Thread: How many people CCW here?

Looks like good news in Maryland. Anyone here following this? Woollard v. Sheridan | Second Amendment | Maryland | The Daily Caller

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Looks like good news in Maryland. Anyone here following this? Woollard v. Sheridan | Second Amendment | Maryland | The Daily Caller

It is an interesting development for MD, but I don't see any real changes coming anytime soon, if ever. Too many years of anti-gun laws and feelings to get this going strong. A real shame for those of us responsible enough.

Originally Posted by SixNipples

It is an interesting development for MD, but I don't see any real changes coming anytime soon, if ever. Too many years of anti-gun laws and feelings to get this going strong. A real shame for those of us responsible enough.

Texas, even being a pro gun state. had a VERY hard time passing a CCW Law. Governor Ann Richards opposed it and it cost her an election.

She knew that the majority was against her, so she refused to have a vote on whether we wanted to have a vote on it. It's a shame that it takes an issue this big to get rid of a politician that won't follow the will of the people. I got to laugh at the campaigner that called me shortly before her re-election attempt.

The process took years. The news was filled with editorials about CCW turning the state into OK Corral. It didn't happen. The first shooting happened on a public street in Dallas. A man defended himself against road rage and was charged with murder. The Grand Jury no-billed him. After that stories of people defending themselves just aren't reported very often. Can't really say why. Violent crime has been falling steadily, but property crimes are still high. I'm lucky that I even get to carry at work. When I was self employed my customers didn't mind either, at least the ones that knew about it. Most didn't. I was just the guy that always wore a vest.

Originally Posted by Crotalus

Texas, even being a pro gun state. had a VERY hard time passing a CCW Law. Governor Ann Richards opposed it and it cost her an election.

That was over 15 years ago, and since then the Democrats have learned their lesson. 'Gun control' lost more elections for them than just that one. There are now over 40 "shall issue" states and the US, and the momentum is gaining. We have a Supreme Court decision on our side too.

All the editorialists' predictions of mayhem and anarchy have come to nothing, and people see that. I remember in the past, back in the '80s and before, how there would be calls for more and more gun control with every public shooting. Nowadays, the Brady Campaign can hardly get a tenth of the coverage they used to, even after high profile shootings like the one in Arizona. The tide has turned. Even Wisconsin is "shall issue", for crying out loud. Illinois is headed that way faster than you may realize. Some Illinois county sheriffs have stopped enforcing the carry ban.

It won't be tomorrow, but it'll be sooner rather than later.

Originally Posted by SixNipples

It is an interesting development for MD, but I don't see any real changes coming anytime soon, if ever. Too many years of anti-gun laws and feelings to get this going strong. A real shame for those of us responsible enough.

I share your sentiment. Having lived in Baltimore and talked to old-timers in the city. Concealed carry there is probably already higher than in most states with shall-issue, just that all the wrong people are the ones with guns.

I'm always shocked how the news there turns a criminal into a poor victim when he is killed trying to a rob a store at gunpoint.

Some idiot tried to rob an armored car here last week. Result, one wounded guard, one dead robber.

No sympathy for the robber. I am always shocked when I hear of someone in England going to jail for defending his family with a gun against a home invasion attack.

How can the British people let their courts do this without a riot?

Originally Posted by Crotalus

... I am always shocked when I hear of someone in England going to jail for defending his family with a gun against a home invasion attack.

How can the British people let their courts do this without a riot?

I got into an internet discussion with a bunch of people about this a few months ago (many of the participants were Brits, and one was in law enforcement). Apparently it's not so illegal in the UK as the sensationalist press makes it out to be. It is legal to defend oneself with a legally owned firearm in the case of a home robbery. They don't have a clear-cut "castle doctrine" there, so there's some ambiguity there. Of course, ambiguity in the law always puts the citizen at the mercy of the state, which undermines a free society. Also, the right to keep and bear arms is given very short shrift in jolly olde England, which by itself is the real problem. And the ACTUAL reason for that right being limited was to keep the commoners from killing the Royals. But hey, that's always been the real motive behind gun control. It started here in the states right after the Civil War. Them uppity blacks were shooting back at the Klansmen and not getting lynched the way they were supposed to. Based on my experience, every liberal gun-grabber is really just a closet racist.

But, I think the case you may be referring to involved the homeowner shooting at a fleeing perpetrator, though I'm not certain. The actual facts in the more famous and sensationalized cases have been groomed to maximize public outrage. The ones I've looked into haven't been such outrageous miscarriages of justice, as the tabloids painted them.

Originally Posted by Crotalus

Some idiot tried to rob an armored car here last week. Result, one wounded guard, one dead robber.

No sympathy for the robber. I am always shocked when I hear of someone in England going to jail for defending his family with a gun against a home invasion attack.

How can the British people let their courts do this without a riot?

It's simple, the Brits are subjects of the crown, we are free men, supposedly.....

Originally Posted by joesixpack

I got into an internet discussion with a bunch of people about this a few months ago (many of the participants were Brits, and one was in law enforcement). Apparently it's not so illegal in the UK as the sensationalist press makes it out to be. It is legal to defend oneself with a legally owned firearm in the case of a home robbery. They don't have a clear-cut "castle doctrine" there, so there's some ambiguity there. Of course, ambiguity in the law always puts the citizen at the mercy of the state, which undermines a free society. Also, the right to keep and bear arms is given very short shrift in jolly olde England, which by itself is the real problem. And the ACTUAL reason for that right being limited was to keep the commoners from killing the Royals. But hey, that's always been the real motive behind gun control. It started here in the states right after the Civil War. Them uppity blacks were shooting back at the Klansmen and not getting lynched the way they were supposed to. Based on my experience, every liberal gun-grabber is really just a closet racist.
But, I think the case you may be referring to involved the homeowner shooting at a fleeing perpetrator, though I'm not certain. The actual facts in the more famous and sensationalized cases have been groomed to maximize public outrage. The ones I've looked into haven't been such outrageous miscarriages of justice, as the tabloids painted them.

Most of the southern states gun laws were Jim Crow type laws. Also most if not all of the KKK were registered Dems....

Originally Posted by EMC45

Most of the southern states gun laws were Jim Crow type laws. Also most if not all of the KKK were registered Dems....

You are absolutely correct. A policy repeated throughout history to keep certain groups down and the ruling party in charge.

There was one extra motivation for being a dem in the south. Lincoln was a Republican, the reconstruction led by Republicans, and so most southerners were dem for a long time after the Civil War. Not sure that the parties from then relate to the parties today.