Obama: 'I am against concealed carry'

[DixieBelle]

All three candidates oppose creating a national handgun registry.

Rather than create a national registry, "I do think we have to do a better job sharing information between local and federal officials," Obama said yesterday. He differs with McCain and Clinton about whether people should be allowed to carry concealed guns. Clinton and McCain oppose outlawing it.

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama said. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

 

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_560181.html

What an idiot. He clearly isn't informed on this issue at all.

[Chris_]

I see, so we can have guns, but we just can't use 'em.   

Idiot.

[Full-Auto]

There you have it folks.  Obama "thinks" vs. educating himself with facts.  The fact is, those places where CCW's are issued to citizens are safer than those which don't.  Those areas that passed CCW laws in recent history experienced a reduction in violent crime as well.

We don't need another "thinker" in the White House that doesn't bother to educate himself with easily obtained facts and statistics.

[Chris_]

There you have it folks.  Obama "thinks" vs. educating himself with facts.  The fact is, those places where CCW's are issued to citizens are safer than those which don't.  Those areas that passed CCW laws in recent history experienced a reduction in violent crime as well.

We don't need another "thinker" in the White House that doesn't bother to educate himself with easily obtained facts and statistics.

We gotta cut him some slack here.   Thinking is a new concept for him.

[Chris_]

I see, so we can have guns, but we just can't use 'em.   

Idiot.

Actually he is being politically astute....he knows that the inevitable result of CCW laws is fewer of "his" voters.....

doc

[Rebel]

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama said. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

Hey, you dumb ****ing moron, people "could" get killed driving their cars on any given day. Wanna outlaw those as well? This does nothing but **** over law-abiding citizens. Criminals aren't going to abide by your dumbass law in the first place.

Hey Barack, 

[Chris_]

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama said. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

Hey, you dumb ******* moron, people "could" get killed driving their cars on any given day. Wanna outlaw those as well? This does nothing but **** over law-abiding citizens. Criminals aren't going to abide by your dumbass law in the first place.

Hey Barack, 

Good Lord, man!  Don't give the obamantion any ideas.

[Rebel Yell]

Less people carrying guns makes it easier to establish Sharia Law.  Just kidding, or am I?

[DixieBelle]

Well you know, the gun ban works so well in D.C.

*eyeroll

[mamacags]

I won't concealed carry anymore then, I will just tie it to my leg with velcro.

[CG6468]

Well you know, the gun ban works so well in D.C.

*eyeroll

It's a blazing success in Chicago, too.

[NHSparky]

Hey, Osama...

[Airwolf]

I would bet every nickel the Goverment spends in one year that he has no problems with the Secret Service detail having the right to concealed carry while they cover his sorry ass.

[Wretched Excess]

concealed carry decreases crime rates;  i would stake my bottom dollar on it.

[DixieBelle]

Some research - http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obama-doesnt-want-you-to-defend-yourself/

A liberal Democrat, criminologist Garry Kleck set out to prove that the ownership of firearms didn’t decrease crime. In 1993 he published Point Black: Guns and Violence in America, which stated that Americans used guns for self-defense against criminals as often as 2.5 million times a year — 6,850 times a day. Of those uses, the mere presence of a firearm ended the threat of criminal activity.

John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime studied data compiled from every U.S. county from 1977 to 1994, and concluded that states with “shall issue” concealed carry laws — “shall issue” meaning that governments must issue a permit unless a citizen is disqualified, versus “may issue” states where citizens have to justify why they would need a permit, and “no issue” states where concealed carry is never an option — and discovered that violent crimes steadily decrease in states where citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons.

But what of Senator Obama’s specific assertion that more innocent people could get shot during altercations? If the senator wants to decrease the number of innocent people shot, he should start by taking firearms away from the state.

A commonly cited figure from Newsweek for well over a decade notes that “only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The ‘error rate’ for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high.” Upon reflection, such a figure makes perfect sense.

Civilians in “shall issue” states take intensive formal classes in advance of obtaining a carry permit, and in those classes the majority of the time is spent covering the legal liability, escalation, and justification for the use of deadly force. As a result, permit holders are very careful about deploying their weapons, as simply drawing a firearm when the threat is not warranted could lead to permit revocation and jail time. Far from being trigger-happy, CCH licensees are extremely reserved when compared to the general population.

In those instances where a handgun is used, civilians so rarely shoot innocent victims because they are present for the criminal enterprise, and therefore can easily isolate who the criminals are as the crime is occurring. Police, however, are reactionary in nature and most often show up after a crime has been reported. They arrive at the scene due to second- or third-hand information provided by a dispatcher, and cannot immediately tell criminal actors from innocent victims or bystanders, greatly increasing the possibility of false identification and an erroneous shooting.

Obama has never recognized a right of Americans to use firearms for defense, and has in the past exuded disdain for firearms and their owners. Like so many of his campaign promises, Barack Obama has based his position on concealed carry upon feelings, not readily available facts.

We should hardly be surprised.

[Wretched Excess]

Some research - http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obama-doesnt-want-you-to-defend-yourself/

A liberal Democrat, criminologist Garry Kleck set out to prove that the ownership of firearms didn’t decrease crime. In 1993 he published Point Black: Guns and Violence in America, which stated that Americans used guns for self-defense against criminals as often as 2.5 million times a year — 6,850 times a day. Of those uses, the mere presence of a firearm ended the threat of criminal activity.

John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime studied data compiled from every U.S. county from 1977 to 1994, and concluded that states with “shall issue” concealed carry laws — “shall issue” meaning that governments must issue a permit unless a citizen is disqualified, versus “may issue” states where citizens have to justify why they would need a permit, and “no issue” states where concealed carry is never an option — and discovered that violent crimes steadily decrease in states where citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons.

But what of Senator Obama’s specific assertion that more innocent people could get shot during altercations? If the senator wants to decrease the number of innocent people shot, he should start by taking firearms away from the state.

A commonly cited figure from Newsweek for well over a decade notes that “only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The ‘error rate’ for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high.” Upon reflection, such a figure makes perfect sense.

Civilians in “shall issue” states take intensive formal classes in advance of obtaining a carry permit, and in those classes the majority of the time is spent covering the legal liability, escalation, and justification for the use of deadly force. As a result, permit holders are very careful about deploying their weapons, as simply drawing a firearm when the threat is not warranted could lead to permit revocation and jail time. Far from being trigger-happy, CCH licensees are extremely reserved when compared to the general population.

In those instances where a handgun is used, civilians so rarely shoot innocent victims because they are present for the criminal enterprise, and therefore can easily isolate who the criminals are as the crime is occurring. Police, however, are reactionary in nature and most often show up after a crime has been reported. They arrive at the scene due to second- or third-hand information provided by a dispatcher, and cannot immediately tell criminal actors from innocent victims or bystanders, greatly increasing the possibility of false identification and an erroneous shooting.

Obama has never recognized a right of Americans to use firearms for defense, and has in the past exuded disdain for firearms and their owners. Like so many of his campaign promises, Barack Obama has based his position on concealed carry upon feelings, not readily available facts.

We should hardly be surprised.

wow.  that is well beyond even what I was thinking.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Gee...

...you'd think the descendents of transported slaves trapped in the middle of a racist hellhole where cops shoot them with impunity, the government invents AIDS to cull their numbers and cocaine is imported as an excuse for shoving millions of them into concentration camps prisons would want to be able to arm themselves under the auspices of the 2nd Amendment.