Concealed carry in the United States.

[Gamer4Fire]

We have had quite a few Gun Control topics here and I'd like to add some calientè this time around.

Concealed Carry of Weapons in the United States of America

Okay, so in the US of A we have many a states that allow concealed carry of handguns by license (and in Alaska its just plain legal). Now with the added requirements that these licenses have I would say that the concealed carrying of these weapons is a simple deterrence to crime and is in general a good thing. Nobody knows who is packing heat so why take the chance that granny is going to mow you down with her .50?

I add also that those peoples that choose to gain a permit also get the chance to do there civic duty of deterring crime, which is also a good thing.


Notes: The following is the list of requirements to acquire a permit in the state of Texas. Most states have similar if not identical requirements.

· is at least 21 years of age;

· is a resident of the state;

· provides fingerprints and submits to a criminal and mental health background check;

· has not been convicted of a felony or any crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year;

· is not a fugitive from justice;

· is not an illegal alien;

· is not an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;

· has not been adjudicated mentally incompetent or been committed to a mental institution;

· has not been dishonorably discharged from the armed services;

· is not subject to a restraining or protection order;

· has not been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence;

· is not awaiting trial for, and does not have any charges pending for, a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment;

· has completed a firearms safety or training course; and

· pays a licensing fee.

Does anyone care to refute me?

 

[applejack]

I can't see letting everyone (who fits those requirements) having a concealed gun as a good thing. I fear that eventually someone will do something stupid, like try to fire at a criminal with their gun only to miss and hit a pedestrian. "With great power comes great responsibility", and I don't know if everyone (who fits the requirements) should be given the power of life or death over another thing. Guns are designed to kill.

This may lead to less crime, nobody wants to risk being shot after all. But people generally steal from desperation, not caring about the risk, and this may forestall that, but starvation or cold or something else could make it worth it.

I add also that those peoples that choose to gain a permit also get the chance to do there civic duty of deterring crime, which is also a good thing.

What if people become vigilantes? Trying to chase a criminal down, only to hurt themselves or others.

I also thought of muggings, now thieves can get the guns from these people, and the gun wouldn't trace to them.

I am a little pesimistic, but I plan on the worst. And the worst here can be very, very bad.

 

[Crimson King]

So, your only objection to gun concealment is that someone MIGHT miss? Honestly, I'd rather have a firearm when I get robbed along with everyone else, than have a criminal with a firearm hold me without a chance for getting out with everything in tact.

 

[cF=)]

"[a]long with everyone else"; that's making the biggest hasty generalization ever. First off, I have never seen anybody getting robbed of its money/jewels/etc. in his house while he was awake, and secondly, why would you carry the task of enforcing the law when officiers are supposed to do this job ?

If you had a weapon, multiple scenarios might occur:
1) The burglar/hijacker/whatever feels threatened even more if you carry a firearm, and might shoot at gunpoint without thinking. Result: you can end up shot.
2) Even with a gun, you don't have the firing skills of a trained shooter. You exchange shots until one of you is wounded, and the other one escape/calls the police.
3) The burglar/hijacker/whatever did not carry any weapon, you either shoot him and death follows, or he flee because he's scared.

2 out 3 times, you end up loosing.

 

[Crimson King]

I meant I wanted a firearm along with everyone else so we can all have a chance a fighting back.

Studies have shown that prison inmates said they were less likely to rob someone because they might have had a gun.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

I can't see letting everyone (who fits those requirements) having a concealed gun as a good thing. I fear that eventually someone will do something stupid, like try to fire at a criminal with their gun only to miss and hit a pedestrian. "With great power comes great responsibility", and I don't know if everyone (who fits the requirements) should be given the power of life or death over another thing. Guns are designed to kill.

Guns are designed to fire small projectiles at high velocity. This can kill. Slight difference.

And you cannot just shoot people. You are required to show opportunity, intent and ability. If all three are present, you are probably in a prime position to shoot them anyways.

This may lead to less crime, nobody wants to risk being shot after all. But people generally steal from desperation, not caring about the risk, and this may forestall that, but starvation or cold or something else could make it worth it.

And all studies show that criminals will go out of their way to avoid people with weapons. They will rob a house when the people aren't home or find someone that looks weak and out of place. Just because someone is starving doesn't mean they will immediately attack a police officer for his lunch money. Being desperate doesn't automatically make you stupid.

What if people become vigilantes? Trying to chase a criminal down, only to hurt themselves or others.

That would unlawful. Which is exactly what a CCW holder isn't.

I also thought of muggings, now thieves can get the guns from these people, and the gun wouldn't trace to them.

If the mugger doesn't get a sucking chest wound or, at the least, soiled underwear first. And the first thing someone does when they have something expensive stolen from them is report it to the police. The weapon would be tracked.

