County Commissioner Carries Gun to Meetings

[tblwdc]

I'm sure for most folks, it would, given his position and experience. For me, no, but I'm biased about the worth of my opinion, as are most folks. I didn't even say you had to give his opinion more weight than your own, just pointed out what his opinion was. But I'll certainly give his more than yours.

So, as suspected, his opinion doesn't matter much but you want to project it to others. Have you looked at the crime stats for Detroit? 96 homicides so far. In May they had 17 shootings in one weekend. So that doesn't really jive with that city being safer now does it? For violent crime, the rate is higher than Baltimore. How could that be?

The difference between you and I, is I'm not basing my information on opinions, I'm basing it on facts. The fact is, Detroit is a city which has shall issue laws. The fact is it's one of the most violent cities in America. Shall issue does little to reduce crime.

 

[glhs837]

I didnt say his opinion didn't matter much, you are trying to put words in my mouth. And I would say to you that Detroit is a special case. Not many US cities have had population that has dropped by more than half in a little less than 50 years, from 1.7 million to 700,000, leaving blight and desolation in it's wake. And I never claimed it made the city safer, statistically, did I? What I said was that the Chief feels the individuals will be safer carrying. Each bad guy shot and killed by a good guy means one less bad guy to kill some good person.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/justified_to_kill_read_why_det.html

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2016/01/detroit_police_report_declines.html

So, has being able to carry made the city less safe? Any stats on that? Lets talk about cities like Chicago

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...hurt-in-weekend-shootings-20160620-story.html

17 shot in a weekend? Bah, Chicago had almost that many dead, and close to 50 shot......

 

[Gilligan]

The fact is, Detroit is a city which has shall issue laws.

It is also a city completely overrun by gangs. Like Chicago..and many others. Duh.

 

[tblwdc]

It is also a city completely overrun by gangs. Like Chicago..and many others. Duh.

Ok, lets forget Detroit because you lose that argument. What about cities like Phoenix, Miami, Dallas, just to name a few. All cities in shall issue states, but have crime rates as high or higher than Baltimore?

 

[glhs837]

Ah, because cities? How do those states fare when you remove the cities?

 

[TheLibertonian]

I didnt say his opinion didn't matter much, you are trying to put words in my mouth. And I would say to you that Detroit is a special case. Not many US cities have had population that has dropped by more than half in a little less than 50 years, from 1.7 million to 700,000, leaving blight and desolation in it's wake. And I never claimed it made the city safer, statistically, did I? What I said was that the Chief feels the individuals will be safer carrying. Each bad guy shot and killed by a good guy means one less bad guy to kill some good person.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/justified_to_kill_read_why_det.html

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2016/01/detroit_police_report_declines.html

So, has being able to carry made the city less safe? Any stats on that? Lets talk about cities like Chicago

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...hurt-in-weekend-shootings-20160620-story.html

17 shot in a weekend? Bah, Chicago had almost that many dead, and close to 50 shot......

So you want to overthrow the rule of law and have a society where every citizen becomes judge, jury, and executioner rolled into one package?

 

[glhs837]

Hmmm, didn't say that, did I? What I want is for citizens to be able to defend themselves from evil people, instead of just filling in the blank box for "Victim" in a police report. Just like the Founders did. Can I assume you think a citizens only response to being faced with a deadly threat is to cower in fear and hope they can hide til the police get there? Or run, if they are not at home? The rule of law allows for self defense, so I'm not sure how advocating that people be allowed to practice self defense indicates I'm against the rule of law.

Hell, given where I live in the county, chances are pretty good a police response to my house is at best in the area of 10-15 minutes. And my house has an odd layout with unexpected nooks and crannies. And failing that, there are enough exits I could escape into the woods where no criminal could catch me. but my wife cant do that, nor can my disabled sister-in-law, nor her non-communicative autistic daughter. So to throw your argument back at you....

So you want me and mine to die at the hands of a criminal rather than avail ourselves of the legal right to defend ourselves?

 

[TheLibertonian]

Hmmm, didn't say that, did I? What I want is for citizens to be able to defend themselves from evil people, instead of just filling in the blank box for "Victim" in a police report. Just like the Founders did. Can I assume you think a citizens only response to being faced with a deadly threat is to cower in fear and hope they can hide til the police get there? Or run, if they are not at home? The rule of law allows for self defense, so I'm not sure how advocating that people be allowed to practice self defense indicates I'm against the rule of law.

Hell, given where I live in the county, chances are pretty good a police response to my house is at best in the area of 10-15 minutes. And my house has an odd layout with unexpected nooks and crannies. And failing that, there are enough exits I could escape into the woods where no criminal could catch me. but my wife cant do that, nor can my disabled sister-in-law, nor her non-communicative autistic daughter. So to throw your argument back at you....

So you want me and mine to die at the hands of a criminal rather than avail ourselves of the legal right to defend ourselves?

And what happens when you decide to blow away someone you thought was a "bad guy" who turned out not to have been? Do you get to shrug and say "I was just doing the right thing?"

Why is it you live in a western country and are so afraid you feel you must go armed 24/7 in case of attacks.

