Recently, I visited Austin, Texas, something I bring up not because mentioning it here allows me to take an income tax write-off for the expense of what was basically an extended booze-up. No, I mention it because my trip involved (inadvertently, I admit) an important public policy issue.
While I spent much of my time in the Lone Star State sampling excellent local beers and whiskeys (as well as memorable orders of chicken-fried wild boar and citrus-cured bacon), I also conducted (accidentally) some Serious Research. My wife and I were walking across the grounds of the Texas State House (it was the shortest route between two bars), where we observed several proud monuments to that state’s racist history, but also noticed a sizable demonstration on the building’s front steps.
A crowd of motorcyclists was listening to a speaker in suit and tie, who looked like the closest he ever got to motorized two-wheel transportation was a Sons of Anarchy box set. Meanwhile, off to the side, a second group of activists was erecting banners for another rally, this one promoting open carry.
Unfortunately, their interpretation of that phrase didn’t involve walking around town sipping cocktails. Instead, they wanted the right to wear a sidearm in public.
I was surprised that Texas, a state famous for its showdowns on Main Street at high noon, now prohibits the open carrying of handguns. Because it sure doesn’t have any law against openly carrying long guns. As we left the capitol grounds, we were passed by a half-dozen men and women headed for the rally, and dressed in camo, sunglasses and black berets. All of them were toting semi-automatic rifles.
You don’t see that in Maine. We have a law against black berets.
We also have a law that allows law-abiding citizens to openly carry handguns. It’s mostly for the convenience of hunters, although occasionally some kook will decide to test his constitutional right to be an idiot by parading through downtown Portland showing off his big pistol.
I’m not hinting at any Freudian interpretation of such incidents, but if you’d like to analyze it in that light, feel free.
Enough speculation about the anatomical deficiencies of weirdos. Back to guns. Maine allows far more firearm freedom than most states. But we do have one restriction of note. In order to carry a concealed weapon, you need a permit from your local police or the state cops. The approval process leaves plenty of room for these authorities to apply their own discretion. For instance, the applicant must be of “good moral character.” And yet, I know several politicians who qualified.
This law may not be on the books much longer. State Sen. Eric Brakey of Auburn is sponsoring legislation to allow anyone who isn’t otherwise prohibited from owning a handgun to carry it around hidden from view. Brakey, you may remember, is the libertarian-leaning Republican who earlier this session unsuccessfully tried to repeal the state’s seat belt law and has proposed welfare restrictions the U.S. Supreme Court has found unconstitutional. This makes him an easy target for gun-control advocates, who claim Brakey is an anti-government extremist – an assertion that seems reasonably accurate.
But even an extremist can have a lucid moment. And this might be Brakey’s.
There are two kinds of people who carry concealed weapons. Most are law-abiding citizens with permits. The rest are criminals without permits. The guy pulling the pistol out of his pants (hmmm) in order to convince the local pharmacist to hand over the opiates almost certainly didn’t bother to apply for a concealed-weapon permit before embarking on his crime spree. He probably wouldn’t qualify, what with his drug addiction and propensity for hold ups. Yet, he carries a hidden gun, anyway.
Likewise, hit men, bank robbers and drug dealers are unlikely to work through the red tape involved in getting properly permitted. The only people willing to endure that bureaucratic maze are folks with no intention of breaking the law.
In other words, the current statute is a burden for gun owners who aren’t causing any problems. For those with less honorable designs, it’s irrelevant.
Meanwhile, back in Texas, that open-carry bill appeared headed for passage, and the governor has said he’ll sign it. On my next trip to Austin, I expect to sit in my favorite bar and watch lawmen and outlaws blasting away at each other in the street.
As for those blasting away at Brakey, they need to realize that even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while.
Don’t conceal your opinion. Email me at aldiamon@herniahill.net.
What is the advantage of being able to legally conceal a weapon other than to alleviate the risk of being arrested for carrying a concealed weapon?
Several decades ago, I was encouraged by some friends to join them on a hunt for raccoons at night. As I recall, the only legal way to hunt them at night was to use a .22 handgun. I was also advised that, it was a good idea to get a concealed carry permit, as that way I could not get in trouble with law enforcement if I was carrying a loaded handgun at night. So I got a concealed carry permit.
