"No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21397
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:44 pm

Dangerousman wrote:Does the possibility that air marshals are aboard your flight terrify you? Talk about a confined and crowded place to shoot! (with little cover to boot)

Are you really comparing air marshals and the training they received to any yahoo with a concealed carry permit, who needed little or no training to tote around a gun in public? Ever hear of the term "false analogy"?

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:47 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:D-man seems to talk in Orwellian doublespeak. For example, he thinks that the Second Amendment enshrines an inalienable and universal Natural Right to firearms... but only for some people.


Somewhere along the way you changed it to "firearms" Henry.

I believe I said a "right to bear arms." But I'm used to people changing my words around to suit their purposes. But, back to my question--

If you look back at your past posts, you said that you believed that the right to free speech was a natural right. Yet you also said that you thought it was okay to infringe that right at times. So how am I engaging in doublespeak any more than you are?

Are you saying that the right to bear arms is a natural right, but it doesn't apply to firearms? Or are you just mindlessly quibbling again?

As as far as First Amendment rights, I've already mentioned that reasonable time, place and manner restriction are constitutional. A balancing act between conflicting rights (such as the right to a fair trial) makes those temporary restrictions fair. But no person is every completely barred from exercising First Amendment rights. Yet you have said that some people can be completely barred from possessing guns (or other weapons).

If you don't see the contradictions in your statements then you are either extremely disingenuous or terminally obtuse.


I don't understand why you're speaking in terms of the Constitution. We're talking about natural rights, and whether it is ever acceptable to infringe upon them. That discussion has nothing to do with the Constitution since natural rights do not need a constitution for their existence or for their infringement. Natural rights presumably existed prior to the Constitution and exist in areas where the Constitution has no effect. The Constitution is an expression of legal rights, which may or may not have any relationship to natural rights.

My restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms are also subject to time, place and manner. Keep guns out of the hands of crazy people? Sure! When they stop being crazy, don't infringe the right any longer. Can't scream "fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire? Sure! In a different place or time, scream all you want.

You haven't shown there's any real difference in your restrictions on speech than there are for mine for bearing arms.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:54 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:Does the possibility that air marshals are aboard your flight terrify you? Talk about a confined and crowded place to shoot! (with little cover to boot)

Are you really comparing air marshals and the training they received to any yahoo with a concealed carry permit, who needed little or no training to tote around a gun in public? Ever hear of the term "false analogy"?


Tell us whether you think the risk to innocent people is greater when an air marshal shoots aboard a full airliner, or when a civilian concealed carry permit holder shoots in a wide open public place such as the parking lot at VA Tech.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21397
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:04 pm

Dangerousman wrote:I believe I said a "right to bear arms." But I'm used to people changing my words around to suit their purposes.

Dangerousman wrote:I don't understand why you're speaking in terms of the Constitution.
Ahem. Where did you get your quoted term above?

Dangerousman wrote:We're talking about natural rights, and whether it is ever acceptable to infringe upon them.

You say that First and Second Amendment rights are natural rights (that is, should apply to all (universal) and can never be totally prohibited to any person (inalienable). Yet you say that bearing arms can be denied on a permanent basis (violent mentally ill individuals).

And yes I agree that time, place and manner restrictions can apply to any right (natural or not). I've already stated so. That has nothing to do with the debate over the natural rights status of arms (fire or not).

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Dangerousman » Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:06 pm

Henry Vilas wrote: Ever hear of the term "false analogy"?


Ever hear of "straw man?" You're pretending I made a comparison of training when I made a comparison of two different settings for shootings. Trust me on this: All the training in the world is not going to make for a "safe shooting" situation aboard a crowded airliner. Air Marshals will probably carry frangible rounds that are less likely to pass through people and things. Air Marshals will have a general idea of where the vital hydraulics and electric controls are on a plane. Air Marshals train enough to be decent shots, although at the distances likely to be found inside a plane, my mother could shoot accurately enough. Air Marshals, or anyone trained to shoot in a crowded environment, will drop low and shoot upwards to minimize the chances of hitting someone behind the perpetrator, if conditions allow. But unless you're wearing a pilot uniform, I wouldn't expect a great deal of consideration to your being in the wrong place at the wrong time aboard a plane by an Air Marshal.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21397
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:08 pm

Dangerousman wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:Does the possibility that air marshals are aboard your flight terrify you? Talk about a confined and crowded place to shoot! (with little cover to boot)

Are you really comparing air marshals and the training they received to any yahoo with a concealed carry permit, who needed little or no training to tote around a gun in public? Ever hear of the term "false analogy"?


Tell us whether you think the risk to innocent people is greater when an air marshal shoots aboard a full airliner, or when a civilian concealed carry permit holder shoots in a wide open public place such as the parking lot at VA Tech.

Another false analogy. Air marshalls have stopped violent acts aboard aircraft and no plane was shot down.

You remind me of Archie Bunker who, because of the frequent skyjackings in the early 1970s, proposed that all passengers be issued guns upon boarding their flights.

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3200
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby DCB » Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:28 pm

I don't have any well-formed opinions about concealed carry, but I came across this, and thought it was worthy of a bump in this thread:

http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/no-comment-1

which links to:
Frequently Asked Questions About the Gun Shows wrote:No loaded firearms and no loaded magazines are permitted in any Crossroads gun show. Your personal safety is our number one priority while you are at the show.


I thought the argument for concealed carry was that it would make us all safer. Wouldn't a gathering of gun-enthusiasts in gun-lovin' Texas be even more safe?

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7690
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby rabble » Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:02 pm

Looks like they've changed it, or maybe I'm not looking in the right place. What I see is "We respectfully request that you do not bring any loaded firearm into the gun show. Safety is our Number One Priority, and a safe environment in the show can only be maintained if there are no loaded guns in the show."

In other words we'd really like you to not carry a loaded gun. You CAN, but we'd really rather you didn't.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12803
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby snoqueen » Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:15 pm

Wow. That really says it all. Even the most hardcore gun fanatics realize they're not comfortable with a bunch of armed strangers wandering around the gun show.

Thanks for joining the rest of us, guys. Have a safe show.

lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3365
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby lukpac » Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:04 pm

There was this...

PROHIBITED ITEMS:

1. Pornographic materials, drug paraphernalia, items
glorifying Nazism, items offensive to the general public.
2. Loaded firearms
3. Loose rounds of ammunition
4. Black Powder
5. Alcoholic beverages, unless sold by the concessionaire
6. Tobacco Products
7. No raffles


http://web.archive.org/web/201011210300 ... mation.htm

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21397
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Henry Vilas » Mon Jan 09, 2012 10:04 am

Chief Noble Wray and Madison police brace for concealed carry

...at the Madison Police Department. Chief Noble Wray and other police officials there have been training officers and contemplating what concealed guns mean for Madison.

"The pressure is making sure we understand the nuances," the chief tells me in an interview at his office. "Do you need a permit (for a gun that is partially hidden) or do you not? Sometimes it's just the matter of the jacket you have on."

The law allowing residents 21 years or older to carry concealed weapons with a permit — and without any enforceable training requirement — was among the parade of special interest payoffs ramrodded last year by Republicans.

What really trips Wray's trigger is the lack of a meaningful training requirement. Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen prepared rules requiring four hours of training courses, but fellow Republicans thought even that low bar overly onerous and GOP Gov. Scott Walker agreed. Says Wray, "I thought four hours was a bare minimum," adding that almost all state law enforcement officials agree.

lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3365
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby lukpac » Mon Jan 09, 2012 10:22 am

From the NYT a few weeks ago:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/us/mo ... wanted=all

Alan Simons was enjoying a Sunday morning bicycle ride with his family in Asheville, N.C., two years ago when a man in a sport utility vehicle suddenly pulled alongside him and started berating him for riding on the highway.

Mr. Simons, his 4-year-old son strapped in behind him, slowed to a halt. The driver, Charles Diez, an Asheville firefighter, stopped as well. When Mr. Simons walked over, he found himself staring down the barrel of a gun.

“Go ahead, I’ll shoot you,” Mr. Diez said, according to Mr. Simons. “I’ll kill you.”

Mr. Simons turned to leave but heard a deafening bang. A bullet had passed through his bike helmet just above his left ear, barely missing him.

Mr. Diez, as it turned out, was one of more than 240,000 people in North Carolina with a permit to carry a concealed handgun. If not for that gun, Mr. Simons is convinced, the confrontation would have ended harmlessly. “I bet it would have been a bunch of mouthing,” he said.

Mr. Diez, then 42, eventually pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill.


And:

More than 200 permit holders were also convicted of gun- or weapon-related felonies or misdemeanors, including roughly 60 who committed weapon-related assaults.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: "No Guns" signs, not "Help Wanted" signs

Postby Dangerousman » Mon Jan 09, 2012 6:00 pm

From the Capital Times:

but fellow Republicans thought even that low bar overly onerous


Or, more accurately, "overly arbitrary" since there is nothing contained in the law that grants authority to the DOJ to set a minimal time on the training.

On the larger point, Wray observes: "What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent."


By all means lead the way, Chief. Disarm your officers and make your police department the example for society. Show us how well it works.

From the NY Times:

More than 2,400 permit holders were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, excluding traffic-related crimes, over the five-year period, The Times found when it compared databases of recent criminal court cases and licensees. While the figure represents a small percentage of those with permits


Not only does it represent "a small percentage" it also shows the the crime rate among conceal carry permit holders is many times lower than among the general population. The rate of crimes committed by police is presumably lower than the rate of the general population. But are the small number of crimes committed by police an argument in favor of prohibiting the police from carrying weapons in general?

You got to love it when you look at the anti-gunner's statistics and see that they are in reality favorable to the pro-gun side. That's why typically the anti-gun side gets all full of detail with anecdotal information about particular cases involving crimes committed by CCW licensees/permit holders, but gloss over or completely ignore the hard statistics that repeatedly show the CCW crowd represents a significantly safer and law-abiding segment of society. They might go so far as to mention in passing that it is a "small percentage" of the CCW people actually commit a crime (and never break down what is meant by "crime" leaving everyone to falsely assume these are mostly violent gun-related crimes) but they never wish to present the crime rate statistics of the general population to make a complete comparison. If the NY Times is correct in saying there were 2400 misdemeanors and felonies committed by 240,000 CCW-permitted Tarheels in a 5-year period, then then that's a pretty damn low crime rate. That would be similar to having just barely more than one crime of any sort committed per day in Madison. The 2008 Madison crime statistics I found showed that for just burglaries alone, there was an average of 5.5 committed each day during that year. The same MPD reports indicated that there was an average of about 41 adult arrests per day that same year. So, this safe little community of Madison is more like Detroit or St. Louis compared to a community made up of concealed carry permit-holding North Carolinians. I'll have to write to the NYT contributor and thank him for showing us how good the North Carolina permit holders are!


Return to “Local Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests