'm not sure what age has to do with anything. You're wrong, no matter your age.) doesn't do you any good if all you have to defend yourself is other running innocents.

So, once again, I ask you to defend gun free zones as you are suggesting that they are ok to have. (Yes, you do not use the term 'gun free zones' but you describe them, so back them up.)

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

of a hostage situation at an American airport ?

*sigh*

You refuse to answer questions.

Communication with you is done.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Its an impossible question for me to answer.

And any answer given would be meaningless in the context of this discussion.

The question is very straight forward and extremely applicable to this topic.

You do not wish to answer it because history and reality are not on your side.

What you have is emotion in how evil those gun things are and how their existance just makes things 'less safe.'

Don't piss on my leg and tell me its raining. You offer NO support to back up your ideas, then see fit to call me a gun nut.

Thusly: you have no desire to answer those questions, so there is no point in disccusing this further with you.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

To come up with answers that would prove inconclusive.

Two I did not call you a gun nut. I called myself a gun nut.

I will note you haven't provided any statistics to make your case but you demand that I go to great lengths to do so.

Show me how gun restrictions at airports have increased violent crime there ? Compare airports with gun restrictions to those that don't.

I don't need statistics, as the right exists. You need statistics to remove the right.

Though, a quick google search would provide alot of evidence of firearms saving people's lives and the existance of conceald carry programs reducing overall crime.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And a google search for gun accidents will turn up what ?

In a safe environment if you increase the number of firearms you will increase the number of mishaps faster than you increase the number of beneficial outcomes.

In a dangerous environment you will increase the beneficial outcomes faster than you will increase the tragedies.

If you are fighting for guns in a safe environment its not a good idea.

It is a much better idea to argue that properly licensed people should be allowed to carry at schools. This is an area where there is a problem and gun restrictions obviously make it worse and disrupt the school system.

And how do you tell safe from unsafe?

Criminals go where the marks are.

I avoid areas I feel are unsafe.

Criminals move to safer areas.

I'll trust myself with a firearm more than anyone else, thanks.

And if you don't like it... tough. Constitution is on my side.

Liberal Judges and Mayors are on yours.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)

y

You know darned well that conservative principles rarely resonate with those "in the middle" and almost never to those on the left. You are talking about an emotional response, which often has no connection to reality. This is no different than the response of "the middle" to things like the mortgage loan bailouts or any number of liberal policies that sound good on the surface but are contrary to things like personal responsibility and basic freedoms as a citizen.

Now maybe it's fruitless to try to use logic on non-conservatives (and I'm certainly not referring to you!), but ... when we're talking about concealed weapons, it's the law-abiding citizens that are affected by such regulations, and not those who actually do the damage (ie. the criminals). The school and airport thing is nothing more than liberal scare tactics to try to chip away at concealed carry rights (and I do grant you that property rights do come into play when we're talking about privately-owned businesses).

In an ideal world you would be able to carry on the damned plane and any time a terrorist tried to pull something they would be perforated.

However nobody seems willing to adopt my solution of providing guns loaded with rubber bullets to passengers as they board.

That is covered by federal regulations, and those are not affected by concealed-carry laws at the state level.

They got Winchester to discontinue it's Black Talon line because it was scary and black colored, not copper. Of course all modern jacketed hollow points are more advanced and deadly but they have friendlier names like "Gold Dot".

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

step for citizens to tie up the manager so they can exercise their right to self defense under state law?

Or are we now not only deferring to 5 lawyers in DC, but also Hartsfield Airport managers?

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

The new law makes no allowance for private gun owners to carry, with permit or otherwise, in the terminal.

Remember, the terminal is on the Other side of the security checkpoint.

The law specifically allows carrying in the unsecured parts of the airport: The parking garage; passenger pick-up and drop-off; the restaurants; baggage claim...

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Else is a clumsy fool, deep down inside. That has to be the reason eveyone thinks people are going to start whipping out their gun and firing at random evey time they hear a loud noise. I would be happy to know they person next to me is armed and ready to defend himself, and most likely me as well.

I agree. Many people have a low view of people who would choose to train to provide their own defense rather than waiting for the underpaid and overworked police to come and take statements.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

It's not the National Guard anymore. Automatic weapons or not. They're not in the airports now.

It's poorly paid, probably poorly trained, low morale, government union employees.

Thanks, but I'd rather trust my own judgement and aim to defend me and my family than theirs.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

I was suprised that I was deemed not qualified to work for the TSA.

I have 3 years experience in security.

I was DOUBLY suprised when I went to the airport and SAW the TSA.

I'll drive, thanks.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

are lots of things, but poorly paid ain't one of them. Practically every police force in the Country has lost employees to TSA, especially lieutenants, captains, and majors, slots that TSA pays really well.

In Vino Veritas

But the guys with the guns actually manning the checkpoints are not so much.
Here's a link to their pay scale:
http://www.tsa.gov/join/careers/pay_scales.shtm

The guy you're trusting to protect you probably makes less than 30k.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

the starting salary at the NYPD was around $25K. It's now about $35K. Would you rather get shot at by drug dealers or stare at an X-Ray machine and tell people to throw away their water bottles?

don't carry guns and have no law enforcement authority. The only thing they can do is take your stuff or turn you away. If they observe criminal activity, they can do the same thing as any other citizen; call the cops. In an airport, at least in a FAR Part 135 airport, that cop is a designated law enforcement officer (LEO) with a commission granted by the local or state government.

In Vino Veritas

Yup, and that LEO comes and takes a report of what happened, interviewing the victim.

That is, apparently, much preferable to the airport manager and gun control advocates than to, say, have a situation in which a person can avoid being a victim.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

in self-defense? I mean the real thing, drew and pointed a weapon at another human being with the intention of restraining him or killing him if he refused to be restrained? Doing it is a lot different from typing about it on a blog. It's so easy to be a purist in front of a computer screen.

In Vino Veritas

So until I've had to kill someone, I don't have a right to stand up for my right to defend myself?

The other day I wasn't allowed to discuss conservativism in your presence until I had held public office.

Please provide me with a list of things I can and cannot do until you have deemed it.

No, I have not killed anyone. I have been the victim of mugging at knifepoint, and I will NOT be a victim again.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

I had two guys try to mug me. One with a box cutter the other had handcuffs he was using as brass knuckles.

Managed to defend myself without a gun.

