The number of county residents applying for permits that will allow them to carry concealed weapons doubled between January and July of this year, compared to the same time last year.
In the first six months of 2008, 101 people applied for such permits through Greene’s courts. In the first six months of this year, 200 made application.
That's quite a jump. What do you think accounts for it? Isn't open carry already permitted in Virginia? Why would people also need the concealed carry permission?
Folks applying gave the usual reasons.
“I’ve heard a lot of people say it’s because they’re afraid President Obama is going to take their right to carry weapons away,“ says Circuit Court Clerk Marie Durrer.
Others don’t mention Obama; they just say they’re concerned about crime, and protecting themselves against it.
“I travel alone with my children, a lot,“ says Susan Rankin of Stanardsville. “If I’m driving, I don’t want a gun on the seat beside me where my children can see it. I would rather have it locked in the glove box.“
It's certainly a fascinating business. Whatever fear-based rationale the individual applicant may have, whether it's the quite reasonable "wanting to protect the family from crime" or the completely unreasonable "Obama's going to take the guns away," one thing is for sure. The gun manufacturers and the gun dealers are laughing all the way to the bank.
What's your opinion? Do you think the Brady statement makes sense?
Doug Pennington, assistant director of communications for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, says: “The problem with allowing the public to carry concealed is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only draw a weapon in self-defense.“
I'm in complete agreement with that. We've already got far too many people with guns who are inadequately trained and who don't have the proper temperament to successfully manage a lethal weapon. Less is what we need, not more.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"The problem with allowing the public to carry concealed is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only draw a weapon in self-defense."
ReplyDeleteJust another permutation of the often debunked "blood in the streets" meme.
Where I live, classes have been filled 2 months out since November. The increase in those seeking permits is no surprise. We have a president who is on record saying that he doesn't believe in the right-to-carry. So, naturally people are thinking that if Barack ever goes after right-to-carry, they'll be grandfathered in. Much like the people who were stocking up on pre-ban weapons and magazines.
MikeB,
ReplyDeletePopulation of Texas - 24,326,974
Number of Active CHL -314,574
That's 1.293% of the population.
2007 Convictions for CHLs - 160.
The statistical evidence shows that those who are licensed are safe, knowledgeable and dependable.
The problem with allowing the public to drive is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only drive defensively."
The problem with allowing the public to carry knives is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only draw a weapon in self-defense
The problem with allowing the public to carry rocks is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only throw it in self-defense
The problem with allowing the public to make a fist is that “you don’t know if someone has the judgment to only fight back in self-defense
At what point do you look at the evidence presented time and time again and say that the public has proven the can be trusted?
At what point do you look at the right to keep and bear arms and say we don't have a good enough reason to keep the law abiding from carrying?
The Paterson N.J. curfew is a great example of punishing the law abiding for the actions of a few.
Now, where is your percentage guessing skills? What percentage of the population of N.J. is part of gangs, what part will go from legal to illegal?
Is it sufficient to take away the rights of everyone because of the actions of the few?
Is it sufficient to take away the rights of everyone because of the actions of the few?
ReplyDeleteMikeB has said repeatedly that he believes it is.
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteWhat does this do to your theory of more guns = more death?
It seems that more people are carrying, more people are buying guns....yet I don't see where the death rate is skyrocketing.
Open carry attracts attention. I want to remain anonymous in public, unless I specifically choose otherwise.
ReplyDeleteOpen carry inserts the gun into any disagreement I have, and may make someone more likely to do it my way because of the gun, not because of logic. It is nearly the moral equivilent of getting my way due to violence, unacceptable to me.
Open carry disturbs people. I don't usually want to do that.
All that said, I want open carry to remain legal.
We are trained well enough to have a better record than police. What standard do you think is adequate?
AztecRed, You must be more disappointed than I am with Obama's failure to push the gun control agenda. You actually named your blog with that in mind. Maybe we should switch blog names now. I could write about Obama's "lies" in making campaign promises regarding gun control and not carrying through.