It was very cool. I bought a shoulder holster. I tried wearing a suit coat over it. I imagined James Bond scenarios.
The reality of night hunting turned out to be less exciting than anticipated. The shoulder holster was uncomfortable and my wife thought I looked foolish wearing it. I was at a complete loss as to what or why I would ever need to wear it.
After a few years had passed, I found the permit in my desk drawer. It had expired. I saw no reason to renew it. I sold the holster at a yard sale.
That was nearly thirty years ago. In all that time, I never once regretted not having that permit. I have hand guns. I use them. I sometimes carry them. I have no need or desire to hide them. In fact, I have thought just the opposite; better that others see that I am armed. When you see a law enforcement officer,carrying a handgun in a holster, doesn’t the sight of the gun on his/her hip signal something?
Does being able to carry a hidden gun help the state of Maine’s economy? Does it lower the unemployment rate? Raise wages? Reduce the state debt? Lower taxes? Improve education? Improve infrastructure?
Aid seniors?
Is that what we elect and pay our legislators to do; make switch blades legal, concealed weapons legal, legalize not wearing seat belts?
Don’t we have real problems, real issues that can improve people’s lives? Isn’t that what our government is supposed to be doing?
“Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America is a grassroots movement of American mothers fighting for public safety measures that respect the Second Amendment and protect people from gun violence.”
https://momsdemandaction.org/in-the-news/exas-moms-condemn-house-for-ignoring-texas-business-and-voting-for-open-carry-without-signage-fix/
It’s a Constitutional right, that’s why. We are not paying legislators to make concealed carry legal … we unfortunately find ourselves in the position of having to pay them to stop making it ILLEGAL ….
Al:
While people have every right to wear their pajama bottoms to the Walmart, I don’t believe passing legislation enshrining it as a right is necessarily in the best public interest. So too with the proposed elimination of the concealed carry permit. Making it easier for anyone with a pistol to walk around with it does not make the world safer. As for open carry, open carry is to the 2nd Amendment as truck nuts are to the 1st Amendment. It’s completely legal and also a visible identifier of one’s status as a nitwit.
So if a citizen wants to openly carry a handgun which he should have a right to do, if he is law abiding, he is dubbed a kook and an idiot? History has shown that the real kooks and idiots are men like you who seem such behavior is idiotic. Men like yourself wind up in serfdom, after a generation or two.
Karen; The Supreme court, (even today’s court, that is willing to bend and stretch the rulings of previous courts), has determined that the 2nd Amendment does not grant full and unlimited use of arms to all citizens at all times. It has further determined that those limitations can be further limited by the states.
For example, the ban on full automatic weapons without a special permit has been upheld numerous times.
Arms, as weapons are referred to in the 2nd. are not just guns- arms can be anything from knives, swords and guns up to cruise missiles and beyond. Clearly, we must have limits.
How come nobody has mass protests and petitions the courts over the 7th amendment? I doubt most of the fanatics who are so vociferously passionate over the 2nd amendment could even recite the rest of the Bill rights, or the rest of the constitution.
I suspect that much of the impetus for this law comes from women who want to carry a gun but for decorum wish it to be in their handbag.
How many women lose their handbags? In my experience with a mother, girlfriends, wives and daughters, it’s a fairly common occurrence. How many bags are stolen? My sister’s once was. My wife’s was too.
Have trouble with a jury, Snowman? In all seriousness, the right to a personal firearm is exactly what the Second Amendment addresses … in fact, it addresses the right to, and indeed the necessity of, such arms so as to be able to muster a militia if necessary. And in those days, the militia was for protection from abuse of authority. That is the context. They were not discussing ginzu knives, boomerangs or bolos, they were talking about firearms. And what we are talking about here is concealed carry of personal firearms. I still don’t see your problem with that: I think Al actually hit the nail on the head with this one (don’t let it go to your head, Al!). Don’t even get me started on the ladies with purses thing, now you’re just being silly.
Mom killed in Wal-Mart accidental shooting kept gun in …
http://www.cbsnews.com/…/mom-killed-in-wal-mart-accidental-shoo...
CBS News
Jan 1, 2015 – Veronica Rutledge’s new purse was designed to carry concealed … She leaves a loaded weapon within reach of a child, totally reckless!
