• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Arugument Against Open and Concealed Carry for Anyone

Statistics do not support this assertion.

Concealed carry citizens have shown a vastly lower rate of gun crime than the general population since "shall issue" became common, and the rate at which CCW's kill the wrong person or hit a bystander is far lower than for police.

The stats and studies have been posted on DP numerous times.... this is old hat stuff.

The most conservative estimates by government studies say that private guns are used in self-defense 108,000 times annually... other studies suggest far higher numbers, some over a million, but solid figures are hard to come by. Nonetheless it is readily apparent that firearms in private hands probably prevent hundreds of thousands of crimes annually.


List of defensive gun use incidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While I don't upport wiki as a credible source, you can make that argument, however the point of the OP does drive home a case for not allowing open or concealed carry for the average Joe.
 
So - you'd feel safer if the twisted cops were the only ones possibly armed and dangerous?

Umm

No thanks.

Besides - not everyone is up to all sorts of shameless niceness. There are some very dark and dirty people in the world and a firearm might be your only safety measure.

Your comments don't square with reality.
 
3 people were actually shot, 6 others were treated for minor fragment injuries....

Police Training like military training is to prepare you for the eventuality your in a volatile situation. It cannot guarantee anyones reaction to human emotions.
While baffling to most how 3 bystanders can be shot by trained police...what most do not realize it is NYC and there are scores of people everywhere all the time...this is not mayberry...the video gives a very narrow view....Fear, uncertainty, confusion all play a part....Is lpast defending these cops for shooting innocent bystanders ? NO NO NO...what i am offering is another perspective with reasons that come into play when a situation like this occur..
This will be thoroughly investigated anything with political ramifications such as this that is right smack in the publics face will leave no stone unturned. Just keep in mind that police investigators including I&A understand more about Police and Police mistakes and the reasons for them than the public. There is always information available to them that is never available to the public
I dont know what the outcome of the investigation will be but I can give you the minimum. If they are exonerated from any wrongdoing they will be place on desk duty, sent for retraining, sent for a complete and total psyche evaluation and then get re evall ed and watched like hawks by their precinct Capt/commander...thats the minimum...situations like this are so sad but they do happen unfortunately

You've overlooked the point: is this type of probability something you would feel safe with?
 
9mm and other handguns are actually somewhat difficult to aim, or at least for those not experienced in using them. Or it could just be that some people really suck at using a damn gun.

Yeah, sometimes bad **** happens and a few innocent people get hurt, but that's hardly a good justification for the elimination of open and concealed firearm possession. The presence of guns among the populace does far more good than bad.

Many pistols are notoriously inaccurate which is why this type of thing happens in the first place. The question is; would feel safe as a pedestrian with the likelyhood of this type of stray increased by ten fold?
 
You've overlooked the point: is this type of probability something you would feel safe with?


Alot safer than not having any police at all
 
Yeah, cops are notoriously horrible shots, and hardly the "marksman" people think they are. I guess they don't do range qualification often enough, or their training is too soft. Lack of experience is a huge factor, too. This is an atypical case, though, because most encounters where a person will need to defend themselves isn't in a heavily crowded area in the middle of the day, and I don't know anyone who would even consider carrying a service pistol as a conceal carry weapon. It's just too ****ing hot to conceal one properly here. I don't even know anyone who would open carry, because that's just stupid in this area, and asking for trouble.

A typical conceal carry gun is small, light, has a low capacity and a low muzzle velocity. I carry a 38 snub because it's reliable, and if someone attacks me, it's going to be in the dead of night when I'm most active, but the town isn't. I don't really have to worry about over-penetration, or missing on the first shot, because A) I'm not going to hit an innocent bystander here at 3 in the morning at the places I go when I go out, and B) I have my pistol loaded with low power soft-points that drastically reduce any possibility of over-penetration. The guy would have to have the body mass of a jellyfish for these to go through him. They won't even penetrate a pig carcass. Other peoples situations might be different, but the point is, these cops reaction to an atypical event isn't really evidence of anything, other than that particular event.

