Concealed Carry on The Course

[skydog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Look at the quote above the article that was posted. Nothing really needed to be said, but the shooter, if he was fairly educated, didn't seem to take to his training.

The NY Times is widely acknowledged as the Best Newspaper in the World .... World.

Facts is facts.

The piece cited facts.

You have your outrage ... that doesn't count for much.

Dude, do the math on your own "Facts" before you post this BS

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, more than 200 were convicted of felonies, including at least 10 who committed murder or manslaughter. All but two of the killers used a gun.

This equates to 8 (10 minus the 2 who didn't use guns) CC permit holders out of 240,000 who have committed murder or manslaughter with a gun. That's 3 people out of 100,000. Any way you look at it that is a miniscule crime rate among this group of people. The NYT was aiming to baffle with BS here and hoped people wouldn't actually distill these numbers down.

[ditchparrot19]

Look at the quote above the article that was posted. Nothing really needed to be said, but the shooter, if he was fairly educated, didn't seem to take to his training.

The NY Times is widely acknowledged as the Best Newspaper in the World .... World.

Facts is facts.

The piece cited facts.

You have your outrage ... that doesn't count for much.

Here's another fact, Jack: There are always -- ALWAYS -- at least two sides to every story, and when a publication opts to paint only one of them, it leaves a great deal of the total picture underneath a veil.

The NY Times is also known as an extremely liberal newspaper that promotes its own leftist agenda at any opportunity.

And I don't have outrage -- I have the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That counts for a hell of a lot. Don't believe me? Check recent Supreme Court decisions on the matter.

[David in FL]

Which leads me to even question the necessity for it.  If the incidents are that rare, then why would you want to encumber yourself with a gun, and with the responsibility for knowing where and when to use it properly and safely?

Do you have a smoke detector in your home?  A fire extinguisher?  The vast majority of people have never had a house fire, heck, don't even know anyone that has, but they'd rather have those items and not need them, than need them and not have them.

A lot of people feel the same way about carrying a firearm, even if that "encumbers" them with additional responsibility.  Fortunately we live in a country where law abiding people have the right to decide for themselves.

[Mr. Desmond]

Dude, do the math on your own "Facts" before you post this BS

This equates to 8 (10 minus the 2 who didn't use guns) CC permit holders out of 240,000 who have committed murder or manslaughter with a gun. That's 3 people out of 100,000. Any way you look at it that is a miniscule crime rate among this group of people. The NYT was aiming to baffle with BS here and hoped people wouldn't actually distill these numbers down.

DUDE

:-)

The point is in my posts is whether you are qualifying to drive a car or carry a gun is more education of those with a license -- not only on caring for a gun and gun safety, but how to handle situations that may arise, role playing, consequences of actions, and the laws of the State that may come into play.

The stories of actual events, even with a low percentage of occurrences, is to reduce them even more. The guy in Houston who carries a gun to tell his neighbor to cut down on the noise at a party and kills his neighbor. This driver who attempts to kill a bicyclist because he rides with his family on the side of the highway. I would not ride on a highway ... but that's another story.

The aim is to educate. And if you do not urge better education, then guess what... bad things happen.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Which leads me to even question the necessity for it.  If the incidents are that rare, then why would you want to encumber yourself with a gun, and with the responsibility for knowing where and when to use it properly and safely?

Do you have a smoke detector in your home?  A fire extinguisher?  The vast majority of people have never had a house fire, heck, don't even know anyone that has, but they'd rather have those items and not need them, than need them and not have them.

A lot of people feel the same way about carrying a firearm, even if that "encumbers" them with additional responsibility.  Fortunately we live in a country where law abiding people have the right to decide for themselves.

I can't kill anyone by accident with my smoke detector.

To the post somewhere above by the guy who keeps a gun in his nightstand... I sincerely hope that you never have any kids running around your house.  This is the most common way that kids get hold of a gun and accidentally shoot themselves or others.

[Golfingdad]

Do you have a smoke detector in your home?  A fire extinguisher?  The vast majority of people have never had a house fire, heck, don't even know anyone that has, but they'd rather have those items and not need them, than need them and not have them.  A lot of people feel the same way about carrying a firearm, even if that "encumbers" them with additional responsibility.  Fortunately we live in a country where law abiding people have the right to decide for themselves.

But there isn't much risk associated with having a smoke detector or fire extinguisher around. If there was even a tiny chance of a smoke detector STARTING a fire, I think a lot of people might think twice about owning one.

[Gunther]

DUDE :-) The point is in my posts is whether you are qualifying to drive a car or carry a gun is more education of those with a license -- not only on caring for a gun and gun safety, but how to handle situations that may arise, role playing, consequences of actions, and the laws of the State that may come into play. The stories of actual events, even with a low percentage of occurrences, is to reduce them even more. The guy in Houston who carries a gun to tell his neighbor to cut down on the noise at a party and kills his neighbor. This driver who attempts to kill a bicyclist because he rides with his family on the side of the highway. I would not ride on a highway ... but that's another story. The aim is to educate. And if you do not urge better education, then guess what... bad things happen.

As I mentioned earlier and your post helps corroborate, the CCL holder is already educated. Let's focus on the other 99.8% of perpetrators where a dent could truly be made relative to gun crime.

[jusanothajoe]

Thank you, that is exactly what I meant. Responsible gun owners. Wasn't including gang banger shooting

[skydog]

The point is in my posts is whether you are qualifying to drive a car or carry a gun is more education of those with a license -- not only on caring for a gun and gun safety, but how to handle situations that may arise, role playing, consequences of actions, and the laws of the State that may come into play.