And remember, I'm not arguing against gun ownership, because that's a property right. I'm fine with you owning a gun. I'm trying to understand why you think you are in danger constantly and always.

 

[tblwdc]

Ah, because cities? How do those states fare when you remove the cities?

I knew some shallow thinker would say this, that's why I specifically didn't mention Memphis. Tennessee, which is a shall issue state and has one of the least restrictive gun control legislatures in the country had the highest violent crime rates. Nevada was second and Alaska was third. Maryland fyi was ninth. LMAO, you should base less on your opinion and more on facts.

 

[glhs837]

And what happens when you decide to blow away someone you thought was a "bad guy" who turned out not to have been? Do you get to shrug and say "I was just doing the right thing?"

Why is it you live in a western country and are so afraid you feel you must go armed 24/7 in case of attacks.

And remember, I'm not arguing against gun ownership, because that's a property right. I'm fine with you owning a gun. I'm trying to understand why you think you are in danger constantly and always.

Then I suppose we would fall back on that whole rule of law thing. And I would be arrested, and the prosecutor would decide what if any charges to press. Great country we live in, eh? Do you think I go armed 24/7? And that I'm afraid? You would be wrong, I don't even own a gun. And while I don't recall being afraid, I am cautious. sometimes more than other, sometimes less. Like my buddy TW, your arguments alwas seem to revolve around, not what I said, but how you feel about what I said. And inferences you make based on that. Bad way to debate a topic, LB.

See, you seem to think someone must live in fear to want to be armed. Me, I know better. Most of the folks I do know who are armed 24/7 are not the sorts of folks who are in fear. Not because they are armed, but because they have the mental mindset that says you don't run and hide, you face things. And be prepared for them. Because when or if something does happen, you know you will be ready.
I didn't constantly drill on how to fight fires on my aircraft and bailout and ditch procedures because I lived in fear of those things. I did that because that way, if there were a fire, and a need to bail out, I was ready for it. When some jackass wielding a pistol stolen from the Tackle Box decides that I must have stuff he wants because I drive a nice vehicle it's too late then to get ready, isn't it? Been how many armed robberies here in the last three years? I think over five, not counting the businesses

 

[TheLibertonian]

Then I suppose we would fall back on that whole rule of law thing. And I would be arrested, and the prosecutor would decide what if any charges to press. Great country we live in, eh? Do you think I go armed 24/7? And that I'm afraid? You would be wrong, I don't even own a gun. And while I don't recall being afraid, I am cautious. sometimes more than other, sometimes less. Like my buddy TW, your arguments alwas seem to revolve around, not what I said, but how you feel about what I said. And inferences you make based on that. Bad way to debate a topic, LB.

See, you seem to think someone must live in fear to want to be armed. Me, I know better. Most of the folks I do know who are armed 24/7 are not the sorts of folks who are in fear. Not because they are armed, but because they have the mental mindset that says you don't run and hide, you face things. And be prepared for them. Because when or if something does happen, you know you will be ready.
I didn't constantly drill on how to fight fires on my aircraft and bailout and ditch procedures because I lived in fear of those things. I did that because that way, if there were a fire, and a need to bail out, I was ready for it. When some jackass wielding a pistol stolen from the Tackle Box decides that I must have stuff he wants because I drive a nice vehicle it's too late then to get ready, isn't it? Been how many armed robberies here in the last three years? I think over five, not counting the businesses

I think you have to live in fear to want to be armed to defend yourself. I couldn't GAF about some guy who owns a billion guns because it's cool and he likes to go shooting on the weekend and likes his variety (and in truth I DGAF about someone who wants to go armed to defend themselves, really). But I ponder about the mindset the idea that we live in such a lawless place (we don't) that we should 'be prepared to kill to defend ourselves" against other citizens?

With your metaphor, of course you learned to do those things; you're in a plane, it's a major risk. You learned those things because they were likely to happen.

The odds of you, out of over a hundred thousand people in the county being the victim of a crime that has happened five times in the last three years, are dramatically lower, but you're thinking seems to indicate that it requires the same level of preparedness as your plane example.

 

[This_person]

I think you have to live in fear to want to be armed to defend yourself.

Do you agree it is up to each person to make this decision, and do you further agree not everyone agrees with your assessment? And, should be allowed to disagree with your assessment?

 

[glhs837]

I knew some shallow thinker would say this, that's why I specifically didn't mention Memphis. Tennessee, which is a shall issue state and has one of the least restrictive gun control legislatures in the country had the highest violent crime rates. Nevada was second and Alaska was third. Maryland fyi was ninth. LMAO, you should base less on your opinion and more on facts.

So, what happens when you remove the criminal on criminal violence? If they are shooting each other, then it makes sense that the amount of carrying citizens might not matter much. And of course, those rates are per captia, better to look at sheer numbers, I would think. 3 million citizens living peacefully reduce the per captia numbers, but not the numbers of violent crimes. Remove Baltimore from MDs crime stats, what happens? Look beyond the raw numbers and look at the whys.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/new...6a-cf49-7432-e053-0100007f4db3-382524111.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/05/most-dangerous-states/2925679/

. To be fair, Tennessee's violent streak is concentrated in some of the major metropolitan areas. Memphis's violent crime rate was the nation's fifth worst, while Nashville's was the 18th worst.

