Obama supports Federal ban on concealed carry

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Of course he doesn't.

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/467988

Yes. Who could possibly contradict Waters' cited study from a law journal we can safely assume he won't understand (since Waters has indicated we are painting all members of a profession with very broad and arbitrary strokes)?

http://www.vpc.org/studies/uninapb.htm

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/468019

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Yes. Who could possibly contradict Waters' cited study from a law journal we can safely assume he won't understand (since Waters has indicated we are painting all members of a profession with very broad and arbitrary strokes)?

No, no. We wouldn't want to paint people with very broad and arbitrary strokes.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

No, no. We wouldn't want to paint people with very broad and arbitrary strokes.

That was precisely my point in that post. Glad you got it.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Why? Is the rationale that a CWP holder will be able to protect us all when a crazed shooter starts a killing spree in a mall? Am I to place my confidence in the CWP holder at that point instead of the police? I am to assume that a person is fully capable of pulling out his weapon and aiming it at the bad guy, and killing him and only him, because he holds a CWP?

Let's assume everyone in America holds a CWP (which Waters and you seem to think would be fabulous). One person pulls out a gun and fires a shot. Someone else then pulls out their gun to defend the crowd. Who is the original shooter? The next person who pulls out their gun doesn't know. They only saw the 2nd gunman, who is the good guy here. He was trying to protect people. He is shot by the 3rd gunman, who is also trying to be a good guy. Luckily, everyone has a gun in this Wild West show, so the 4th CWP gunman can quickly eliminate the 3rd gunman for killing the 2nd gunman. At this point, everyone else should all pull out their weapons and open fire on the person they each saw kill another person. Right?

Yeah, sounds great.

Cali has suggested that concealed carry statutes increase violent crime.

And provides no proof.

He thinks he has provided proof, but he hasn't.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

That was precisely my point in that post.

I doubt it.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Cali has suggested that concealed carry statutes increase violent crime.

And provides no proof.

He thinks he has provided proof, but he hasn't.

What, exactly, are you looking for? Did you open a single link from my prior posts? Does this help?

http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/95/5/830

Really- what do you want? The study you cited has been thoroughly discredited, not that you are interested in an intellectually honest argument.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

What, exactly, are you looking for? Did you open a single link from my prior posts? Does this help?

http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/95/5/830

Really- what do you want? The study you cited has been thoroughly discredited, not that you are interested in an intellectually honest argument.

You're not responding to Mike's comment of your post in which you seem to think that all those with carry permits are looking for a gunfight.

Posting links to studies that say there is a possibility that violence can increase doesn't make you the winner of this argument.

And the study Mike provided has thoroughly been discredited? Really? Or are you trying to push your opinion as truth yet again?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

What, exactly, are you looking for? Did you open a single link from my prior posts? Does this help?

http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/95/5/830

Really- what do you want? The study you cited has been thoroughly discredited, not that you are interested in an intellectually honest argument.

you claimed that concealed carry increases violent crime. THAT is the theory that has been discredited. And that is Lott's legacy.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You're not responding to Mike's comment of your post in which you seem to think that all those with carry permits are looking for a gunfight.

Posting links to studies that say there is a possibility that violence can increase doesn't make you the winner of this argument.

And the study Mike provided has thoroughly been discredited? Really? Or are you trying to push your opinion as truth yet again?

And just like that, Il Pad reveals he also didn't click on a single link.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

And just like that, Il Pad reveals he also didn't click on a single link.

Untrue. I read them and didn't see what you were blabbing about. Perhaps you could point to where your links discredited Mike's link.