The stories of actual events, even with a low percentage of occurrences, is to reduce them even more. The guy in Houston who carries a gun to tell his neighbor to cut down on the noise at a party and kills his neighbor. This driver who attempts to kill a bicyclist because he rides with his family on the side of the highway. I would not ride on a highway ... but that's another story.

The aim is to educate. And if you do not urge better education, then guess what... bad things happen.

And my point is these miniscule number of violent bad apples who obtain CC permits are not an indictment of the gun education system because the overwhelmingly vast majority who obtain them are good law abiding citizens. If someone has the capacity to commit murder, I don't believe better CC eduaction would have changed that and they would have committed said murder whether they had that permit or not.

[jusanothajoe]

Your State does not license people or require training?

But I agree with you. Part of the licensing process should include anger management and road rage with the objective to get to your destination safely, and not endangering others. We've seen the "films" about crashes. But why not include talks by victims of road rage and drunk driving, and those who have recovered from such behavior.

Yes, we are in agrreement

[ditchparrot19]

If someone has the capacity to commit murder, I don't believe better CC eduaction would have changed that and they would have committed said murder whether they had that permit or not.

BINGO!

[jusanothajoe]

Do you have a smoke detector in your home?  A fire extinguisher?  The vast majority of people have never had a house fire, heck, don't even know anyone that has, but they'd rather have those items and not need them, than need them and not have them.

A lot of people feel the same way about carrying a firearm, even if that "encumbers" them with additional responsibility.  Fortunately we live in a country where law abiding people have the right to decide for themselves.

X2 !

[phan52]

Here's another fact, Jack: There are always -- ALWAYS -- at least two sides to every story, and when a publication opts to paint only one of them, it leaves a great deal of the total picture underneath a veil.

The NY Times is also known as an extremely liberal newspaper that promotes its own leftist agenda at any opportunity.

And I don't have outrage -- I have the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That counts for a hell of a lot. Don't believe me? Check recent Supreme Court decisions on the matter.

Wrong. The NYT is one of the few publications left in the world that actually has journalists on staff and investigates their pieces to a very high degree. They don't rely on AP or Reuters for all their investigative pieces because they don't trust the source material. The idea that they are extremely liberal is a canard put out there by competing right wing publications because those people don't have the same investigative integrity and they get almost all their information from other sources.

One of the few times the NYT was caught with their pants down it was because of Judith Miller, who was a mouthpiece for the neoconservative foreign policy of the Bush White House. That's a liberal agenda?

End of rant. I have no comment about the thread subject because it is just another polarized conversation with no middle ground or nuance.

[Dave2512]

Which leads me to even question the necessity for it.  If the incidents are that rare, then why would you want to encumber yourself with a gun, and with the responsibility for knowing where and when to use it properly and safely?

Yes and it clearly demonstrates what this thread has failed to do, why a gun is necessary on a golf course. In roughly 4 hours in almost every instance you are several hundred yards from the 8 or so people around you with little interaction with them. I am not anti CC just think people need to make wise decisions where and why. I am fairly certain the instances of on course violence resulting in death are exceedingly rare, like getting struck by lightning rare.

This thread has left the realm of how it pertains to golf long ago and some members are contributing fictional events in an attempt to prove a risk that really doesn't exist. That the OP lived to tell his tale is proof enough it's unnecessary, the chances it ever happens again is slim to none. If it happened at all as he described it. Seriously panhandling bums approaching from the trees? Yeah right. Think about this one. The entire point of panhandling is to beg as much money as you can. You'd have to be an idiot to think standing along a course hiding in a tree line with groups passing every 10-12 minutes, maybe nowhere near you, would be a good opportunity. All this crazy anecdotal evidence is full of holes.

[Gunther]

Um, did you read their Benghazi piece? They were universally railed for it's lack of investigative journalism as well as outright lies within. Once a great paper, now a rag...

[jusanothajoe]

I can't kill anyone by accident with my smoke detector.

To the post somewhere above by the guy who keeps a gun in his nightstand... I sincerely hope that you never have any kids running around your house.  This is the most common way that kids get hold of a gun and accidentally shoot themselves or others.

I educated my child on firearms. taught her how too shoot and firearm safety at a very early age. She also knew to never touch a firearm without me around.

Hope you don't have any kitchen knives around for kids to get their hands on and go around stabbing there friends and their selves.

[Gunther]

Fair point relative to guns on courses: I haven't personally felt a need to carry on a golf course, as yet, but I don't diminish the anecdotes because I play in the big city and the stories of episodes like those cited here are somewhat common.

[Mr. Desmond]

And my point is these miniscule number of violent bad apples who obtain CC permits are not an indictment of the gun education system because the overwhelmingly vast majority who obtain them are good law abiding citizens. If someone has the capacity to commit murder, I don't believe better CC eduaction would have changed that and they would have committed said murder whether they had that permit or not.

That could be ... my point is that it is a balance. Why not review the education? Perhaps if some of these people had seen the view from the other side, that an unjustified killing took my father, husband, brother, et al, and its effect on a family and community, some of it might have gotten through.

But it's tough to prevent bad acts from anyone, gun owner or not, who suffer from depression, schizophrenia, delusions, voices, fantasies ... who are unaware. We will always have senseless acts of violence. The idea is to reduce that number as much as possible, and if it comes at a small cost, why not?

And I believe this is related to carrying on a golf course. Because we must be aware of our actions, how to disengage from a situation, and only as the last resort, and that sense of reality or awareness is different for all of us, defend ourselves with the force dependent on the situation.