If I could fight off a guy with a box-cutter and a guy with brass nuckles at the same time, I wouldn't carry a gun either! I would walk around shirtless, Bellowing out my manhood at the top of my lungs.

And how many people do you see walking down the street everyday that could do it the same way?

As has been said: "Guns are the great equalizer. A little old lady with a 9mm is the equal of any 6'2" 240 Lb bruiser with a knife."

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

His story reminds me of one I heard from a guy in Ireland.

A doped up idiot stumbled into his house and wanted money. He chased him off with an electric screwdriver.

he, therefore, supported gun control because if he could chase someone off with an electric screwdriver, everyone ought to be able to.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

like she freezes, gets the gun taken away...jams...anything..

Then she's dead...

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

If she's unarmed. Which is exactly what she is if the weapon jams or she freezes. So what's you're point?

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

I get the desire to want to defend yourself...but in a way, pulling a weapon has now just escalated the confrontation....

And the larger point is , guess what, I really just don't trust everyone has sound judgment .....how do I know that if you and I get in a fist fight, you won't just pull out a 9 cause I beat your arse?...

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Nope.

You don't pull a weapon because you're scared.

You pull it to kill someone directing deadly force at you.

As for judgement... your view is fairly typical of those who do not have contact with concealed carry permitholders, and think of them as the stereotypical gun show goer.

When I went for my permit, I saw younger people (21 age minimum) including a girl who had been raped, all the way up to 3 little old ladies in the front row.

people there in jeans and a tshirt and a businessman in expensive suits over the two days we had training.

One older couple retired and was getting a concealed carry permit so they could travel to the states that recognize our permit (also getting one from FL or Utah I think) and be able to carry for protection.

We come from all walks of life and we are not here to escalte confrontations, just defend ourselves from muggers, murderers and rapists.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

deserves deadly force? Or should we just trust every differnet opinion as to what is "life threatening"?

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Like, what if you shoot at someone who wants to rape you and you miss and the bullet goes into a school and kills a child?

You'd feel pretty dumb then!

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

by hitting the crack pipe for about 20 minutes.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I shoot someone and miss, hitting someone else, I go to prison for murder, as it ought to be.

You are responsible for yourself and every round that comes out of that firearm.

I would also be destroyed inside, having hurt (and possibly killed) an innocent kid.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

You have a right to defend yourself. And before lance chimes in that isn't the point I was arguing.

Nope.

A mugger wants my watch.

I say "no."

He pulls out a knife and says "Give me your watch or I'll cut you."

I say, "No, piss off slimeball" (I'd actually say something worse)

He threatens me with a knife, gun comes out and I yell at him to drop the knife and run away now.

He drops the knife and runs away, I put my pistol away and call the cops.

He comes at me, I pull the trigger and go to therapy after being released by the police.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Now multiply that by whatever number you want...is everyone that carries like you?...Can you somehow assure me of that?

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

You shouldn't trust me.

But you should trust yourself and determine if you are someone willing to defend yourself via firearm.

Not everyone has to, but if you're afraid of us 'gun nuts' . . . .maybe you should.

On the other hand, one could point to the INCREDIBLY low crime rate amongst people with concealed carry permits, as compared to the population as a whole.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

To decide what anyone can or can't do just because you don't trust them?

Here's an idea: I don't think I can trust you to raise children properly, so I'm going to ban you from reproducing.

See where you're going?

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Nice try...

I have said that I am a gun guy...but I can't figure out why people are so concerned about being able to carry...

Yes, many have reasons in their past, some "just want to", some think it will deter crime, some just want to be a bad ass...so many reasons, big freaking deal...

I don't get it..I don't think you're nuts, I just don't get it.
I don't want to keep you from doing it, I just don't get it.

My expierience is in 40+ years and having been all over the world, I haven't needed one..period. Will I in the future, who knows...you can construct your pro positions any way you want...reality is that no, I can not just count on people who carry to make sure that gun is only used in legit self preservation....

Bottom line that you never addressed is that adding a weapon to any situation escalates the situation.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

No way possible that private gun owners can guarantee that every single time a gun is ever used it is for legitimate self-preservation.; There are too many criminals out there.

And whether you trust people or not is not a valid point in an argument over a right already specifically granted us by our Constitution.
If you don't trust us, then too bad. WE trust ourselves, and that's all that counts.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Never questioned if it was your right.. I actually agree.

I do question abuse of rights....especially when it involves deadly force.

I also question people that put such I high value on being able to carry a gun....but hey, have at it...whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy.

It reminds me of a guy I used to work with...the dept. we worked allowed you to carry off duty.. We'd always go out as a group after shift and have drinks and fun. No one except one guy carried.....the biggest wuss in the group. And we told him so.....All.The.Time.

We were glad he felt safe and secure though....gotta run Rav..peace.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

We don't like the abuse of rights either.

However that is not justification for the support of their infringement, especially not in the face of state laws, as was the point of this blog.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Search the internet for Suzanne Hupp and read her story.

Then tell me that there isn't really a 'reason' to carry a firearm on your person.

reality is that no, I can not just count on people who carry to make sure that gun is only used in legit self preservation....

No one makes that claim, but I can make this claim: If the law-abiding citizens are NOT able to keep and bear firearms (that includes carrying) then you can guarentee that ALL firearm violence will be criminal in nature.

Bottom line that you never addressed is that adding a weapon to any situation escalates the situation.

Nope, get enough people to do it and it diffuses situations. Would you mug someone who is armed? No.

Also, when it comes to self-defense, firearms don't esclate the situation, then end the confrontation in one of two ways.

Don't let your fear of the irresponsible few blind you to the regular responsible and intelligent actions by the MANY of legal concealed carry permitholders across the united states.

I also recommend that you go through the training for a concealed carry permit. You don't have to get it, just go through the training. See what kinds of people are there. Learn what we learn.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

you've used it a couple times... I do not fear this...I question it.

People shoot cops....they are armed. Bad example.

Not sure how you can quantify "intelligent actions by the MANY"
but it sounds good...I guess..

As for the training....when this training tells and assures me that those who carry (humans) are not irrational, scared, have feelings of inferiority, "little big men", or a host of other human conditions....then I will stop questioning if it's a good idea.

