Posted on 09/08/2009 7:53:08 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
A blogger for the Roanoke Times wrote a recent blog post breathlessly informing his readers that contrary to "false claims" concealed carry permit holders have, indeed, been responsible for acts of murder and mayhem. Dan Casey presents the report issued by what he claims is the "nonpartisan" Violence Policy Center.
That report finds that seven policemen and forty-three civilians have been killed by concealed carry license holders. This is a horrible body count and no one can say otherwise.
Casey, for his part, is crowing about the "lies" of the "gun zealots" and seems quite pleased to find proof of this body count, however.
It's gripping reading for anyone who cares about the truth. And it proves the falsity of gun zealots' claim that nobody, nowhere, can ever point to an unjustified killing by a permit holder. It also undermines the notion that every CC permit holder is responsible and law-abiding.So, let us review.
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
Well reasoned and presented!
“Are CCL holders dangerous?”
To some. To some.
I would like to know the circumstances of the shootings.
Were they at home, was there any justification?
How many police killed citizens during this time period?
I bet the armed citizens are more responsible than the police on a percentage basis during the time period in question.
Liberal sympathizers are unsympathetic to the argument from the Bush administration that a post-9/11 world requires expanded executive authority to suspend habeas corpus and detain individuals indefinitely, or to eavesdrop on Americans' phone conversations, or to torture terrorist suspects. In those instances the Bush administration says the need to protect Americans from wanton violence justifies infringing on American liberties. But liberals are quite adamant that saving lives is not a sufficient rationale for abandoning principles.
Yet when the subject turns to the right of American citizens to own guns, many liberals suddenly find that the goal of saving lives justifies just that.
They’re not nearly as dangerous to the law-abiding public as, say, cops.
I wonder how many civilians were killed by non-ccw holders. It’s that tiny subset of the population about which I am concerned.
Heh, is this pantload Dan Casey another Carl Rowan?
I would bet on it.
“They’re not nearly as dangerous to the law-abiding public as, say, cops.”
I suppose a case could be made for that. However, cops are not the reason people obtain CCL’s. CCL’s are more likely when there is an absence of cops.
Just making the point that CCL holders are among the most careful and law-abiding folks in the country.
“Just making the point that CCL holders are among the most careful and law-abiding folks in the country”
Agreed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.