Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Guns When Gun Control Freaks Go Wild:-)

Sometimes reality intrudes.;-)



I said I would try to find a link to his work for you to look over. I did not use him in support of an argument. You expanded it into a red herring. I simply pointed it out.:-)
Yours,
Issodhos

Oh I do believe that someone who is armed is a deterrent.
I just can't abide by that philosophy of being afraid and looking.

NO!
I wouldn't wear a statement like that on my t shirt or sticker on my car.
Crikey, although I agree most gun owners are nice
there are gun owner nuts out there who would definitely react to my 'activism' by advertising that I don't particularly like guns or think them helpful in my life.

One wonders if there is any potential middle ground between being absolutely opposed to any gun ownership at any time by any citizen at any time ever..... and the position that any regulation of any sort that impacts gun ownership and sales in any way is the fatal first step on the slippery slope to the absolute and universal abolition of all gun ownership.

It occurs to me that many businesses now have decals on their doors indicating that firearms are not welcome there.

I wonder if anyone has studied data on crimes committed in such businesses, compared to the norm.

A similar question could be posed in regards to alcoholic beverages.

The states and the Fed have laws on the books now that restrict the right to the private ownership and use of firearms. The current goal of anti-gunowner organizations is to put more laws on the books restricting the right to the private ownership and use of firearms.;-)
Yours,
Issodhos

It would be interesting to see. At the same time I'd like to know if any store owners have signs saying "No Guns Allowed" followed by "The Owner and Employees of this store are not armed" and see what the data would be on such businesses.

Announcing that guns are not permitted and announcing that a person is unarmed, or that a vehicle, residence or a place of business is not protected by firearms are two entirely different things.

If a tweaking meth freak decides he's going to rob a dry cleaner or a bowling alley or a gas station or a sandwich shop does anyone seriously think that meth freak is going to honor the "no guns allowed" signs? Oh, hey'll no!!!!

How many gun owners with a CCW have committed gun crimes anywhere? Damned few. So a gun owner who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon carrying legally in a store is statistically no threat to anyone in the store or to the business itself and may in fact be a deterrent, while people intent on breaking the law while in possession of a firearm don't give a damn about "no guns allowed" signs.

What person however would put up signs saying "I am not armed", "there are no guns in this house", "there are no guns in this vehicle", "there are no guns in this business"? The answer of course is that no one would be so completely stupid as to do that.

No gun allowed signs are nothing more than a talisman, a modern day mojo to ward off the evil spirits. No gun signs in essence keep good guns out and let bad guns in. I'll have to check but I doubt guns were allowed on campus at Virginia Tech when students were massacred.


In Miami after Hurricane whatever, I get my hurricanes mixed up, parts of the city were wiped out. Homestead, just south of Miami was a disaster. Looters were going crazy. Police couldn't even begin to protect everyone. I was there. I saw a few houses or parts of houses with signs saying "You Loot, We Shoot." No where did I see a sign saying "This business is not protected by guns". I wonder why that was?

I would think that there is no crime (at least no crime involving a gun) in such businesses because no one would take a gun into an establishment that has prohibited such an action.;-)
Yours,
Issodhos

Is that in fact true? If a business establishment prohibits firearms on the premises, are the employees exempt?

There's a lot of truth in that. Similarly, a sign on the door stating that this establishment is insured my Smith and Wesson is not likely to be a deterrent either.

Not sure I follow your logic here. If the weapon is concealed, how can it be a deterrent?

No doubt there were no guns allowed at Columbine High School either. But we need to have a basis of comparison in order to draw a conclusion as to cause and effect - for example, the comparative rate of violent crime on college campuses where guns are prohibited versus college campuses where guns are not prohibited.

Perhaps it signifies the relationship between reliance on violence and the catastrophic breakdown of civilization.

This gun thing baffles me.

Am I correct to interpret the position of those who oppose regulation of guns to the effect that if citizens are allowed to have whatever guns they wish it will either have no effect on the rate of crime or will suppress it?

If the latter, is that because more criminals will be killed by law abiding citizens or because criminals will be less likely to commit crimes because they don't know who is loaded and who not?

Any factual backup for any position?