I am a little pesimistic, but I plan on the worst. And the worst here can be very, very bad.

Then why aren't you packing heat mister plan for the worst.

"[a]long with everyone else"; that's making the biggest hasty generalization ever. First off, I have never seen anybody getting robbed of its money/jewels/etc. in his house while he was awake, and secondly, why would you carry the task of enforcing the law when officiers are supposed to do this job ?

Because the police have no responsibility to your safety. Only you do. If you get killed, it is the police's job to bring him to justice, it is your job to not get killed in the first place.

If you had a weapon, multiple scenarios might occur:
1) The burglar/hijacker/whatever feels threatened even more if you carry a firearm, and might shoot at gunpoint without thinking. Result: you can end up shot.
2) Even with a gun, you don't have the firing skills of a trained shooter. You exchange shots until one of you is wounded, and the other one escape/calls the police.
3) The burglar/hijacker/whatever did not carry any weapon, you either shoot him and death follows, or he flee because he's scared.

1. No, a burglar would avoid you and find someone less threatening. And criminals know the difference between B&E and robbery compared to Murder in the First degree.
2. First, weapons and safety training are a requirement for CCW. Second, criminals do not wait around to exchange shots. They escape at the first sign of trouble and try elsewhere.
3. This is the most likely scenario. And the one that happens hundreds of thousands of times each and every year.

2 out 3 times, you end up loosing.

The numbers don't lie and the statistics are against you.

 

[cF=)]

A burglar would avoid you and find someone less threatening. And criminals know the difference between B&E and robbery compared to Murder in the First degree.

The real threat here is not the weapon, it's the fact they are uncovered and need to escape before police comes in. If you were ever robbed, you'd know burglars don't mess around and wait to see if the guy who walks down the stairs is armed or not.

First, weapons and safety training are a requirement for CCW. Second, criminals do not wait around to exchange shots. They escape at the first sign of trouble and try elsewhere.

1. If I go back to your "granny" example in your first post, I don't think she meets the requierement for CCW. Are seniors asked to do another test of physical and mental abilities or do they have the right to carry around guns just because they were judged "ok" during their youth time?
2. "They escape at the first sign of trouble" just confirmed what I said in my first paragraph. You don't need to be holding a weapon to scare away burglars, because at the sight of somebody else, they will likely escape.

The numbers don't lie and the statistics are against you.

The options I pulled off in my previous post were situations I saw on TV, or in my local newspaper. I might not have the scans, but titles like "A man is found dead in his house after exchanging shots with criminals" don't lie.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

The real threat here is not the weapon, it's the fact they are uncovered and need to escape before police comes in. If you were ever robbed, you'd know burglars don't mess around and wait to see if the guy who walks down the stairs is armed or not.

And if you caught the burglar unawares, you could hold him till the police got there with a M79 for all it mattered.

1. If I go back to your "granny" example in your first post, I don't think she meets the requierement for CCW. Are seniors asked to do another test of physical and mental abilities or do they have the right to carry around guns just because they were judged "ok" during their youth time?
2. "They escape at the first sign of trouble" just confirmed what I said in my first paragraph. You don't need to be holding a weapon to scare away burglars, because at the sight of somebody else, they will likely escape.

Did you not read the requirements? Having not been found mentally incompetent is one of them. So granny could get a CCW if she so chose and wasn't a fruitcake.

And what you said in your first paragraph is obviously superfluous. You don't require a license to conceal carry in your own home, thus holding up a robber with a large M79 instead of a discreet pistol.

The options I pulled off in my previous post were situations I saw on TV, or in my local newspaper. I might not have the scans, but titles like "A man is found dead in his house after exchanging shots with criminals" don't lie.

Why you keep returning to weapons at home, which has little to do with CCW, is beyond me. However, to refute your point, about thirty thousand people are killed with guns each year. Most of them are between criminals on criminals (gang on gang) and criminal versus police. Few deaths are accidental or between criminals against citizens. Nevertheless guns are used in self defense (most of the time never even being fired) hundreds of thousands of times each year. Thus it is quite apparent that the benefits of CCW far outweigh the negative effects of weapons in general.

 

[Crimson King]

I'll be honest, I'm not so much for the whole concealed weapon publicly, personally. I believe firearms should only be used for protection and are our right to own and possess. However, I will say if you live in an area where carrying a firearm makes you feel more secure, then you should be allowed to.

 

[snex]

to add to gamer4fire's point, instances where a criminal tried to rob somebody, but was scared away because they pulled out a weapon, would tend to be extremely underreported. its not like the robber is going to go to the local newspaper about it, and it is doubtful that the potential victim would either. you will only hear cases where the gun was actually fired.