The wild west saloon of the 1850s?, or the modern DC bar with a “seedy” crowd.

Which period in history had more innocent policmen killed, than bad guys? The roaring 20’s when every criminal or mafia member carried guns, or the modern 2008 gangs and mafia hits on policemen and judges.

Which period in history had more innocent chidren killed from discovery of revolvers hidden under the bed, the early 1700s when indians were everywhere, and you needed a weapon to protect your family or the 2000’s when you need a weapon in your house and your care to protect your family.

True or false? a guy with a gun who wants to shoot you in a convience store he is robbing can be killed with “pepper” spray.

Which happened more often, a guy with a gun, can be killed by a student at Virginia tech, before he kills others happens more often than, a student at Harvard killed a fellow student over a “dual” over a girl’s affections and betrayal?

True or false? a sick-o can get a gun as easily as a non-sicko?

True or False? A sick-o with a gun, or a criminal with a gun, is going to shoot more innocent people more often and wrongly than a law-abiding citizen with a gun is going to accidently shoot an innocent person or police officer?

True or False? a criminal can always get a gun, no matter what the law says.

True or false? An innocent person is more often killed than a criminal with a gun?

True or False? A law abiding citizen with a concealed weapon is more likely to shoot an officer, that if he caries it out in the open?

TRue or False a criminal with a concealed weapon will have it concealed anyway without a permit, and is more likely to shoot an officer, than if the carries it out in the open because his permit says he has to.

Really which society had more violence, the Wild west where everyone carried guns, or crime neighborhoods where everyone carries guns? You can’t base this on what you see in the movies.

Can we make a weapon that will stop a criminal dead in his tracks faster than he can shoot you with a gun, and not harm a policemen that is wearing protection and the necessary armor for his job?

Personally I vote for only “large” easily visible guns to protect homes and cars (legally) as a built in feature, no small hidden guns, but small hidden self protection devices that really work to stop bullets and bad guys, But FIRST we hunt down the criminals and kill them without a second thought or lock them away with harsher punishment laws, that don’t let them roam the streets of innocents, no matter what it costs us. Get rid of parole, and other ways of minimizing sentences and make all crimes with guns by criminals VERY HARSH. If they carry sticks, then let the punishment be light.

Why dont we kill two birds so to speak and make it justifiable for people open carrying in a bar to shoot drunks getting into the driver seats of cars.

You should attend the next VCDL meeting. It would probably help clear up a number of misconceptions you seem to have.

Then why bring it up? That is like saying, I saw some person driving the speed limit in their large horse power car. Why even mention it, if you were not otherwise just trying to cause issues? Or trying to imply they were breakign the law.

Jay,

I do not like onion rings….

CCW permit holders have a lower percentage of “bad shoots” than the police do.

Generally this is because the police arrive at the scene after an incident is developed and must, in many cases, make a snap decision on who the “bad guy” is. (Look up “blue on blue” incidents.)

Permit holders are involved from the start and usually have a pretty clear idea of who the threat is.

Permit holders are generally going to be engaging at closer range than police officers so their hits have a lower chance of being off target.

Permit holders generally are the solo participant in their encounters so group tactics like covering fire aren’t employed.

The thing that you should take away from all of this is that, generally, its safer and more effective (for everyone concerned) for a permit holder to resist force than to rely on the police.

Those men were not breaking the law, in fact they were following the law if they did not have a CHP. Why do you liberals hate parts of the Bill Of Rights?

Anon,

I agree. Maybe it is the crowd I hang out with, but I have never seen people act in such a manner when carrying. I think the vast majority of gun owners understand the responsibility of gun ownership.

GOOMBA, it is mean spirited comments like yours that will continue to diminish the image of gun owners in more moderate folk like myself. I would never say anything to you about your right to open carry. It is your right. But if you public act like a idiot in front of my family while in possession of a firearm, it is my right to leave to keep them safe. Does that make me a nervous Nellie? Probably. But I don’t mind a bit.

You’re required by law to open carry in an ABC licensed restaurant.
If you’ve been concealing you were breaking the law.

Krutis,

Once again, “Why the Gun is Civilization”
http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-gun-is-civilization.html

“Macho” has nothing to do with it.

100 years ago only the “bad guys” hid their guns. Honest law-abiding citizens had no need to hide their guns. Carrying a gun is the birth-right of every citizen of this country. While you may choose not to, the fact is that guns are one of the cornerstones of this country. You don’t like it you’re free to go to one of the other countries that restricts gun ownership.

Regardless of public sentiment 100 years ago, gun owners today realize the benefits of protective coloration — criminals have no way to know who is armed, which protects everyone.

Concealed carry in restaurants also allows Virginians to enjoy an evening out without the risk of some nervous Nellie from New Jersey calling the police and causing a scene.