Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Man dies from wounds after accidental shooting

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:57 AM
Original message
Man dies from wounds after accidental shooting
Beaverton police arrested a 60-year-old man in connection with a shooting that killed one man and injured another Monday night at the Mobile Home Corral.

Police said two brothers, 36-year-old Preston Wilson and 31-year-old Phillip Wilson, were both shot during the incident.

Phillip Wilson suffered a gunshot wound to his face, and died at Legacy Emmanuel Hospital Wednesday, surrounded by family. Preston Wilson suffered a gunshot wound to his finger.

. . .

The gun used in the shooting was registered to Laffoon, who holds a concealed weapons permit.

Alcohol appears to be a factor in the shooting as all three men were reportedly drinking throughout the evening, said Det. Pam Yazzolino, Beaverton police spokeswoman.

http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=...

****************************

ccw holder with a gun - alcohol - a death

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. don't drink and shoot your friends...what is a mobile home corral?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NBachers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
2. It's a mobile home and RV park in Beaverville
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 08:25 AM by NBachers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. Pulled out the gun to "defuse the struggle". Hmm.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 08:41 AM by bluerum
I say let the drunks duke it out and break the furniture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
4. And the carnage continues.
It's time to ban that Demon Rum. If they outlaw alcohol then "accidents" like this just couldn't happen. Do it for the children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gravity556 Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. "You know what, Stewart?
I like you. You're not like the other people here
in the trailer park. Oh no, don't get me wrong, they're fine people, good
Americans. But they're content to sit back, maybe watch a little Mork and
Mindy on channel 57. Maybe kick back a cool Coors 16-ouncer. They're
good fine people, Stuart"

Booze and guns, while sounding like a good idea (come on, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms. Who bought the chips?) are on a bad idea scale-like amateur death ray construction and a leaky roof in a wet locale. Or fireworks and beer. Gotcha with that one, didn't I? Actually probably more dangerous than guns and beer//
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
6. Some gun owners are stupid. I agree. n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
7. I am glad we are in agreement bout how guns and booze do not mix.
We advocate the same thing. Great.


Was there another point you were trying to make?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. you did see the "ccw" part, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. While those gun owners who have carry permits are more law abiding ...
and misuse their firearms far less often than those gun owners who do not have carry permits, they are not angels.

Obviously with 8,000,000 to 10,000,000 people licensed to carry, there will be a few instances where a person with a license does something wrong with his weapon.

I don't believe that any of us who support concealed carry in the Gungeon ever said that those with a permit never commit a crime with their firearm.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. 2 in just a matter of days - the drunk in Missouri and this case
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. So what? You keep trying to insinuate something, but refuse to just come out and say it. Why?
Stop playing games and make your point so we can get on with the discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #18
22. perhaps CCW-holders are not as responsible as suggested
2 in the past few days - one resulting in a death.

But - you knew that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Ahh, so if that is your premise, that "CCW-holders are not as responsible as suggested"
then present your evidence and data to support your (dubious) claim. Two anecdotal current events stories do NOT invalidate the hard data, so unless you have something MORE to add to this, I will simply understand that you do not have any data or evidence to support your (fabricated) claim.

Your turn. Show us the evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. you get the point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #26
33. The only point anyone here is getting is that you are intellectually dishonest in your attempt
to present an argument. If that was your point, then point made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. you get the point
CCWers are clearly not as responsible as portrayed here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. We get the point that you were able to find two events
compare those to the general population, to the number of "events" that occur with non-ccw holders and give us the results then. Just the cold hard statistics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #43
50. Apples and oranges.
I'll bet that nonCCW holders with the same criminal and mental records have about the same crime rate as those that do have a CCW license. When you compare a selected group to the whole population, of course you'll get skewed numbers when you include all of the criminals in only one group to begin with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #36
53. Yes, I get the point that you are intellectually dishonest. Well done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. Now correlate to the general population.
2 is not much of a statistical blip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. who said those 2 were all of the CC-incidents?
Just the two that came to mind over the past couple of days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. You are using a typical tactic of those who oppose concealed carry ...
You are promoting irrational fear and paranoia by trying to paint all people with carry permits as irresponsible based on the actions of a very few.