Parents Shot by Toddler Who Found Pregnant Mom’s Gun …
ktla.com/…/parents-shot-by-toddler-charged-with-child-abuse-in-n…
KTLA
Feb 6, 2015 – The parents of a toddler have been charged with child abuse after their … “[The father] knew the firearm was inside [the mother’s] purse.” … Father of 3 Shot, Killed by Police After Wild Pursuit Ends in Multi-Vehicle Cr…
“We live in an imperfect world full of people, some of whom are stupid, and others just hateful. Not everyone is going to “get” the whole “safety training” thing. As this man proves. He had a loaded gun on him, safety off – who does that?”
http://americablog.com/2012/12/kids-find-loaded-gun-in-movie-theater.html
Karen:
I think you need better history lessons regarding militias in colonial america and in the states during and after the war of independence.
Don’t just listen to what the NRA tells you; find the facts.
Also, do some research on supreme court decisions regarding the 2nd amendment. Read the actual decisions, not the synopsis provided by the NRA and gun advocates.
The purpose of a militia was not protection from authority; it was for the common defense of the people from any external or internal threats that may arise, such as conflicts with native aboriginal peoples or attack or encroachment by for powers. Recall that at the the time, the United States had Spanish territory to the south and West, French Territory to the West and British to the North.
The Bill of Rights original intent was focused primarily on granting those rights to the States. Later amendments to the constitution were then interpreted as granting those rights to individuals.
Arms, as applied to arming militias, were clearly not limited to small arms. Guns at that time were all single shot, nearly all were low accuracy muskets, they were very susceptible not working in in-climate conditions and thus quite limited in effectiveness. Often times a sword was the weapon of choice, especially when used by cavalry. A cavalry charge was one of the most formidable and effective battle strategies at that time. Cannons were owned by militias, with accompanying gun powder and shot. Having a supply of powder for those cannon was considered as part of the militias arsenal. In fact, it was the storage of gunpowder that led to the battle of Lexington and Concorde, Paul Revere’s ride, etc.
How come we don’t hear any squabbling over the right to own explosives? How come nobody wants the right to be able to walk around with a pound of TNT around their waist?
This would be an extremely effective manner of self-defense; attack me, and I will blow all of us up.
Like, mutual assured destruction. It worked so well in the Cold War.
Why would anyone want to legally carry concealed rather than open?
How about the gun-grabber crowd that goes wild when they see a perfectly legal, constitutionally-protected firearm on someone’s side, and calls the police out of nothing more than the fear brought on by ignorance? In more than a few cases, people have bee KILLED by police this way when they are reported as “potential robbers”. I suppose that makes gun-grabbers happy (#people using their rights lives matter). Al points this out with his comment on the ‘kooks in Portland’….just SEEING a firearm often leads those who don’t know their rights to the brink of panic. We need to (further) shelter them from the evils of freedom, I suppose. Even tho these rights extend to ALL…
The arguments against sound a lot like how the Southern Democrats viewed minorities just a FEW short years ago, doesn’t it? People using their GUARANTEED rights treated with derision – as kooks, nuts, dangerous – almost inhuman….yet EVERY SINGLE metric, including those compiled by Holder’s Dept. of Justice/FBI, show that an armed citizen is a GOOD thing, a responsible citizen. But, but – the emotionally-driven lies spouted by Bloomberg’s folks (“Moms….” and “Everytown…”) sound so CONVINCING, don’t they? Makes you FEEL a certain way (exit logic).
For every story of tragedy (and yes, there are a VERY few….same as with cars, boats, and swimming, the most dangerous act a child can do) there are 10 or 20, or more, cases where firearms have SAVED lives, in the home and away from it, and empowered WOMEN and MINORITIES to avoid becoming a victim (and a statistic).
Oh for the days when people used logic and intellect to ponder a question rather than emotion and “feelings”! “Just one child saved”….yes, we agree. And supporting YOUR freedoms has this effect. Make carry easier, more moms will do it, more lives saved. End of story.
“…just SEEING a firearm often leads those who don’t know their rights to the brink of panic.” Think about it, OverRegulated: How would you FEEL if somebody who looked like a “Hell’s Angel” or some “minority” was walking around town with a hand gun? Silly me! Open-carry is for the white good-ol’-boys who know what’s best for everyone.
