What? No blood in the streets?
Another case of concealed carry law going into effect and, well, nothing happens. No blood in the streets, no wild west gun fights. In fact, the number of people applying for them was actually half of what was predicted.
June 9th, 2004 at 10:59 am
No blood in the streets, no wild west gun fights
Give it time. It will happen – I believe it’s inevitable.
However, I will be glad to be proven wrong on this. But it’s difficult to bet against human nature. And human nature will inevitably lead someone to act out their revenge urges in the most bloody way possible, and will hurt innocents nearby.
June 9th, 2004 at 11:04 am
You’ve been proven wrong about 37 times. The number of states with permits have never experienced these phenomenons.
June 9th, 2004 at 2:20 pm
It is precisely because of human nature that we need CCW. Let’s face it, if we were all angels there would be no need for guns or self-defence in general. It’s because of the inevitability that we need guns for self-defence.
June 9th, 2004 at 4:27 pm
And human nature will inevitably lead someone to act out their revenge urges in the most bloody way possible, and will hurt innocents nearby.
You mean like those gang shootings we hear about in L.A.? Didn’t realize they had shall-issue CCW there.
June 9th, 2004 at 5:02 pm
I’ll use the same argument as before.
Just because a terrorist hasn’t exploded a nuclear bomb in an American city doesn’t mean they won’t.
The lack of an event’s occurance does not prove that it will not ever happen.
I still believe, just as with terrorists, that the situation with concealed weapons is eventually innocent bystanders and other non-legit targets are going to get hurt or killed.
Just because it hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t, and no body of non-evidence is going to convince me that it’s not possible.
June 9th, 2004 at 5:54 pm
Barry, the blood in the streets analogy implies that it would be frequent occurence (i.e., all these guys with guns will have gun fights and it will be like the old west). Not just one person going nuts, which is why your nuke analogy doesn’t hold water.
And sure it’s possible but the odds of it being a ccw holder are small. After all, someone who obeys the law to carry gun has a predisposition to obey the law.
Say, how many columbine killers had CCW permits?
June 10th, 2004 at 5:44 pm
Uncle:
Say, how many columbine killers had CCW permits?
Cute, but that really doesn’t prove much. That some people use illegal guns to illegally kill or injure people does not prove that nobody ever uses legal guns to illegally kill or injure people.
Right or wrong, common sense would seem to indicate that the more people who have guns, legal or not, the easier it becomes for someone to obtain a gun illegally. It’s considerably easier for me to obtain cigarettes illegally than it is for me to obtain, say, cocaine. Why? Access.