This is about the same amount of classroom time and "test" time for someone to get their first driver's license. Does this mean that he or she is in a position to operate a car????????????

yes, and keep in mind the OP did have one entire hour of training on the shooting range to get his permit. Note that all the cops and military in Boston fired all those shots and didn't manage to kill the younger brother. There is also the story told by the chief of police that they didn't kill the older brother either, that he was in fact run over by his sibling driving away. Either way, cops and soldiers miss a lot more than they hit. Good luck with your head shot in a darkened theater or on the square.

Thank you for being observent. That was the point I was trying to make. I think the Colorado shooter had a rifle. Anyone with a CCW would have a pistol and making a head shot with a pistol from a distance and in a darkened theater AND in a high stress (person shooting at you; people screaming; people running around) situation would be almost impossible.

Someone shooting back with a pistol in that situation would have a far more likely chance of hitting a bystander than the head shot on the bad guy.

In the 3+ years I have been living in The Villages, there was only ONE incident of gun violence. That was a domestic shooting and BOTH were retired police officers. It did not leave their house.

There were two other separate incidents of men with concealed weapon permits who were arrested after displaying their pistols in a threatening manner to someone for taking a parking space. These resulted in arrests and charges of Assault With A Deadly Weapon. I am sure the legal fees and fines (maybe jail time) were well worth the parking space.

Does anyone else know of anymore gun violence incidents in The Villages where it would be necessary to tote a gun in The Villages?

Yes it is!!!

I haven't seen any houses burned down in my neighborhood lately, so maybe I should cancel my fire insurance.

I Say to mat o and you say tomato, let's call the whole thing off
 

Well what I have learned from viewing TOTV ,that the following subjects really hit a nerve guns, dog poop, old people driving cars/carts, young people driving cars/carts, slow golf carts, fast golf carts, round-a-abouts, dogs at the square, dogs in restaurants. Gosh isn't living in TV exciting.

Owning a gun is a personal choice. Yet I noticed during a review of the posts the same people who argue against gun ownership are the same ones that have argued that abortion is a personal choice. Hmmmmmmmmm

BTK got it right. I have never owned a gun and only shot one, once, in order to get through boot camp.

However, because of the push by some to limit my Second Amendment rights I have been seriously considering going to the gun club in Leesbug to buy a gun and learn how to use it. In addition to the Second Amendment issue what changed my mind I want one "just in case as BTK pointed out. The police are slow to respond and the FBI missed big time with those guys from Boston.

As for how many bullets actually hit their target my response would be how many of those bad guys will hang around long enough to find out

By the way its tomato.

Are you kidding? The older sibling died of lead poisoning. He had so many GSW's they were too numerous to count. And the younger one got away because he drove away in the dark. He, too, was shot numerous times.

OK, let's split hairs. Either way these two were going down.

Perhaps backgrounds checks should be necessary for pressure cooker purchasers since they can be used to manufacture weapons of mass destruction.

I'm sure at least one person is already thinking about that one.

I have a CCW Permit in Pennsylvania, what must I do to get one in Florida? It mine tranferable from Pennsylvania? What does it cost?

Florida has a reciprocal agreement with states that issue Concealed Weapon Permits. I'd just keep your Penn. license active or apply for one here.

He just didn't have enough time to die from the gun shot wounds.

I am an active law enforcement officer, and carry off duty often, as many of us do. I have been in the villages 5 times and do not carry. However when I leave the Villages I carry again. I am sure that TV has many retired law enforcement officers that carry as needed. Just my opinion.

No it is not splitting hairs. It speaks volumes about the ability of incredibly highly trained good guy with a gun, far more trained than anyone who needed a six hour course to get his carry license, to stop a bad guy with a gun. They didn't succeed in killing the suspects with what apparently were hundreds of shots. NYC cops in a massive shootout near the Empire State Bldg succeeded in hitting 9 civilians in addition to the suspect who was standing still only a few feet from the cops. The point I am making is that extremely well trained personnel miss a whole lot. The minimally trained 70 year old in a highly chaotic situation is not going to do nearly as well as the cops and soldiers. I am troubled by the contention that if only there had been bunched of armed civilians all unloading their weapons in the theater in Colorado all would be well. Far more likely they would have had a horrific circular firing squad shooting at each other and potentially increasing the carnage.