Until then, I guess have at it.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

See my post at the bottom

I'd be armed, would you be likely to try to kick my ass in the first place?
Hell, how do you know that wouldn't happen NOW?
You DO know that if it happened it a "safe zone" the weapon would be in the hands of a criminal and now you're dead.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

a firearm does not equal surviving.

But it gives you a much higher shot than not having one.

How many people need to die before that idea is discovered?

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

If the mugger is likely to say "hey, it's likely that that old lady has a gun", that's something that we want.

Yes, the muggers who say "a whole host of things could happen! She could freeze! I could steal the gun! It could jam! Anything!" might be lucky for a while, but, eventually, they'd be selected against.

That's a good thing.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

And I had a bag with 20 pounds of nickel plated steel links with me and Two very heavy pliers for bending the links.

The muggers got a surprise

Hell, how many people knit chainmail?

Would you guarantee that I would have a 20Lb bag of links or the heavy pliers with me if I was attacked? Would I even know what to do with them?

You don't know the answer to that.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

I am dense today but my point was just because you don't have a gun you don't have to be a victim.

You can defend yourself. Even without the chain I would have fought. That isn't bravado it is just my reaction. When they tried to rob me my reflex was to hit them.

That's fine.

Please pass along your technique to the 80 year old lady with a walker, so that she can beat up the 18 year old 250 pound thug.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And none of us would make our own armour if it were possible to buy it (it isn't in my case).

But that's not the point. You and I train regularly in defending ourselves without firearms (mostly so we can beat on each other at Pennsic). Most people don't. And even so, we're MORE at risk in the situation you mentioned than we would be with a trusty gun, even if we didn't know what to do with it.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Sorry I didn't want to give that impression.

I was a member of NJ Laire way back when. At the time I didn't train regularly to defend myself. Truth be told in a fight I generally acquit myself poorly.

I just got put into a situation where I had to choose. I chose to fight. There are other ways to not be a victim.

I am still not understanding this.

It is not a binary, black or white, right or wrong World. And you can discuss anything you like in my presence, just pack your lunch.

In Vino Veritas

Well, I'm glad you settled that.

I don't know who you are.... don't rightly care, to be honest.

You assume quite a bit about me for someone who doesn't know me.

I have a right to defend myself and, unless you're willing to come here and be my personal bodyguard for life, for free, I guess that leaves it to me to defend myself.

I hope I never HAVE to kill someone, but I am more than ready do.

That makes me a purist to you?

I suppose you'd prefer if I just sat in the corner shuddering in fear while people go through my wallet taking my stuff, or raping those I am with.

After all, I haven't killed anyone, right?

What qualifications do YOU have to trump my beliefs in the responsibility to defend myself?

What grand things have you done that make me wrong?

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And don't call me 'kid'

You're not either of my parents, nor anyone in my family older than me.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

pontificating is tiresome.

In Vino Veritas

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you... "Boy"

You have a problem with me, so even when I am agreeing with you and your points, you see fit to try and dump on me.

You also have not addressed my questions, just see fit to tell me why I'm stupid.

Do not address me again, I will do the same to you.

Idiot.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

This isn't the first time they'd pull this crap with me.

It is becomming a pattern with them.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

everyone should!

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I have nothing against you personally if anything I agree with you on a whole bunch of things.

I just disagree with you that this is an issue to push on.

not talking about you.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

and I have been wondering this as I read the posts here about carrying a weapon...

My family has a long line of cops...one thing I was always told by Dad was more problems arise when weapons are pulled, and that person chokes, and/or gets the weapon taken away from them...

NOT that you are unable, unskilled...but if you pull it...are you prepared to die in the situation?..

I get the pro gun thing...I am...but it's not just that easy..
IMOP

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

and been a part of disciplining, or clearing, lots of cops and COs in excess force cases. It is one of the hardest things you'll ever do! It is rarely clear just what the officer "should have" done and very hard to substitute your judgement for his.

In many ways though, it is easier with actual cops than it would be with a civilian. Cops are taught that their role is to control a suspect or offender and to use a continuum of force to achieve that control. As the cop ratchets up from command presence, to hands, to hard hands, to a baton, or ultimately to deadly force, one can be much more objective about the steps he took and the necessity of those steps in the totality of the circumstances than one can be with the civilian who either perceived a threat or became fearful and reached directly for a gun. A cop would never do that without some consideration of the continuum, at least not properly, unless he had strong indications that he was about to be confronted with a direct threat to his life or the life of another.

In Vino Veritas

Those stupid civilians.... if only we could make sure they were disarmed so they never hurt themselves....

Here's some aspect of my training that is common amongst people with a concealed carry permit, despite your apparent dislike for such folks:

If my pistol comes out, someone has to die, provided they do not INSTANTLY turn and run away. My pistol is not there to get the upper hand in an argument or to come out if I am scared, but it is to come out when deadly force is aimed in my direction.

I am not a cop nor am I someone there to stop crimes like Batman. My pistol protects me and those I love from intruders, muggers, rapists and murderers.

you perpetuate this myth that we carry because we don't trust cops. Couldn't be farther from the truth. I value police and donate to help support them.

I carry because a firearm is much lighter than a policeman and fits in my pocket more easily. Poliemen are not everywhere I go. I am.

So, once again, please tell me where I am wrong.

Or go away.
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

You're "brandishing" which is illegal everywhere I've ever been.
Applies to my blades in a lot of cities as well. No laws against me carrying the blade (sword, axe, big ass Dundee knife...) of my choice that I've ever run into, but if I draw it and no one dies, I go to jail.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Nope, if deadly force is coming my way, as a concealed carry permitholder I am allowed to draw for the purpose of shooting.

If they run, I put it away.

Brandishing, specifically, is showing your firearm or pulling it out when there is not a situation where a 'reasonable person' (legal term) would feel that deadly force is directed their way.

Also note, there are restrictions on carrying knives in most states. In oklahoma, it cannot be anything considered a "bowie knife or dagger" (basically it has to be a folder) Swords are also not allowed. neither are crossbows.

if I do have to shoot someone and they don't die, I call 911 and apply first aid (or CPR if they stop breathing and/or heart stops) until the cops and ambulance gets there.

I am not an evil and vengeful man. Despite what pro-gun-control folks would say.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

There's a reason that the military and police forces spend endless hours in elaborate simulations training in "shoot, no shoot" situations.

