constitutional carry states
Twitter
Previous Post
Next Post

By Rob Morse

It is more dangerous when honest men and women face criminals barehanded, and safer when the good guys are armed? That isn’t a hard question to answer. It’s easy to calculate the additional lives we’d save each year if a state allows honest people to carry guns in public. I’ll explain it in a minute.

I will, but the real mystery here is why we’re still talking about fantasy problems while real violent criminals are killing our neighbors. We’re acting as if our bad dreams were more real than the bodies with chalk marks around them on the evening news.

Part of that problem is political. Politicians appeal to our fears and our fantasies. We’re suckers for that. Politicians also suck up to anti-gun billionaires to extract campaign contributions. Ultimately, voters like us are the problem when we hide behind sound-bite solutions. Back in the real world, disarming our neighbors costs lives.

chalk outline body crime scene
Who disarmed the victim? (Shutterstock)

When you take even the shallowest look at violence, you notice that an armed attacker usually overpowers their unarmed victim. Criminals may break the law, but they aren’t stupid. They choose tools that work and victims unlikely to resist.

To quote one longtime thug, ‘Guns and knives make people so generous.’

Robbers sometimes threaten to shoot us even when they don’t have a gun. Criminals only use guns in about one-seventh of all violent crimes. Unfortunately, violent criminals wait until they have an advantage in strength, numbers, or surprise. Rather than struggle with the insoluble problem of knowing how real the threat of being victimized is, the real solution is for good men and women to arm themselves.

We don’t need clever calculations to know how many lives are saved when victims are armed. We know that about 1.7 million legal gun owners use a firearm in self-defense each year.

We know how many people live in each state and already have their carry permits. We know the rate of violent crime in each state, and we learned that about 30 percent of adults will carry concealed if the carry permit is optional. We even know how often people with their carry permits actually go armed in public. We know what happens because we asked, and because 21 states already have a form of permit-optional concealed (constitutional) carry.

In most states, we’re talking about saving thousands of lives a year by removing restrictions on carrying a gun. We can argue about the clearest way to explain the answer, but the calculations only take junior high school level math.

In contrast, fantasies about guns are complicated. We can imagine that all kinds of things might happen if we let our neighbors go armed without first a getting a government-issued permission slip from the state.

  • We imagine that the police will keep us safe. We ignore that the police ask their own families to go armed because the world is dangerous.
  • We imagine that if everyone can carry, the police won’t be able to tell the good guys from the bad guys unless we have a state permit in their pocket. We ignore that the police seldom know the history of the people they stop on the street, or the identity of the passengers in the cars they stop.
  • We imagine that our neighbors will act crazy with a gun. We ignore that civilians who legally carry a firearm in public are statistically even more law abiding and non-violent than the police themselves.
  • We imagine that enacting more laws will keep us safe. We ignore that we have already over 23 thousand firearms regulations today and criminals ignore them.
  • We imagine there are almost no guns in our world today other than those carried by the police and criminals. We ignore that concealed is concealed, and one-in-a-dozen adults in public is legally carrying a gun today.
  • We imagine that our laws somehow disarm the bad guys, but leave the good guys free to protect themselves. We ignore that making it harder for the good guys to get a gun legally means more innocent victims are disarmed and victimized by criminals.

Some of us cling to these fantasies even though they cost lives. We feel virtuous as we imagine an ideal world without evil or violence. We want safety without effort. We want our security to be someone else’s responsibility. Clinging to those fantasies leaves us vulnerable in more ways than one.

Politicians are all too eager to sell us something for nothing. All the politician has to do is put more ink on paper and send out a press release about more gun control. These are the same politicians who have their own security details. Most of them are exempt from their own gun control laws. These are the politicians who get large campaign contributions from anti-gun billionaires.

I have a problem with that because we are the ones who pay the price for these delusions they’re selling. Demanding that our neighbors live according to a gun-free fantasy puts our neighbors at risk. Sometimes it gets our neighbors injured, raped, or killed.

I believe we should live and let live. Think what you will, own a gun or don’t, but please don’t use the law to chain your neighbors to your gun-free fantasies. Leave your neighbors free to take care of themselves. That’s exactly what permit-optional concealed carry laws do.

Contact your legislators and set your neighbors free.

 

This article originally appeared at Slow Facts and is reprinted here with permission. 

