ID - 2 year boy accidentally shoots and kills mother in walmart in ths US

[sonjay]

Just had a thought on Open Carry vs. CCW. I have to agree with Nova on this one. Although with Open Carry I'd be intimidated, I'd have the choice to leave Starbucks/Walmart, etc. when I saw their gun. With CCW, I'd be lulled into a false sense of security that there were no guns in public, when in reality, I'd be in far more danger and wouldn't have that informed choice to leave the place.

In reality, if you're surrounded by legal concealed-carry permit holders, you'd be in less danger than if you were surrounded by the population of non-CCW holders. Statistically speaking. No cherries on top.

 

[Brightbird]

More cherry picking. Australia this time.

It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

• In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
• Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
• Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847


If there are enough cherries to pick, does it eventually stop being cherry picking and become "research"? How many cherries are needed for that, exactly?

BBM. I don't think that's correct. From the link below there were 256 murders in 2006, with 41 of those by gun. In 1995, the year before the Port Arthur massacre there were 342 murders, with 67 by gun. That's 16% and 20% of murders committed with a gun, respectively.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia

 

[sonjay]

It is also a common fantasy of pro gun people that pointing to Australian stats from the early 2000's is proof of their argument. The rate of gun homicide has been trending downward for the last decade in Australia. Even then we're only talking differences less than 1%. You have more chance of being murdered with a gun in America than you do of being murdered by any means in Australia. Declining or not, guns still kill more people in America than in countries where there is stricter gun control. That link is also spurious because their definition of sexual assault in Australia is wrong. Sexual assault includes someone grabbing your breasts on the train.

Worldwide, there is no discernible correlation between rates of gun ownership and homicide rates. This is pretty much the whole darn cherry tree:

 

[Montjoy]

Uh..... I hate to be the one to break it to you, but people carry in Target too.

Yes, even though Target has requested that they do not bring firearms into their stores. Very respectful of gun owners.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/target-asks-customers-to-keep-guns-out-of-stores-1404311690

 

[CoolJ]

Repeating it endlessly still doesn't make it so.

In the absence of guns, criminals continue to assault and kill; they just do it using different weapons. Are deaths okay as long as they're not caused by guns? If you have 100 people murdered by someone wielding a hammer, vs. 100 people murdered by someone wielding a gun, are you happy with the number of murders because they're not caused by guns? Are the guns deaths needless but the hammer murders needed?

Why on earth would Australia's crime rate, and homicide rate, have gone up after they banned handguns? Or England's? Why on earth would Chicago's homicide rate have plunged after concealed carry was legalized? Why on earth would Vermont's crime rate, with its easy access to weapons, be among the lowest in the country, while D.C.'s crime rate, with its draconian gun control, be among the highest? These may be very tasty cherries, but they don't represent cherry picking; they represent large datasets, in large cities, in whole states, and in whole countries.

We will just have to agree to disagree I suppose.
You feel safer packing a gun in a nation where every other person is also packing. I can understand that.
But understand that I feel safer having never even seen a real life handgun in a nation where there virtually are no handguns and a very low homicide rate to boot.

 

[CoolJ]

In reality, if you're surrounded by legal concealed-carry permit holders, you'd be in less danger than if you were surrounded by the population of non-CCW holders. Statistically speaking. No cherries on top.

So it is the guns then after all!! I thought it was the people holding the gun?

 

[LinasK]

.....until a criminal enters your home & rest-assured it won't be gun-free any longer.

But I respect your position, L.

We all have to make our choices based on our own perceptions of risk.

Nope! NEVER. We have other measures for security- a large dog, knives, baseball bat, and outside lighting. I will never own a gun, nor will my husband have one in my presence. I have the local police programmed into my cell phone.
And I have had my apartment broken into previously.

 

[LinasK]

In reality, if you're surrounded by legal concealed-carry permit holders, you'd be in less danger than if you were surrounded by the population of non-CCW holders. Statistically speaking. No cherries on top.

Strongly disagree!!!

 

[LinasK]

It is gun-free until a rapist/robber/murderer comes into into it with a gun.

NOPE! NEVER in my household!!! I've had my apartment robbed and I'm a molestation victim. Still refuse to have a gun in my presence.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Nope! NEVER. We have other measures for security- a large dog, knives, baseball bat. I will never own a gun, nor will my husband have one in my presence. I have the local police programmed into my cell phone.
And I have had my apartment broken into previously.

You missed my point, Linask. The perp entering your home (Breaking & Entering...& I hope this never happens to you) will have the gun most likely.

Therefore, your house will no longer be "gun free".

I believe SStarr (posted above) was making the same point as me also.


Moo

 

[LinasK]

You missed my point, Linask. The perp entering your home (Breaking & Entering...& I hope this never happens to you) will have the gun most likely.

Therefore, your house will no longer be "gun free".

