Comments On: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit by Chicago Fan http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/20/gun-nuts-on-mass-transit Comments On: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit by Chicago Fan en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Go check the FBI, I'm not going to do the work for you.

Most gun deaths are suicides. Also a mental health issue...


Posted by GeneStoner]]> Fri, 22 Feb 2013 00:09:57 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by Brooklyn Reader]]> Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:10:19 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
As gun ownership in the US has gone up, our violent crime has gone down. It's all in the stats people.
Posted by GeneStoner]]> Thu, 21 Feb 2013 09:24:31 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Facepalm. You've proven my point.

1) Criminals, by definition, don't follow the law.
2) Guns are already banned on Chicago Public Transportation.
3) There are still gun crimes on CPT.

Ergo, criminals are already carrying guns on CPT. You then blather on about LOTS of guns on CPT.

Guess what? Concealed Weapons Permit licensees ride the bus every day in Seattle... right alongside gun-packing criminals. And right alongside you.

Are there daily shootouts on the bus in Seattle from Concealed Permit licensees? Yes or no?

@38

You have no way of knowing who did or did not have a gun in that situation. You are simply projecting your fear and biases into what you saw.

You're basing your thoughts on what you feel, regardless of facts, like most of the guns-are-scary crowd here on the SLOG.

Posted by CPN]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:06:21 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
BTW, I have completed firearms safety education through The State of Washington, The State of California, and The NRA, as well as other firearms safety and proficiency classes. I have not been judged mentally defective or guilty of a criminal offence. I have maintained stable employment in both the private and public healthcare sector.

Looks like 20 is ok with me carrying a machine gun or rocket launcher.

@25
Do you have descalation training?

Do you know anything about Descalation?
My guess is no, and that you are talking out of you ass as usual.

I'm certified by http://www.crisisprevention.com/Home
and http://www.moabtraining.com/main.php
as well as around 100+ hours in other descalation programs

Descalation, which should always be the first option, doesn't always work.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:56:05 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Anyway, about the point of thinking daily gun carry is excessive... well, how can you predict when you'll need a gun? You never know. So infrequent carry is would seem to be statistically useless for the sort of protection you are describing. You can be attacked on the bus, at a party, in a club, at home, walking down the street, ...oops, you stayed a bit too late at a friends house, now it's dark and you have to walk around Greenlake. Didn't bring your gun because you didn't think you'd be out late? well, no protection for you!

That implies that all situations are equally dangerous, or that planning to avoid bad situations is excessive. Yeah, you never know when something random is going to happen, but it's reasonable to take more steps to protect yourself in certain situations. Since it's established that there are different levels of risk associated with different situations, I don't think that it's sane to suggest different levels of preparedness are reasonable to consider in different contexts. Taking your kids to Madison Park on a summer Saturday? Probably don't need to pack your pepper spray.

That being said, I'd think that the best solution to confronting any situation where you're uncomfortable enough that you feel that you need to carry a handgun would be to entirely avoid it in the first place.

Even so, I don't think that my opinions on what's reasonable for my own self defense should be used to dictate what other people deem to be reasonable for themselves. I might think a bit less of them for it, but I doubt they care.
Posted by doceb]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:33:59 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
@43 I think we would all be a good deal safer (though less free) if guns were rare and difficult to obtain, but that's not going to happen. In the gun crazy country we live in shouldn't law abiding citizens have the right to defend themselves?
Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:27:10 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Anyway, about the point of thinking daily gun carry is excessive... well, how can you predict when you'll need a gun? You never know. So infrequent carry is would seem to be statistically useless for the sort of protection you are describing. You can be attacked on the bus, at a party, in a club, at home, walking down the street, ...oops, you stayed a bit too late at a friends house, now it's dark and you have to walk around Greenlake. Didn't bring your gun because you didn't think you'd be out late? well, no protection for you!

For the people who are all interested in the 2nd Amendment right to carry guns all the time: I'd like to see their proposals for making society safer in general. Carrying guns is statistically shown to make things more dangerous. How do we make things safer, AND diminish the damage that criminals can do?
Posted by treacle]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:56:48 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by doceb]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:48:37 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> more guns to the situation is a solution? Or even a good idea? No.

Anything + more guns = greater chances of being shot.

