re: Another gun in a vehicle question

quote:

---

We can all realize places where guns shouldnt be allowed except for certain instances (schools, bars, chemical plants).

---

You were making a lot of sense until you made this broad statement.

Limits on where guns should be "allowed" to be carried is completely arbitrary. They are merely there to make people "feel" good and respect their "feelings" to "feel" safe.

I do respect the right of a property owner to restrict firearm access because I respect property rights. But the limit that is put on said property by the owner is, again, arbitrary.

Your statement is analogous to saying, "we should all agree with common sense gun registration." If I don't agree, I have no common sense.

Brief explanation on boat gun laws




The point was to illustrate a, generally accepted, public safety concern with people carrying firearms in certain places.
Go to Congress in Washington DC. When you try and enter the buildings, they check you for guns. Concealed Permit or not, you cannot bring a gun inside unless you are an on duty police/security officer.
Why is that?

What about a school?

quote:

---

They are merely there to make people "feel" good and respect their "feelings" to "feel" safe.

---

You may not agree that "gun free" school zones are safer but most lawmakers agree.

A reasonable public safety concern exists. As so, you may use that argument as a private property owner too in order to argue against the law posted.

quote:

---

Go to Congress in Washington DC. When you try and enter the buildings, they check you for guns. Concealed Permit or not, you cannot bring a gun inside unless you are an on duty police/security officer. Why is that?

---

Because the government only trusts their own agents with firearms. It's still arbitrary.

And to inject some factual information into this point, concealed carry permit holders commit crimes at a considerably lower rate than law enforcement officers. So technically you'd be safer around armed citizens than government agents.

quote:

---

What about a school?

---

A school is absolutely no different from any other public place. Unless the entire place has a fence with barbed wire and checkpoints to pat down every person, the whole idea of the "gun-free" zone is based on feelings. The presence of children does not make a single difference when I carry my own firearm concealed on my own body. I see kids in public all the time so how is a school different?

There is no physical barrier preventing someone from walking straight onto a school campus armed. It has been proven time and time again.

quote:

---

You may not agree that "gun free" school zones are safer but most lawmakers agree.

---

This is completely irrelevant to the original point. I don't care how law makers feel. I only care about the facts.

quote:

---

A reasonable public safety concern exists.

---

How does the mere presence of a concealed firearm pose any safety risk at all? My concealed handgun has never jumped off my body and hurt anyone and it will continue to reside in my holster unless it is needed.

quote:

---

Yours hasn't, but others have.

---

Let's not talk at this level. Come on man. Guns are not thinking beings. It requires active use to commit crimes.

And again I'll reiterate that concealed carriers commit crimes at a lower rate than even law enforcement. They account for way less than 1% of crimes nationally.

quote:

---

It's a risk because we don't know what the user is going to do with it.

---

This is based on emotion.

quote:

---

You may be perfectly fine but what about the next guy with a concealed gun?

---

This is based on emotion.

quote:

---

Or if an incident does occur, how does a security guard or police differentiate between you and a person trying to harm someone?

---

So the distinction you're making here is whether or not a person is "qualified." So if a person is a security guard, that makes that individual more upstanding and responsible than an armed citizen? What about the two former soldiers who killed law enforcement officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge? Did their qualifications prevent them from committing murder?

And most self defense incidents will not have a security guard or law enforcement officer present since they don't prevent crime and generally come after the fact. The only person who is responsible for my own safety is me.

If I somehow got into a situation where I was wrongfully shot by police or security for having my concealed handgun out, that is a risk I'm willing to take.

Please try to be more objective in this discussion. Using of facts is highly encouraged.

quote:

---

Using of facts is highly encouraged.

---

Good to see someone is still fighting the good fight even on Tigerdroppings....I'm so jaded that I'm certain the ability to rely on facts for discussion is 100% absent for most posters on this site regardless of board.

Facts - Lower Murder Rate in School After Gun Laws Enacted

After laws were enacted to prohibit guns in schools, the murder rate dropped.

quote:

---

So the distinction you're making here is whether or not a person is "qualified." So if a person is a security guard, that makes that individual more upstanding and responsible than an armed citizen? What about the two former soldiers who killed law enforcement officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge? Did their qualifications prevent them from committing murder?

---

Bap, you missed the point I was making.

quote:

---

try to be more objective in this discussion. Using of facts is highly encouraged.

---

Take your own advice. And as far as fact, isn't it illegal to carry a gun in "gun free zones" on schools? Even with a CCP?

R.S. 40:1379.3 (N) states that no concealed handgun may be carried into and no concealed handgun permit issued pursuant to this Section shall authorize or entitle a permittee to carry a concealed handgun in any of the following:
A law enforcement office, station, or building;
A detention facility, prison, or jail;
A courthouse or courtroom, provided that a judge may carry such a weapon in his own courtroom;
A polling place;
A meeting place of the governing authority of a political subdivision;
The state capitol building;
Any portion of an airport facility where the carrying of firearms is prohibited under federal law, except that no person shall be prohibited from carrying any legal firearm into the terminal, if the firearm is encased for shipment, for the purpose of checking such firearm as lawful baggage;
Any church, synagogue, mosque or similar place of worship; See RS 40:1379.3 (U)
A parade or demonstration for which a permit is issued by a governmental entity;
Any portion of the permitted area of an establishment that has been granted a Class A-General retail permit, as defined in Part II of Chapter 1 or Part II of Chapter 2 of Title 26 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.
Any school "firearm free zone" as defined in R.S. 14:95.6.

With my company vehicle, which I pay $200/month after tax to drive as a personal vehicle as well, not by choice I might add B/c I hate the car, i don't interact with people in my company. So the only way I would get caught, is if I used it, or they confiscated my vehicle, which means i was fired already.

So I wouldn't consider it a false choice in my case.

this whole debate came about you disagreeing with a law and you trying to blanket statement say that we shouldn't follow this law because of opinions you held against it. But now when laws agree with your mindset they are common sense and everyone should agree with them.

You call it arbitrary but it's law...based on a consensus of lawmakers...

quote:

---

in the country, changing where they are "allowed" to carry will not suddenly turn them into murderers.

---

I certainly hope not.


On the arbitrary nature - to each his own