search
top

A Solution to the UK Crime Problem

Now, just like Mexico, they can blame it all on weak gun laws in America.

15 Responses to “A Solution to the UK Crime Problem”

  1. mikeb302000 says:

    That’s one way to look at it.

    Another is to mention that he’s a concealed carry permit holder who has no compunction breaking serious laws. That makes him one of the rarest of the rare according to John Lott. What do you think about that. Is it really so rare?

  2. Shawn says:

    To late. They have already blamed America for there crime problem for years now. Whether it be American guns or influx of American culture.

    These people simply cannot accpet they are wrong so they need to blame people.

  3. Bob S. says:

    Mikeb302000,

    Yes, we do think it is that rare.

    See, unlike you, we don’t have to make up statistics to find out. We can point to years and years of statistics showing how rare a crime by concealed handgun license holders are.

    In the State of Texas, the percentage of all convictions for CHL holders has never exceeded 0.5% of all convictions.
    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

    Now, that isn’t all crime but unless you believe that CHL holders are super criminals who can commit a crime and never get caught it’s pretty telling.

    Sparky, what statistics, evidence or support do you have to show it isn’t uncommon?

  4. mikeb302000 says:

    Bob, Maybe you didn’t get my point. I suspect that many crimes, even serious ones are committed by concealed carry permit holders, but the fact doesn’t come up. Who’s checking to see if they have the permit, who’s keeping track of the number? In many cases no one. That’s the point.

    And since you brought it up, yes I believe some licensed concealed carry guys are criminals who haven’t been caught.

  5. Weer'd Beard says:

    “What’s a better example of sheep-like behavior than mindlessly repeating catchy one liners, regardless of their veracity?” -MikeB30200

  6. Bob S. says:

    Mikeb302000,

    So you think that 12 years worth of CHL conviction rates happened by accident?

    You think that details like who does or does not have a concealed handgun license are recorded by happenstance?

    I understand that you want to deny the validity of statistics that refute your position, but trying to deny the existence of that the information is systematically track is asinine

    The data used to compile this report was received through the following avenues:

    * Concealed Handgun License Suspension or Revocation forms submitted by law enforcement agencies
    * Fingerprint cards submitted with new arrest information submitted by law enforcement agencies
    * Uniformed Crime Reporting-Concealed Handgun License Incident Reports submitted by law enforcement agencies
    *Notification programs for delinquent taxes/fees from other Texas Governmental Agencies
    *Complaint letters from individuals/law enforcement officials

    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/basis.htm

    Let’s use some basic common sense here Sparky — which makes more sense that the police — the people you say don’t support concealed carry — are more likely to do:

    A.) Break the law to hide the fact that a license gun owner was arrested

    or
    B.) Record every possible arrest or conviction of license firearm holders?

    By the way, where do the newspapers get the information on who has a license if not from the police??????

    Guess you would be the expert on getting away with things eh?

    And since you brought it up, yes I believe some licensed concealed carry guys are criminals who haven’t been caught.

    Since you brought it up — were you ever arrested or convicted for your illegally owned firearms?

    See let’s use more of that common sense again…..while the district attorney’s office may throw out some weapons related charges in order to gain a higher conviction rate – which do you think is more likely:

    A.) The D.A. throwing out weapons related charges for known felons in order to get convictions or to get charges for other criminals?

    or

    B.) The D.A. throwing out weapons related charges for licensed gun owners who usually have no bargaining power?

  7. Dixie says:

    … but the fact doesn’t come up. Who’s checking to see if they have the permit, who’s keeping track of the number?

    The state. Or are you honestly attempting to say that state officials– who issued the permit– aren’t competent enough to run a person’s name and DOB through a background check?

  8. Nate says:

    in any event, mikeb, I don’t see how the permit is even relevant. Let’s say he didn’t have a permit. Would that have changed anything? Though the article says some nonsense about him using his permit to buy in bulk or something like that, it’s extremely easy to legally buy a large number of guns if you’re not prohibited from doing so. What impediment would the lack of a permit have presented? And if the answer is “none”, then how is his possession of a permit even relevant?