OverRegulated:
If you actually believe that having an aversion to someone openly carrying a firearm in public, is akin to being a racist, that what a person freely chooses to do without coercion, to openly display a device that has one and only one purpose; to kill, is somehow even remotely related to harboring a sentiment of intolerance and hate towards a person who are as they are through no will of their own but rather through either divine grace or inherited genetics; if you believe that, you are a defective human being. I have no other way to say it and I hope the BullDog editors publish it.
to A Mom, stories like this exist too!
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-driver-with-concealed-handgun-prevents-mass-shooting-in-chicago-2015-4
Yes, I feel that people who have no concept of individual liberty and who panic re. the ownership and carry of firearms by others, and who react in a way that endangers them – by their OWN IGNORANCE….and who push for policies to remove these peoples’ rights (which Everytown- and Mothers- are actively engaging in)…are no different at all than those who would oppress minorities and the rights they fought to have applied to them. It’s a civil rights issue equal and as important as any other. That gun has more than one purpose, but its main one is SELF DEFENSE. But why should I be surprised at your hateful reaction, when today ppl have no trouble at all with having their 1st and 4th Amendment rights violated constantly? You’re a sheep.
Elmira: I know black people who carry, who enjoy ownership of firearms – a good percentage do. I know you like to speak for minorities, as if they have no ability to speak for themselves (that liberal arrogance again)…so here we go again, back to race – these rights, as with your right to assemble, to speak freely about the government, to practice your religion in peace…are for ALL. Funny how you and snowman fail to be able to equate the 2nd Amendment (“keep and BEAR arms….”) to the other rights GUARANTEED in the Bill of Rights. If you don’t like this, it would behoove you to start a movement to change the Constitution. Did you know that “Stand Your Ground” benefits minorities MORE than whites in FL? Seems that you eat up the propaganda and ask for seconds…
“Defective human being”….so, my support for my constitutional rights makes me defective. Wow. I should put that right on the back burner, because YOU said so…if not, I’m “defective”. Just as was said about people like Martin Luther King; it’s really quite tragic that people like you can’t see how SIMILAR you are to those who oppressed minorities, and who helped get the Nazi Part, the Bolsheviks, Khmer Rouge into power. Perhaps you don’t see the whole picture; it’s not ‘one little thing’, it’s death by 1,000 cuts.
Do you feel as hateful about people speaking out about things they disagree with, or is it only “THAT” Amendment? Or do you fight for speech that YOU approve of, but not any other? Are you able to see how YOU are defining MY right based on what YOU want?
Hypocrite.
Over regulated: Where did you find the statistics on the 10 or 20 times the tragedy rate, guns save and protect lives? Must be one heck of a data base to be so concise.
Start counting please: Recently a child shot another child with a 12 gauge shotgun, that had been foolishly left out in the open and loaded. The tragedy. Now please document for me the ten to twenty times that people have been saved by carrying guns, or even having them safey stored in their homes. Will a week be enough time? 10 to 20 times 1 in a week?
Ready, begin…
I have argued before and commented almost word for word the following in the past with others, but, I will credit another famous person as to not be accused of committing a literary theft;
“They have Gun Control in Cuba, they have Universal Health Care in Cuba, so why do they want to come here?”
Paul Harvey Aurandt (1918-2009)
I can only add that; since our dear leader and his supporters are trying to force us into the same state that Cuba finds itself and in addition, with the current deals he is negotiating with Cuba I find it odd that those that think we should follow in step with Cuba’s policies are not rushing to the airport in droves and leave us here alone with our constitutional rights not infringed?
The anti-gun folks would come off better if they didn’t instantaneously resort to baseless assumptions and personal attacks when someone disagrees with them. I’m not going to sink to that level. Snowman, neither you nor anyone else here knows me, knows my politics, knows my educational level, or anything else. You might wish to know that paternalistic males don’t so much irritate me as make me snicker. But then you might not.
It’s ironic that the same haters of this country and what it stands for, freedom, protection from, liberties, etc., will not leave this country and buy or even take a free one way ticket to the same countries that repressed people leave from at the risk of harm or death, by whatever means, even in near sinking vessels, death trains or desert treks?