Previous Post
Next Post

54 COMMENTS

  1. Yes but sheep frequently don’t really want to be free but only free to live out their utopian fantasies in a gilded cage padded with Democrat lies.

  2. Some of us now have neighbors who are part of an invasion force from south of the border. They hate our guts, They’re not Americans and never will be. OUR rights are not their rights. They deserve nothing but deportation.

  3. quote————We imagine that enacting more laws will keep us safe. We ignore that we have already over 23 thousand firearms regulations today and criminals ignore them.————quote———quote

    States with lax laws enable criminals to cross borders and buy all the firepower they want. Most do not even have to leave their state because they can buy all the second hand guns they want on the black market with no paperwork because any greed monger can sell his privately owned gun to anyone he wants without a background check. Blind greed rules.

    Studies show that states and countries with tough gun laws and less firearms are safer to live in and have less homicides. The Naked Ape, naturally viscous and violent, will use firearms on each other for the most trivial of offenses. Its no mystery that the U.S. leads in road rage murders and spousal murders with firearms and leads in accidental child deaths from firearms.

    quote—————-Robbers sometimes threaten to shoot us even when they don’t have a gun. Criminals only use guns in about one-seventh of all violent crimes.———-quote

    Studies prove much the same thing. When you resist a robbery with your own gun you are way less likely to survive the encounter and end up dead or crippled for life.

    quote————-We imagine that if everyone can carry, the police won’t be able to tell the good guys from the bad guys unless we have a state permit in their pocket. We ignore that the police seldom know the history of the people they stop on the street, or the identity of the passengers in the cars they stop.————quote

    That statement is hilarious. Birds of a feather flock together. We live in a surveillance and computerized world now. One punch of a button and the cop in the cruiser knows who you are and your complete life history instantly and even the color of your last toilet roll. And if the computer shows you are a street thug with a violent record chances are the fellow passengers in your care are probably convicted felons as well.

    quote—————We don’t need clever calculations to know how many lives are saved when victims are armed. We know that about 1.7 million legal gun owners use a firearm in self-defense each year.———–quote

    University studies proved this far right propaganda a complete falsehood as private civilians seldom stop or prevent crime by using their guns.

    quote—————We imagine that our neighbors will act crazy with a gun.———-quote

    Studies prove most people murdered with firearms are killed by people they know, usually family members or next door neighbors not strangers on the street. If you have a gun in the home the chances of you dying by a firearm are far higher than if you do not have a gun in the home. The studies and stats proved this decades ago.

    Studies show that when a firearm is in the house the risk of suicide is far higher because guns make it so quick and convenient and unlike most other methods of suicide most people do not survive a suicide with a gun.

    • More of the same nonsense.

      States with lax laws enable criminals to cross borders and buy all the firepower they want.

      And yet no one can ever explain how states with “lax firearm laws” such as Vermont have almost zero violent crime.

      … states and countries with tough gun laws and less firearms are safer to live in and have less homicides.

      That may or may not be true. Even if it is true, “tough gun laws and less firearms” could simply be a coincidence.

      At any rate, thoughts and questions along those lines are distractions at best and at worst they are outright malicious attempts to make you vulnerable to harm and thus dehumanize you.

      Let’s ignore the distractions and get down to the nitty-gritty. Do we have an inherent, inalienable right to life? If the answer is, “yes,” then we also have an inherent, inalienable right to self-defense. For, if we cannot defend our lives, then our lives are not ours and we have no life at all.

      If we truly have a right to life and hence self-defense, then attempts to disarm us are attempts to deny that we have a right to life.

    • darcydodo…Your perpetual finger pointing paranoia is a cry for help in neon lights. The laws you want to impose on everyone are laws you need to psychologically protect you from your evil self. Without laws that order you around you are lost in space all because you assume everyone is as nutty as you. And your insane remedy for your insanity is seeing your Gun Control rot imposed by law on others.

      Surrender The Guns You Constantly Boast About Owning To Law Enforcement and Immediately Seek Help, Mental Help.

      • You should! It’s funny as H*ll! Here’s an example: “The Naked Ape, naturally viscous and violent. . . ”

        ‘Viscous.’ VISCOUS?! It doesn’t even proofread its copy-and-pastes!

        The word is ‘vicious.’

        • Well, lil’d has an excuse.
          He was pleasuring himself to vids of an underage Greta T, or recruiting little boys for NAMBLA while he made that post.

        • i have a viscous damped tonearm, sounds vicious when deployed onto “here come the warm jets.”

