Councilman wants sheriff to stop urging people to get pistol permits, page 1

Councilman wants sheriff to stop urging people to get pistol permits, page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times

Topic started on 27-1-2012 @ 03:24 PM by thisguyrighthere

The lone Democrat on the council:

“I think it's irresponsible, irreprehensible and of course incendiary if you keep on making these types of comments,” Councilman Michael Brown said during a portion of Monday evening's council meeting devoted to honoring a local group's efforts to mentor at-risk youth.

The Sheriff began urging people to arm themselves in October of last year:

In late October, in the wake of an attempted rape at a popular park in Spartanburg County, Wright implored female residents to obtain concealed weapons permits, saying that residents need to fight back. The comments made national news and precipitated a spike in interest in concealed weapons classes.

Link

The Sheriff's statement preceded a 450% increase in permits.

Some are wondering if his comments may already be impacting the crime rate:

For instance, from October 31, 2011 (when the sheriff urged people to get guns) through January 24, 2012, certain violent crimes spiked, while others stayed the same or even dropped, as compared to the same time period the year before.

From 10/31/2011 - 1/24/2012 there was one murder, 21 forcible rapes, 28 robberies, and 95 aggravated assaults (any assault where a weapon was used or where there was a serious injury).

A year earlier between 10/31/2010 - 1/24/2011 there were four murders, 21 forcible rapes, 42 robberies, but 66 aggravated assaults.

Link

No one is attributing the crime stats directly to what the Sheriff has said or to the increase in permits. It would be early and disingenuous. Seems as though this lone councilman has no problem making wild claims and running with disingenuous statements.

reply posted on 27-1-2012 @ 03:32 PM by AnIntellectualRedneck

It's irresponsible to encourage law-abiding citizens to get a weapon to protect themselves from rapists.

It's incendiary to encourage law-abiding citizens to have weapons to protect themselves against criminals.

Brilliant.

reply posted on 27-1-2012 @ 03:41 PM by mileysubet

Unfournatly people with side arms, that have little or no training are more of a danger to themselves or loved ones they are trying to protect.

I own several pistols and they are placed at strategic places in my residence, and I often carry when I am "out and about", so I am deffintly not anti-gun... But I grew up with propped weapon handeling drilled into my head, and 11 years of military.

For most untrained citizens mace or a taser is a much better option for self defense, as they are less likely to cause permanent damage of used improperly. I think this was this mans point of not encouraging the purchase of firearms.

edit on 27-1-2012 by mileysubet because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 27-1-2012 @ 03:41 PM by thisguyrighthere

reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck

It goes back the long held position that a raped and bloodied woman crying to police is morally and ethically superior to the woman explaining to police how her attacker ended up on his back with a hole in his chest.

There is a mindset out there who sees a thwarted attack and thinks "damn" and who sees a successful attack and thinks "yippee!"

They're everywhere.

reply posted on 27-1-2012 @ 03:46 PM by Mcupobob

YouTube Link

Are the guns pink?

Also that Dem can shut his face.

reply posted on 27-1-2012 @ 04:02 PM by MikeNice81

Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.
Thomas Paine

Maybe the councilman needs to brush up on his history. Then he could actually take the time to do a little research. Several studies have shown that between 13 and 17 lives are saved for every injury involving a gun.

ETA:
South Carolina requires an eight hour course on safe handling and the legal use of firearms to get your permit. So, I don't see the problem.

edit on 27-1-2012 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 06:56 PM by Daedalus

Originally posted by MikeNice81
ETA:
South Carolina requires an eight hour course on safe handling and the legal use of firearms to get your permit. So, I don't see the problem.
edit on 27-1-2012 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

Eight hours is not enough. Eight WEEKS is more reasonable.

Look at it this way, the average person who's gonna buy a gun is not buying it because they're exercising (just because they can) their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. They're doing it because a neighbor's house got broken into, or that nice lady down the street got robbed and raped, or there's some crazy #er on the loose, attacking people. Had these things not occurred, they would not have even considered purchasing a firearm, or having anything to do with one. In other words, in a lot of cases, the acquisition of arms is a knee-jerk reaction made by people who might be considered stupid. They take their few hours of mandatory training, and then think they're golden. These people are stupid. Stupid people with guns = problem.

More training should be required to ensure that EVERYONE with a gun knows how to use it, and not just that, it'd ensure that they know how to use it WELL.

now don't take this to mean i'm anti-gun....quite the opposite actually, i love guns. I just don't love guns in the hands of the irresponsible, or the stupid.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 07:04 PM by LittleBlackEagle

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
The lone Democrat on the council:
“I think it's irresponsible, irreprehensible and of course incendiary if you keep on making these types of comments,” Councilman Michael Brown said during a portion of Monday evening's council meeting devoted to honoring a local group's efforts to mentor at-risk youth.