This is why magazine limits are not a good idea.

Excellent post, Billethkid!

JUST EXCELLENT! Thanks for sharing....

:agree: Collateral damage, unfortunately, is a fact of life or death, as it may. In the heat of the moment could you do any better than the LEO's?

All you "armchair quarterbacks" just sit back and judge the results of these gunfights. Let's put your life in the line of fire for a civil servant's pay and see how you react.

BTW, I've had my FL. CCW permit for 26 yrs.

I'm thinking about carrying in TV, just in case I get attacked......by a big dog in a restaurant.


:D


.

while there is no comparison to hitting the target....you must also allow for the very positive and impressive impact of a perpetrator hearing a gun shot or a near miss......it does affect his attitude about his now changed environment......yes even if he has much more fire power and capability. Even the bad guys do not like being shot at!!!!

A comment on the 5 or 6 or 8 hour class for weapons permits. There is an expectation that one will either have or as a result of the class seek training. The much more important aspect of the course is all about conveying an understanding of what it means to fire a gun in a public situation. What are the laws and how they apply to a shooter. It opens one's thinking about what happens to a bullet that leaves the gun....where does it go....what if you miss....what if you hit or kill somebody. It defines deadly force.....what constitutes a concealed weapon (especially for those who erroneously think it automatically means a gun!!!!).

There is a lot gained in that 8 hours and very understandable why the actual shooting is the least amount of time allocated. For these reasons I recommend even those who do not intend to get a permit or shoot a gun to attend. Then and ONLY then will you be able to understand what it is all about.

btk

btk

There have been 56 mass shootings in the US since 1989. Not a single time has the shooter been stopped by an armed civilian. ZERO times. We have 310,000,000 guns in the hands of civilians. It has not happened once that that huge cache of weapons has made us safer from a mass killer. Maybe if we just had more guns we'd be safer.

PA Lic expires July of this year, so I guess I better get started. Where do I apply?

I find google to be a very useful source for that kind of information. Just type in "where to apply for a florida concealed weapons permit" and you will get your answer. But you knew that, right?

sorry, too snarky and I'm not usually like that.

Wow! A lot of different posts from a a lot of different perspectives. I have a 9 MM Glock at my home in Ohio, to protect my family. I take it to my brothers cabin in Michigan once a year to shoot it, then clean it and put it away. I have never brought it to my home in the Villages and do not intend to.

Owning a gun legally (I had a background check) is a right and privilege and I do not want to see it taken away.

My 23 year old daughter works in a women's health clinic in the ghetto of Detroit (the Cass Corridor). The 3rd most dangerous city in the world. She owns a gun but does not carry.

I go to Juarez Mexico, the 2nd most dangerous city in the world twice a month, I do not carry,you cannot even if you wanted to.

Why would I need to carry a gun in the Villages, or Leesburg or Ocala for that matter?

I do not want a guy with a CCW setting next to me in the theater....the Aurora shooter was wear ballistic leggins, chest protector, throat protector and a ballistic helmet.... body armor head to toe. Do you want to be setting next to the guy that fires on him?

Some one mentioned this in the context of insurance, just in case....Do we carry condoms "just in case" some 21 year old we meet in the square wants to hook up with an old guy....

I think the chance of this hookup happening and needing your weapon in or near the Villages have the same probability.

I think the average person (senior or otherwise) carrying a concealed weapon poses much more of a danger to society and the chance of running into him much higher than is running into real trouble and needing a weapon. George Zimmerman is a good example of that.