    Should that fact that a vast number of malicious vehicular crimes are committed by licensed drivers each year be considered grounds for making it more difficult to acquire a driver’s license?

  9. mikeb302000 says:

    Nate, You’re exactly right. The permit is not relevant. That’s the point and that’s why all the claims about incredibly low crime rates among CC guys are bogus.

    Dixie, Listen to you now defending the State Officials and their efficiency. That’s a good one. I’ll bet you’ve had the experience of dealing with some of them too, maybe the IRS or the ATF or maybe the Social Security people. Did you ever see any indication that they’re completely mixed up, one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing.

    But, now when the pro-gun argument depends upon their most trustworthy stats to prove that concealed carry permit holders are better than your average citizen, you insist it’s true.

  10. Bob S. says:

    MikeB302000,

    I wish you could get your story straight. For years now, you’ve been advocating all firearms be registered with the government, all transactions be conducted through licensed dealers and background checks done.

    You’ve advocated background checks on every purchase, you’ve advocated local and states be allowed to make their own gun control laws.

    Now you say:

    Listen to you now defending the State Officials and their efficiency. That’s a good one. I’ll bet you’ve had the experience of dealing with some of them too, maybe the IRS or the ATF or maybe the Social Security people. Did you ever see any indication that they’re completely mixed up, one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing.

    Can you keep a story straight or do you just make it up as you go along to get everyone stirred up?

  11. mikeb302000 says:

    There’s no contradiction there, Bob. Government agencies are famous for their inefficiency. That doesn’t mean I think guns should not be regulated by them. As bad as they are, it would be a helluva lot better than what we’ve got now.

    More restrictions, better enforcement, that is what I preach. That doesn’t mean I think the government’s got its shit together.

  12. Jake says:

    The permit is not relevant. That’s the point and that’s why all the claims about incredibly low crime rates among CC guys are bogus.

    MikeB: For those of us who might not be as enlightened as you, would you mind explaining how you get from A to B in that statement?

  13. mikeb302000 says:

    Jake, You’re right to question that. It got a little confusing.

    I’m saying that when murder and suicide are involved the question of whether the shooter had a CC permit or not is often overlooked. Therefore any claim that the low number of CC revocations proves something about CC holders, is wrong.

    I’m not claiming to be enlightened or anything of the kind. Your nasty sarcastic remark was unnecessary and says more about you than it does about me. We’re just disagreeing here. Of course if you can’t disagree without getting all shitty about it, you’re in good company. You should ask yourself if that’s helpful to the cause or not.

  14. Jake says:

    I’m saying that when murder and suicide are involved the question of whether the shooter had a CC permit or not is often overlooked. Therefore any claim that the low number of CC revocations proves something about CC holders, is wrong.

    Do you have any evidence to back that up? It might not always make the news, but I doubt the police overlook it – especially since it’s automatically checked by computer anytime someone’s driver’s license or ID is checked by the police even for something as simple as a burned out taillight. Somehow, I think they do a more thorough check for a suspected murderer, and I know from personal experience that they do at least the same check for a suspected suicide (or any death not from natural causes).

    Your nasty sarcastic remark was unnecessary and says more about you than it does about me.

    I’ve read enough of your “debating” style that I find what you think my remarks say about me meaningless – and my “nasty sarcastic remark” was based on that same experience.

    Again, rather than simply throwing out unsupported assertions, show us the evidence. People might actually start taking you seriously if you did that.

  15. Weer'd Beard says:

    Stop feeding the troll, Jake

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Weer'd World » Going the Distance - [...] Seen here This Quote of the Day is infinitely useful. [...]
  2. 3 Boxes of BS » Blog Archive » Troll of the Day — Repeat Winner - [...] on A Solution to the U.K. Crime Problem That’s the point and that’s why all the claims about incredibly…
top