Guns apparently good for us, but not for them

Zanesville Times Recorder ^ | 21 December 2002 | Jim Siegel

[Deadeye Division]

A majority of Ohio's state lawmakers will tell you that allowing people to carry concealed handguns is a good thing.

They'll point to other states that allow it, noting gun-related incidents have showed no increase. They'll even tout how overall crime in those states has declined.

[Deadeye Division]

The House will never go along with the Senate version. Did you read in the Dispatch that "Taft and his wife, Hope, have never been wild about the idea of Ohioans carrying concealed handguns"? Hmmmm?? Anyway, Householder says, "I think we're in a position to pass it in February or March".

Cases to test change in court: Shift could affect concealed-carry suit (Ohio)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/811283/posts

[harpseal]

I remeber the days of mail trains and every postal employee aboard those trains being armed with a .38spl.

Dtay well - stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[Marauder]

For courthouses, there's a more likely rationale: When your everyday work involves working for one side of a conflict, or deciding against one side of that conflict, you would or should fear being a target of someone's wrath, which might and in several cases has involved a firearm.
I used to work at a law firm as a file clerk back before the Texas carry law was passed. Every lawyer was a staunch democRat and pro gun control, but every one of them kept a pistol or revolver in his desk.
Later, some judge was shot and killed in his courtroom, and that's when the metal detectors went up in courthouses almost immediately.

[alpowolf]

It's like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, you have free speech, but it is possible to push it too far.

I wish people would stop using this example when discussing gun control. It doesn't apply. Think a minute; when you go to a theater, is there a govt agent there, who duct-tapes your mouth shut when you enter? Do they rip out your voice-box? No, as that would be illegal prior restraint. You fully retain the ability to yell anything you want, with the proviso that you will be held responsible for whatever you say. Firearms should not be treated any differently.

[harpseal]

There was also a time when absolutely every postmaster in the USA was issued a handgun to protect the mail.

Stay well - stay safe - Stay armed - yorktown

[goldstategop]

Bob Taft is a RINO who'll never meet a concealed carry weapon permit bill he'll be willing to sign. All of his so called objections are just a smokescreen for his opposition to the 2nd Amendment. Ohio could have done better than with Taft around.

[chuknospam]

bump

[esopman]

Pinned-and-recessed-N-frame bump. You are correct: Gun control is victim disarmament...I personally like Walter Williams' one liner: "When they finally get Walter Williams' gun, it will be warmer than he is..."

On a more serious note, I no longer believe that the majority of the populace in our republic is capable of appreciating the truth of your statement "Responsible people carrying firearms is not a problem anywhere." This whole grimy century-long episode of the erosion of our Constitutional rights is a Greek tragedy in slow motion. While we can resist now at the ballot box (where it is not compromised by fraud), we are facing an ultimate confrontation with tyranny. Just a matter of time. Keep your powder dry, close and abundant.

Blessings on Freepers Everywhere.

[Ravenstar]

Well put alpowolf, Well put.

Ravenstar

[jonascord]

If I were a hijacker, and I KNEW that possibly thirty people on the plane I was planning on flying into the Sears Tower were packing, even if I had a gun, and they said a nightly prayer to God for a chance to shoot me fifty times, dismember my body, and pack the remains in matching pigskin luggage, I might be a little less willing to try.

[ClearCase_guy]

I wish people would stop using this example when discussing gun control.

Excellent comment. I'd like to apologize to all for my earlier comment on gun control. I'm usually pretty reliable on this issue ("shall not be infringed" means something). But I slipped up today and indicated that some infringement would be a good thing. A lot of people have called me on that, and they are correct.

To alpowolf I'll say that your comment about "Fire" in a crowded theater is very insightful. I now see that it is a case of apples and oranges and I won't be linking gun control to that chestnut again.

FR is great because it helps good conservatives realize when they begin to stray from the path of Truth.

