Expanding Concealed Carry vs. Accidental Discharge / Negligence

Much is being made of the availability of firearms in the United States. Rather than suppress concealed carry, what if permits (after appropriate training and strict penalties for violations) were more freely available to law abiding citizens? Would the Orlando nut job have been able to kill 49 people if even three armed folks were able to return fire?

Certainly, there will be some drunkard shooting a suspected cheating spouse, or a child accidentally shooting their parent when they get into a negligently exposed firearm... but I suspect violence would actually go down as bad guys wouldn't know what they were up against. I there any research on what the overall net would be? Military service in Switzerland is compulsory, and folks used to be able to keep their guns after it was over. Folks there are very polite. Coincidence?

In the spirit of the original "Bigot" poll, I created the one above. Vote your conscience.

First, I say let each state decide for themselves.

Second, for whatever state I'm in, I would favor liberal laws on law-abiding and permit-carrying citizens carrying. I hate a CCW permit myself, although seldom invoke the right.

As you wrote, an armed society is a polite society.

I might vote for Israeli conditions. No modern civilization with conditions similar to an American city (not yet like Compton, or Detroit) could claim a similar challenge.

(for the moment I am not getting into who is to blame for anything over there)

Not just any citizen can get a gun. They get a lifetime supply of 50 bullets, and they have to train every 3 years.

And yes they have quite a few knife attacks lately. Who doesn't prefer that, when a perpetrator has knife rather than a gun, when you have the gun. (Face, speak up or forever hold your peace)

(oh yeah, the 2nd A throws the wrench over here, as every a-hole says he deserves a gun)

This type of issue carries so many consequences of all types, good and bad, that it should be looked at objectively and dispassionately (I know: FAT CHANCE!!)

To begin with: how many accidental gun-related deaths and injuries as things are? How many gun-related deaths and injuries as a result of crimes of passion? How many successful actions in self-defense, or in defense of someone else, and with how much collateral damage as well? Next, how do these statistics change, or don't change, in states with restrictive and liberal concealed carry permits? How about open carry? Are visible guns a better deterrent, or do they tend to make the carriers targets?

Quote: Wizard

First, I say let each state decide for themselves.

Second, for whatever state I'm in, I would favor liberal laws on law-abiding and permit-carrying citizens carrying. I hate a CCW permit myself, although seldom invoke the right.

As you wrote, an armed society is a polite society.

I am guessing "hate" is a typo?

IMHO, all states need to be "shall issue" states. It is indeed no coincidence that more restrictive gun laws means more gun violence. I need to get my CC permit again FWIW.

I suggest we take away all small arms from private citizens, and instead supply them with much larger military guns such as artillery style cannons capable of actually supporting a fight against a tyrannical government.

A small number of (militia)citizens will both manage their assigned weapons and mini armory in their local neighborhood.

Keeps the 2nd amendment intact but keeps all the bozos, thieves and murderers, from hurting themselves and others so easily with handguns and rifles.

You'll just have to go hunting ducks with weapons capable of taking out mechanized armor and weighing a thousand pounds or more.

Los Angeles issues carry permits only to civilians who complete the entire police academy course at their own expense.

All those gang bangers carry illegally.

Remember that jewelry store owner who was targeted because he shot a gang member during a hold up attempt? Police warned him he was a target of revenge but would not give him a permit to carry.

Quote: rxwine

I suggest we take away all small arms from private citizens, and instead supply them with much larger military guns such as artillery style cannons capable of actually supporting a fight against a tyrannical government.

Why not just do both? The government is arming to the teeth so citizens need to protect themselves. Why do police need armored personnel carriers anyways?

Quote: AZDuffman

Why not just do both? The government is arming to the teeth so citizens need to protect themselves. Why do police need armored personnel carriers anyways?

Because of this:

Quote: Ayecarumba

Because of this:

Rare. The population is ignorant as to how armed law enforcement is getting. Dangerous stuff.