Much of the crime, state officials maintain, comes from the swarms of tourists who visit Las Vegas, Reno and other cities with casinos and related entertainment. Factor out the casino traffic in Reno, and local crime rates are similar to the rest of the nation,

Alaska -

It has among the worst violent crime rates in part because of its forcible rape rate: 79.7 per 100,000 residents, the nation's highest rate.

While rape and assault rates are high, other crime levels are average.

Maryland -

A big issue for the state is the heavy concentration of violent crime in and around Baltimore, the largest city. Baltimore’s murder rate — 35 per 100,000 — is the sixth highest in the country.

 

[tblwdc]

Hmmm, didn't say that, did I? What I want is for citizens to be able to defend themselves from evil people, instead of just filling in the blank box for "Victim" in a police report. Just like the Founders did. Can I assume you think a citizens only response to being faced with a deadly threat is to cower in fear and hope they can hide til the police get there? Or run, if they are not at home? The rule of law allows for self defense, so I'm not sure how advocating that people be allowed to practice self defense indicates I'm against the rule of law.

Hell, given where I live in the county, chances are pretty good a police response to my house is at best in the area of 10-15 minutes. And my house has an odd layout with unexpected nooks and crannies. And failing that, there are enough exits I could escape into the woods where no criminal could catch me. but my wife cant do that, nor can my disabled sister-in-law, nor her non-communicative autistic daughter. So to throw your argument back at you....

So you want me and mine to die at the hands of a criminal rather than avail ourselves of the legal right to defend ourselves?

Is there any law in your county which prohibits you from having a firearm at your house?

 

[tblwdc]

So, what happens when you remove the criminal on criminal violence? If they are shooting each other, then it makes sense that the amount of carrying citizens might not matter much. And of course, those rates are per captia, better to look at sheer numbers, I would think. 3 million citizens living peacefully reduce the per captia numbers, but not the numbers of violent crimes. Remove Baltimore from MDs crime stats, what happens? Look beyond the raw numbers and look at the whys.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/new...6a-cf49-7432-e053-0100007f4db3-382524111.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/05/most-dangerous-states/2925679/





Alaska -


Maryland -

Um....you answer the question when you talk about Maryland.

 

[glhs837]

I think you have to live in fear to want to be armed to defend yourself. I couldn't GAF about some guy who owns a billion guns because it's cool and he likes to go shooting on the weekend and likes his variety (and in truth I DGAF about someone who wants to go armed to defend themselves, really). But I ponder about the mindset the idea that we live in such a lawless place (we don't) that we should 'be prepared to kill to defend ourselves" against other citizens?

With your metaphor, of course you learned to do those things; you're in a plane, it's a major risk. You learned those things because they were likely to happen.

The odds of you, out of over a hundred thousand people in the county being the victim of a crime that has happened five times in the last three years, are dramatically lower, but you're thinking seems to indicate that it requires the same level of preparedness as your plane example.

Nobody ever had to bail out of that type of aircraft in 40 years of it's service. Fire, I never had one in over 4,500 hours flying. I think being prepared for virtually anything is a good idea. Am I afraid someone is going to go all active shooter in my building? Odds are pretty damn low. They were pretty damn low for the folks in the Navy Yard. Odds are so low there's no real way to calculate them. Doesn't mean I don't have a plan, or even a few of them. Odds of a car crossing the centerline at me is pretty low, but I'm ready for that. We see examples every day of people dying who didn't have to with just a tiny smidgen of forethought. Seems the height of foolishness to me to not take some reasonable measures to not go out like that. Were the state to allow concealed carry tomorrow, don't think I would arm up for everyday. Would I get one and train with it? And carry where I felt the threat level was higher? Most likely. Same reason I safely explore the mechanical limits of my vehicles, just in case. I might never need all .89gs of grip my car can pull to save my life, but I know how to get it.

You feel fear is the only reason to be prepared, I feel differently. I certainly don't feel afraid as I go about my daily life. Fear is the mind killer, fear is the little death...

 

[glhs837]

Is there any law in your county which prohibits you from having a firearm at your house?

Nope, sure can, and yet, at least for now, I don't Why shouldn't that right extend to everywhere I go?

 

[Clem72]

I have my concealed carry permit, am I'm glad to have it. It came in real handy when a thug decided to pull a knife on me because he wanted some cash. I instructed the nice man to go home, sit on his milk crate and wait for his Obama check! PS, I still have my cash!

I agree with Mr Hijinx that there should be no special qualifiers for getting a permit. You shouldn't have to be connected to LEO or rich/famous to exercise your rights.

But I specifically responded to your comment because you are full of ####. Point us to the newspaper article or arrest/conviction supporting your story or quit making up baloney to try and impress us with how tough you are.

 

[tblwdc]

Nope, sure can, and yet, at least for now, I don't Why shouldn't that right extend to everywhere I go?

Why are you asking ME that question?