    • Here we go again. With only 1/7th of crimes being committed with a firearm (and 99% are illegal firearms) your argument is ludicrious and spurious. It goes to show your frantic attempts to get firearms declared illegal and confiscated. Just how will your “universal background checks” deal with the illegal black market gun sales? I can answer that for you. It cant and won’t do a damn thing. The Federal Government by the Constitution CANNOT restrict sales of firearms to a person who lawfully may own one in the state where it is sold, regardless of your protestations. Oh, incidentally, your “studies” are full of crap and without revealing how they came up with their spurious conclusions.

      Here is a FACT that you cannot contest. When the number of firearm purchases went up, crimes went down. I don’t give a rat’s behind what your favorite European countries do. Again, your studies about confronting an armed perpetrator with a gun is FALSE. You are more likely to surprise the perpetrator if you counter his aggression with your own firearm. Your ‘studies” are a LIE.

      If your contention that we live in a “computer society and the cops can tell who and where you are” how come so many crimes go unsolved and the perpetrator gets away with it?

      Another one of your lies discredited: How many times is a gun used to stop a crime?
      A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation found that defensive gun uses occur an average of 67,740 times per year. Further, almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals,

      Looks like your nonsense is just that, NONSENSE! But then what can one expect from an anti-gun radical like yourself?

      • to Walter the Beverley Hillbilly

        quote—————–Here is a FACT that you cannot contest. When the number of firearm purchases went up, crimes went down.————quote

        Your lies are really over the top on this one. Crime and homicides exploded during the pandemic and curiously so did the mad rush to buy guns as well proving when gun ownership went up so did the crime wave. Where do you live in a cave???????

        quote————-If your contention that we live in a “computer society and the cops can tell who and where you are” how come so many crimes go unsolved and the perpetrator gets away with it?————quote

        Your reading comprehension is at the 4th grade level (normal for the average cop). I was speaking of cops in their cruisers when they stop some one in a traffic violation. Have someone with a normal I.Q. explain my post to you.

        quote———————Investigation found that defensive gun uses occur an average of 67,740 times per year.————-quote

        Again your reading comprehension is at the 4th grade level. That stat does not refute the fact that if you use a gun to resist you are far more likely to be killed or crippled than if you had not resisted.

        GUNS DO NOT STOP MORE CRIME EVIDENCE SHOWS

        https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-
        crimes-evidence-shows/

        Harvard Study: Do guns make us safer? Science says no. But when did the Far Right ever believe in Science??????

        https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/do-guns-make-us-safer-science-suggests-no/

        • There goes dacian again, citing studies he does not understand from years past that have been debunked so may times its hard to keep count.

          These studies that start out with the very premise that “Everything else in all the other studies is wrong, the only true thing in the universe is what we say here with our cherry picked incomplete data” and then goes on to design the study to fit the data and end with the same premise it started with as its conclusion.

          Then in the article at scientific american this: “I was standing in a shooting range 15 miles south of Kennesaw, Ga. …’ Which was later found to have been a lie. Then the pic later down entitled “The Rarity of Self Defense” citing the debunked Hemmingway and Kellerman studies that used cherry picked data from different time periods, and excluded all women and anyone who was not white and then only considered those in which the criminal was actually killed and then only included those victims left who suffered some sort of injury – this bit of smoke-n-mirrors from two paid consultants of the anti-gun lobby, one of which later recanted.

        • Corrections:

          “…Hemmingway” should have been “Wiebe who used flawed data from another researcher named Hemmingway”

          Also in these two debunked studies, they purposely exclude defenders who were successful in their DGU and were not harmed, These bogus studies also excluded DGU for home defense that simply scared the bad guy away (over 1 million of these daily across the U.S.). Plus these two debunked studies used an ‘odds ratio’ methodology using only their flawed data. Aside from the fact that an ‘odds ratio’ methodology is the wrong methodology to use in these studies they made it worse and more biased by trying to cover their flawed data sets by saying it was only “crude odds ratio” which is researcher ‘cover your ass’ speak for “we know our data is flawed and we are guessing”. These flawed studies also include the old smoke-n-mirrors ‘False Cause Fallacy’ of ‘correlation equals causality’ premise in their “crude odds” methodology which is the go to ’emotional hook’ of the anti-gun/gun-control lobby that always indicates their underlying data is flawed.

        • Then there is the infamous and debunked “Gun Access Does Not Reduce Crime” study referenced in dacians links. The study where Donohue focused on only one type of crime that being rape.

          The study by Donohue focused on rape only but only included those who were not carrying their gun at the time of the rape or could not get to their gun or did not have their gun in their hand (been disarmed in some way) at the time of the rape then comes to the conclusion that states with relaxed permitting did not show a reduction in rapes. We duh, of course if the person does not have the gun at the time the rape can’t be stopped so a relaxed permit system didn’t do anything to reduce that crime rate among those who did not have their gun at the time.

        • The “mad rush” to purchase was the response TO not the cause OF the explosion of crime and homicides. Distortion and lies are all you know.

        • dacian the Dunderhead
          quote: “Your lies are really over the top on this one. Crime and homicides exploded during the pandemic and curiously so did the mad rush to buy guns as well proving when gun ownership went up so did the crime wave. Where do you live in a cave???????”

          Here you go again, Dunderhead. While your vaulted Obuma the Phone was in office, gun sale skyrocketed and crime went DOWN!
          We are experiencing a crime wave now due to your welfare programs which have failed miserably. It seems that for all the “Great Society” programs, poverty has gone UP not down. Your welfare recipients want to make a living the easy way without the hard work that the rest of us labor.

          Quote: “Your reading comprehension is at the 4th grade level (normal for the average cop). I was speaking of cops in their cruisers when they stop some one in a traffic violation. Have someone with a normal I.Q. explain my post to you.”

          Nice try at trying to qualify your remark. You are lying yet again. Or is that still. That is NOT what you said. you said in this “computer society”. Your IQ must rival your shoe size. Most police “cruisers” do not have cams in their cars. Most police do not have chest cams either.

          Quote: “Again your reading comprehension is at the 4th grade level. That stat does not refute the fact that if you use a gun to resist you are far more likely to be killed or crippled than if you had not resisted.”

          Dunderhead, you have the attention span of a gnat. you claim that having a gun does not enhance your safety when you are attacked by one of your proteges. FACT: Of those 67,000 cases, it was the good guy who overcame the bad guy. IT seems that you don’t like the fact that in this country we have the right to self defense. Try reading the case law on the matter.
          In fact, Lefty, it seems that the bad guy with a gun expects the victims not to be armed as most people are not. When he is confronted by the good guy with a gun, he often panics and is taken into custody until the cops arrive. As I have pointed out to you on a multitude of occasions, “When seconds count, police are minutes away.”

          The so called “studies” you provide are as bogus as your Lefty philosophy.

    • Dackie Boy, your words:
      “Studies show that states and countries with tough gun laws and less firearms are safer to live in and have less homicides. The Naked Ape, naturally viscous and violent,” Had a squiz at those states in Australia since they did the Fine Stine meme of Mr. And Mrs;Australia, thurn them all in”. and they did. Idiots. Yes, “gun crime” did drop about 35% in those first few years. Overall violent crime DID NOT in fact it rose. Imagine that? Housebreakings, muggings, rapes, etc rose by some 35% withn two years. Now, with some of the most draconian laws rohibiting ownership and use Australia now have far more “gun violance” than prior to Mr. And Mrs; Australia Tur them AlIN happened. WHY? The eedjits in gummit believed their law would magickally make al firearms vapourise, problem sovled. They forgot about ilegal importation.. now by the sea frieght can load. Fuly automatic weapons of war. Along with the fodder to feed them.

      How about Mesxico, another state that bought the Fine Stine bill of goods.. Señor y señora Mejico dejen todas las armas.
      And Méjico is one of the most dangerous places for unarmed normal folks to be anywhere. Nigeria and SOmalia might be safer. And that is rapidly invading our own country, arms and all. Along with a hot mix of nasty drugs.
      Now lets havvalook at countries like New York CIty and Chicaongo and Philadelphia and Baltimore.. all with some of the nastiest antigun laws anywhere on the planet and together those three cities account for more murders and RANDOM shootings of inncents than neary the entire rest of the US combined.

      Yoo Fulla Bull Oney.

    • Dacian doesn’t want to carry because he wants to be raped and shot. The whole idea just turns him on. He loves to read crime reports of thugs victimizing innocents and touch himself, just like many other “progressives.” He gets off on it. His long windbag posts are just pseudo-intellectual cover for his grotesque and insane desires.

    • “States with lax laws enable criminals to cross borders and buy all the firepower they want.”

      Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

      “Studies show”

      Heh.

      “naturally viscous”

      Heh.

      “will use firearms on each other for the most trivial of offenses”

      The places with the highest rates of gun ownership have the lowest rates of violent crime.

      “Studies prove”

      Heh.

      “One punch of a button and the cop in the cruiser knows who you are and your complete life history instantly and even the color of your last toilet roll.”

      Thanks for letting us all know you don’t know any cop or anything about policing.

      “University studies proved”

      Heh.

      “Studies prove most people murdered with firearms are killed by people they know”

      Studies have proved that most people murdered with firearms are involved in with drugs. Who’s surprised that drug users know their drug dealer? Who’s surprised drug dealers know their competition?

      “Studies show”

      Heh.

  4. These three sentences from the article do a bang-up job of distilling everything down to the simplest explanation possible:

    We feel virtuous as we imagine an ideal world without evil or violence.

    We want safety without effort.

    We want our security to be someone else’s responsibility.

    Those three sentences epitomize the Progressive human condition. They are lazy, they want other people to be responsible for them, and they cling to whatever feels good in spite of facts to the contrary.

  5. RE: “Back in the real world, disarming our neighbors costs lives.”

    Lots of lives…

    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. Excludes the numbers tied to racism and Gun Control in the US.

    Bottom line…Abolish Gun Control.

    • back about 1917 ten thousand Mencheviks were holed up in the Kremlin, armed, holding out for their frredoma nd the end of the Bolshevik revolution. In “talks” the Mencheviks were assured that if they laid down their arms they would be given free pass to go on back home. So, they began filing out of the Kremiin and down the steps to the street, laying down their Mosin Nagants as they left the large porch atopo the steps. As they filed on down the street they came to a corner a couple bolockes up there they were directed to turn up one road. As they reached a certain point the Bolshevik machine guns began barking, and all ten thousand of the Mensheviks fell dead.

      That is
      disarmement at is worst.

  6. “We know that about 1.7 million legal gun owners use a firearm in self-defense each year.”

    How do we know that? Is that 1.7 million incidents that got reported? How many went unreported? or does that automatically make them illegal gun owners? I am sure that the number of brandishments of firearms to chase away would be robbers, burglars, or just kids looking for a nest to make babies is much higher than that. Are you going to report the kids down the street for doing what you did 20years ago? Do you want to ruin that kid’s reputation or get him slapped with a record? You can have a few laughs about it later, but at the time, you thought it was something different. Many of these go unreported.

    • That 1.7 Mn is a guesstimate. The figures, all believeable depending on source run from abut half a million to around five million such events each year. I know some folks wh have “presented” their firearm to defuse a nasty and building situation against them and never said a word to anyone “official”.
      I once came close, I thougth, to feeling compelled to introdyce my own weapon into a heated situation (road rage I did NOT start or cause) but was able to calmly defuse the irate eedjit who tried to cut in front of me, but whom I could not even see because he was in a very small car and was not visible on my right side because of the large vehicle I was driving. Had he taken a poke at me or tried to break the window I would have presented, but I calmed him down explaining he crowded into my blind spot, below where I could see, as he passed me/cut in front on my right, having come up illegally on the shoulder to cut round me. Saved him thir thirty feet in stopped dead traffic.

  7. @dacian

    “… states and countries with tough gun laws and less firearms are safer to live in and have less homicides.”
    You mean like NY, NJ, CA, & Chicago Ill.? They have THE toughest gun laws of all 50 states.
    You’re so FOS I bet your eyes are brown.

    • Keep in mind that the Liberal Democrats have adopted the strategy of: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels Nazi Propaganda Minister
      The problem with their strategy is the second part of that quote. People are beginning to feel the consequences of the Lies. In all facets of their daily lives. From the Increase in Crime, Inflation and the Indoctrination of their children in School. Much in the fashion of the Hitler Youth, to follow a Prescribed Doctrine of Revisionist and Removal of History. To the constant moving of the Goal Posts and Lies concerning the Chinese/ Fauci “Gain of Function” Virus. All the way to the Buyer’s Remorse of the Biden administration as a whole.

      • Darkman, they are not “liberals.” The Liberals were our Founding Fathers. These people are Leftists.

        They, in spite of their claims that “right wing” people are “fascists” in fact it is they who are the “fascist” and Nazis.

