I will leave it to the armed reader to judge which is happening here: "The Concealed-Carry Fantasy."
Anti-firearm New York Times quotes even more virulently anti-firearm Violence Policy Center "study" and expects us to take it seriously. If you will forgive me a blunt observation, this looks like a rather embarrassing case of public circular onanism to me.
So they admit that the "data" on which the study is based is basically cherry-picked for sensational appeal rather than being based on any independently verified facts, but it is concealed carry advocates who are engaged in 'fantasy'.
Also, I'm tired of people who promote making it easier for people to commit suicide turning around and talking about instances of suicide as "gun violence". That would be utterly hypocritical except for the fact that, when someone contemplates suicide with a gun, they are significantly more likely to decide to seek help rather than go through with killing themselves. Thus it is logical that suicide advocates would want to discourage the involvement of firearms in suicides, since it has been proven over and over that this actually saves people's lives by making them question the wisdom of killing themselves.
Logical, but still very annoying and dishonest, since they never admit that the reason they count suicide by firearm as 'gun-violence' is because contemplation of suicide by firearm causes many people to decide not to commit suicide after all.
"Since 2007"says volumes.Something I've been asking myself is why so many incidents since Stalins apprentice was sworn in in 2008? Must be the revolution.
By all means, stop bowing to the gun lobby - eliminate the permit structure altogether along with the arguments about "crime statistics".
All that is required is to relent to the Constitution - specifically the enumerated, individual, incorporated right to keep and BEAR arms.
Back in 1998 the NRA Rifleman reported that the Clinton administration had ordered DOJ/FBI to do a study on the number of incidents where a citizen had used a firearm in self-defense or to prevent a crime.
The FBI statistician had compiled data from 4 years running from 1994-1998 and found 2.4 million recorded uses of a firearm by a citizen (basically 600,000 / year) to defend themselves or to prevent a crime. The Statistician went on to note in a footnote that it was unknown how many incidents had occurred where the citizen didn't bother to report the incident to LE
Many 'now wish they had a 2nd Amendment'...Europe now scrambles for guns
Don't believe this BS for a minute. I'd be willing to bet a case of beer that very very few of the alleged 29 killers actually held concealed carry permits. They concealed their firearm, which the law against doing so without a permit didn't stop; they went to "gun-free" hunting grounds, which the signs and laws didn't stop and they shot people until someone else with a gun showed up, which no sign, law, or amount of handwringing could stop. I'll keep carrying and practicing for that occasion I hope never comes, when I need to defend myself or someone else against criminal deadly force. But at least if that time comes, I won't just be a cowering victim or witness.
And even if the NYTs and the Collectivist Libtards DO get their fondest wet dream and have the 2A abolished from the Constitution -- that does NOT abolish the natural/God-given rights of man to bear arms for self defense, even against their own gooberment. The Constitutional 2A is just the written codification of those natural rights.
" it was unknown how many incidents had occurred where the citizen didn't bother to report the incident to LE"
In 1976, I was confronted by a very large person that wanted to do me harm. After I stuck the 38sp that I was carrying in his face, he decided he had some place else he needed to be. No shots fired. I did not call the police or make any kind of report. It makes you wonder just how many times a day that actually happens.
Well, if we really want to talk about self-defensive uses, then we can't ignore the largest category of prevented crimes, which is when criminals look over possible targets and decide that confrontation won't end well, and move on.
That decision can be based on a variety of factors of the targets' appearance or circumstances. But the most important thing criminals look for in a victim is a lack of emotional, mental, and physical preparation to respond to an attack (in that order). A high level of physical preparation (muscularity, body armor, gun on the hip, rifle, etc.) has substantial deterrent effect but also raised the perceived value of a target. Criminals often commit random, unprovoked violence to stoke their ego, and for many this is the only significant source of self-esteem and 'cred' they have. Because they spend so much of their lives running, hiding, and feeling 'hunted', they need to assert their worth through confrontations that appear dangerous. So while criminals are, on the whole, more likely to assess a target as a victim given a lack of physical preparation, they value physically prepared targets more highly.
Indications of mental preparation, such as awareness of surroundings (including the criminal) and a constantly updated plan for reaction to contingencies, are much harder to read and many stupid criminals can miss them until their approach when obvious indicators like direct eye-contact and adoption of a ready stance (or even reaching for a possible concealed weapon) come into play. The loss of the element of surprise turns a 'target' into an adversary, which may raise the incentives to attack slightly but far more dramatically increases the risks of a confrontation in the mind of an assailant, particularly as they must consider the worst case scenario.
But the decisive factor is almost always emotional preparation. Almost all mammals share a 'hunter/prey' signaling system which allows almost any two mammals, upon meeting one another, to decide which is the hunter and which the prey. Most criminals wouldn't survive long as criminals without a fairly keen instinct in this respect. A 'target' that radiates the feeling of having embraced the possibility of violence and fearlessly come to terms with the possible outcomes is the very last person most criminals want to attack. Because of the deeply instinctive nature of the signaling behavior involved, it is generally difficult to fake convincingly...one does have to at least vividly imagine being attacked and prevailing without significant loss. While this can be a purely imaginative exercise, it will always be more convincing (to the person emotionally preparing for combat, and thus to a possible attacker) if it is based on the current circumstances (including the possible attacker and the physical defensive preparations).
Clearly, possessing a gun and knowing how to use it dramatically improves physical and mental preparation to defend oneself from a criminal. But actual firearm practice hardens the psyche to the possibility of violence in a way that few less inherently dangerous experiences can. If you train with and carry a firearm regularly, for every criminal dumb enough to force you to draw, there are a hundred that took one look at you and decided to find something else to do.
Of course, much of this is highly applicable to the massively organized criminals who generally end up working their way into positions of authority in government and other social institutions. It is easy to underestimate how terrified they are of people who are prepared to resist their crimes, especially those who are emotionally prepared. Indeed, they often try to mask their fear with expressions of hatred and contempt. The attacks they plan on us are different in scale and organization from those contemplated by the typical disorganized criminal, the preparations which will deter them vary accordingly. But as much as they fear physical and mental preparation, an apparent willingness to fearlessly embrace the possibility of open resistance to their crimes is what scares them more than anything. Physical preparation is not nothing, but without mental preparation it is far less. Mental preparation has high value in forcing criminals to slow down and reconsider their plans for violence, but they will still advance wherever they sense weakness in the will to fight back.
When those who desire peace prepare for war, those who desire conquest will find somewhere else to be.
Post a Comment