Damn I wish we could have handguns in Canada. It's the only thing that sucks about living here.

No shiat, Sherlock.

Yeah surprize! People who get a liscense to carry a firearm are not the ones out there shooting other people. Just like the gun registry up here in Canada. Newsflash if you are going to shoot someone with it, you arn't going to register your gun.

Gun thread! Where's my helper landshark, I need to send him downstairs to make popcorn.

/if he burns the butter again, I'm teaching him to use the microwave
//No, I will not loan him out during Mormon season, I need him here

Statistics won't matter a bit to the gun grabbers.

OMG, we can't have warped statistics like this released to the general public. Guns are dangerous.... they kill.... they'll sneak up on you when you least suspect it.


/no CCW
//live in Wisconsin
///damn :(

FTFA: John Lott, a visiting professor at the University of Maryland who has done extensive research on the role of firearms in American society, said the results in Michigan since the law changed don't surprise him.

Academic studies of concealed weapons laws that generally allow citizens to obtain permits have shown different results, Lott said. About two-thirds of the studies suggest the laws reduce crime; the rest show no net effect, he said.

But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.

To which, I would like to add... Duh!

LEGAL gun owners aren't the problem. Taking guns away from the good guys don't affect the bad guys one bit. You'd figure people would have realized that by now...

This is going to be a an awesomely productive and intellectually meaningful thread.

TheYeti: This is going to be a an awesomely

And literate, too!

The headline and article are misleading, as the firearm homicide rate in Michigan has been declining since 1990, with the sharpest drop occurring during the mid-1990s. Reference.

But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.

That would be John Lott, the darling of the NRA whose flawed studies were discredited several years ago.

Finally, we can shoot at cars that cut us off on the highway!

chicken little loses again........

Lorelle: The headline and article are misleading, as the firearm homicide rate in Michigan has been declining since 1990, with the sharpest drop occurring during the mid-1990s.

Would you wear BravadoGT's graphic on your person? Would you put that on your home

I just applied for a Firearm Owner Identification Card. I don't want the terrorists to win. And I want to kill the hell out for some of those goddamned geese.

Dancin_In_Anson: Would you wear BravadoGT's graphic on your person?

No, because I am armed (but not with a gun).

Would you put that on your home

As soon as you put a sign on your humble abode that reads, "I gots a whole lotta guns in mah shack, but no one's home, and mah dog ain't gots no teef."

Lorelle: No, because I am armed (but not with a gun)

What is your weapon of choice?

As soon as you put a sign on your humble abode that reads, "I gots a whole lotta guns in mah shack, but no one's home, and mah dog ain't gots no teef."

Why would I do that? It's not true. Ooooh...wait! I get it. Because I am a gun owner, I am a redneck cracker that speaks as such...I get it!

Weaver95: LEGAL gun owners aren't the problem. Taking guns away from the good guys don't affect the bad guys one bit. You'd figure people would have realized that by now...

Actually taking guns away from the good guys, or making it harder for them to have a gun does. When the bad guys have to start thinking about the chances that the rube they want to mug/carjack/rape/burgle might be packing heat it's actually a deterrent.

I don't personally own a handgun, but I'm not averse or scared of them. I just haven't felt a need.

/does own a few swords, some bats, hockey sticks, and other things I could grab if needed.
//not to mention three lovable but scary sounding dogs...

Dancin_In_Anson: Lorelle: No, because I am armed (but not with a gun)

What is your weapon of choice?

I'm gonna walk without rhythm, so I won't attract the worm.

/sorry. had to be said.

birdmanesq: I just applied for a Firearm Owner Identification Card. I don't want the terrorists to win. And I want to kill the hell out for some of those goddamned geese.

A FOIC? Where the hell do you live? Illinois or something?

Seriously, I can't understand how people could live in a state that forces registration of guns. I think that's why we signed Tank Johnson. Nothing he was convicted of is even a crime in Texas.

Dancin_In_Anson: Why would I do that? It's not true.

That's how I feel about that sign.

...I get it!

I certainly hope so. :D

Lorelle: That's how I feel about that sign.

You don't own a gun though do you? In your case it would be quite true.

Dancin_In_Anson: Lorelle: As soon as you put a sign on your humble abode that reads, "I gots a whole lotta guns in mah shack, but no one's home, and mah dog ain't gots no teef."
(Dancin_In_Anson:)Why would I do that? It's not true. Ooooh...wait! I get it. Because I am a gun owner, I am a redneck cracker that speaks as such...I get it!