        It seems that there was this guy, Giovani Gentile who ghost wrote Mussolini’s Manifesto. He was also a favorite of Adolf Hitler. The Left turned on their brothers the Fascists when Hitler turned on Joe Stalin and invaded their beloved USSR. Since then they claim that we are Nazis and Fascists. National Socialism is a byproduct of Karl Marx and the Socialist Cabal.

  8. My experience in a CC State?
    Some open carry, many more conceal carry, everyone leaves one another alone.
    No daily shootouts, the very few armed robbery attempts end badly or with a perp captured or shot to pieces by a group of armed citizens.
    No car jackings.
    Criminals know they are outgunned in a crowd so they pick soft targets like empty cars or abandoned houses to strip of copper wiring.
    Drug deals still happen but in the shadows, not in the open.
    The police know they arent alone in an emergency so they declined to enforce stupid covid mandates.
    Why wouldnt we want every law abiding citizen to be armed, trained and insured?

    • INSURED? WHY? And on WHOSE nickel? Not gonna happen. My persnal liability insurance should cover an honest mistake or accident. Beyond that I refuse. AndYOU should too.

  9. There is little disincentive for a criminal to not carry a gun concealed. If they get caught, they’re already going to be charged another felony or misdemeanor anyway, so a concealed gun charge is a rounding error, especially if there’s a Soros DA. On the othet hand, an otherwise law-abiding person now faces their first ever misdemeanor or felony for having a concealed weapon (or any wrapon in some jurisdictions). If it’s a felony, they’ll lose many rights they exercise, including right to bear arms. Therefore, these laws penalize the law-abiding and do nothing against the criminal. They put the balance of arms on the side of the criminals and leave the general populace as disarmed victims. This makes it easier and safer to be a criminal, and more dangerous to be the victim. It’s precisely the opposite of what laws should do — protect the victims and make criminality more dangerous.

  10. The Far Right people generally ignore the fact that the bulk of people that carry guns come from the lower classes. Not all people but the bulk of them do. This was very evident at my concealed carry classes.

    As I said before at my own concealed carry class even after the people had had the training I got the hell off of the firing range as fast as I could as they were pointing loaded guns at each other, unable to clear jams, and often pointing their guns at themselves when loading them.

    When the class was going on few knew safe gun handling practices and most thought they would not be sued after even a justifiable shooting. Most did not know the laws of when you could and could not shoot.

    Again only an uneducated Hillbilly would advocate for Constitutional Carry which also makes it way more likely more draconian gun laws will be passed when local Yahoos shoot people illegally.

    • “The Far Right people generally ignore the fact that the bulk of people that carry guns come from the lower classes.”

      This is not being ignored. Everyone knows, acknowledges, and even talks regularly about the fact that criminals from lower classes carry guns. This is something that the left will deny.

    • dacian, the Dunderhead, On the contrary. We know that the bulk of people who carry ILLEGAL guns: are from the lower class. Color of their skin not withstanding.

      You have a gun permit? ROFLMAO! And here you want to disarm the rest of us? Gee, I wonder why. (Well, not really).

      The gun safety courses you take to get your gun permit do not detail the laws on the Use of Force. That is an entirely different course, two courses actually. One is Personal Protection Inside The Home and the other Personal Protection Outside the Home. Both of these courses (NRA) provide a detailed part describing the LEGAL Use of Force. And yes, I am certified to teach both of these courses as well as a few others.

    • “The Far Right people generally ignore the fact that the bulk of people that carry guns come from the lower classes.”

      It’s funny when democrats make clear how much they hate the lower class. It’s funny you think your disgust for the lower class exercising their basic huamn rights upsets anyone on the right.

      “I got the hell off of the firing range as fast as I could”

      That says a lot about you and your condescension for your fellow man.

  11. Strange how the states with permit optional/Constitutional Carry have not had the bloodbaths and gunfights in the streets the anti gun folks predicted. Stranger still is the fact the majority of violent crime in the US is mostly in the cities and states with the harshest restrictions on firearm ownership or carry permits. Could it be due to the fact that the local miscreants have it figured out that unarmed victims are preferable to armed citizens who might fight back?
    Can any of the pro permit and pro background check crowd show any verifiable evidence of either set of laws has stopped any criminal or thug from either getting a firearm or prevented said miscreants from committing a crime?

  12. the violence is confined to liberal enclaves…where gun laws have no impact whatsoever as they are routinely ignored…

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here