🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7q2bqs$k9d@dfw-ixnews17.ix.netcom.com>, Merlin Dorfman
<dorfman@netcom12.netcom.com> wrote:

> In ca.general Tom Huffman <toemoss@cv.hp.com> wrote:
> :      The one aspect of this that has to be recognized is
> : that conceled carry permits aren't valid in certain places,
> : including schools.  This is why Kip Kinkel was successful
> : in his shooting spree in Eugene, OR (my home state, where
> : CCW is "shall issue").
> :      Were CCW holders allowed to carry on school grounds,
> : Kip would be dead (or at least stopped quickly) and there
> : would only be a few victims; possibly none, if someone saw
> : him coming in the door and confronted him.
> 
>      There was an armed guard at Columbine.  I never did hear
> all the details about him--did he just duck under his desk?

Apparently.
 
> :      Yeah, I agree that airlines aren't a good place for
> : CCW; people get too frightened in cases of bad turbulence.
> : But other places, such as schools, need the protection of
> : CCW holders.
> 
>      It's not a matter of "frightened."  Bullets tend to put
> holes in things, and a hole in a pressurized fuselage at 
> 30,000 feet isn't good for anybody's health.

This is just ignorance speaking. (Nothing personal, Merlin.)

There is a huge amount of air flowing through an airliner,
a bullet hole in the fuselage isn't going to make much of
a difference. Taking a whole window out would be a different
matter, but it wouldn't threaten the structural integrity
of the aircraft. (There would be more than enough time to
descend, with oxygen for crew and passengers in the interim.)
 
> :      And those who think this will only increase violence,
> : haven't absorbed the concept that CCW holders have a much
> : lower crime rate than the general public, and are *much*
> : more accurate than the police.  They're also at the place
> : of the crime *WHEN IT HAPPENS*, not 5 or 10 minutes later.
> 
>     It's not the CCW holders I'm worried about.  It's the arms
> race when the gang bangers, drug lords, etc. discover that the
> victims are shooting back. 

Show us where this effect occurred in the 30 current "shall-issue"
states. We've had upwards of 15 years of data to look at.

> Is the next step a permit to carry
> an Uzi to match the bad guys?

If your argument has merit, you should be able to show where
this has become an issue in any "shall-issue" state.

The old "blood in the streets" argument against CCW is
intellectually bankrupt.