I was in college in Florida during the Mariel Boat invasions, and what I noticed first hand, (and odd at first and pertinent to this article), was that the Marielitos, as they were called, bought a gun, a beater car then rented a cheap apartment and always in that order. Now, we can argue all day long and write volumes as to why they did that and watch reruns of Scarface, etc., finding ourselves to believe and begin to know why…only to realize that in fact it is that very simple; they all wanted to have what they could not have in their country. And here we are, arguing, debating and even “killing” ourselves in order to give it all away?
Thinking – what’s your source re. the shotgun accident? You ‘require’ me to provide you with qualified data….Nah, I won’t bust on you, I know that’s true. And accidents happen, mostly due to the idiocy of some people. You can’t fix stupid. NOBODY wants anyone to be harmed, with a gun or not – which may be one big thing being left out of this….even the horrible and defective human gun owners feel this way. But – at the end of the day – the #1 killer of children in the U.S. is – swimming pools. Most accidental deaths ARE due to someone’s negligence. With rights come responsibilities; 99.99% of people know this. Cars kill kids, too.
This isn’t germane to the conversation at hand, tho – but it does further reinforce that those against constitutional carry are against gun ownership in general, and it’s why people like me (kooks) speak up, and feel our rights to be threatened. Because they are.
For your edification, I recommend you do your own research, and go read the report by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council – remember, the study conducted under The Ruler’s executive order? He didn’t get the results he wanted. Do some homework, and you’ll find that firearms are used for lawful self defense somewhere in between the (very low Lefty estimate) of 108,000x per year, to a (NRA posted high) of 2 to 3 million. In a population of 310 million plus, accidents and homicides involving firearms are actually not statistically ‘large’. Nowhere near so….there are MANY other causes of death which we simply ignore. Again automobiles being perhaps the biggest overall.
Are firearms accidents preventable? With proper EDUCATION (rather than ignorance; hiding in the dark), a great many surely are. Farm kids don’t tend to play with dad’s gun – for a reason.
The root of this argument is simply that part of the population thinks their neighbors can’t be ‘trusted’ with firearms.
Doesn’t say much about their view of other people, and perhaps themselves. The word for this is “hoplophobia”.
Snowman, it sounds like your family is irresponsible with their belongings. Gun control won’t cure that.
A mom. I could provide countless links to articles where handguns in the hands of ordinary citizens prevented violent crime and resulted in getting violent criminals off the street. But why waste my time. You have obviously made up your mind, facts and data be damned.
Over regulated:
Go read the US Supreme Court decisions regarding gun restrictions and the 2nd amendment. Read all of them. They’re right on the internet. Slow reading, but not too difficult to follow. Won’t take all that long.
As I wrote above, even today’s Court’s majority rulings, which have expanded and broadened all previous court’s interpretations of it, have agreed that there can, must and will be restrictions to the second amendment.
If the NRA thought for a nanosecond that there was even the slightest chance that they could get the court to pass a judgement that all citizens have the complete and un-infringable right to walk about with a concealed handgun, they would have petitioned the court for a ruling.
They have not. Even those wackos that have manipulated people like you into a paranoid frenzied fit of government oppression, have not wanted to take the issue that far.
The US Supreme court is no friend of the administration. They have not been manipulated by what your ilk sadly believe is a dictator/president. They have not been unduly influenced by liberals.
I do believe that they all, are patriots of the first order and extremely intelligent and learned people.
I therefor am firmly in the belief that they have a far, far better understanding of constitutional rights than you.
I am happy that I do not inhabit a mind such as yours.
Insanity: “When guns are everywhere, only people with guns will have guns!”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/05/19/1299907/-Cartoon-Guns-everywhere?detail=email
When I read Elmiras comments I get the same exact reaction as when I hear the squeeky , hysterical , pompous voice of Rush Limbaugh or Howie Carr.
They will Never change any minds.
And neither will you Elmira..
You extremists are just preaching to your own choirs.
Congratulations on accomplishing nothing.
“Investigators say…gun was inside a diaper bag when it fired.”
http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/28791819/mother-charged-after-gunfire-at-bargain-hunt-in-southaven
That’s the stupidest quote I’ve read in a long time..
“When guns are everywhere, only people with guns will have guns!”
Only people with guns will have guns? Did you even think to proof read and or analyze that statement? Coming from Elmira, I doubt it.
So, only people with cars, will have cars … only people with jelly beans will have jelly beans … or … well, I think you get the drift.
