Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-15-2010, 04:24 PM
 
Location: ATL
4,688 posts, read 7,987,097 times
Reputation: 1804

Advertisements

^^^

Why are you defending NYC/LA and bashing Atlanta for the same crimes? You make up every excuse in the book when home invasions happen in NYC/LA/Charlotte. First you complain that only Atlanta has home invasions and then when I bring up the links to the NYC home invasion you act like it isnt a big deal in NYC. NYC has so many home invasions that it is ridiculous. Why do you downplay crime in other cities? Just like when people say that Atlanta is segregated but when I bring up the NYC neighborhoods that are segregated you all come up with a million excuses. You should be more worried about a home invasion living in LA, NYC, or Charlotte instead of in Atlanta. It's raining bullets in NYC, La, and Charlotte with home invasions and try to make it seem like a small crime when it happens in those cities and then you defend LA because of gang bangers like it ok

Home invasion suspects who terrorized Brooklyn family held without bail

Home invasion news in Canarsie, Brooklyn, New York, NY | Outside.in local topics | alt4

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/...ts-caught.html

Senior pistol whipped during home invasion - NYPOST.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2010, 05:07 PM
 
230 posts, read 619,522 times
Reputation: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonygeorgia View Post
^^^

Why are you defending NYC/LA and bashing Atlanta for the same crimes? You make up every excuse in the book when home invasions happen in NYC/LA/Charlotte. First you complain that only Atlanta has home invasions and then when I bring up the links to the NYC home invasion you act like it isnt a big deal in NYC. NYC has so many home invasions that it is ridiculous. Why do you downplay crime in other cities? Just like when people say that Atlanta is segregated but when I bring up the NYC neighborhoods that are segregated you all come up with a million excuses. You should be more worried about a home invasion living in LA, NYC, or Charlotte instead of in Atlanta. It's raining bullets in NYC, La, and Charlotte with home invasions and try to make it seem like a small crime when it happens in those cities and then you defend LA because of gang bangers like it ok

Home invasion suspects who terrorized Brooklyn family held without bail

Home invasion news in Canarsie, Brooklyn, New York, NY | Outside.in local topics | alt4

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/...ts-caught.html

Senior pistol whipped during home invasion - NYPOST.com
Yikes, I'm not trying to argue with you and I'm not defending any city, I'm just saying I worry if crime is spilling over into areas that appear to be affluent. I've personally never experienced that sort of thing happening in NYC or LA and maybe it's because wealthier neighborhoods get more police presence or the local neighborhood watch is really on top of their game. Not that I think that "ghetto" neighborhoods deserve crime, but if I move to Compton and a shooting happens, I will be much more understanding than if I move to Brentwood and someone gets shot.
I'm planning on moving to ATL soon and it's a natural concern to see these stories. If I were moving to any other place or even back to NYC, I would be just as concerned to hear about good neighborhoods getting robbed or crime occuring in them. I was looking at Va-Hi and Grant Park for homes because I heard they were lovely gentrified areas. But hearing about increasing crime has me worried.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 05:31 PM
 
Location: 30080
2,390 posts, read 4,385,927 times
Reputation: 2180
And some people here think that owning a gun doesnt make a difference... the hell you say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 06:02 PM
 
2,642 posts, read 8,235,982 times
Reputation: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullbear View Post
Ahm, Im pretty sure you dont really mean this. Most gun owners do not end up shooting themselves. What you probably meant is that when there is an accident with a gun, in most cases the owner shoots him/herself.



This seems a little inconsistent. If one doesnt like the state/political organization intruding in our lives/deaths then one shouldnt approve of the state mandating safety" training. In both cases it requires people be "under a government.

Conservatives are opposed to the idea of Government as nanny state.

PS: I have owned guns for 30 years and never shot myself with any of them. Also, fyi, I have used a gun to defend a home in a self defense situation.

First off, I'm not a conservative. Never have been and never will be. I'm as liberal as you can possibly imagine (but not a Democrat, mind you). As such, I do no subscribe to a list of ethics/morals/mores/beliefs held by some group of people who affiliate via politics or religion, etc. I believe what my life experiences have taught me. And I ain't a young woman, nor someone who never went far from home. I have been very, very, very far from home in ways that are more than simply geographic space.

Second off, there's nothing inconsistent about my personal believes. A. I don't believe the government should be in the "business" of killing people. B. I am sympathetic to individuals who kill in self-defense. C. I am fine with the right to bear arms, but D. with great power comes great responsibility, to quote the SpiderMan movie (actually, it's origin is Mayor Gilroy of NYC in 1892, discussing partisan control of the government) so I am all for regulation that either mandates or incentivizes(sic) gun owners to take gun safety classes.