Own a gun for sport, recreation or home protection but leave it at home. Leave the police work to the police. Who are underpaid in my opinion....

I respect the opinions of all that have posted here and I hope you respect mine. I do not want to see our lawfully obtained guns taken away, I am not anti gun or a bleeding heart, I just do not want to be part of the problem...

Time to put on the flame retardant suit....

A well written, balanced and common sense post. :thumbup:

I think only trouble can come from someone who starts drinking at noon, gets mad at anyone who passes them on a golf cart, fancies himself as John Wayne........and is carrying to boot. :oops:

.

Wow, On Track, you really are on track with this posting. Excellent job!

You aren't going to stop "mass shooters" from getting guns. For some reason they don't care much about laws! Therefore, I'd think the best was to protect those that might be victims of mass shooters by having armed guards! Wish it weren't so but I feel it would be the only possible deterrent!

I haven't researched these 56 " mass shootings" but I would wager most of them were in a " gun free zone " or a location where it's very difficult to get a carry permit, no??


I'm not sure the intent of a CCW holder is to keep YOU safer, certainly not mine or my wifes...........it's for us, no offence intended..

People talk about gun battles.... I'm thinking 3 to 5 feet in front of me and only and hopefully as a deterrent! If I have no other choice and my wife, children or grandchildren are threatened with grave bodily harm I'll shoot!

As far as practicing your weapon only once , obviously you would be better shooting more and practicing ( with weapon unloaded) taking it from your concealed location.

My wife and I enjoy going to the range and shooting. My wife can put 5 holes in a torso target at 20 feet in 10 seconds...

Licensing.........difficult in NYS almost impossible in NYC. I had to give up my NYS licence when I became a Florida resident. My Florida permit isn't valid in NY anywhere.

Carrying in the Villages.........rather than leave it home in the safe its easier to drop it in my pocket sometimes.

Not many people know we carry and It's better that way

if you're a timid person by nature and uneasy around guns we understand, no problem with that. Most permit holders don't announce the fact that they're armed so you wouldn't know.

Hey, try it you might like it......you don't have own you can rent a gun at the range

so much more to say but many peoples minds and feelings are set in stone and won't be changed for others that are interested, like the OP, there is plenty of FACTUAL information around to help you, ask, read, clubs etc.

A poster replied, "Carrying in the Villages.........rather than leave it home in the safe its easier to drop it in my pocket sometimes."

The poster just said it is easier to carry the pistol in The Villages rather than to put it in his safe. I hope he realizes it is a felony to go into a bar or bar area of a restaurant with that pistol in his pocket. If someone gets an (accidental) look at the concealed pistol in the bar area and calls the police (and I would), that means a felony charge and big time legal fees and trouble.

I cannot understand the mindset of someone who believes it is necessary to carry a pistol in The Villages.

A law biding CCW permit owner would not carry in a bar, that would make him/her a criminal and criminals should not be allowed to own guns, it would be your duty to report that person. But, as someone said in a dog thread, she would take her dog anywhere it was legally OK to do so and not care what others thought. I feel the same way about guns. Not too long ago two thugs tried to rob an internet casino and were stopped by a legal CCW permit holder, who knows how that could have turned out if it weren't for him.

That is not where he said he would go, but a negative (my opinion) illustration created to make a point. No permitted gun owner would do what the illustration suggests!!!!

"accidental look" another illustration to make a point. A permitted gun owner who is carrying does so as the permit implies CONCEALED.

btk

" But, as someone said in a dog thread, she would take her dog anywhere it was legally OK to do so and not care what others thought. I feel the same way about guns. Not too long ago two thugs tried to rob an internet casino and were stopped by a legal CCW permit holder, who knows how that could have turned out if it weren't for him."

I agree with you if someone takes a gun where it is legal to do so.

The Internet casino incident could have been tragic as the citizen began to shoot at the robbers INSIDE the casino. Luckily, no one was hit - not even a robber. The citizen then continued to fire shots at the robbers even after they had left the casino. They no longer presented a danger to the citizen. He was very lucky not to have been charged with reckless endangerment.