Guess what? Rights are rights…they don’t require defense, or even explanation. You’re not entitled to that. This is the 2nd time you’ve wished to label me ‘defective’ in some way, which is a major component of the abusive personality…can’t push back the idea, destroy the person. Alinsky tactics – good work. Don’t look at truth and fact, just buzzwords and propaganda. Use emotion rather than logic. All it really means is that one is acting like a smarmy little dirtbag.
I’m well aware of the restrictions that SCOTUS has placed on the 2nd Amendment, Snowball. That’s fine, most everyone has accepted them…have you read “Heller”, by the way? You now seem to want to jump to SCOTUS for ‘backing’…funny, as they’ve leaned more toward my position than yours of late. SCOTUS ‘interprets’ these rights; however, there was a time when they were firm in their belief that slavery was just FINE….so I find it hard to simply accept whatever they rule on as ‘fact’. It is mutable; changes with the times, which is actually unfortunate. Luckily we get ‘settled law’ eventually, and right to keep & bear IS settled. Lets keep your position in mind when the issue of Citizens United comes up :)
Have I advocated for ‘unrestricted access’ or anything like that? NO. YOU have put that out there, not me. I said that I support constitutional carry, because people who are hoplophobic (irrational fear of guns) have been calling about seeing a firearm. I should have clarified that. Some groups have been reported to be setting up lawful gun owners, trying to set up CONFRONTATIONS with police, if they see them USING THEIR RIGHTS to open carry (hence my reference to civil rights….theirs are openly being violated this way). A couple of these confrontations have been deadly, whether set up or not. Shot to death for exercising your rights. It makes sense for an otherwise ‘vetted’ citizen to be able to CC….again, the bad guy will just do what they want; they will do it anyway.
Is this, or is it not, the law? (Maine Constitution): Section 16. To keep and bear arms. Every citizen has a right to keep and BEAR arms and this right shall NEVER BE QUESTIONED. Sounds to me like yes, it’s being openly questioned, and has many times in the past via the permit process.
‘Paranoid’ view of gov’t? MORE personal insult?….EVERY gov’t on earth is simply the application of force, and the smaller the gov’s power in relation to the citizen, the more freedom you will have. Source? George Washington….wow, how paranoid and extreme. You only enjoy the right to call people names (having run out of intellectual weight, I presume) because of folks like him, who wished the citizens to be the MASTER of gov rather than the other way around. People like you, Snowball, want it to be just the opposite. You WISH for a ‘master’ to just wrap it all up nice n clean (fantasy). That’s scary. You don’t trust your neighbors to have full rights, yet wish to hand all that power to a gov made up of…..who? Same ppl. Sounds like a NAIVE view of gov. and what its role is, and should be….the view of a sheep…
FTown: Colorado campus carry: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/20/colorado-campus-carry-12-years-no-mass-shootings-no-crimes-by-permit-holders/
Women empowered to defend themselves against rapists/robbers…sounds like a good thing to me!
Dang it, Snowman, you might’ve told me sooner that you could become an authority on the Constitution just by reading a few Court rulings on the internets. I’m tellin’ ya, why, oh why, did I waste all that money on tuition?? … You’ll have to excuse me now, I seem to have misplaced my purse.
“Nobody, save perhaps for the hardcore gun lobby, doubts that gun violence is a serious problem. In an editorial in the April 7 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, a team of doctors wrote: “It does not matter whether we believe that guns kill people or that people kill people with guns—the result is the same: a public health crisis.” ”
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/04/true-cost-of-gun-violence-in-america
Here’s all you Liberal nitwits need to know:
The average response time on a 911 phone call is 23 minutes.
The average response time from my .357 magnum handgun is 1450 fps.
Whether one carries open or applies for a CC permit is his or her Constitutional right- whether you libs and leftists and like it or not. The right to defend one’s self, one’s home or family or property is God given and not by the government.
There ought to be a law that protects the sane from having to sift through the inane BS posted here but alas- there is none! The first Amendment protects you even when we have to decipher your mindless drivel- we don’t like to but we would NEVER deny your right to espouse your moronic opinions. But I digress…
In the interest of public Safety:
how many people were killed by hammers last year? (answer is: more by hammers than handguns)
How many people were last year killed by cell phones?