The Sheriff began urging people to arm themselves in October of last year:
In late October, in the wake of an attempted rape at a popular park in Spartanburg County, Wright implored female residents to obtain concealed weapons permits, saying that residents need to fight back. The comments made national news and precipitated a spike in interest in concealed weapons classes.

Link

The Sheriff's statement preceded a 450% increase in permits.

Some are wondering if his comments may already be impacting the crime rate:
For instance, from October 31, 2011 (when the sheriff urged people to get guns) through January 24, 2012, certain violent crimes spiked, while others stayed the same or even dropped, as compared to the same time period the year before.

From 10/31/2011 - 1/24/2012 there was one murder, 21 forcible rapes, 28 robberies, and 95 aggravated assaults (any assault where a weapon was used or where there was a serious injury).

A year earlier between 10/31/2010 - 1/24/2011 there were four murders, 21 forcible rapes, 42 robberies, but 66 aggravated assaults.
Link

No one is attributing the crime stats directly to what the Sheriff has said or to the increase in permits. It would be early and disingenuous. Seems as though this lone councilman has no problem making wild claims and running with disingenuous statements.

i read of a 65 year old man who was riding his bike on a trail when three young men, 16,17 and 15 years of age assaulted him and attempted to rob him, he drew his psitol killing one, injuring one and the other fled.

i think it's safe to say those three wont be robbing people in the future.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 10:15 PM by KilrathiLG

fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net... this pretty much summs it up perfectly in the words of one old lady talking to a police officer asking her if she had any weapons in the car

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 03:06 AM by MikeNice81

reply to post by Daedalus

Actually since guns are used between 13 and 15 times to save a life for every time they cause any injury, I think the current regulations are fine. Believe it or not people defended their homes and lives with guns for a long time without ever having to take a class.

Heck most people in the Army don't get eight weeks of gun training during basic. Most LEOs get less than three during BLET. So, where does this absurd notion that people need eight weeks come from?

This "everybody else is too stupid to be trusted with a gun" type of mentality is really no different than the anti-gunner's position. They just think you are part of the too stupid to own a gun group.

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 02:26 PM by Daedalus

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Daedalus

Actually since guns are used between 13 and 15 times to save a life for every time they cause any injury, I think the current regulations are fine. Believe it or not people defended their homes and lives with guns for a long time without ever having to take a class.

Heck most people in the Army don't get eight weeks of gun training during basic. Most LEOs get less than three during BLET. So, where does this absurd notion that people need eight weeks come from?

This "everybody else is too stupid to be trusted with a gun" type of mentality is really no different than the anti-gunner's position. They just think you are part of the too stupid to own a gun group.

so instead of reading what i said, you only saw what you wanted, and as predicted, you asserted that i am no different from the anti-gun crowd. You idiot.

I don't care about your statistics. statistics are inaccurate, because they're incomplete pictures. non reported incidents throw your numbers way off, so please don't site statistics to make your argument

Yes, people defended their homes with guns back in the day, without having to take a class, but just because they never took a "class", doesn't mean they weren't trained or educated on the proper handling and usage of firearms. we just do "classes" now, because that's what we "modern folk" do....we have classes, or seminars, or workshops for everything under the sun.

Back in the day, people were a lot more open and comfortable with guns, and kids grew up around them, learned how to use them and be responsible at a much younger age. it was a lot more common a hundred years ago, than it is today. Nowadays, guns are strange, scary things, and people aren't used to them.

As to soldiers and police, they train, and drill, and practice all the time. and i believe both are subject to regular weapon re-qualification. there are no such regulations for civilians, so you could hit the range once a week, once a month, or once a year, and it wouldn't matter.

I never once said "everybody else is too stupid to be trusted with a gun "what i said was that most people who are buying guns are doing it as a knee-jerk reaction to something that's happened, and that had it not been for that something, they wouldn't want to have anything to do with a gun, and that is what's stupid. a gun is a tool, and like many tools, it is a dangerous, unlike most tools, it's primary use is as a weapon, and the primary use of a weapon is to injure and kill. not knowing what you're doing can, and in most instances WILL get you, or someone else killed. That kind of power is not to be taken lightly. i can't stress enough the importance of this: a gun is not a toy, it's not just a pretty piece of metal. it is a tool, it is a weapon, and it can MOST DEFINITELY end a life. Anyone who has never handled a gun before should be required to have a LOT more than an 8 hour course. that's common sense, not an "absurd notion"

Pages: ^^TOP^^