Third off, as far as my "statistics" I can definitely tell you that guns kept for self-protection are 43x+ more likely to kill or harm you or someone else than to be successfully used in self-defense (New England Journal of Med, 1986).

They are 22x more likely to be unintentionally used in shootings, criminal assaults, homicides and suicide attempts than in self defense (Journal of Trauma, 1998).

As I said, I am not anti-gun. I own 2 handguns and 2 shotguns. I am also trained in gun safety and in gun operation. But let's not be deniers, okay? We can't expect people to just purchase a weapon and use it the way they intend to. The risk of harming someone who doesn't deserve it is way too great. And society pays for that, literally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 07:31 PM
 
31,994 posts, read 36,548,100 times
Reputation: 13254
Quote:
Originally Posted by movingsoon2020 View Post
... I'm just saying I worry if crime is spilling over into areas that appear to be affluent. I've personally never experienced that sort of thing happening in NYC or LA and maybe it's because wealthier neighborhoods get more police presence or the local neighborhood watch is really on top of their game.
Manson and the Tate-Bianca murders. OJ in Brentwood. John Lennon outside the Dakota.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 09:17 PM
 
Location: metro ATL
8,180 posts, read 14,791,669 times
Reputation: 2698
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post
It's sad to see this sort of thing spreading to a town like Charlotte. I had always thought of it as a nice place.

It is, but that doesn't mean it's crime-free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonygeorgia View Post
Charlotte has ALWAYS had home invasions and crime but if you let the people on CD tell it Atlanta is the only city with home invasions
Not sure what you mean by "always," but people breaking into other people's homes is as old as prostitution. That goes for any city that has been sizable city for some time now. But I do think it's quite disingenuous to try and put Charlotte into the same category as NYC and LA when it comes to this. How in the world one jumps from NYC and LA to Charlotte of all cities is beyond me. Must be a chip on your shoulder or something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonygeorgia View Post
The people in the Charlotte forum try to hide this information from everyone
That's a flat-out lie and is easily disprovable:

//www.city-data.com/forum/charl...=home+invasion

//www.city-data.com/forum/charl...=home+invasion

//www.city-data.com/forum/charl...=home+invasion

//www.city-data.com/forum/charl...=home+invasion
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 11:44 PM
 
Location: Southeast, where else?
3,913 posts, read 5,204,291 times
Reputation: 5823
Default Choices in life

Making the decision to own a firearm brings on an inherent and grave responsibility because as we all know, they are very, very unforgiving if you make a mistake with one.

That said, I am very much on the side of gun ownership, albeit responsibly. We expect people to get a license and a modicum of training before driving a 2 ton vehicle down the road (and larger up to class IV/19,000 lb GVW) so, asking someone to have a modicum of training is not entirely a bad idea.

To be sure, I am a very staunch advocate of owning firearms. I just don't want anyone, especially a smaller diminutive or physically weak one owning some S&W 500 as they probably just become a danger to the public at large. Asking to demonstrate a basic understanding and knowledge of said firearms is not all that bad.

All that aside, owning and being prepared to use one are entirely two different matters. I would hazard a guess that at least 50 percent of the firearms purchased by first time owners may experience one or two trips to the range and that's it. Scary. They are then tucked away for that day that one may actually need to use one.

It's a responsibility and a right. We do need to be very, very responsible and I openly applaud the individual who defended himself and removed society of one more ill. Think of the money Rockdale County saved on incareration with this return guest?

Cinicism aside, the kid sounds like he was a responsible individual but, depsite all that, he will face serious legal questions and probably have to spend more time than he wants explaining it at some point. And he is the good guy!!! There's always the civil court from the survivors to deal with.....go figure....

Some things any of you who are considering such ownership should know about Georgia. And this is NOT universal in each state.

1) You can own a CCW Permit (Concealed Carry Weapons) for a fee at your local county government office. They take your trigger fingerprint, some personal data, and charge you $25-$75 depending on which county, for a 5 year license. It is a "shall issue" state which means you can't be reasonably denied. It takes about 2-3 months to get it back (background check...a good thing). If the ATF says you are okay, you will get the license in the mail.

This permit allows you to have on your person, a loaded firearm even if it is concealed. Naturally, this has limitations. You can't bring one into a restaurant that makes over 51% of it's revenue by alcohol, public gatherings, schools or school events, government property of any kind and not limited to the above....common sense.