God knows you've a right to carry and to defend yourself, and that is a right that I exercise as well, but if you're as certain about your shoot, no shoot decisions as you seem to be about everything else, you might consider retaining a good attorney and checking on your life insurance.

In Vino Veritas

There's a reason that the military and police forces spend endless hours in elaborate simulations training in "shoot, no shoot" situations.

Funny, while I haven't spent 'countless hours' doing so, I have also done the same thing.

I also train regularly with my firearm. Due to gas prices, I do not live fire as often as I like, but I practice with safely drawing, firing and returing my firearm.

Don't tell me that I don't know what I would do... .especially not right after I told you specifically what I would do.

Now, as for the attorney, I am actually looking for a new attorney that has a strong focus on 2nd Amendment rights, but I suspect that you amde that statement more as a mocking statement than anything else.

Do you dislike all citizens who choose to carry a concealed firearm? Or just me specifically?

I'm getting the "I dislike them all" vibe.

Please note, the one doing my training had been in charge of training okc policemen and was involved in training of all ok policemen for a couple decades before he retired from the force.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And the reason I do not carry a weapon now is not because it was too hard. It was too easy.

Years ago in ATL, I carried ALL the time even though it wasn't legal, if you valued your life, you had to. I still carry some and I'm always armed when I'm out on the boat or in the woods, not for people necessarily though. I'm not much afraid of people, but big bears scare Hell out of me! That said, I'm well aware that I've made some rash decisions with a gun, and, yeah, it is too easy.

In Vino Veritas

__________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

But in Pittsburgh, Columbus, Phoenix (only place I've seen MP5s), and Dulles they most certainly Are armed. These are airports I have been through regularly over the last few years.
There is always at least 1 armed person wearing a TSA badge or patch at every x-ray machine at the security checkpoints.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

I don't know what they pay nationally, but in Oklahoma the TSA pays 13 bucks an hour.

Considering that Security pays 8 bucks an hour, that is a GIANT Jump in pay.

Cops still get paid more, but the job is also MUCH more dangerous.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

To rely on your own resources to keep yourself and your family safe.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

I'd like to.

Kind of hard when you have people on "Conservative and Republican" websites standing up for gun control and an airport manager who is threatening to arrest people who are engaging in legal activity that goes against his personal agenda.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

With my Ruger I'm pretty accurate to within 25 yards. (all shots within the 9 or 10 ring)

with my kel-tec, not so much. shorter barrel.

I am equally accurate with both in the 3 to 7 yard range, which is where most gunfights take place in the civilian world, so I am more than confident.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

When the Guard was deployed to the airports after 9-11, they carried rifles but no ammo. It was all for show, not for go. And (with all due respect for your other fine posts) please do not infer that folks with concealed carry permits exercising our rights are "idiots".

One final note. Remember the incident at the Glasgow airport when two men rammed through the windows and attempted to car-bomb the place? Here's a quote from the article:
"The police tried to pounce on him but he fought back and was struggling with them. It was only when a member of the public punched him in the face that the police managed to restrain him. The police were trying to spray CS gas in his face but it was not working."

What if the police were way back in the terminal responding to a diversion? When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!

debaters against you don't respect the rule of law. I mean, even if their preferred law is enacted, why would they think it worthy of being followed? eh?

Its like, why, Justice Kennedy, should we respect your opinions when you don't respect We the People's super majority ratified Constitution.

great blog LK

this needed to be known

and God knows people need to defend themselves at Hartsfield

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

Oh, I rant against such law-disrespecters to give them fair warning.

I also do it in hopes that a new trend will spark to deny service to people who would deny us our rights.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

at least more than, I think, 25 passengers, called FAR Part 135 Airports, have to have a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) available for immediate response to a security threat. The TSA employees do not have law enforcement authority per se; they can turn you away, but not arrest you, so they call on the LEO. LEOs are under the authority of the airport's management either directly to the manager or, in larger airports, through a Chief of Airport Police. In most places, the LEO is a fully commissioned police or peace officer with full law enforcement authority. It is actually a very nice, fairly lucrative, if somewhat boring gig that has become a prime sinecure for retired city/state policemen and ex-MPs.

In Vino Veritas

airports in Michigan, like Grand Rapids, we have the "airport police". Supposedly under the supervision, and tutelage of the county sheriff. I would hope a police supervisor would break land speed records to advise his people not to arrest someone legally allowed to carry. As has been said, this is just a huge lawsuit waiting to happen. What do you charge someone with, who is not violating the law? Make it up as you go along, like some of the Supremes?

that Bearden is not backing down and will sue if arrested.

First, I haven't read the GA law, but most state's carry laws have some provision that allows banning concealed carry in various places. Our law in AK is one of the more "gun friendly" in the Country, carry unless prohibited, and even it allows governmental entities to prohibit concealed carry in their facilities, e.g., courthouses, and prohibits concealed carry in certain facilities, e.g., bars.

So, presuming the fundamental right to "bear arms" includes the right to carry concealed, it is a short step for a court to consider whether there is a "compelling state interest" and an appropriate "narrowly tailored" law that infringes on that right.

Now were I looking for the case to extend the right, this WOULD NOT be it. There's lots and lots of people out there who are going to find it real easy to accept the notion that a government should be able to limit weapons in a high pressure environment like airports have become these days. Bad cases make bad law!

In Vino Veritas

the new GA law that took effect at midnight of last night specifically allows people to carry in the non-secured areas of the airport, specifically the terminal outside of the securty checkpoints and where you pick people up at the airport.

It also allows someone to carry at restaurants that also serve alcohol (such as Applebees).

This isn't a case of someone wanting to bring a gun on the plane, this is a case of someone wanting to have their legally owned and properly carried (via permit) firearm on their person when they're picking someone up at the airport or going out to eat at a restaurant.

It is incredibly short-sighted and stupid to suggest that disarming law abiding citizens reduces crime. Even more so to threaten to arrest people for legally carrying a firearm where they are legally allowed to.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

MARTA has a police force that is bound to follow and carry out the law.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice

And believe me, airports are something I know well. I'm Platinum on American Airlines and spend more than my fair share of time in them. I just spent about four hours at MKE yesterday, and have probably been in twenty different ones so far this year.