When one doesn't have an intelligent view or the ability to understand complicated issues, one must go to insulting the others due to lack of a rational point to support their inferior opinion.

/In this case, Lorelle's "opinion" is wrong...but thats OK.

Kenneth Levin, a West Bloomfield physician, was one of those critics. In a letter to the Free Press in July 2001, he referred to the "inevitable first victim of road or workplace rage as a result of this law."

Last month, Levin said he suspected "it probably hasn't turned out as bad as I thought. I don't think I was wrong, but my worst fears weren't realized."

"it probably hasn't turned out as bad as I thought. I don't think I was wrong, but my worst fears weren't realized."

ummm
so you were wrong
and you can not admit it?
god I hate you
dont you remember the lesson you learned from the fonz??

FARKTARD

filth: A FOIC? Where the hell do you live? Illinois or something?

LOL - of course he does ...
sigh ....
now I have to wait and see how this SC decision goes
might not need one in a few months

/FOIC - we got your prints and you KNOW that we are gonna run them

I almost feel sorry for the gun grabbers. They keep making these claims of blood running in the street in regards to CCW and/or Castle Doctrine laws. Then the stats come out, showing that CCW holders are amongst the safest, most law abiding people in the country, gun crimes going down despite there being more guns than ever, accidental shootings going down despite there being more guns than ever, millions of crimes prevented each year due to civilians with guns... it has to be demoralizing to be proven wrong each and every time you open your yap.

/But I don't really feel sorry for them.
//Couldn't happen to a bigger bunch of ninnies IMHO.

Dancin_In_Anson: You don't own a gun though do you? In your case it would be quite true.

One can be armed without owning a gun, dude. Assuming that someone without a gun is unarmed is the same as assuming that all gun owners are rednecks.

NOW do you get it??

Lorelle: Dancin_In_Anson: You don't own a gun though do you? In your case it would be quite true.

One can be armed without owning a gun, dude. Assuming that someone without a gun is unarmed is the same as assuming that all gun owners are rednecks.

NOW do you get it??

Whew! Now that's settled. And good thing, too, because it's totally relevant to the issue at hand.

Don't worry DIA, Lorelle is armed with a sharp wit that can deflect any bullet and ward off any murderer/rapist/robber with a mere glance.

/That and some sharp keys.
//And bo-staff skills.

Huzzah!

I got my fill of picking apart the text of the 2nd Amendment this morning. I think I'll just stop and soak in the fact that, as bad as America is, we still have the heritage of the Founding Fathers to draw on and that the spirit of resistance, though bruised and battered, still lies just beneath the surface as an integral part of the American psyche. I despise blind nationalism with a passion, but sometimes it does feel good to be able to point to the American Revolution and say "That is the heritage our forefathers created for us."

And maybe just someday we'll actually live up to it.

colovion: Don't worry DIA, Lorelle is armed with a sharp wit that can deflect any bullet and ward off any murderer/rapist/robber with a mere glance.

Yeah, but no kid's gonna find Lorelle's sharp wit and decide to play William Tell with it.

In any case, John Lott, the "a visiting professor at the University of Maryland" is a trolling douchebag with very questionable research methods.

Fabricating and altering data kind of methods, such that nobody has been able to reproduce his results.

Think cold fusion for gun nuts.

Maybe one of his online identities will show up in this tread and explain his "my hard drive ate my data" theory of academic integrity.

Michigan's law might have some positive impact, but trusting this guy to deliver that message is like hiring O.J. to sell cutlery.

dameron: In any case, John Lott, the "a visiting professor at the University of Maryland" is a trolling douchebag with very questionable research methods.

Possibly true, but the point he was making is correct. A relaxation of gun laws has never lead to a noticeable increase in crime, much less the blood in the streets the gun banners are always predicting.

friendinpa: HEY SPITZER! PAY ATTENTION!

Isn't he going after people who illegally get guns, and then use them in crimes?

(ie: the people all the gun people in here claim are the real problem?)

// If you're not talking about the VA lawsuits, nevermind...

Churchill2004: Possibly true, but the point he was making is correct. A relaxation of gun laws has never lead to a noticeable increase in crime, much less the blood in the streets the gun banners are always predicting.

I have yet to see a gun grabber wrap their head around that concept. To a certain segment of the left, merely SEEING a gun makes you a homicidal maniac.

Churchill2004: Possibly true, but the point he was making is correct. A relaxation of gun laws has never lead to a noticeable increase in crime, much less the blood in the streets the gun banners are always predicting.

In a time of steadily decreasing violent crime, saying that something hasn't increased crime is a dodge.

How do areas with liberal concealed carry laws compare to areas with stricter regulations during that same steady decrease in violent crime?

The one thing I know for certain is that opening up the concealed carry laws really, really help gun sales.

Whether at work, a picnic, or a dinner party, nothing improves a social situation like guns!

birdmanesq: I just applied for a Firearm Owner Identification Card. I don't want the terrorists to win.

I don't know which terrorists you're talking about, but they won when you were required to have a FOID.

I'm sure this isn't true. I believe in Sara Brady and Sara says that guns cause more crime. Therefore this article CANNOT be true.

//I actually own more guns than you

Just a question, is there an increase in gun related injuries / deaths?

dameron: How do areas with liberal concealed carry laws compare to areas with stricter regulations during that same steady decrease in violent crime?

well of course you ask the question correctly
but this is the thing which lott adjusted for in hi book/study

another way for us to "study" this problem would be:
1) for the next 30 years, in DC, make the law be that NO PERMIT is required to own a handgun and must permit for all other firearms.
2) wait 30 years
3) compare the crime rate between the two 30 year periods.
My guess/bet? it can NOT be as bad as it has been for the last 30 years

/there are already laws to deal with people who commit crimes with hand guns, and a permit or lack thereof will NOT stop them
/the thread is whether the 2nd amendment is about people or government ...
/if it is people, then you MUST change amendment to ban guns ... period
/doesnt matter what you WANT to be the law ...

dameron: In a time of steadily decreasing violent crime, saying that something hasn't increased crime is a dodge.

No, it's not, because the justification for these laws was that without them there'd be spikes in violence. If you repeal a law and nothing bad happens, you were correct to repeal the law.

dameron: How do areas with liberal concealed carry laws compare to areas with stricter regulations during that same steady decrease in violent crime?

That's a specious argument, because it assumes that all other things are equal. It's a basic rule of the scientific process that your data is worthless if you have multiple uncontrolled variables. It's also an argument that doesn't support your point, because some of the strictest gun control laws in the country happen to be in some of the highest crime areas in the country. Also true is that the looser gun laws are all in areas of much lower crime. It's still not really a relevant argument because of uncontrolled variables, but at the very least make sure your flawed arguments actually support your position.

dameron: The one thing I know for certain is that opening up the concealed carry laws really, really help gun sales

So? Not banning things tend to help them sell better. Your point?

Six-fold increase? That would be like 583% of the population, unless you're talking about legal ownership.

/Guns are for wimps who can't kill people with their bare hands

Lorelle: The headline and article are misleading

Is it really a good idea to argue with a bunch of gun nuts?

//actually not a problem
//but if liberal gun grabbers actually thought law abiding gun owners were dangerous, they be a lot nicer to us than they are

Ryan2065: Just a question, is there an increase in gun related injuries / deaths?

I would bet HUGE dollars that the increase/decrease is TINY ...
otherwise each side would be trumpting the data

PLUS: darwin wins .... idiots who buy guns and then accidently kill theirselves? well this is a good thing

sadly true for all minors who die in gun deaths

ANYONE who has ever fired a gun, KNOWS that it is NOT a toy.
PERIOD
if your kid gets access to it ... shiat they should just hang you from a tree in your front yard

BOOM!

Vic Sage: if liberal gun grabbers actually thought law abiding gun owners were dangerous, they be a lot nicer to us than they are

winner!

bighairyguy: /Guns are for wimps who can't kill people with their bare hands

Oh, you'd best believe I can kill you with my bare hands. It's just that I've got this suit on, see, and my tie was a gift from my wife. So, bang!, and stuff.

Ryan2065: Just a question, is there an increase in gun related injuries / deaths?

Did you RTFA?

That's actually the part i was most curious about: accidents. While i can totally get the logic behind "more people carry guns, fewer people will be killed by violent crime/assault etc", i was always interested to hear if that number would be offset by the number of people who accidently blow their faces off and whose kids play with them and blow their or their dumbass friends' faces off.

apparently, though, if Michigan is a good sample, that doesnt appear to be the case.

FTFA:

The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined

personally, i think if a group of citizens live in a certain area where carrying concealed is appropriate and acceptable to the electorate of the area, fine! let em be so. seems like a states rights thing to me. If michiganders or texans or what have you feel its in their self interest to make these sorts of laws, well fine, its up to them, right? i doubt such a thing would fly here in Los Angeles, but if you want it, great. if you dont, that's good too.