2) Believe it or not, you do NOT have to have one to leave one in your car. It just can't be concealed. You could buy one today and leave it on your dashboard, loaded, completely legal at least as of the last booklet I read dated 2009. Go forward at your own peril (I'm NO lawyer, just a gun owner, your results in court may vary).

3) Georgia has enacted, like many states, a Castle Doctrine. This was created to help those who may have found themselves in a predicament where a crazed or influenced felon enters your dwelling/business makes verbal threats but, does not necessarily attack....you are legal to shoot them....so to speak. It means, you no longer have to retreat from a viscious act in your home, car, or similar dwelling to include (I believe) boats and RV's. You no longer have to retreat. Years ago, LEGALLY you may have considered this option as you were going to have to Prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT YOUR LIFE WAS IN IMMINENT DANGER. Not real or imagined but, one you could defend.

Well, no more deputy dog. It is now legal and OKAY to hold your ground. That is roughly what the Castle Doctrine is all about. It protects the good guys...so to speak. You don't have to retreat from a felon that is threatening to shoot or do you, your family, or a member of the public, at large. You should, however, use EXTREME caution because this is a fine line.

Example: Bad guy comes up to you at your mailbox, shoots you 3 times, turns to flee, you return fire and her turns about and shoots you...get this...in self defense....why? Because after he assaulted you, he TURNED away and at that point, you were no longer in IMMINENT DANGER? He may win in court.....ergo, the caution.....

These rules do NOT give you the authority to play dirty harry. Far from it. I only bring this up to help illustrate just how careful and cautious one needs to be when using Deadly Force and owning a firearm. If you own a gun, know it, own it, understand it or advance at your own legal peril. The bad guy is only part of your problem when you send that bullet down range....

Think about it......

As far as owning one? I advise one to get one THEY can handle and for quite a few people who are LIMITED in their abilities and commitment to the SPORT, consider a simple revolver. Lower level of training necessary, overtly reliable should you need it, simple to operate, effective, small package...all the things any home/gun owner might consider.

There are going to be a few that may respond here telling you about the litany of other gun choices you have. I only mention the revolver (snub nosed .38) as a good, general, overall handgun choice for quite a few people who need simple, reliable protection with no safeties to manipulate or deal with in a panic situation and a firearm that never jams, needs no rack to slide, and in short, is as simple as it gets......keep that in mind before you respond with you-pick-the-gun-mfg and caliber.....this is for the masses, not the classes and experienced semi-auto handgun owner....refrain, PLEASE....

Like I said, I own dozens of assorted firearms as much for collection as for hobby. I carry concealed routinely and you would never know it. I also know, that if I am hassled, I will try everything in my power to evade up to and including tossing a few bucks to make the guy go away. It's simply cheaper than to spend thousands on an attorney proving I was right. I don't need the grief.

HOWEVER, if necessary, and I pray this NEVER happens, I am fully versed, practiced, educated, responsible, and aware of the liability incurred should I go "bang" into that good night. I advise any of you to do the following should you go to the next step.

Just know that even if you are right and justified, you WILL go through an extraordinary amount of hassle proving so (potentially anyway) and you will always face the threat of civil lawsuits from survivors up to and including the knucklehead you shot!!! There's an attorney on every corner waiting to take this if they think they can make a buck out of it. Be forewarned.

Be safe, be vigilant, be aware of your surroundings. And if you do choose to arm yourself, take the time to LEARN how to use your weapon properly so you only harm the one it's intended for?

P.S. Concealed permits only apply to handguns. Knives (always a good 2nd choice) are not covered. In Georgia, the open blade can not exceed 3 inches. Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 09:54 AM
 
479 posts, read 699,767 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by plessthanpointohfive View Post
First off, I'm not a conservative. Never have been and never will be. I'm as liberal as you can possibly imagine (but not a Democrat, mind you). As such, I do no subscribe to a list of ethics/morals/mores/beliefs held by some group of people who affiliate via politics or religion, etc. I believe what my life experiences have taught me. And I ain't a young woman, nor someone who never went far from home. I have been very, very, very far from home in ways that are more than simply geographic space.

Second off, there's nothing inconsistent about my personal believes. A. I don't believe the government should be in the "business" of killing people. B. I am sympathetic to individuals who kill in self-defense. C. I am fine with the right to bear arms, but D. with great power comes great responsibility, to quote the SpiderMan movie (actually, it's origin is Mayor Gilroy of NYC in 1892, discussing partisan control of the government) so I am all for regulation that either mandates or incentivizes(sic) gun owners to take gun safety classes.