But if I were in your position I might do the same. It's hard to win a discussion when all the statistics and the facts prove you wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #30
38. And all your work still lay before you to definitively show that CPL holders are less
law-abiding than the general public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. you wouldn't be putting words in my mouth, now would you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Your words
"CCWers are clearly not as responsible as portrayed here"


Clearly? Go ahead and establish that. Since the pro-ccw contingent's claim is that CCW holders are STATISTICALLY more law abiding. Not 'universally' or whatever bar might actually meet your claim above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. could you share the evidence that CCW holders are more law abiding
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. Permit holders charges filed by Michigan.
This has been shown in various ways before, and I'm not going to do your homework for you.
Florida and Michigan report revocation of CPL's due to criminal activity. Michigan even shows CPL holders charged with a crime (not yet convicted).

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1645_3501_4621...
http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1591_3503_4654...

The VPC's own numbers show a lower murder rate among CPL holders.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
(See post 6)


And Florida's revocation/suspension/renewal data.
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/reports.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. so your statement is based on CPL revocation . . . and murder rates
and that is supposed to support a "law abiding" claim.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. As a percentage of total population. Yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #42
60. They may well be more law abiding as a class. So what?
They usually go through more rigorous background checks and don't include felons. Law abiding behavior doesn't preclude stupid behavior. Carrying a gun brings them much closer to becoming potential felons. Stupid is as stupid does. It's their choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #38
59. Who ever said they were less law abiding than the general public?
I've never seen anyone claim that. Toters do claim the opposite though and they may even be correct, as they mostly appear to have graduated from being hall monitors at the school of moral righteousness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #28
58. Those 2 jacked up the CC quota by about 5% for this year in 2 days
I'd call that more than a blip. You think more CC permits are gonna bring that number down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #22
80. I think they are. No one suggested that permit.license holders never....
...accidentally or intentionally shot anyone. The clam has always been that they less likely than the general public.

I see no evidence to contradict that claim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
49. You have made a great case
for applying the same rules for obtaining a CCW to the purchase of any handgun. More complete background checks, class in safe handgun handling and a class in gun laws in your state. I'd be all for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #49
55. Only the fingerprint check and FBI/State Patrol background check
applies in my state. Washington does no classes: shooting or legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #49
64. I actually have no problem with that ...
I'm sure the NRA would disagree.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. I did. I also saw that this happened in their home, so having a CCW was not relevant.
So again, I ask, did you have another point to make? Why not just come right out and make it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I seem to remember the many posts here relative to CCW holders and their
mature, responsible attitude toward guns.

Maybe I was mistaken . . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. Obviously, you are mistaken.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 10:29 AM by cleanhippie
It has been posted, and proven with data, that as a group, CCW holders are many times MORE responsible and less likely to be involved in a gun crime than the average person.

Unless you are trying to say that this ONE instance, that took place at home, invalidates ALL of that data, again, I ask, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

No need to be afraid to just say it. If your point is supported by factual data, you will have the upper hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. one instance? Just a few days ago there was another CCW holder
drunk on school property brandishing his weapon.

Those 2 are just in the past few days.

Ignore them if you like - but one resulted in a death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Since you seem averse to actually stating your point, is this it?
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 11:07 AM by cleanhippie
"Even though there are millions of CCW holders, and backed by the copious amounts of data that show that CCW holders are many times LESS likely to be involved in a gun crime than the general public, I present two anecdotal stories that I feel dismisses ALL of that."

Have I summed up your point? No? Then state your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #17
61. You are absolutely correct
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 03:50 PM by Starboard Tack
and people who wear scuba gear in the desert never drown.
Do you make all your decisions based on factual data, or do you ever resort to common sense and the occasional reality check?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #61
67. Classic. A quote for the ages.
Do you make all your decisions based on factual data, or do you ever resort to common sense and the occasional reality check?




And now in context:

Starboard Tack (884 posts) Mon Apr-25-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #17
61.You are absolutely correct

Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 01:50 PM by Starboard Tack
and people who wear scuba gear in the desert never drown.
Do you make all your decisions based on factual data, or do you ever resort to common sense and the occasional reality check?
Keep it real.


This is pure genius. It brilliantly encapsulates the gun control viewpoint--there is a divide between factual data on the one hand and "common sense" and "reality" on the other. And obviously, we should pay less attention to factual data.

Stephen Colbert couldn't have put it better with a week to brainstorm.

Stephen usually presents resistance to factual data as a Republican position, however, for whatever that's worth. It's funny how rights opponents can't help aligning with each other.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #67
71. If it were a right you wouldn't need a permit
Rights are for everyone, not the elite few.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #71
73.  So you now advocate for no permit concealed carry? Great! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #73
79. I don't advocate for any kind of carry
but open just seems to be more honest, offensive, but honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #71
74. Alaska, Arizona, Vermont, Wyoming
and soon Montana all agree w/ you which is why they (except Vermont who never had one) have done away w/ their permitting process and have acknowledged that their citizens have a right to carry their firearms at their discretion.