Frankly, all "gun-free zone" restrictions are crap. Concealed carry laws are there precisely so you CAN carry a gun with you. There is nothing, I repeat nothing, different about an airport. Do you think the bad guys are going to look at that sign and say "Rats, I can't take my gun in with me". Of course not. It's no different than having concealed weapons on you at the mall, grocery store, doctor's office, Six Flags, etc. The TSA checkpoints are there to prevent the weapons from getting through to the airplane. And if a bad guy is bound and determined to get a weapon onto the plane, a "gun-free zone" restriction is NOT going to stop him.

I'm a lot more worried about a bad guy carrying a blob of C4 into the airport than I am a handgun.

Nice research. Yet another reason to put this guy's picture up everywhere so that he can be denied service at grocery stores, restaurants, gas stations, flea markets, sports stadiums, cable companies, telephone companies, etc.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Bill Campbell's spoor in Atlanta. I wonder if Bill has given Obama a jailhouse endorsement.

SHirley Franklin has been an OK mayor. She would do well to send DeCosta packing(luggage, not heat).

Thanks, appreciate it.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Man, Gene Hackman was great in Unforgiven, wasn't he?

Anyway, if you operate from the general assumption that the average citizen is pretty much a criminal who is guilty of something, you can get a lot more done to eliminate crime.

Let's look at what that crazy chick Ayn Rand had to say:

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

Well, it's a good thing we aren't doing that here.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Shh... According to Achance, you likely haven't killed enough people to have an opinon.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

I have totally killed enough people to have an opinion.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

So have I: 0

Killing is not a requirement in a discussion on the right to self-defense and the 2nd Amendment.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Have I smoked enough pot (in my youth, of course, I haven't touched it since the early 90's) to have an opinion on the legalization of marijuana or have I smoked waaaay too much to be able to have an opinion on it?

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Experience is not always wisdom.

In a discussion on whether or not kidnapping should be legal, I likely wouldn't listen to kidnappers saying it should be legal.

But on discussing proper execution of a golf swing, I'd likely listen to Tiger Woods much more.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

A point of view will stand or fall on its own, no matter who gives it... no matter how many folks they've killed, no matter how much pot they've smoked, no matter how many thingamabobs they've whatevered.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

I do agree.

I would also imagine that you'd agree that stupid minds and PR campaigns can ensure that reality never sees the light of day.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

The best we can hope for is something similar to a First Amendment protecting everyone's right to put their own data in the public arena.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Oh, he understands it.

Like some here on this thread, agenda is more important.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Imagine how much safer DC would be if we had laws to prevent, for example, handgun ownership!

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

is the fact that I fully support the USSC decision, do believe that the right to keep and bear is an absolute right, and do in fact, often carry concealed myself. There's a wall full of guns not five feet away as I type and I'd no more go out away from town unarmed than I'd go in those woods naked, well, I might go in those woods naked under the right circumstances.

The point, however, is that more even than other fundamental rights, this one carries with it an horrendous level of responsibility, and if someone thinks the answers are simple and the actions easy, they don't know enough.

In Vino Veritas

And you're the judge, of course, of when someone knows enough.

Now who is beating their chest and claiming absolute certainty?

---------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

In Vino Veritas

First, that is res ipsa loquitur.

If you are going to poke sticks at me, at least spell it right.

Secondly, you are right. You are easy enough to pick out.

You are little more than an internet bully, a cyber-blowhard.

You believe that anyone who does not fit your mold ought to be insulted and ignored.

So you assert yourself and berate people who do not meet your standards, specifically those who have made standards that are not YOUR standards.

Yes, indeed. The Thing Itself Speaks. No further arguments or information required.

You are plain as day, Achance. You dislike anyone who does not bow down to your obviously superior nature in all things.

On the internet, you are a dime a dozen. You may have done great things, and you may have witnessed horrible things.

But your work here, in belittling me and others who would seek to defend themselves from attackers and thugs is very counterproductive to the safety of people as a whole.

I haven't dropped a sledgehammer on my foot, but you would require me to do that before I be allowed to discuss heavy objects. I've never had my hand crushed in a vice until I bled, but you would require it before I be allowed to discuss pain.

The standard of life is not yours to set, it was set by someone greater than you. The defense of that life is not yours to set, it was put in the Constitution by people greater than you.

Yet you see fit to sit back and sling arrows at others who are willing to defend themselves.

Keep it up, those on the left appreciate it.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

The Right to a free press, the Right to a trial by jury, even the Rights that aren't enumerated here but aren't particularly notable by their absence.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

Yes I am, but do not doubt me when I say that I will likely be JUST as much of a mental wreck as the policemen you've dealt with.

Do not mistake my confidence in my rights and my desire to be self-responsible with any feelings that I think of myself as some uber-man.

I expect to be broken. Even though it was in self-defense, I will have taken the life of another. I will likely doubt, I will likely sob, I will likely need quite a bit of therapy in order to sleep well.

However, it should be noted that if I DO doubt, sob and need therapy, it would mean that I survived.

If I am in a situation where I need my firearm, that is a major achievement.

Do not belittle those who, like you, are willing to defend themselves.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

And I am not sure Lance is the only one who is pounding his chest, if he is.

Seeing the cops you have interviewed being wracked with self-doubt makes uncertainty a certainty (if that makes any sense).

In Lance's defense, I do not think he is a chest pounder any more than anyone else, he has just made a decision to carry, and when you make the decision to carry, you have made the decision to use. At least he has thought about what he would do. A survey was conducted in one prison about what criminals feared most - a homeowner with a gun, or a big dog. The answer was "a big dog" - because a dog doesn't hesistate.

I have decided not to carry for the time being, but the recurring nightmare that I have is being in a situation where having a weapon would have saved someone's life.

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

Steel-Belted Radial Right Winger

Thank you.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

and exactly what I was thinking. The real story here is in a bureaucrat believing his authority somehow supercedes that of the ELECTED officials. This guy ought to get canned for flagrant violation of his job description.

.

as a victim.

My point was that being robbed doesn't make you a victim in any real sense, its how you deal with things that determines if you are a victim.

If I were of a mind to I could whine about the shirt that got destroyed and the scars I have on my arm.

You seemed to be saying something about having the links I think I am not certain where that subthread was going.

No, if I have been mugged, I am a victim of a mugging.

That you cannot identify what a victim is might be part of your problem.

You have a right to NOT be robbed.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

(though in reference to that, I think you are ignoring the definition of the word "victim")

In any case, you implied that since you were able to fight off 2 muggers without resorting to a firearm, then obviously firearms are not necessary for personal defense. A logical fallacy if ever there was one.