I thought the post from the OP was just letting people know that he thought the class was very good....does it mean anybody has to take it ....no.....its your choice

Constitution
 

Regardless whether or not one feels a need to carry a weapon and the other does not is really not the important factor. The important point is that the Constitution (Amend#2) provides for the right for every citizen to own a gun and I am totally in favor of the Constitution. The drafter's of the Consititution had a protection of the citizens against "threats" where ever they came from as their focus. To believe we should be left without any form of protection against aggression is against the wishes of the writers of the Constitution. I for one want the right to protect myself and family and to have a gun if I so wish. I do belong to the NRA only as a means to protest those that think we should be restrained from he possibility to protect ourselves. I hope I never have to use one but if necessary I don't want anyone to say i can't protect those that rely on me.::sad:

And to answer your question... No they were not increased in "gun free zones" although that myth is commonly spread by the gun lobby. A few did include schools, eg Columbine, but in all cases of school shootings there is evidence the school was targeted not because it was gun free ( and it is important to recall there was an armed officer in the building and another nearby both of whom were unsuccessful in hitting the killers) but rather because the killer had a grudge against the school much like a fired employee attacks his former place of work. Even the murder at the Sikh temple doesn't qualify as that facility was not gun free under state law.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...mass-shootings

As to your second question whether these slaughters occur in areas where it is difficult to get a carry permit.. I don't know your definition of difficult but the killings seem to be distributed fairly similarly to the population of the country. The entire data is available at http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ones-full-data
Keep in mind as you look at the data that the laws on carry may have differed years ago.

Aren't you tired of the old argument that we don't need laws because the villains don't care about laws? It is transparently wrong. The logical conclusion would be we therefore need no laws, just perhaps suggestions and appeals to our better instincts.

Armed guards may have deterred some attacks that we don't know about because they didn't happen but there are no cases where an armed guard succeeded in stopping an attack which was happening. There was an armed guard at Columbine and a second officer who arrived at the scene before any students were slaughtered.

Please look at how Australia, a country still somewhat in its own wild west phase, handled the issue of trying to stop mass killings and as a side benefit reduced suicides and non-mass homicides as well. It worked unbelievably well.
http://tobacco.health.usyd.edu.au/as...uryPrevent.pdf

: In the 18 years before the gun law reforms, there were 13 mass shootings in Australia, and none in the 10.5 years afterwards. Declines in firearm-related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p = 0.04), firearm suicides (p = 0.007) and firearm omicides (p = 0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased. No evidence of substitution effect for suicides or homicides was observed. The rates per 100 000 of total firearm deaths, firearm
homicides and firearm suicides all at least doubled their existing rates of decline after the revised gun laws.
Conclusions: Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms were followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accelerated declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides. Total homicide rates followed the
same pattern. Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides and firearm suicides

Questions don't result in answers but instead more questions!
 

This was my question, and as far as this answer goes, I don't know. I come from a large farm family, and my parents insisted on months of practice time before we were allowed to take our driver's license test. I guess a few hours plus passing an exam would be enough if one "owned" the roads, but would it be enough in a crazy, stressful driving situation with lots of factors? I know someone who in spite of decades of driving experience got caught in what defensive driving instructors call a "collision trap" that also involved bad weather and poor visibility and was killed. The question is if carrying a concealed weapon--just having the permit and carrying it--is similar to carrying a driver's license--just having the license and carrying it. I don't know.


Can anyone answer my other questions?


A parking space?! Is this a joke, or at least an exaggeration? If it's not, then it really can be serious.


Is there any solid info out there about how many homeowners don't carry insurance? Having a mortgage requires it, I think, but how many others say that with the odds so slim, why spend so much each year (especially those living on the edge who might have to choose between a homeowners insurance policy that they've never used and, say, badly needed medical care or prescription meds)? Florida is the lightning capital of the country, yet very few people (to my knowledge, anyway) have a lightning rod system.