No, hammers DO NOT kill more people than guns.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2013/02/paul_broun_says_hammers_and_baseball_bats_kill_more_people_than_guns_is.html
For clarification, the article above is referencing legislation that would get rid of the CCP not some door-to-door government gun confiscation program. If all we can do is go by the Maine Constitution, is there any recourse to the possession of weapons by convicted felons or the dangerously mentally ill?
I can understand why Mr. Holt might feel the need to be armed. Anyone who takes that tone is probably in continual need of self-protection.
Hammers? This crowd gets stranger by the day. Ball peen,sledge or claw?
I think he (JRH…), was being a little rhetorical, because we are starting to get a little frustrated with the “BS” and endless cynical remarks trying to lead us into a rabbit hole. Hammers, pools, a banana peel and even guns are all possible causes of accidents and or may lead to death. Any reasonable person will agree, however, when it comes to “Guns” all bets are off with those whose only agenda is to get rid of them or create a state of panic and legislative nightmare that makes lawful individuals into criminals. You can’t conduct a random experiment on any one cause on one side and then pile on indiscriminately, data to support your position. Most “stats” that are quoted to demonstrate “numbers” of deaths by guns are usually including all deaths by the use of a gun whether accidental, justified, law enforcement and gang bangers. There are too many variables to contend with, so, instead, researchers are left with statistical models, which are “very fragile,” as says (Charles F. Wellford, who was chair of the committees that authored a lengthy 2004 report on this topic by the National Research Council of the National Academies. These models are subject to what control variables researchers use. “Everyone knows there’s other things than guns that cause crime,” says Wellford, a professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland. So these models become very complex and slight changes can cause very different results, he says).
“The CDC’s most current data show there were 11,078 homicides committed with guns in 2010 — or about 30 per day. The CDC data also show gun homicides have declined each year since 2007, falling from 12,791 in 2006 to 11,078 in 2010, even as the nation’s population grows. In fact, the homicide rate in 2010 (3.6 per 100,000 people) was the lowest since at least 1981 — which is as far back as the CDC’s online database goes. The FBI collects murder data, too, but academic researchers we consulted said the CDC data is the more accurate measure of gun murders. CDC gets its data from the National Vital Statistics System, which collects death certificates that are required to be filed in every state.”
Eighteen experts participated in the National Research Council (NRC) report, including those in criminology, sociology, psychology, economics, public health and statistics. The NRC’s conclusion: “In summary, the committee concludes that existing research studies and data include a wealth of descriptive information on homicide, suicide, and firearms, but, because of the limitations of existing data and methods, do not credibly demonstrate a causal relationship between the ownership of firearms and the causes or prevention of criminal violence or suicide.”
Those are the facts, they are irrefutable, and I looked it up: FBI and CDC data, most agree (oh; intelligent, reasonable and rational person, that is) as a valid source.
And as another example is yes, hammers and blunt objects do kill more than “all” rifles, shotguns combined. And before your panties get in a bind, remember that suicides account for almost 60% of death with a firearm. Which just adds to my original point that its not that simple to blame guns as really being the major or even significant cause of deaths as compared to other causes. Anyway straight from the FBI: “…there were a total of 625 murders committed with rifles and shotguns in 2012. That breaks down to 322 murders that were rifle related and 303 that were shotgun related.
The total number of deaths committed with fists, hammers, and other blunt objects was 1,196. That breaks down to 518 murders related to hammers and blunt objects and 678 related to fists.”
Slate.com is a GREAT source of information, Bwahahaha! Not. FBI is better. Tend not to be so partisan (Holder’s influence notwithstanding).
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2008-2012.xls
The point stated was Hammers vs. HANDGUNS. Not “guns”. More lib lack of understanding I guess.
For a society of 310+million, I’ll accept 12,700 or so gun deaths (all guns, and 2000 less than 2008) in order to keep my freedom. Because I know that those were CRIMINALS that caused them, NOT the people we are talking about. Guess we need more COPS (altho they are hated and blamed, too). This tangent is irrelevant, unless you change the Constitution….and nobody need defend or justify their rights, since of course…they are rights. Libs LOVE experts, never stopping to think that little groups of them may just in fact have a political agenda…
“According to the FBI, there were a total of 625 murders committed with rifles and shotguns in 2012. That breaks down to 322 murders that were rifle related and 303 that were shotgun related.