My question was twofold: How did you do it? (ans: with a bag of metal and big ass pliers)
and: How many people do you see walking down the street everyday that could have done the same?

My point is that firearms allow a certain form of equality that was never before possible. An 82 yr old lady CAN fight off 1 or 2 muggers with a glock. Will she be successful? Will she even try? That's up to her and God. But she CAN.

Then along came jdub with his "I dn't trust anyone but myself and trained professionals to make the right decision everytime..."
Well, you know what jdub? You and they WON'T make the right decision EVERY time and furthermore, I don't think I trust you to raise children correctly so I'll support any law that restricts your right to reproduce.
Have you yet figured out where we'll get if we operate on "I don't trust..."?

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

No I did not want to imply that because I was able to defend myself that firearms were unneeded. My point was just because you don't have a firearm it doesn't mean you have to be a victim.

My first point in this thread has been and continues to be that allowing concealed carry everywhere does not necessarily make the bearer safer or the people around them safer.

My second point is that fighting to keep and bear in airports is not the wisest of battles to pick. My own first reaction was why not wear a sign saying shoot me while you were at it. It just makes people that are pro the 2nd amendment look goofy

We're not choosing to fight over carrying in an airport.

We';re choosing to fight over some bureaucrat who thinks his will supercedes that of the elected lawmakers and, thus, of the electorate.
THAT's what this fight is about.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Do you have any evidence, besides random hypotheticals, that having a firearm makes you less safe by nature of having it?

And, to your second point, again, this is not about having firearms in the secured areas of the airport, this is about a state law that allows a concealed carry permitholder to carry in the unsecure areas of the airport, and about an airport manager who is ignoring the law to continue to push his anti-gun agenda.

If someone does not have a concealed carry permit and they're carrying anywhere illegally, go ahead and lock them up.

But if someone is properly permittd and carrying legally, to try and stop them is disgusting.

The actions of this airport manager are just that.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=127

I believe the accidental death rate is higher than the number of homicides prevented by gun owning civilians in year that are recorded. I have no idea how to account for the dogs that did not bark.

I would point out that logically having a firearm introduces both risks and advantages. It all depends on the degree of the relative hazards in your life.

http://www.medicalmalpractice.com/National-Medical-Malpractice-Facts.cfm

And yet we don't ban people from going to the doctor. Accidents happen, have always happened, and will continue to happen. No matter what you try to do about it. Mistakes will be made. It's a fact of life.

Owning a firearm, or carrying one with you wherever you go does not, as a rule, make you safer in every situation.

But then, neither does going to your doctor...

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

As to the doctor issue you need the win loss there

Odds of going to the doctor saving your life /odds of doctor killing you.

Accidental death by firearm is lowered by education, not elimination of firearms.

As for the numbers of people saved by firearms, no one but God knows that, so to even suggest that the number of accidental homocides is higher is kind of silly, as you suggest.

however, if we are to concern ourselves with creating an environment in which no one dies accidnetly, despite any rights, then we ought (in my state of Oklahoma, for example) than we need to get rid of motor vechiles as they are 52 times more likely to result in accidental death, eliminate ways for people to fall as that is 16 and 2/3rds more likely to result in accidental death, etc.

In fact, in Oklahoma, the only way LESS likely to die by accident is by pedal bicycle accidents.

I hope that kind of helps you toss the 'accidental death' idea out the windw. In oklahoma in 2005, 16 people died of accidental gun death. 61 drowned.

Let's see more restrictions on who can drive and who can swim before we start to further restrict where one can have a firearm.

Though, if you REALLY want to discuss accidental firearm deaths, it is easy to solve: If I carry it on my person, it isn't somewhere that a kid can find it.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

The elimination of firearms would unarguably eliminate accidental death by firearms.

Is education preferred absolutely. Eliminating firearms creates a people that can't defend themselves or take responsibility for themselves. Personally I feel that is the greater loss. After all everybody dies but not everyone lives.

You framed the terms of this question now you are moving away from them. I am sorry that the answer is not what either of us would like it to be.

You framed the terms of this question now you are moving away from them. I am sorry that the answer is not what either of us would like it to be.

And which question was that?

you linked to a chart that showed how TINY the number of accidental deaths via firearms is, as compared to drowning and falling and car accidents, and you're going to suggest that it is somehow a defense of getting rid of guns or getting rid of concealed carry or somehow bolsters the gun-control crowd's argument?

Really? That's going to be your suggestion?

If anything, that there are MILLIONS of guns owned in the united states and such a radically tiny number of deaths really shows how safe gunowners are.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

In case you forgot you asked me to prove that you could be less safe with a gun. I did why are you upset ?

I asked that you prove that we are less safe with firearms and not more safe.

You pointed to the statistics on accidental shootings. In oklahoma, in 2005, that was 16 people.

I think it is safe to say that over the year of 2005, more than 16 people have been saved by their firearms.

The net is towards safer. Not less safe.

So, no, you did not 'prove' that we are less safe with firearms.

You did provide, however, a good example on why we need more firearms safety education and more guns on people's hips rather than left at home where they can cause problems/be stolen/get found by kids.

My gun can't accidently shoot a kid if it is on my person in its holster.

The same can't be said of it anywhere else on the planet.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Do you have any evidence, besides random hypotheticals, that having a firearm makes you less safe by nature of having it?

I gave it to you.

Now you are asking me to prove something I never asserted and you are countering with your guess to make your point. Further you are asserting that I failed to prove something I never tried to prove.

I don't even know that your second point about the need for more safety education is valid. But that is a whole nother can of worms.

Yes, you proved that in oklahoma in 2005, 16 people accidently died via firearm.

That is not proof that we are less safe by nature of having firearms.

It is kind of dishonest to suggest otherwise.

Now you are asking me to prove something I never asserted and you are countering with your guess to make your point. Further you are asserting that I failed to prove something I never tried to prove.

Speaking of, you spoke earlier about how being disarmed in the unsecured areas of an airport will make the airport safer... because there won't be a bunch of people with guns there.

This is the same thinking that leads to 'gun free zones' . . . do you also support those?

If so, please get back to an earlier question of mine as to what evidence exists that gun free zones have made us more safe.

If not, how do you support your dislike for gun free zones when you are (by other terms) supporting it at an airport?

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

By definition.

