PROS and CONS on "the right to carry weapons" (Washington: crime, felons)

[Northeastcouple]

I know the people in NH are probably sick of the gun topics, since President Obama's meeting on health care, but It did sort of strike a few questions in my mind since I truly love NH and have often thought about relocating my family there....
First off so you understand where I am coming from: I am in my mid thirties and was born, raised, and still reside in Queens county which is part of NYC. Where I am from 99% of the people that carry guns publically are either a cop, some other sort of other law official or a criminal. I consider myself neither pro gun or anti gun. If I owned a house I would like to own a gun , just for the case of protecting my family from break ins. I dont see myself walking around in public with one.
A few of my friends are die hard on the right to carry weapons, not only for their right , and protecting themselves, but they feel if most people have guns, in a particular area, the criminals will think twice before trying anything stupid. To me this makes a lot of sense. However I cant help but think if it works in the opposite fashion too. For instance If some dude gets in a heated argument with his wife,or has a really bad day at work,Im not sure if a gun is the best thing he should have on him...
What is your opinion on that, and why?

[BF66389]

Originally Posted by Northeastcouple

For instance If some dude gets in a heated argument with his wife,or has a really bad day at work,Im not sure if a gun is the best thing he should have on him...
What is your opinion on that, and why?

The same can be said of a knife, brick, baseball bat, or even fists. The issue in the situation you describe is the individual- an individual wishing to deal bodily harm to another will do so regardless of the tools available (does a guy wanting to steal the GPS out of your car wait until he can buy a lockpick kit?)

A firearm is no different from any other tool, its safe & responsible usage is up to its owner/user; and these individuals are/should be held responsible for their actions in a court of law- use a firearm to break the law face the consequences- use it responsibly and enjoy your life! A criminal is a criminal and should be punished as such, the tool used in the crime is a non-issue.

[BF66389]

Oh, I also want to add that one reason you tend to mostly hear only about the police and criminals with guns is because "John went to the shooting range with his son after work" is a really boring story. Crime is much more exciting, and police are much more visible...

[fishnfool]

If it were really an issue the media would be jumping all over the senseless killings by people in "heated arguments" in open carry states.....I don't see too many of those, do you?

This is analogous to saying people should not have drivers licenses because they might get road rage and kill someone, or they might drink and drive, or they might cause an accident.....most people would say that stance is ludicrous....why is it any different with guns? I bet cars kill more people in this country that guns do.

Passing more laws does not stop criminals because criminals don't follow the law. Gun control laws only affect (and restrict) law abiding citizens and not the people they are really aimed at.

[Northeastcouple]

Originally Posted by BF66389

The same can be said of a knife, brick, baseball bat, or even fists. The issue in the situation you describe is the individual- an individual wishing to deal bodily harm to another will do so regardless of the tools available (does a guy wanting to steal the GPS out of your car wait until he can buy a lockpick kit?)

A firearm is no different from any other tool, its safe & responsible usage is up to its owner/user; and these individuals are/should be held responsible for their actions in a court of law- use a firearm to break the law face the consequences- use it responsibly and enjoy your life! A criminal is a criminal and should be punished as such, the tool used in the crime is a non-issue.

for what its worth, I totally agree 100% with what you are saying, that if an individual wants to hurt someone he is going to do it anyway whether he has the right tool or not....I just think if this guy (this guy being a fictional person just for example) is someone that has a very accessable breaking point, owning the gun makes it that much easier to do violence...Also lets face a gun is usualy the weapon of choice, esp. when someone is looking to do the most harm , the easiest way....

[Northeastcouple]

Originally Posted by fishnfool

If it were really an issue the media would be jumping all over the senseless killings by people in "heated arguments" in open carry states.....I don't see too many of those, do you?

This is analogous to saying people should not have drivers licenses because they might get road rage and kill someone, or they might drink and drive, or they might cause an accident.....most people would say that stance is ludicrous....why is it any different with guns? I bet cars kill more people in this country that guns do.

Passing more laws does not stop criminals because criminals don't follow the law. Gun control laws only affect (and restrict) law abiding citizens and not the people they are really aimed at.