Moo

I still wouldn't get one after that if that's what you were thinking. I don't think that's the answer.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I still wouldn't get one after that if that's what you were thinking. I don't think that's the answer.

And that's fine. We all have a right to make our own choices.

I think that you should probably worry more about the convicted felons, repeat assaulters, those violating probation, those out awaiting sentencing for robbery, etc, etc standing next to you in a store than those law-abiding, licensed CCW citizens.

What propels my decision re: guns is that I never want to be a victim of someone breaking into my home (with weapons) & me being defenseless. A 911 call to LE isn't going to protect me in that dire moment.

Moo

 

[Caffeine]

Nope! NEVER. We have other measures for security- a large dog, knives, baseball bat. I will never own a gun, nor will my husband have one in my presence. I have the local police programmed into my cell phone.
And I have had my apartment broken into previously.

How quick are police to respond to emergencies in your area? I've had to call twice, one for a theft in progress, one for domestic violence issue. I lived 5 minutes from the station. They took 15 minutes both times. When seconds count police are always minutes away as the saying goes.

Knives and bats to me are inferior weapons. I don't want to go head to head with one or more intruders with a close range weapon.

If they have guns, well so do I. At least I have a fighting chance. I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it.

 

[SStarr33]

NOPE! NEVER in my household!!! I've had my apartment robbed and I'm a molestation victim. Still refuse to have a gun in my presence.

Not sure what prior robbery and molestation has to do with this???

And of course it is your choice to take the risk that the bad guy can easily shoot your dog and then do whatever he wants to do to you, your husband or your child. You are comfortable with that risk and I am not. I want a good chance against a bad guy with a gun.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

And that's fine. We all have a right to make our own choices.

I think that you should probably worry more about the convicted felons, repeat assaulters, those violating probation, those out awaiting sentencing for robbery, etc, etc standing next to you in a store than those law-abiding, licensed CCW citizens.

What propels my decision re: guns is that I never want to be a victim of someone breaking into my home (with weapons) & me being defenseless. A 911 call to LE isn't going to protect me in that dire moment.

Moo

BBM

That's the biggest problem I have with most gun control measures. The felons that already are prohibited from possessing guns and ammunition will hardly obey 10 round magazine laws, pistol grip bans, mandatory training and other assorted "safety measures" that are supposed to protect us. JMO.

 

[Montjoy]

That's the biggest problem I have with most gun control measures. The felons that already are prohibited from possessing guns and ammunition will hardly obey 10 round magazine laws, pistol grip bans, mandatory training and other assorted "safety measures" that are supposed to protect us. JMO.

By that sort of reasoning, I have to ask you the broader question: why have laws at all, if criminals are not going to obey them anyhow?

 

[Crimson clover]

Uh..... I hate to be the one to break it to you, but people carry in Target too.

Naw...ya not breaking nothing to me.
A misconstrued post...I am 'those' people.
I don't do Wal-Mart so much. Now, I'll have to delve in Target's gun policies here in Louisiana. I've seen the little lady security guard at the entrance. :facepalm:

 

[Deleted member 39678]

By that sort of reasoning, I have to ask you the broader question: why have laws at all, if criminals are not going to obey them anyhow?

I'm concerned about convicted criminals ignoring the gun prohibition laws that are already on the books. Further restrictions placed on law abiding citizens doesn't address that problem. That's the point I'm making.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Naw...ya not breaking nothing to me.
A misconstrued post...I am 'those' people.
I don't do Wal-Mart so much. Now, I'll have to delve in Target's gun policies here in Louisiana. I've seen the little lady security guard at the entrance. :facepalm:

Does this Target security guard carry a gun? Someone posted the other day that Walmart has security guards. I've never seen one at the Walmart I go to. I've seen cops being called there and arresting people for something but no security guards either armed or unarmed. Maybe it's just the case at the one I go to. JMO.

 

[sonjay]

BBM

That's the biggest problem I have with most gun control measures. The felons that already are prohibited from possessing guns and ammunition will hardly obey 10 round magazine laws, pistol grip bans, mandatory training and other assorted "safety measures" that are supposed to protect us. JMO.

Nope, criminals by definition don't obey the law. They don't obey the laws against assault, robbery, rape, murder..... Why does anyone think they would obey laws against standard-capacity magazines, concealed carry, barrel shrouds, shoulder things that go up, or any other alleged "gun violence prevention" laws?

Peaceful, law-abiding people obey those laws. People like Dr. Suzanna Gratia-Hupp, whose gun was in her car that day she went to Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Tx., because of the law. 23 people died that day, including both of Gratia-Hupp's parents. Dr. Hupp may or may not have been able to stop the carnage if she had her gun on her instead of in her car, but we'll never know. She didn't even have a chance to try, because she obeyed the law and left her gun in her car.

Who needs to pack heat at a family cafeteria? Isn't that as crazy as carrying at Wal-Mart?