Of course owning a gun is a personal choice. I don't get the impression that anyone is "arguing" against someone else owning a gun, since it is legally permitted. Instead they're saying that THEY don't wish to own a gun. I didn't notice a connection between these people and abortion being a personal choice, but remembering an unrelated thread I did notice a connection between being pro-concealed weapons and opposition to health care for all Americans.

Speaking of abortion (not to hijack the topic), it seems to me that there is a difference between "pro-life" and "anti-abortion," just as there is a difference between "pro-abortion" (must say that I have NEVER known anyone to be "pro-abortion" other than for oneself as a personal, legally permitted choice) and "pro-choice."


Is this also a joke, or is it sarcasm?


This is the very concern that prompted my initial question about the required training seeming so little before people can not just carry but actually use a concealed weapon based on their own judgments stemming from the little training they've had. Should this be a concern, or is it a non-issue in light of the law allowing it?


This makes sense. It also speaks worlds about how very, very serious (life-and-death serious!) this all is, not some casual thing about carrying a concealed weapon. I really hope that "parking spot incident" was a joke. We grew up as a hunting family (and it was for food, not sport), and although there were firearms in the house (all inherited from grandparents and earlier) and all us kids had to take a course in firearm safety, our hunting was ONLY with bow and arrow. There were personal family reasons for this, and though some might laugh at this, we were taught to quietly apologize to the animal for having killed it and thank it for providing us with food. Not quite the same thing, though, as a law permitting the carrying of a concealed weapon.


I would like to think that this too is a joke. I'm still thinking of that parking spot and how it was handled, again assuming that wasn't a joke.


Do people feel there is a connection between being a "timid person by nature" and those who are "uneasy around guns," whatever their reasons? "Timid" people might take comfort in carrying a concealed weapon; maybe it would give them self-assurance or serve some other purpose. However, the word "most" in the next sentence about not openly saying that they're armed implies that there are some who do the opposite, and this could explain why some feel "uneasy around guns."


This is no easy subject, and as I say, I now have more questions than answers. But we are a nation of laws, so we must remember that (like abortion mentioned in an earlier posting) we are obliged to respect the laws, including this one.

Not at all sure where you got that piece of information as you didn't cite a source. Everything I have seen is that he was not subdued but was arrested standing alone next to his car in the parking lot. If there really was a person in the theater with a CCW who was prepared to take out Holmes, how much longer was he going to wait?

Aurora officers describe arresting James Holmes

Aurora police officer Jason Oviatt arrested Holmes a few minutes later, after finding him outside, standing with his hands on top of his car. Oviatt said Holmes was "completely compliant" when told to surrender. Oviatt, though, said that when he first spotted Holmes, he thought he was a fellow officer because he was dressed in full body armor and wore a gas mask and helmet.

"He was just standing there not doing anything, not urgent about anything," Oviatt testified

Quote:
One of the heroes who helped take down the Arizona assassin said Monday he was prepared to shoot the murderous maniac himself.
"I was ready to end his life," Joe Zamudio said. "I had my hand on the butt of my gun. If they hadn't grabbed him and he was still moving, I would have shot him."
Without hesitation?
"Damn right," said Zamudio. "This is my country, this is my town."


Let us set the complete record straight here. Perhaps had Mr Zamudio fired his gun you might have your only actual example of a CCW carrier stopping a mass murder, however, here is the full story as opposed to the snippet that was printed in Mr Murdoch's newspaper:

Armed hero nearly shot wrong man in Ariz. - Slate.com | NBC News

"I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready," he explained on Fox and Friends. "I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter," Zamudio recalled. "I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!'"
But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out.
Zamudio agreed:
"I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky."

In other words we have a brave man who ran to help and also had a gun. His ownership of the gun did not result in any benefit to the situation and very nearly resulted in the death of more innocents. Really lucky.