(no subject)

[theweaselking]

An Oklahoma ice cream man opened fire on a customer after a summer ice cream sale turned sour, police said on Tuesday.

"It is not a normal or legal thing, anywhere in the country to carry a handgun without a permit while selling ice cream," said Sgt. Eric Holtzclaw, a spokesman with the Enid Police Department.

Comments

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

You know what though? Looser gun laws will lead to less of this happening. [/sarcasm]

[wizwom.livejournal.com]

You know what though?
Idiots who never bother to check facts annoy me.
The GUN was UNLICENSED. I.E. he had never undergone any validation of his sanity, or knowledge of the law.

When people with knowledge and sanity own and carry, crime drops. Precipitously.

[(Anonymous)]

Funny how the statistics don't back that up, both in places where there are more guns and in places with stronger gun control, like Britain or the Scandahoovian states.

And where did the unlicensed gun come from, again? That's what I thought.

[wizwom.livejournal.com]

http://home.wi.rr.com/ccw4wi/nra.html

[ex-cerebrate131.livejournal.com]

*ahem*

I'm from Britain, and hell, yes, the statistics back that up.

More importantly, they demonstrate conclusively that gun control laws have precisely no effect on the amount of criminal gun-use - or, if anything, an upward trend.

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm an idiot now because I didn't check facts? Well, now that you've brought the facts to my attention I can completely change my opinion! Now that I know it was an unlicensed gun, my opinion completely changes! Everyone should have guns so that they too can whip it out and shoot at someone buying ice cream from them! Had he been licensed, you seem to claim, he surely wouldn't have done that. I guess you make that claim because people who own guns legally have never ever in the history of the country shot someone or shot at someone for any reason other than self-defense, right? I didn't not check my facts, the issue of license wasn't pertinent since both unlicensed and licensed people have committed these kind of acts with guns, therefore making the laws looser would increase them happening. Making the laws looser could allow people like this guy to squeeze through next time and get a legal gun. Your point holds ZERO water.

I'm not one of the people who thinks that turning the country back into the Wild West is the way to handle the gun problem. When everyone back in the day packed, no one said "I'd better not start with him, he might have a gun." We'd go back to "who's quicker on the draw?" Also how does a guy packing a gun react when the criminal who pulls the gun on him has him dead to rights? Here, why don't I tell you what would happen: the criminal would not only rob the guy (or whatever) he'd take the gun too, adding it to the number of illegal guns carried by criminals. Or we could have ourselves a good ol' gunfight at the OK Corral with bullets flying from two guns instead of one (or none, depending on the victim's cooperation) and possibly hitting bystanders. Criminals won't stop committing crimes because people might have guns, they will just think of ways to assure their superiority in the situation. Since the criminal creates the situation, they can create it how they want and slant it to their advantage. But you go ahead and go gunslinging Tex. Tell John Wayne and Jesse James hi for me.

How about the claim that "When people with knowledge and sanity own and carry, crime drops." How is that a provable fact? How do you measure that? Are people who own guns legally out in the streets like super heroes stopping crime? How are other facts weighed like security or police response time in areas where crime has dropped? If you dropped a 100 legal gun owners into Compton, would the crime rate drop? There's no "X = lower crime rate" equation so stop selling that BS.

I think you're the idiot pal.

[wizwom.livejournal.com]

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FSAC/Crime_Trends/violent/index.asp
Oh, look - steady DOWNWARD TREND since the 1987 Concealed Carry law.

http://home.wi.rr.com/ccw4wi/nra.html
Oh, look, it happens other places, too.

Criminals don't tangle with an armed populace (as much, there are still idiots).

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

#1: It is so completely asinine to say that a downward trend in crime is soley because of the Concealed Carry Law that I can't even begin to explain it.
#2: Oh look, your graph starts in '94 and your table starts in '89. Even if the idiotic idea I already said something about in #1 was legitimate, your link provides no proof for it. That link has no data on 1987 or 1988, so, for all we know, '89 could have been the first year violent crime was down, thus destroying your shaky thesis.
#3: Oh look, only when you look at the "per 100,000" column does the violent crime rate go consistantly down. The total violent crimes fluctuated up and down for the entire period of the graph (1989-2003) with total crimes going up by ~2,200 (2000-2001), ~1,110 (1995-1996) and even ~15,000 (1989-1990). If you were correct (which you're not), none of these increases would be there. I'd love to see the same state tables for all the "proof" you offer on your second link.

Criminals do tangle with an armed populace. Crime hasn't stopped because there's a Concealed Carry Law, and you have yet to prove it even had anything to do with it.

Thanks for commenting on NOTHING I wrote in my entry.

[wizwom.livejournal.com]

Re: #3, Crime rates are always compared per population, not directly, in order to decide which places have a problem. And yes, isolated rises are possible, for a variety of reasons. I'm not here to remind you of Hatian and Cuban boatlifts.

I don't live in Florida, I don't know what Florida is like. If you don't want to hear or see, go ahead and ignore it. I'm not here to try to convince you, but to counter you. You made an off-the-wall statement and I took you to task on it.

Re: #2, they aren't my graphs and charts. They are the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

Re: #1, Yes, it would be insane. But I've seen instances where Bad Things have been prevented by a gun toting civilian on the spot. And I have seen many, many cases where the victims were victims because no one had a gun, but the criminal.

Millions of crimes are prevented each year because the victim was armed with a personal firearm.

[eididdy.livejournal.com]

Crime rates are always compared per population, not directly, in order to decide which places have a problem. And yes, isolated rises are possible, for a variety of reasons. I'm not here to remind you of Hatian and Cuban boatlifts.

But your contention is that Concealed Carry Laws were responsible for the decline in violent crimes. In several of those years crime did not decline, meaning that your contention is false. It's funny how those comparison numbers made everything look better (still not supporting your contention, but better) and it's funny how you go with averages instead of the raw number because of it.

I don't live in Florida, I don't know what Florida is like. If you don't want to hear or see, go ahead and ignore it. I'm not here to try to convince you, but to counter you. You made an off-the-wall statement and I took you to task on it.

I made an off the wall statement? You countered it with data from one state that, when it is critiqued and shown not to support your version of the story ("When people with knowledge and sanity own and carry, crime drops. Precipitously."), you claim I'm ignoring it. Violent crime up over 15,000 cases 2 years after the inaction of your precious Concealed Carry Law. Don't talk to me about ignoring things when you're doing such a great job yourself. Also, don't kid yourself, you are here to convince: you're addressing your replies to me, not as rebuttals to me. Anyone who says they debate with someone not to convince it a liar.

Re: #2, they aren't my graphs and charts. They are the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

"Your" meaning the ones you cited. Do I have to hold your hand through this? I obviously am an idiot who can't read a webpage or even understand that a web address with the state.fl.us means "the state of Florida in the US." Now, why don't you respond to the actual points in #2.

Re: #1, Yes, it would be insane. But I've seen instances where Bad Things have been prevented by a gun toting civilian on the spot. And I have seen many, many cases where the victims were victims because no one had a gun, but the criminal.

Oh, so now it's not "crime drops precipitously," but "I've seen instances?" Anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all.

Millions of crimes are prevented each year because the victim was armed with a personal firearm.

Millions of statements like those above do not have any validity to them until they are backed with more than anecdotal evidence. I can claim to have seen my dog reading Moby Dick outloud to my children. No one should have to believe that until I produce proof.

And I think it's beautiful how you keep dodging things I write in my longer posts BTW.