Is the question you are trying to ask this

"Is society safer with the right to keep and bear arms or is it less"

That is a very different question. I would have to discount safety in favor of having a society where the people are considered free and not wards of the state.

As to your other question: yes and no. Not all gun free zones are created equal.

Courthouses are a gun free zone. Would you overturn that ?

Lance the people that had those guns were less safe by By definition.

Yes, those 16 people, ages 0 and up, ended up being less safe. 16 people in 2005 in Oklahoma. How many do you think were saved by firearms in the state of oklahoma? I'd wager much more than 16.

As to your other question: yes and no. Not all gun free zones are created equal.

Courthouses are a gun free zone. Would you overturn that ?

Well. Yeah.

I seem to remember some shootings taking place at courthouses, gun free zones didn't save those people.

Schools are another one. If someone has a concealed carry permit, they ought to be able to carry at a school. School Shootings have proven that making schools gun free has done nothing to increase safety.

Remember that at schools, we're not talking about arming kids. We're talking about faculty, staff or some select college seniors that would even be able to qualify for a concealed carry permit.

Post Offices? Think of the employees that went on a rampage and shot up the place. Don't you think another employee armed could have saved lives by taking out that shooter?

A Case could be made, in the interest of state or national security, for disarming people when the Congress or Governor/President is around, or in the places they work/live.

I wouldn't like it, but there would be sufficient reason, I believe.

Does it sound unsual, to have someone as pro "Yes, carry there" as me? Sure. why? because our society, for a few decades, has been taught that guns are evil, in and of themselves, and their mere existance puts everyone in danger.

That really isn't the case. Yes, firearms get used by people who do evil, but then again.... so do cars and bats. Perhaps we should work on the elimination of cars and baseball.

After all, there's no good reason for someone to be carrying around a baseball bat...

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

You did not ask the question "Is society safer for having the RKBA"

If you had I would have answered I don't know one way or the other and from your answers it is quite apparent you don't either. What you have is a guess. You guess that more than 16 people in Oklahoma in 2005 were saved by RKBA.

You guess that more than 800 were saved in the U.S. in general.

Me I don't know that and I don't consider it determining to the RKBA.

I really find it disturbing you dismiss my point about specific instances less safe in specific circumstances but then you turn around and try to bludgeon me with the same thing.

The courthouse is a case point. I asked a general question. You used rare specific circumstances to make your case.

You asked me a specific question I replied with specifics.

What is with the baseball bat now ?? Where is that coming from.

Yes, I asked if people were less safe or more safe with firearms and you linked to a chart of accidental gun deaths as your answer.

You didn't answer the question, you provided PART of the answer.

Yes, in Oklahoma in 2005, 16 people died of accidental gun death.

but that isn't the sole determining factor of whether firearms make us more or less safe.

You specifically answered the question in such a way as to avoid the actual question, which makes me wonder if you are a lawyer or a politician. I'm betting on lawyer.

I really find it disturbing you dismiss my point about specific instances less safe in specific circumstances but then you turn around and try to bludgeon me with the same thing.

because you ONLY looked at instances in which people were hurt by guns accidently, you didn't look at instances where people were SAVED by firearms, and then tried to pass it off as a complete answer, and you're trying to play a "What is the definition of 'is'?" type of game with me.

What is with the baseball bat now ?? Where is that coming from.

Don't play coy. You're digging yourself into a hole and while I have no problem providing you with bigger shovels, I would request that you at least be on the level.

I was very clear with my example. Reread it if you must.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

what I have said.

Deliberately ignored anything you did not want to hear.

Failed to present any evidence to support your positions except your guesses.

Recast your responses repeatedly.

Answered questions about general situations with responses about outlying situations.

Answered questions about specific situations with generalizations that have no bearing on the question.

Finally on the baseball bat, With someone else I would hazard a guess but the way you have been acting here not a chance.

Yup, you're a lawyer, aren't you?

Now you're trying to play victim to me as a big and mean bully.

I have consistantly asked you two questions, and you gave half an answer to one of them.

Then you condemn me.

Nice try.

Meanwhile, an airport manager is giving the state government the finger and promising to arrest people in the airport legally carrying a concealed firearm..... and you're upset because I don't like your half-answer to one of my two questions.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

See? yet another unanswered question.

I supposed I asked this one incorrectly as well?

What is your given profession for compensation as a primary income source while on your temporary stay on this plane of existance on this planet in this country we refer to as the United States of America?

seriously... it is hard for you to play the 'I'm a victim of LanceKates the bully' if you won't even answer basic questions like "You're a lawyer, aren't you?"
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

I remember an interview with someone from the California version of "Roads and Bridges Department"

In this interview, they had the most incredible God Complex.

They actually said (I'm quoting as well as I can remember) "You may think you elect your leaders, and you may vote for a governor or your mayors, but *I* run this state. You need roads and unless *I* approve it, you don't go anywhere."

These unelected government officials have a large hurdle of self-importance to overcome.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

In Virginia they have the Alcoholic Beverage Control. These guys get to decide who opens a restaurant, convienience store, etc. They are not elected, they just have a power granted that they use as a weapon.

You bring up a good point, we all worry about elections, but those that often have more power have no accountability at all.

___________________________________________________________

Molon Labe!

-----------------------------------
4.62, 0.51

Yup, that's it I think.

Basically the ones in charge of planning and maintenance of roads and bridges and such.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

have valid points...I seek not to change those points because I do respect guns in our society.

I only ask that you respect those of us That Just Don't Get It.

To me, it comes down to this...I have no problem defending myself or others if I have to..I have in the past. I don't shy from it, and on occasion, have enjoyed it.

When I read stuff that deals with Taking a life, I'm not that confident that I could shoot someone, stab someone, beat someone to death, anything, that easily...

I don't apologize for that, and really, don't want to lose that.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I don't have a problem with your feelings about yourself.

I don't advocate that EVERYONE has to do this.

I only request the ability to do so if I choose, and seek to dispel the incorrect rumors and fight the irrational fear of people like myself.

It is not a status issue, I don't think of myself as 'more in tune' with anything, or think that you are wrong for not being able to shoot or stab someone. Each person is different and one of the greatest joys here is that you can be you and I can be me and we can both exist together.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Someone starts spouting off about how they don't trust me and I get a little irritated (and now that I'm not a recruiter and can safely vent, I vent).