More states will join them as American gun laws become more progressive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #74
81. That's great. Hopefully they'll all be as responsible as you
Fortunately, those are states where very few people live. So I don't foresee any problems. They are also the states with the highest suicide rates, so it should all even out in the end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #71
77. Concealed carry is not a right, per se.
Carry is.

Most localities still refuse to fully accept the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That doesn't change the people's actual rights, just the recognition of those rights. (If you don't accept the distinction between actual and recognized rights, read up on the "Alien and Sedition Act", or the Bush regime's Orwellian "Free Speech Zones", for that matter.)

In any event, I think you should consider basing your decisions and positions on factual data, just like those of us who support gun rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #77
82. Thank you for the education.
Obviously not everyone interprets those rights in the same way. My arguments are not so much about rights, as about behavioral choices. I believe owning and keeping arms is a right. Even carrying may be a right, but toting in town is just bad manners, like spitting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TPaine7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #82
83. I'm honored that you found something that I wrote edifying. I appreciate your kind words.
I see manners differently than you do.

Manners are often arbitrary. The words "thank" and "fuck"--as in "thank you" and "fuck you"--could easily have their meanings reversed, with no real change. Neither word is inherently good or bad. (In fact, that would be a great show for a hypnotist to put on--having a prim lady saying "fuck you, sir" to a cultured gentlman, with both of them offended at another person's open use of the vulgarity "thank."

The things that are substantively rude--or polite--have to do with treating people fairly, considerately and with respect. You can do that whether or not you're carrying. Or whether or not your weapon is concealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #67
84. Also, factual data is poisonous to moral panics.
I can see why some would object to it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #61
69. factual data=reality check
to answer your question, most of the time but I have a good gut instinct when none is available (or maybe instinct is simply factual data on a sub conscious level?) Common sense? Einstein said it best: "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age 18"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
41. By all means, cite some universal, blanket statement that *all* CCW Holders are
mature/responsible with firearms.

Go ahead. I'll wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
27. Still illegal to be intoxicated while in possession of a firearm.
A CPL is no defense/excuse.

(Nor was one necessary in his own home)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
9. Anecdotes are not indicative of a trend.
ccw holder with a gun - alcohol - a death

I'm assuming the point of posting this news event and your comment is to show that this sort of thing is a common occurrence. It is not. This anecdote simply highlights one of the rare ocassions when a CCW permit holder has engaged in a crime.

How do we know it is rare? By looking at the statistical data that states like Texas and Florida have provided for over a decade. We can see that in Texas, for example, the rate of conviction of CCW permit holders for everything from Public Lewdness to Homicide is a mere .026%. This is less than for the public at large. This means that CCW permit holders are less likely to be involved in any kind of crime, let alone firearm-related crime, than your average citizen.

Do CCW permit holders get involved in crimes? Yes. Does it happen very often? No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. 2 in a matter of a few days - the idiot in Missouri drunk flashing his
weapon on school grounds - and this one. Both CCW holders.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. 2 in millions is nothing.
2 in a matter of a few days - the idiot in Missouri drunk flashing his weapon on school grounds - and this one. Both CCW holders.

All of the above is true.

It is also true that this is completely irrelevant to what the statistics tell us about CCW permit holders. 2 examples out of tens of millions of concealed carry permit holders is statistically meaningless.

I encourage you to read this thread concerning the rate of conviction of CCW permit holders in Texas. Other states are similar:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Yes, CCW permit holders do commit crimes, even with firearms. But it is extremely rare.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
63. Statistically meaningless?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"They track deaths caused by Conceal Carry (CC) license holders. They have tracked 298 deaths since May 2007 caused by CC. These include suicide, murders, etc. Any illegal deaths cause by CC. Of course many of these deaths would have happened even if the person did not have a CC license but lets use the worse case numbers.....298 over 4 years or about 75 per year."

75/year means 1 every 5 days. Let's see how that holds with more permits being handed out like pizza fliers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #63
66. In most states, nothing has changed WRT issuance rates.
I would also like to see "These numbers do not include any killings determined by authorities to be lawful self-defense."

Funny, these one-issue advocacy groups never mention the lawful counter-use when pushing these things.

