TX Gov. Perry: Allow concealed handguns everywhere.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So he endorses taking guns into bars.... I wonder if he endorses drink driving too

Yeah, then folk can shoot the muthafcukers that get in their way on the ride home. You know they always hate those guys with them flashing lights when they drive drunk. Bothers the eyes...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So he endorses taking guns into bars.... I wonder if he endorses drink driving too

Yeah, then folk can shoot the muthafcukers that get in their way on the ride home. You know they always hate those guys with them flashing lights when they drive drunk. Bothers the eyes...

Agreed. For all the other (better) arguments for gun ownership, this sort of thing seems pretty dumb. Is the "right" to carry ultimately more important than public safety? Common sense should dictate that if alcohol distorts a person's judgement to the extent that you can't legally drive a car or operate machinery - it should apply equally in this instance too.

Edited May 2, 2007 by erekose

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So he endorses taking guns into bars.... I wonder if he endorses drink driving too

Yeah, then folk can shoot the muthafcukers that get in their way on the ride home. You know they always hate those guys with them flashing lights when they drive drunk. Bothers the eyes...

Agreed. For all the other (better) arguments for gun ownership, this sort of thing seems pretty dumb. Is the "right" to carry ultimately more important than public safety? Common sense should dictate that if alcohol distorts a person's judgement to the extent that you can't legally drive a car or operate machinery - it should apply equally in this instance too.

Exactly. Some people will argue though that carrying a firearm is a right while operating a vehicle is an unprotected privilege. It's a stupid argument but people will make it nonetheless.

[russ 1]

Here in Florida, one can legally go to a restaurant, sit down, and drink with a concealed weapon. You can not go up to the bar, or even walk through that portion of the establishment. You can drink. You can not be intoxicated (same standard as driving a car) This has not caused major problems here.

In Texas, you can not carry concealed in an establishment that has more than 51% of revenue from sales of alcohol.

These rules are somewhat arbitrary. I doubt loosening these rules would have any statistical impact on crime whatsoever. Like every other responsible person in the world, I do not believe that guns and alcohol mix. I have much respect for dangerous machines - cars, guns, boats, airplanes, power tools, etc. I use due care operating all of them.

Either way, people that have CCW licenses are exactly the same people that don't drink and drive, or get drunk when they are carrying or handling weapons. The Florida Depatrtment of Agriculture publishes statistics for criminal convictions every year. Of 12,000,000 CCW licenses issued here, there have been about 150 criminal convictions in 20 years (most of these having nothing to do with guns or violence).

To put things in perspective, I worry much more about my saftey in my own car than I do about guns. The cigarettes I smoke are far more likely to kill me than a deranged gunman.

The rate of murder in the US has been either decreasing or level since about 1968. Compared to Europe as a whole, the murder rate in the US is about twice as high. (If we include Russia and Eastern Europe, the per capita murder rate is about the same). Stastics are usually compared between with US and individual states in Europe, which is not a truly fair comparison. Even Russia, with one of the highest rates of murder in the world, more people still manage to die in cars.

Agreed. For all the other (better) arguments for gun ownership, this sort of thing seems pretty dumb. Is the "right" to carry ultimately more important than public safety? Common sense should dictate that if alcohol distorts a person's judgement to the extent that you can't legally drive a car or operate machinery - it should apply equally in this instance too.

[russ 1]

It isn't a stupid argument, as far as the law is concerned.

Rights, such as voting, speech and religion, can not be licensed by the government. Congress could not require a tax to go to church - it is already a right you have. Everything else for that matter - the right to make internet posts for example, is also a right unless a law prohibits it.

Flying an airplane, on the other hand, is not a right. The air belongs to the United States, and licenses are granted in the interest of managing the national airspace for the public.

I am not a lawyer, nor a constitutional law scholar, but there is a distinction here. The law was never intended to be fair or right. It was intended to be written down, and applied to everyone equally. Right or wrong, that is what it is.

Any lawyers here - please correct my opinion.

As for the second amendment, it was put there for a reason. At the time, everyone had guns, and the people were the militia. It strikes me as nonesense that it was put there to ensure the Army would have the right to have guns (common sense here, of course they do). If we do not want guns in America, a constitutional amendment is the only way to get rid of them. (With all of the "you can pry it from my cold, dead hands" bumper stickers out there, I would not hold my breath)

Exactly. Some people will argue though that carrying a firearm is a right while operating a vehicle is an unprotected privilege. It's a stupid argument but people will make it nonetheless.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

I think that being able to carry a concealed weapon everywhere is a great idea. If some creep threatens me with a knife, I want to be able to point my gun at him. We all have the right to protect ourselves, no matter where we are - at the mall, in the park or at school.

So just hand out guns to everyone. Yeah, that will work.

Typical irrational liberal response. Just hand guns out on the street. What's wrong with allowing someone to defend themselves?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Here in Florida, one can legally go to a restaurant, sit down, and drink with a concealed weapon. You can not go up to the bar, or even walk through that portion of the establishment. You can drink. You can not be intoxicated (same standard as driving a car) This has not caused major problems here.

In Texas, you can not carry concealed in an establishment that has more than 51% of revenue from sales of alcohol.

These rules are somewhat arbitrary. I doubt loosening these rules would have any statistical impact on crime whatsoever. Like every other responsible person in the world, I do not believe that guns and alcohol mix. I have much respect for dangerous machines - cars, guns, boats, airplanes, power tools, etc. I use due care operating all of them.

Either way, people that have CCW licenses are exactly the same people that don't drink and drive, or get drunk when they are carrying or handling weapons. The Florida Depatrtment of Agriculture publishes statistics for criminal convictions every year. Of 12,000,000 CCW licenses issued here, there have been about 150 criminal convictions in 20 years (most of these having nothing to do with guns or violence).

To put things in perspective, I worry much more about my saftey in my own car than I do about guns. The cigarettes I smoke are far more likely to kill me than a deranged gunman.

The rate of murder in the US has been either decreasing or level since about 1968. Compared to Europe as a whole, the murder rate in the US is about twice as high. (If we include Russia and Eastern Europe, the per capita murder rate is about the same). Stastics are usually compared between with US and individual states in Europe, which is not a truly fair comparison. Even Russia, with one of the highest rates of murder in the world, more people still manage to die in cars.

Agreed. For all the other (better) arguments for gun ownership, this sort of thing seems pretty dumb. Is the "right" to carry ultimately more important than public safety? Common sense should dictate that if alcohol distorts a person's judgement to the extent that you can't legally drive a car or operate machinery - it should apply equally in this instance too.

I guess it depends on whose statistics you go by. For instance if you're going isolate Europe to discuss specific trends there's a big differences in figures between the EU (as its own entity) and Europe as a whole. If we're including Russia and the former Soviet republics into the mix the results are about as distortive as if we were to lump the US together with Mexico.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As for the second amendment, it was put there for a reason. At the time, everyone had guns, and the people were the militia. It strikes me as nonesense that it was put there to ensure the Army would have the right to have guns (common sense here, of course they do). If we do not want guns in America, a constitutional amendment is the only way to get rid of them. (With all of the "you can pry it from my cold, dead hands" bumper stickers out there, I would not hold my breath)

Actually, the whole reason you have that second amendment was because the US Bill of Rights was based on an older English document that was used as a model...

Bill of Rights 1689

* freedom from royal interference with the law (the Sovereign was forbidden to establish his own courts or to act as a judge himself)

* freedom from taxation by royal prerogative, without agreement by Parliament

* freedom to petition the King

* freedom from a peace-time standing army, without agreement by Parliament

* freedom [for Protestants] to have arms for defence, as allowed by law

* freedom to elect members of Parliament without interference from the Sovereign

* the freedom of speech in Parliament, in that proceedings in Parliament were not to be questioned in the courts or in any body outside Parliament itself (the basis of modern parliamentary privilege)

* freedom from cruel and unusual punishments, and excessive bail

* freedom from fines and forfeitures without trial

[natty bumppo 297]

I think that being able to carry a concealed weapon everywhere is a great idea. If some creep threatens me with a knife, I want to be able to point my gun at him. We all have the right to protect ourselves, no matter where we are - at the mall, in the park or at school.

So just hand out guns to everyone. Yeah, that will work.

Typical irrational liberal response. Just hand guns out on the street. What's wrong with allowing someone to defend themselves?

don't forget about the "buy back" programs too ...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's wrong with allowing someone to defend themselves?

I guess it really depends on what you see as a threat and how likely you consider yourself to be a victim of crime.

[Caladan 19]

The Second Amendment needed an editor. Badly.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The Second Amendment needed an editor. Badly.

The language is pretty vague and open to broad interpretation.

[Otto 83]

What's wrong with allowing someone to defend themselves?

I guess it really depends on what you see as a threat and how likely you consider yourself to be a victim of crime.

Well why don't you share what you see as a threat and how likely you consider yourself (or loved one) to be a victim of crime erekose?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's wrong with allowing someone to defend themselves?

I guess it really depends on what you see as a threat and how likely you consider yourself to be a victim of crime.

Well why don't you share what you see as a threat and how likely you consider yourself (or loved one) to be a victim of crime erekose?

How would I do that? I've not been the victim of a violent crime in the various countries I've lived in. The wife (USC) hasn't either. So no I don't consider myself "at risk". But even if I did - it would imply (at least to my thinking) living in constant fear of attack.

Edited May 2, 2007 by erekose

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

There should be a national law that every man, woman and child be wrapped with explosives, so if anyone attacks us or tries to kidnap us, all we have to do is go kaboom. That would be quite a deterrent.