[alpowolf]

Glad to help...I had second thoughts about it after I sent it, just because it's something I tend to rant about. I'm glad that I was able to remain (somewhat) civilized!

Thanks for setting such a terrific example.

[caspera]

This is a stupid argument. Government buildings are well guarded. There are plenty of people walking around with guns. The question is what do people do when they have to go about their daily lives in places where there are no guards. If for some reason it were stipulated that armed guards and police had to stay 2 miles away from every goverment building and could not respond to emergency calls from that building for at least 15 minutes, then I bet you bureaucrats would be all in favor of an armed citizenry.

Also, this author does not know what "to beg the question" means.

[Stat-boy]

On a more serious note, I no longer believe that the majority of the populace in our republic is capable of appreciating the truth of your statement "Responsible people carrying firearms is not a problem anywhere." This whole grimy century-long episode of the erosion of our Constitutional rights is a Greek tragedy in slow motion. While we can resist now at the ballot box (where it is not compromised by fraud), we are facing an ultimate confrontation with tyranny. Just a matter of time.

Most of the time, I think exactly as you do; but I have seen in Texas a glimmer of hope. Concealed carry is starting a quiet revolution in gun ownership. I know many people who have (or are considering) licenses, and such an idea would have been outrageous to these people as recently as 5 years ago. Ask any firearms instructor; he will tell you the difference in his customers today from when concealed carry first started here. When it first started, the applicants were those who already were familiar with firearms. Now, many new shooters are beginning to understand the usefulness of a handgun. Classes are no longer the minimum for the license, but often involve extra training and familiarization, and I am talking about the very basics. For example, “the difference between a revolver and a semi-auto is ….” This means there are new shooters from families that did not previously consider firearms. It becomes contagious: first dad gets a license; then mom wants one. Dad’s brother finds out that mom has a license, then he feels like carrying also. Fifteen years ago very few in Texas outside of the far right talked about gun rights; today, it is an open topic for discussion. Mentioning concealed carry is not taboo [that being said, I avoid mentioning that I have a license or that I am armed—unless legally required, of course].

[FreeTally]

I personally think that a courthouse is the only possible place that a law prohibiting everyone from carrying a gun into may be ok. Otherwise, the guard would be forced to make sure any person walking in with a gun was carrying legally and was not a violent felon. It would be impractacle. And if they didn't confirm this, a friend of the accused, in any case where some thug is on trial, could just walk in and blast people when the verdict was unacceptable.

I think bar owners should be able to set their own policy. I dont think there should be a law imprisoning someone for breaking the policy, but the bar should certainly be allowed to have law enforecemt escort the person out and swear a tresspass warant against the person.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

While this writer really is pooh-poohing the anti gun mantra he has a point. That point is that politicians are hypocrites, liars and will say/do anything for a few votes. And when it comes down to it they know that what they do every day would have been a death sentence in the early days of this country. They know it and quite a few law abiding, gun carrying citizens know it.

Agreed. Where is the surprise that politicians say one thing and do another, pass laws for us from which they are exempt?

[jjm2111]

And what does Frist say about guns? I really want to know because I think he is against them.

As do I.

[jjm2111]

Taft is one of those people who thinks CCW is okay if the "right people" have one. The "right people" in his mind are probably weathly blue-bloods. God forbid Leroy the mechanic gets a CCW.

The CCW rolls in NYC reads like a Vanity Fair who's who column. Every celebrity and scion who wants one has one. If Muhammed the grocer get's robbed and he tries to get one, the cops tell him, "You don't have need."

[jjm2111]

Fifteen years ago very few in Texas outside of the far right talked about gun rights; today, it is an open topic for discussion.

Even in the socialist hell hole known as NJ, the recent GOP gubernatorial candidate wanted a shall issue CCW (at first). I think self-defense rights advocates have come along way in the past twenty-five years.

[joesnuffy]

fish in a barrel syndrome