ReplyDeleteBob, This is a good example of needing to take the stats with a grain of salt. I've seen those numbers before but I don't trust them, I'll tell you why. When a guy commits a crime with a gun, it is often not mentioned if he had a concealed carry permit or not. I wouldn't be surprised if there are many more than the paltry few you keep citing. When the police arrest someone for a serious crime, it's not the most important thing for their investigation whether he had a permit or not. Only guys like you and me are interested in this.
ReplyDeleteMikeB,
ReplyDeleteWhether or not the person had a permit is besides the point.
We know, actually KNOW, as in able to prove several two items.
1.) Firearm sales are increased across the country, every state.
2.) Carry permits are increasing in VA.
Those are two known, verifiable and true facts, don't you agree?
Then if that is the case and either of your "theory" of more guns = more deaths" and your "theory" of 10% are true, then we should see more gun deaths and crime, right?
So, where is the crime wave?
By the way, please visit my site and clarify your last comment
"When a guy commits a crime with a gun, it is often not mentioned if he had a concealed carry permit or not. I wouldn't be surprised if there are many more than the paltry few you keep citing.
ReplyDeleteIf that is how the system worked, I'd agree with you.
In reality, there are so many places where this will get caught it isn't reasonable to expect the license status to be ignored. In order for your view to work, the police, the prosecutor and his staff, and in almost all cases the defendant's lawyer would all have to ignore he had a license..
Additionally, there is a mechanism to revoke licenses when a disqualifying event occurs. When anti-gun reporters have investigated, they find that well less than 0.1% of licenses are issued in error. If there wasn't near universal abuse of licensing records, this investigation could be ongoing, but so far multiple investigations have not turned up more mistakes than that in any state.
Bob asks, "So, where is the crime wave?"
ReplyDeleteI thought you were the one who keeps pointing out how bad the crime is in your own city, justifying why you carry a gun. Now, in order to disagree with me, you're taking the opposite position? Which is it, Bob?
How's your carrying a gun affecting the crime in your town? Why is there still crime there with guys like you going around prepared like you are?
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteSorry, haven't seen this before today.
I thought you were the one who keeps pointing out how bad the crime is in your own city,
I addressed this in a post called "The odds and the Stakes" on my site.
http://3bxsofbs.infamousanime.net/?p=406
You are conflating two separate issues here.
Let's break them down.
1. More guns =more death - that is your meme.
2. I carry because there is crime in the world.
You claim that more guns will cause more crime, more death, more global warming (joking on that one)....yet with the carry permits increasing and the number of firearms sold increasing; we dont see that increase in crime or death.
Doesn't that invalidated your claim?
2. I consider the crime statistics. Let's say there is a 1 in 1,000 chances that I will be a victim of a violent crime. This crime can end up with me dead, injured or wiped out of cash/possesions/whatever or my wife/daughter raped, then dead/injured/etc.
So, with the stakes being what they are, I feel justified in taking legal precautions to reduce my chances of being a victim of crime.
Now, if there is an reduction in crime--say the possibility goes to 1 in 2,000 or even 1 in 5,000 - does it change the consequences of being a victim?
NOPE. NOT ONE BIT.
This is in no way opposite of anything I've said before. In fact it disapproves several of your theories.
1. If 10% of gun owners go bad, we should see more problems. Crime reports, injury reports don't show it.
2. More guns=more deaths -- not happening.
So, where is the mayhem and murder that you claim results from more guns?
You may have something there, Bob. Time will tell.
ReplyDeleteMikeB,
ReplyDeleteTell has told. Look at the numbers. Linoge did a great job with a simple graphic.
http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/07/graphics_matter.html
Pay attention to the red and blue lines.
If what you said was true, then they should track together. They don't.
There are other explanations for the increase in deaths. See Reputo's great posts in 4 parts
http://myreputo.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-caused-90s-reduction-in-gun-deaths_10.html
That is part 4 with links to the others.
The data is out there and these two guys have done a great job of putting it together. Reputo shows how there is greater correlation to other factors than gun ownership.
While correlation does not mean causation, it certainly is true that the greater the correlation the likelier the causation, right?
Look at the data.