With the Department of Justice listing over 60,000 legal defensive uses of firearms per year, one wonders why the rate of malfeasance is never contrasted in the light of lawful use?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. How do they verify the 60,000 legal defense uses per year?
Paper never refuses ink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. By your (lack of) logic then, any anecdotal evidence is proof of a larger point?
Am I getting you right? Just come out and say what you want to say. No need to be scared. If your point is well-founded and supported by factual data, you will get no disagreement.
Come on, no need to be afraid, just make your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. no reason to get offensive - you get the point - CCW-holders are perhaps
not as responsible as suggested many times in this forum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. By all means, present some evidence so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. 2 cases of gross conduct in the past couple of days
1 drunk brandishing a weapon on school property
1 death

both CCW-related

Sure suggests to me some irresponsible behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #31
37. You realize you are countering a statistical trend with 2 anecdotes right?
You're going to need a lot more evidence to show that statistical trend is invalid.

Specifically because the claim is not that ALL CCW advocates ARE more law abiding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #31
51. And a snowstorm in March means AGW is a myth, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #51
56. Uh oh.
He went there.

ka-blammo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #56
68. I'm seeing a lot of parallels: the over-reliance on anecdote, the claims that
the government is refusing to do research or collect data that would support their point (so obviously, unseen mountains of such data must exist, right?), and complaints that the authorities (forum mods, around here) are censoring otherwise reasonable arguments. Not particularly compelling arguments, in any context...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-11 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #31
86. In any college math or science class....
your professor would, at best, gently point out that you are making wild extrapolations from insufficient data.

If they had already lost patience with you, their terms would be... stronger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. Not getting your point at all. You seem to be making a claim, but refuse to support it
with relevant, factual data that counters the well-substantiated fact that CCW holders are much more responsible that the general population.

If anything, I am frustrated at your continued assertion that an anecdotal story or two somehow negates everything else. Perhaps when you have an actual valid argument, supported by facts, we can continue. Until then, you are just a game player with no agenda other than to try and create a controversy that simply is not there, and instead have created controversy about yourself.

Let me know when you are ready for that factual conversation. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #32
52. Good point.
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 01:50 PM by safeinOhio
"substantiated fact that CCW holders are much more responsible that the general population." That makes a great case for applying the same requirements to purchase and possess a handgun as obtaining a CCW. That would go a long way in reducing handgun crime, using your facts and logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RSillsbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #52
65. So what you're saying is that you are a gun owner
(just like us) but you want to add more restrictions to hand gun purchases even though gun accidents and violent crime are at historically low levels and gun ownership is at historically high levels.

What would be the purpose of such legislation? Other than to make it more difficult for the law abiding to obtain handguns.

Good thing you support RKBA (just like the rest of us gun owners)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
70. *gasp* 2 makes it a trend! (or something like that)..
Is that what you're saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straw Man Donating Member (986 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-11 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #11
85. So that's two in two days.
Two in the past few days? OK, say one a day, or 365 a year. Taking the low estimate of 8,000,000 permit holders in the US, that yields a rate of .00004653 percent of CCW holders involved in criminal misuse of their firearms. Any such incident is regrettable, of course, and should be met with the full weight of the law. But it hardly looks as though the sky is falling. Perhaps you have some other numbers to share?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
62. And so it should be. Toters have set themselves a higher standard
than the rest of us plebes. When you do that, you must be prepared for scrutiny or risk losing all credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. And your point is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #10
20. Who knows? He keeps dancing around an anecdotal premise, but I think he is afraid to just come out
and state his point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
44. Another CCW permit holder gone bad. This is becoming quite common, despite what carriers say.

Looks like all those stats that supposedly "proved" CCW holders hardly ever commit a crime with the one or two guns they feel compelled to strap to their bodies when they go out in public.


Laffoon could even be one of our very own favorite gun carriers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Please specify what 'quite common' means.
Quite common as a percentage of population, or quite common among confirmation bias selection in this forum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleanhippie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #44
54. Only common in your head, Hoyt. Perhaps you should see someone about that.
In case it starts to spread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #44
57. ccw-drunk brandishing a weapon on school grounds, ccw-er pulling his gun to settle a dispute
why does the following not surprise me.

http://www.ky3.com/news/ky3-story-accident-shooting-cla...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
75. Yet aother "responsible" "law abiding" CCW permit holder
yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Remmah2 Donating Member (971 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. How do you feel about licensed drivers who speed in school zones? nt
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #76
78. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 23rd 2014, 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC