[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

I grew up in Oklahoma, where open carry has ALWAYS been legal. I can count on two fingers the times I ever saw a civilian carry openly, and in both cases, they were business owners. One of them was a favorite downtown burger joint, and I will admit, the first time I saw a guy flipping burgers with a 357 on his hip, it was a shock. But I doubt that he was ever robbed.

It's a stupid thing to worry about. Nobody who means you harm is going to advertise it.

Maybe not in the Villages but criminals market themselves often on their desire to do harm to others. Especially to members of other gangs.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Did we read the same report?

Did the report you read include the following conclusions?

- There is supportive evidence that shall-issue concealed-carry laws may increase total homicides, firearm homicides, and violent crime. Evidence for the effects of permitless-carry laws on total homicides is inconclusive.

- the existing literature provides supportive evidence that shall-issue laws increase firearm homicides.

- there is supportive evidence that shall-issue laws increase violent crime.

That permitless-carry was found to have no supportive evidence is interesting. Perhaps looking at the crime statistics of the areas prior to choosing the two different approaches would help explain the difference.

[forebubba]

Originally Posted by Rocksnap

I’m liking Florida more and more.
Floridas AG is telling law enforcement that open carry is the law of the land, after the state supreme court decision last week, stemming from a state lower court ruling that the states open carry ban was unconstitutional.
Of course there are common sense restrictions on where you cannot open carry. But this is a step in the right direction.
Side note. It’s been 17,396 days of a loaded firearm in my dwelling. Another successful day of zero discharges. Accidental or otherwise. It’s a win win!
Florida'''s open carry ban overturned: Sheriffs laud decision but caution gun owners to know these restrictions | FOX 35 Orlando

Wait for a couple of over served angry people get into at the square

[Mrprez]

Originally Posted by forebubba

Wait for a couple of over served angry people get into at the square

It’s illegal to carry a gun into a place serving alcohol. Concealed or open carry.

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I remember hearing about a few different mass shootings, when more than one person in the crowd was carrying a gun, but NONE of them shot back. For that reason - I am of the opinion that all these folks claiming to demand the right to protect themselves from a shooter - are posturing. They WANT to believe that they'd shoot the assailant. But chances are, they won't. And if they do shoot, and miss, guess who ends up shooting them instead?

This is a completely ridiculous argument. Depends what you mean by mass shooting. No one is going to try to take down the guy in Las Vegas a few years ago shooting from a high perch, but if you're in a small restaurant and some whack job starts shooting, you would be much more likely to intervene.

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Did the report you read include the following conclusions?

- There is supportive evidence that shall-issue concealed-carry laws may increase total homicides, firearm homicides, and violent crime. Evidence for the effects of permitless-carry laws on total homicides is inconclusive.

- the existing literature provides supportive evidence that shall-issue laws increase firearm homicides.

- there is supportive evidence that shall-issue laws increase violent crime.

That permitless-carry was found to have no supportive evidence is interesting. Perhaps looking at the crime statistics of the areas prior to choosing the two different approaches would help explain the difference.

"Shall issue" hmmm, what do the states that have Shall Issue have in common? Would those be the states that previously had (and still do) the most restrictive gun laws? Did those gun bans in NYC, Chicago, Baltimore and DC, etc, lead to any reduction in gun crime when the bans were in place before they were forced by SCOTUS to become Shall Issue?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

"Shall issue" hmmm, what do the states that have Shall Issue have in common? Would those be the states that previously had (and still do) the most restrictive gun laws? Did those gun bans in NYC, Chicago, Baltimore and DC, etc, lead to any reduction in gun crime when the bans were in place before they were forced by SCOTUS to become Shall Issue?

According to the paper, what those states have in common is an increase in violent crime AFTER shall-issue became law.

Take a population with a high crime rate then make it easier to get a gun and crime increase. Who would have guessed?

Take a population that has such a low crime rate that permitless-carry doesn’t seem like a ridiculous idea and crime does not increase. A little surprising yet…

Definitely needs more study but there might be a pattern.

[MrFlorida]

Originally Posted by kingofbeer

Win win for who? Can someone carry an unconcealed gun into McDonalds and order a Big Mac? If somone carries an unconcealed gun, how do you know they are not there to rob the establishment? Welcome to Floriduh!

Ask somebody who lives in the 45 other states that allow open carry....

[MrFlorida]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I remember hearing about a few different mass shootings, when more than one person in the crowd was carrying a gun, but NONE of them shot back. For that reason - I am of the opinion that all these folks claiming to demand the right to protect themselves from a shooter - are posturing. They WANT to believe that they'd shoot the assailant. But chances are, they won't. And if they do shoot, and miss, guess who ends up shooting them instead?

Then there's the possibility that someone turns the corner JUST as a defender is firing against the original shooter. And that corner-turner person sees the defender doing the shooting, and shoots THEM thinking they're saving the day.

You couldn't pay me to possess a firearm. If I thought otherwise, I would've gone into law enforcement instead of retail.

Daniel Perry comes to mind...

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by MrFlorida

Daniel Perry comes to mind...

Murder of Garrett Foster - Wikipedia


That is a real mess as far as any indication of a justice system that works. And the complete absence of common sense.

[MrFlorida]

Originally Posted by forebubba

Wait for a couple of over served angry people get into at the square

You know people DO carry guns now don't you? They are concealed so you'll never know. I don't see anybody getting shot over getting served.

[Joecooool418]

Originally Posted by maggie1

This could become a slippery slope for those who will now purchase a firearm and end up shooting themselves or a family member by accident. Don't forget to contact your insurance agent for an add-on to your policy, because if you accidentally shoot someone who didn't deserve to be killed, or even if they did, you'll be in a heap of trouble financially.

Don't get me wrong, I am not against gun ownership, but unless there is training involved where the gun owner is placed under stress, the heart is beating at 100+ bpm, there's shortness of breath, and the sweat is running down your face, then it's best not to carry a firearm. Just regular target practice won't get it.

The average person might think they know what to do when faced with a life-and-death situation involving a firearm, but believe me, they don't. However, I also understand the axiom of it being better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Lots of things to think about, but training needs to be a big part of the equation before strapping on.

Well, that's the inconvenient truth about gun ownership.

“People living in homes with guns were 7 times more likely to be shot by a family member or acquaintance than by a stranger.”
— American Journal of Epidemiology, 2003

and

“For every time a gun in the home is used in self-defense, there were 37 suicides involving firearms.”
— Kellermann et al., NEJM, 1992 (backed by later CDC studies)

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by MrFlorida

You know people DO carry guns now don't you? They are concealed so you'll never know. I don't see anybody getting shot over getting served.

There have been incidents in which a gun carrier goes off the deep end. I am not talking about school and other type of culprits but just someone who snaps. Killing of Chad Oulson - Wikipedia

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

This is a completely ridiculous argument. Depends what you mean by mass shooting. No one is going to try to take down the guy in Las Vegas a few years ago shooting from a high perch, but if you're in a small restaurant and some whack job starts shooting, you would be much more likely to intervene.

Then what is your justification for carrying a firearm in that kind of crowd? And if some whack job starts shooting, and hits you before you even realize you need to unholster your weapon - or if you hit them and miss and hit another customer - then what?

[Mrprez]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Then what is your justification for carrying a firearm in that kind of crowd? And if some whack job starts shooting, and hits you before you even realize you need to unholster your weapon - or if you hit them and miss and hit another customer - then what?

Basic firearms training for concealed carry.