No,I really dont hear much about that, but then again, I am still more in tune with the local news down here... a lot of time if its not something of monumental proportions it doesnt make national news., which basically means,they are not gonna cover every story of a yo yo pulling a gun on his wife in NH on the 10:00 news in New York

One person on another post mentioned that most of the persons packing are realy responsible because with their liscence they are taught not to be cowboys or cops..I thought that made a lot of sense and again Im not trying to criticize anyones life or the views. Im really just trying to determine if keeping the robbers and carjackers out of the neighborhood by being armed out weighs the irresponsible people that should never even be allowed to hold a scissor , let alone a gun..

[Ashls]

Even if you had a gun to defend yourself, who says the robber wouldn't shoot you first on purpose or out of panic? I'd rather take my chances with a knife, brick or baseball bat.

[GregW]

I believe it is a fundamental right to defend your self against any assault. I also believe it is a fundamental right to choose whatever weapons you deem necessary and to carry these weapons, openly or concealed anywhere you want to. I do not believe in any restrictions.

Given that the above may seem extreme, I also believe the shooter is completely and personally responsible for the results of any shooting. This means shooting at a range does no damage so no problem. If someone shoots a gun in his back yard and hits a neighbors pet, or the neighbor, he is responsible for paying for the damages. If an adult allows a child to shoot and there is damage the adult is responsible. In the case of an adult shooting another person then the shooter had better be able to prove it was self defense, in the defense of another or a complete accident.

The most important point of gun ownership, carry and use is the shooter is responsible for the damage. The essence of proper gun control is to have the judgment to pick a legitimate target and the skill to hit it with the first shot.

PS – My economics may be left wing but my right to defend myself, family and strangers in danger is definitely not.


PPS - Never bring only a knife, club or fist to a gunfight. If you do not have a gun just run away as fast as you can.

[sgthoskins]

Originally Posted by Northeastcouple

However I cant help but think if it works in the opposite fashion too. For instance If some dude gets in a heated argument with his wife,or has a really bad day at work,Im not sure if a gun is the best thing he should have on him... What is your opinion on that, and why?

If someone is going to resort to murder, it's going to happen regardless if they are carrying a gun or not. There is always going to be crazy people. More than likely they already have a record and can't legally own a gun any ways.
The passion crimes are so minute there is no way to quantify them statistically. They are simply rare, and like I said if a gun wasn't present the end result would still be serious injury or death.

I am glad you are thinking about getting a firearm to protect your family. You and only you are responsible for the safety of your children and wife.
I carry daily not because I fear I'll need my sidearm, it's because I know there are crazy people out there who would not think twice about ending my life or the lives of my boys. I simply don't want to be in a situation where I am helpless and at the mercy of a nut job.

Fact: 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.

Fact: Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because they fear being shot.

Fact: 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are “hot burglaries” which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a “hot burglary” rate of only 13%.

Fact: Washington D.C. has essentially banned gun ownership since 1976 and has a murder rate of 56.9 per 100,000. Across the river in Arlington, Virginia, gun ownership is less restricted. There, the murder rate is just 1.6 per 100,000, less than three percent of the Washington, D.C. rate.

Fact: 26% of all retail businesses report keeping a gun on the premises for crime control.

Fact: In 1982, Kennesaw, GA passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% the following year.

Fact: A survey of felons revealed the following:
• 74% of felons agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."
• 57% of felons polled agreed, "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."

History and government crime stats prove time and time again that guns save lives. You have to ask yourself how valuable is your life and the lives of your family.

[nicolem]

There are no cons to me exercising my 2nd amendment right. I am a woman and I carry not because I am scared or want to cause trouble but because I am responsible for myself and my family and I don't rely on the government to take care of me or protect me. I do that myself. My husband also carries and he feels the same way to take responsibility for his safety and the safety of his family. That does not mean we are wacko vigilantes out to act recklessy like the media and anti-gun nuts like to portray those of us who exercise our 2nd amendment rights. We took gun safety courses and consistantly shoot at the range. I doubt a criminal invests the time, money and resources to go to the range and legally buy guns and ammo- however we do. Gun control laws only help the criminal element and even worse take away my 2nd amendment right which government has no right to do.

If you think government is out of control and has too much power now, it will be a million times worse if certain groups are successful in stripping Americans of their 2nd amendment rights.