Third off, as far as my "statistics" I can definitely tell you that guns kept for self-protection are 43x+ more likely to kill or harm you or someone else than to be successfully used in self-defense (New England Journal of Med, 1986).

They are 22x more likely to be unintentionally used in shootings, criminal assaults, homicides and suicide attempts than in self defense (Journal of Trauma, 1998).

As I said, I am not anti-gun. I own 2 handguns and 2 shotguns. I am also trained in gun safety and in gun operation. But let's not be deniers, okay? We can't expect people to just purchase a weapon and use it the way they intend to. The risk of harming someone who doesn't deserve it is way too great. And society pays for that, literally.
You made your liberal position quite clear in your previous post. Im not sure why you felt the need to restate it.

The fallacy of your argument is your BELIEF that govt mandated "training" will result in fewer gun accidents. You have that belief based on an assumption, not facts. Has there been a study showing the number of accidents between a "trained" gun owner group and a non-trained? Until there is one you have only your assumption.

The inherent danger of a mishandled gun is the only incentive needed to encourage proper handling. If somebody isnt smart enough to figure that out, a gun accident is probably the best thing for the gene pool.

Your statistics are quite dated. Regardless, previously you indicated that gun owners were very likely to shoot themselves. That is patently not true. Many tens of millions of people will own guns who will never shoot themsevles (nor anyone else).

My conservative beliefs have NOTHING to do with religion. They have to do with the preeminenece of the individual, the principle on which this country was founded. I dont believe in the "nanny state", where the govt is charged with protecting us from....ourselves! Good lord, that is not the job of the govt!! Given that obesity kills far more people than guns, next I guess we will want the govt to regulate our daily calorie intake, right? After all, society pays for that, doenst it. Better start demanding cakes and cookies be outlawed or restricted!

The govt's job is to keep order so that commerce may proceed at the most expeditious rate possible. Their job is not to protect us from our own stupidity/carelessness. People take themselves out everyday. Sometimes by accident, sometimes on purpose. That wont ever change.

If someone has committed heinous crimes against fellow citizens that are worthy of the death penalty, I have no trouble with it. It should be a much more efficent use of govt resources rather than feeding clothing and housing such an individual their whole life (but often isnt because of all the absurd legal machinations)

The nanny state is a liberal concept based on utopian ideals that have no basis in reality. Darwin and Ayn Rand had it right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 12:02 PM
 
31,994 posts, read 36,548,100 times
Reputation: 13254
Great post, Caleb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleb Longstreet View Post
Making the decision to own a firearm brings on an inherent and grave responsibility because as we all know, they are very, very unforgiving if you make a mistake with one.

That said, I am very much on the side of gun ownership, albeit responsibly. We expect people to get a license and a modicum of training before driving a 2 ton vehicle down the road (and larger up to class IV/19,000 lb GVW) so, asking someone to have a modicum of training is not entirely a bad idea.

To be sure, I am a very staunch advocate of owning firearms. I just don't want anyone, especially a smaller diminutive or physically weak one owning some S&W 500 as they probably just become a danger to the public at large. Asking to demonstrate a basic understanding and knowledge of said firearms is not all that bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 12:11 PM
 
31,994 posts, read 36,548,100 times
Reputation: 13254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullbear View Post
You made your liberal position quite clear in your previous post. Im not sure why you felt the need to restate it.

The fallacy of your argument is your BELIEF that govt mandated "training" will result in fewer gun accidents. You have that belief based on an assumption, not facts. Has there been a study showing the number of accidents between a "trained" gun owner group and a non-trained? Until there is one you have only your assumption.
I truly don't understand the opposition to requiring basic firearms training for people who buy guns. If you can demonstrate that you already have proficiency, then maybe you should be exempt from training, but as Caleb said, we wouldn't let somebody behind the wheel of a car unless it was shown that they knew what they are doing.

I grew up around guns and am a staunch supporter of the private right to own firerarms. I've got a number of them in the house and have had occaision to use them in self-defense before, and was damn glad I had them. I've also got friends who are passionate hunters, collectors and target shooters, and they have every right to do this.

But why the opposition to some basic training? Everybody I know who knows about guns would never take one out without being confident about their abilities. Nor would they go out with people who didn't know what they were doing. You're begging for a Dick Cheney moment when you do that.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top