The total number of deaths committed with fists, hammers, and other blunt objects was 1,196. That breaks down to 518 murders related to hammers and blunt objects and 678 related to fists.
Taken together, the rate of murder by fists and hammers was nearly 100 percent higher than the rate of murder by rifles or shotguns.”
If people actually cared about PEOPLE and not propaganda, they’d take a close look at child deaths by swimming pools – ALL 100% preventable. It’s an EPIDEMIC. So are deaths by AUTOMOBILE. Nope, gotta go for the wedge issue, of course. “Us against those REDNECKS”
What people are focused on emotionally are CRIMINALS who are killing people, mostly in INNER CITIES (cue Elmira and race please). This emotional chaos is churned up by politicians in order to divide, and to gain votes. There’s no end to what they’ll stoop to get ‘your support’, even though it’s about things you don’t really have a good understanding of.
And re. constitution/never be questioned….felons….hmm….after you ‘do your time’, aren’t you ‘innocent’ again? I’ve always wondered how we can treat a felon like a ‘subhuman’, forever, after they’ve paid their debt to society. Perhaps they’re not ready to be OUT OF JAIL YET, so rather than worry about them having their rights as citizens, we need to keep them in longer?? When they wrote the constitution, those folks would probably have been hanged. And the number of crimes that would be felonies were FAR fewer. We are “over regulated”, clearly.
“…firearms are one of the top three causes of death among children, killing twice as many kids as cancer does.”
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/01/27/3206581/kids-gun-violence-killed-injuries/
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/5/e1416.full
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/drowning-lead-cause-of-death-kids_n_5155542.html
Just so you know,
From your own cited story:
“In its early, more modest form, the argument is plausible. Rifles killed 323 people in 2011, and shotguns killed 356—both lower totals than blunt objects racked up that year. Of course, the blunt objects category includes more than just baseball bats and hammers, but only a portion of rifle deaths involve assault rifles.”
…just so every one knows….
Seamus,
It’s really this simple- the average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes.
Whether I carry or not is my decision based on where I am or where I am going. Sometimes my risk of becoming a target is higher due to the nature of my work, the amount of cash I might have on my person and where I travel to and from.
Here’s a couple of scenarios for you:
Someone storms into your church screaming, Aluha Akbar! What do YOU do?
You are at the movie theater when you hear a succession of gunshots. What do YOU do?
You are at home alone and a stranger insists on coming through your door to make an emergency phone call… what do YOU do?
I’m just saying… the right to own and carry is not a debatable point for me. It is Mine and YOUR CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHT. I understand that some don’t want a firearm and their reasons for that. I at least, respect their decision. The problem is that some of those who choose not think they can impose their political will on others; which is the very basis for the 2nd Amendment.
BTW, no 2nd Amendment you can kiss the 1st and 5th Amendments goodbye as well…think it through…
the thought police here took down my earlier post responding to the hammer vs guns article.
If you read near the end of the article it plainly states more people died from Blunt traumas than rifles (guns)
About two years ago, some moro.. luna.. idio.. 2 3 4 .. some fellow citizen strapped a toy gun on his belt and strolled around downtown Farmington. The results were as predictable as sunrise. Some citizens became afraid and called the police to come protect them. Later some other citizens hyperventilated about the right of a moro.. luna.. idio.. 2 3 4 .. fellow citizen to carry openly a squirt gun – for his protection.
The mission of police is 99% reactionary – they arrest people who commit crimes. They do not make people feel safe by attempting to prevent other people from committing crimes. That’s Minority Report stuff.
The 2nd amendment is what it is and it’s amusing to watch the contortions some will go to attempting to turn it into something else. The 1st amendment is much more important, which is why the current administration is actively trying to destroy it – making it imperative to preserve the 2nd.
Al, I lived in TX for about a year. I quickly got used to the hats and boots, the rack with a rifle in the back window of every pickup, and the open carry. What I couldn’t get used to was the constant spitting of big brown quids into spittoons. But, what the hey, it’s freedom of expression. And from way up above …
The Bill of Rights original intent was focused primarily on granting those rights to the States.
Nope. The granting was done by another agency long before there was a USA – to states and individuals the world over. The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to preserve, protect, and defend those already granted rights from infringement by government. That purpose is under severe assault now. Let’s hope it survives.