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Well, I understand where they're coming from.

One of the reasons to carry is that you don't trust your safety to others.

It isn't a negative to not trust someone. It is rational to not trust people you don't know.

I didn't take it as a personal attack on me, as though I was not worthy of trust.

In fact, the "I don't trust gun people" is often a good starting grounds to open people up to understanding folks like myself.

I often suggest firearms training and concealed carry training to people who never have a desire to own a firearm.

The training teaches you how to safely use one or what is invovled in concealed carry.... and sometimes that education is enough to get people to understand that we are not a bunch of para-military-wannabes.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

It's the concept...on the whole...people!

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

3 years as an Army recruiter and having to be nice about it when people called me a liar to my face, mostly.
But also because, whether you trust people or not is a moot point here.

Bad laws are written based on not trusting the electorate. You can't get food cooked with transfats in a lot of areas anymore because the government doesn't trust you to choose to eat right (as opposed to because people stopped buying it of their own accord).
The government has control of your thermostat if you live in Cali because they don't trust you to save energy.
PA is considering a law mandating all cats and dogs be spayed or neutered by 4 months of age unless you possess a special permit to breed because they don't trust the citizenry to manage their pets properly...

"I don't trust..." not only pisses me off, but it's totally irrelevant, and if that's your argument, you need to either sit down and shut up or go find a better one. And this is REGARDLESS of the law you are fighting with the sole exclusion of any that increases the power of the government.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Is that the American people are not trusted to give enough to charity to help all the "poor" in the US.

The chief defense of leaving Social Security the way it is rather than allow people control of their own SS investments is that people aren't trusted to make the right investment choices.

The Dems got their primary the way they did this year because they set up a system based on not trusting their voters to make the right decision.

California tried to ban homeschooling because they didn't trust people w/o teaching certificates to educate their own children (as if those With the certificates were really doing so well)...

"I don't trust..." is not a good thing to base laws on. Period.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

"I don't trust..." is not a good thing to base laws on. Period.

Except this one:

I don't trust the government to make daily decisions for me.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

sounds like you have issues other than the right to carry.

For what it's worth, when R2C peeps talk about how grounded they are, the training they have, whatever crap they want to spew, yes...I still site that because they are human, they cannot be trusted to behave the right way, all the time. The fact that they want to carry guns on themselves, all the time, yes, makes me a little uneasy. If I have to deal with it, pipe down and handle it as well.

We are here to stay.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I trust myself with a firearm much more than I trust most people with children.

That doesn't mean that I'd support the reduction of rights when it comes to being allowed to get pregnant and have a kid.

"Sorry, I don't trust that you'd raise your child in the right way, I'm afraid that I'm going to have to ask you to not reproduce. ever."

I trust myself with a firearm much more than I trust most people with a car.

That doesn't mean that I'd support a phasing out of cars.

"Sorry, I don't trust that you'd drive well, I'm afraid that we're going to have to ask you to not drive. Ever."

That you have a fear (yes a fear) of people with firearms does not mean that we ought to just get rid of firearms or reduce their number, and it SURE doesn't mean that we ought to support measures or people who engage in such gun control.

I can tell you this much:

You trust me MUCH more with a firearm than you'd trust those who are armed if guns were illegal.

If you want to play into your trust, then push for legislation that is concealed carry friendly. Take the classes to get your own concealed carry permit, whether you get the permit or not.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

Yes, I am wound pretty tight. On Some things. Violation of my Rights is one of them. I and no one else, will decide whether I exercise my rights.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

A-Friggen-Men!

5 times infinity points.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

I have not in this blog sought to deny your right to arm yourself, even carry. Infact, I have recognized that it is a right we have.

I do have to thank you for very clearly making my main point for all to see....the last thing we need are "wound tight" types walking around a packing heat...period.

This is exactly why I and others would do a double take when we hear people spouting off about tossing on a Sig in a should holster to run down to the Walmart...

Don't be confused here...it's not fear at all. It's questioning the logic behind the action.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Where and when I have EVER said that I possess a Concealed Carry Permit?

Also, you'll need to explain to me where I said that I am wound tight when it comes to weapons of any sort.

And, please, finally, explain to me why it is so shocking to hear someone who may just do it every day, comment off-handedly about grabbing his weapon for an ice-cream run. Last I checked, people who do a given thing on a regular basis tend to speak rather matter-of-factly about it.
Someone who gets Excited about grabbing his glock or sig or whatever for a trip to Walmart would bother me. That's someone just Waiting for a chance to whip it out.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

Try reading past my first sentence.

"Always be honest with yourself. Even if you are honest with no one else."
--me

has a soft side...? :P

I know, I know..a soft side covered up by his Sig/Glock/Mac10..
I got it..!

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Ruger kp-95dc and kel-tec pf-9 to be specific... heh.

----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.

for the showdown at the South Terminal first. Stay tuned.

No details yet, just heard it on the radio.

Or is it supporting the pro keep and bear side. If its friendly to him well there we go its a backfire for nothing.

I'll have to break down and buy the AJC, and watch local news tonight(blecchh). He was no media darling during the fifth runway scandal, though. Mayor Franklin has proven surprisingly pragmatic about some things, so this could get interesting.

which should have some information.
-----------------------------------
4.62, 0.51

Quoting the NYT article that you linked:

My belief is if the Legislature believed this would allow people to bring guns to the busiest airport in the world, they never would have passed it,” he said.

...contradicting the bill's author in the process.

He'd probably get a sympathetic hearing from our SCOTUS liberals, though, who love to decide what the law should have said in accordance with their perception of an evolving social consensus and then override the actual language.

And Rightly So!

because for all the times he's made the news over the years, it's never been for managerial excellence.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

Parking lots, pick-up, drop-off, and the like.

Not a big deal to me then, but the minute someone with a CCP goofs and tries to make it into a secured area, I've got no problem with throwing them in jail and taking away their guns forever. Same standard as should apply to those idiots who pack a gun in a bag and then "forget" they had it there until after they get popped by the underwear sniffers.

I do fly a fair amount, and the last thing I want to see is anyone with a weapon inside the security areas other than sworn officers. I'm not all that keen on pilots having guns ether, but that's not the point of this blog...so never mind.

______________________________________

NObama...no way!.....McCain '08 !

That video pretty much says it all.

unfortunately, those of us who get it aren't the ones who need the message.

.