I vote for less chances of being shot. I also vote for requiring gun owners to lock their shit, get gun insurance, and have passed rigorous certifications to own their gun. Kinda like a car license. Both devices can kill with the flick of a switch. Let's make sure people truly know how to use them, and are responsible when things go wrong. In fact, let's make gun vendors partly responsible if they sell a gun without background checks and then the idiot shoots someone malevolently.
Posted by treacle]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:47:31 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> It doesn't take a mental giant to wrap your mind around the notion that people who go through the trouble of getting a gun license are fundamentally law-abiding people.

Yea that worked out pretty well for Reeva Steenkamp
Posted by JonnoN]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 13:26:25 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Maybe because the laws were in depopulated states to begin with? All those guns certainly made suicide a worse problem in Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, etc.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:59:32 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by doceb]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:37:14 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
@27: You assume that without laws allowing concealed carry, nobody will have a gun on a public bus. This is untrue. You only need to look one month back to find an example of someone being shot aboard a bus in Chicago. Go ahead and feel safer, so long as you recognize that there is no rational basis for it.
Posted by doceb]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:26:41 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
THANK GOD that no one had a gun in that situation.
Posted by Ruke]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:22:17 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
But in all seriousness, why do people want to carry concealed weapons?
What need is there, what public good is served, by carrying concealed weapons?

Statistics indicate that (a) weapons in public do not effectively deter crime, and (b) are the cause of accidental shootings. Where is the upside?
Posted by treacle]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:18:01 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:13:46 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
The funniest part is, you have this huge axe to grind, but politically I believe essentially the same things you do when it comes to gun control, as I have stated plainly. Find another stone to grind that axe on, your repetition is becoming tiresome, and it is comically misplaced.

Also, to you and #31, I did not address my post to "Chicago Fan", nor did I say anywhere I was necessarily talking solely about "Chicago Fan." It is a trend I see many places, and it compelled me to make a statement which was in no way controversial until you two decided to take it personally on account of "Chicago Fan." Relax and take a breath you two. It is a comment thread, not an exam.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:06:02 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Crime dropped everywhere in the 1990s, not only in places with those inane shall issue rules. The crime drop was due to the baby boomers aging past their most criminally inclined years years; a proportionally older population has less crime. It was not due to Walter Mitty and his beloved gun.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:05:47 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Here's a fascinating quote from today's news from Clint Walker at New Evolution Military Ordnance, a custom gunsmith:
When three men tried to steal his truck a few months ago, he said, he scared them off with his wife’s handgun; he had left his assault rifles in the garage. But, he said, “If I had to defend myself and my family, there’s no question I would choose my assault rifle. No question I’d want a 30-round magazine.”

Mr. Walker added, “In a defensive situation, not every bullet is going to find its target."
Walker knows his guns. He knows an assault rifle is the most efficient way to take down large numbers of people. The armies of the world know their guns too, that's why they use assault rifles and not cheap ranch rifles.

Sure the regulatory definition of an assault weapon is bound to have some ambiguity, and will have to change with the times, no different than the regulatory definition of "car" and "truck", but so what? I can tell a car from a truck, or an SUV from a station wagon, or a bush from a tree or a child from an adolescent. Humans can recognize patterns that literal minded robots cannot.

And people like Clint Walker can recognize the pattern of a gun that lets you kill the most humans in the least time. And that's why we can draw a line on which guns are too efficient at slaughter for civilian needs. If we're not allowed to draw a line, then we have to permit machine guns, and bazookas, and dirty bombs. We have to do this because my preferred method of completely disarming all the fuckheads has zero chance of happening, so we do the next best thing.

Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:00:03 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:53:45 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Yes, some use that term unironically. Chicago Fan is obviously using it ironically in this instance. Judges made a ruling that conservatives would love, so he's ironically calling them "activist" judges. How about you learn to read between the lines?
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:39:23 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]> Posted by watchout5]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:30:38 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
You buffoons are surrounded by concealed carry all day long if king county statistics are correct.

You don't get shot.

Hmmmm...

Maybe THEY aren't the problem.

But hey, you're scared and fearful. You can't control thugs and crazy people, but you can try to strip law abiding people of their rights.

Sounds like a plan written by children and totalitarian dickholes.
Posted by You are tedious]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:30:18 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Gun Nuts on Mass Transit]]>
Of course, when they keep getting lumped in with crackpots and lunatics, it doesn't really suggest a respectful dialog can take place.
Posted by Ben]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:26:32 -0800 The Stranger