English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In Sarah Thomspon essay "Concealed Carry Prevents Violent Crimes" she believe that people shouldn't be able to carry concealed weapons. Do you agree? Why or Why not?

2007-10-08 06:05:18 · 24 answers · asked by Serious1 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

24 answers

I don't think legalizing concealed weapons will do anything but make more guns available for crimes. It also raises concerns about untrained users who end up being hurt or killed by their own weapons being turned on them.
The criminal elements already carry concealed weapons and de-criminalizing it will only serve to get those criminals lighter sentences.

2007-10-08 06:20:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

Don't listen to the Canadiennes - they're just a bunch of wusses who gave up their rights to own guns long ago. They blame the guns for the crime instead of the criminal. The gun is merely the tool the criminal chooses, not the cause of the crime. They make judgements of the U.S. when they don't have any idea of what they're talking about or the guts to stand up to their own government to preserve their own rights. Maybe we should annex their @$$es and give 'em their balls back ...

I believe everybody should have the right to carry a weapon of their choice, as long as they are properly trained in it's uses and the restrictions imposed by the law on when it can be used.

I also believe that if a person chooses NOT to carry a weapon, that is their right as well. Just don't come crying to me when you're the victim of a crime and without the option to defend yourself. Or even worse, you're the central figure in a chalk portrait on the street ...

It has been proven over and over again in cities and states where concealed carry has been allowed, that violent crime (murder, rape, assault with a deadly weapon, etc.) decreases because the criminals do NOT know who is armed and who isn't armed. Criminals ALWAYS will go for those that they know will not be able to resist them.

Calling the police when you are threatened by a criminal is an exercise in futility. You WILL become a statistic in the police records. A "surviving" victim if you are lucky. An outline in chalk if you are not. When the perpetrators are beating on your front door, call 9-1-1 and Pizza Hut and see who gets there first. Hopefully, the crooks will leave you enough to pay for your pizza.

Banning guns has absolutely nothing to do with safety or crime control. It has everything to do with "people control." An armed person is a "citizen" - an unarmed person is a "subject." As long as there are armed citizens, a government cannot take complete control. One of the first actions taken by people like Hitler, Castro, Lenin, Mao, and other dictators in recent history was the disarming of the general public so that only the government had firearms.

... Besides, Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my entire arsenal!!

2007-10-08 13:49:39 · answer #2 · answered by Big Jon 5 · 1 1

I'd ask Ms. Thompson to show me some statistics on how many crimes were stopped because someone was carrying a concealed weapon. In my lifetime, I have not heard of one incident where some lucky person happened to be carrying a gun and managed to prevent a crime. But pro-gun advocates always bring this up. Also in my lifetime, I've noticed the people that carry concealed guns usually have quite a few enemies and wouldn't hesitate to use their weapon against them. I'm sure this doesn't cover all people, but still it makes me wonder why I keep hearing concealed guns are so great and yet I see no worthwhile result from them.

2007-10-08 13:22:24 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0 4

It is not about being legal to carry guns. It is a question of when and where guns cannot be carried. Absent a law to the contrary, it is legal to carry a gun in the US. The more armed law abiding citizens we have, the less likely there will be crime.

2007-10-08 13:08:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

people have the right to bare arms in the U.S. witch should also carry over into concealed firearms, but some liberal states feel they need to protect their citizens by not allowing responsible gun owners the right to carry a gun. owners who have been through courses and interviews with law enforcement to even own a hand gun. And i have heard arguments for tougher gun laws, but what most Americans don't understand is that there are thousand of unenforced gun laws on the books already. We need to strip them down and just follow the second amendment.
As for you Canadians mind your own business. we don't want your universal health care, where you have to Waite 6 to 18 months to even see a doctor.(hope its nothing serious) and we sure as sh!t don't want your F@G European gun laws.
THIS IS AMERICA WHERE IF I WANT TO CRACK OPEN A BEER AND SQUEEZE OF A FEW HUNDRED ROUNDS FROM AM AK-47 THAN GOD DAM-IT I WILL........

2007-10-08 13:38:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

I carry a concealed glock every day.. Its the people illegally buying guns and filing the serial numbers off. I have mine registered and carry it concealed and if the s#it ever hit the fan im not going to die by some gangbanger..

2007-10-08 13:09:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 7 0

For people with no criminal history, yes. There was a 20/20 special on not long ago about this subject. It talked about so many crimes that where prevented because an innocent person was armed. I know there will be incidents where 2 drunken idiots shoot each other but if people where packing the average criminal would think twice.

2007-10-08 13:09:18 · answer #7 · answered by Zenkai 6 · 5 1

To some extent yes. There constitution grants the right to keep and bear arms, but not carry them on the street. That should be regulated quite well - still there are probably tens of thousands of people maybe even hundreds of thousands that are of sound mind and body who would put in the time necessary to train themselves and carry a firearm responsibly.

Evidence you might go back to the 1970's when a fully automatic weapons license was required by the federal government to own such a gun - there were about 200,000 such licenses issued and in 20 years not one of those guns were ever used in a crime - still they banned them out of pure emotion.

Read the book: "More Guns Less Crime" it was written by an author who set out to prove the opposite - but was honest with his research and reporting.

2007-10-08 13:10:01 · answer #8 · answered by netjr 6 · 3 3

I believe in the right to defend one's home but concealed carry is different. People carrying concealed weapons in today's society are too likely to get angry while carrying a loaded weapon and take their anger out on whoever's around. Even "trained"people like the deputy sheriff who just killed 6 people lose self control.

I read that somewhere between 10% and 30% of people you see driving are carrying. That can't lead to any good outcome. You can easily see someone angered because somebody else cut them off, etc., etc.

2007-10-08 13:18:05 · answer #9 · answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6 · 1 3

It IS legal for people to carry guns with a permit......but do you think the criminals care about getting a piece of paper for their guns? I believe I should be able to carry a weapon....I want a fair chance if someone threatens me with one.

2007-10-08 13:08:22 · answer #10 · answered by Blue Oyster Kel 7 · 6 0

fedest.com, questions and answers