Your situation is just as isolated as you say this incident is, so I don't see how it refutes the OP argument. Secondly, I don't know where you get your police information from, but I know many cops, and range qualifying is something that is taken very seriously for this very reason. I think many of you are missing the point however: if open and concealed carry is allowed to permiate society, I say that we're going to see much more of these types of incidences and that is very bad for teh public at large and definately presents an overall risk that others have just as much of a right to be protected from, hense the necessity for police in the first place.
 
Wouldnt have been better for one of those innocent bystanders to have pulled out their CCW and put two in the guys skull from 0ft and just ended it there?

That's a silly and unreasonable thing to say.
 
Why does it occur to you to target concealed-weapons permits instead of police training?

Quite simply because, if the cops can't get it right, what makes think that Joe blow is going to make things any better?
 
Alot safer than not having any police at all

No: you missed the question. "Would feel safer on teh street knowing that there are a bundle of people either open carrying or concealed carrying that are no more qualified that those two police officers?
 
Quite simply because, if the cops can't get it right, what makes think that Joe blow is going to make things any better?
That's a question, not an answer. If you believe civilians are not as good as cops, please link to your source material proving such.

There are also considerations other than skill and training to account for, such as a 9lb trigger pull on NY cop's pistols. Good lord that's a heavy trigger pull practically guaranteed to mess anyone up. My pistol has a 4lb pull, which makes it a lot easier to place an accurate shot.
 
Last edited:
Would feel safer on teh street knowing that there are a bundle of people either open carrying or concealed carrying that are no more qualified that those two police officers?
Yes, I would and do feel safer knowing that there are a bundle of people either open carrying or concealed carrying that are no more qualified than those two police officers.
 
Your situation is just as isolated as you say this incident is, so I don't see how it refutes the OP argument.
Because not every situation is the same, as I stated.

Secondly, I don't know where you get your police information from, but I know many cops, and range qualifying is something that is taken very seriously for this very reason.
A lot don't and the evidence is prevalent. Different departments have different regulations, some are absolutely god awful when it comes to shooting.

I think many of you are missing the point however: if open and concealed carry is allowed to permiate society, I say that we're going to see much more of these types of incidences and that is very bad for teh public at large and definately presents an overall risk that others have just as much of a right to be protected from, hense the necessity for police in the first place.

Well now I'm confused, because in your OP you're heavily criticizing the police in the video, using them as an example as why citizens having conceal/open carry is a bad thing (which doesn't make any sense at all) and now you're sticking up for the police. Consistency please.
 
Because not every situation is the same, as I stated.

A lot don't and the evidence is prevalent. Different departments have different regulations, some are absolutely god awful when it comes to shooting.



Well now I'm confused, because in your OP you're heavily criticizing the police in the video, using them as an example as why citizens having conceal/open carry is a bad thing (which doesn't make any sense at all) and now you're sticking up for the police. Consistency please.


Again, you’re not citing your source for this “police” information, so I have trouble taking it at face value.

The OP says nothing critical of the police in any way: that’s the way you want to read it. The title of the thread and the OP point out, that if professional people have half of there shots going wild and hitting people, what chance does the average guy have of doing any better? And since it’s not likely that “average Joe” is going to any better, the notion of open or concealed carry for just anyone who can apply and qualify is a very dangerous ting for society at large.
 
Quite simply because, if the cops can't get it right, what makes think that Joe blow is going to make things any better?

uh because every study I have read shows that CCW holders are better shots

8 feet-16 shots, 9 wounded bystanders

Do you realize how badly that SUCKS
 
I think many of you are missing the point however: if open and concealed carry is allowed to permiate society, I say that we're going to see much more of these types of incidences and that is very bad for teh public at large and definately presents an overall risk that others have just as much of a right to be protected from, hense the necessity for police in the first place.


Not merely wrong, but very, very wrong.

Concealed carry already "permiates" about 40 states that have some version of "shall issue", with tens of thousands to millions of CCW'ers in each state... and yet incidents like this one with the NYC police have NOT happened with CCW'ers any frequency. To this point, CCW'ers have shown far less inclination to shoot the wrong person or hit bystanders in those states than the NYPD or many other police departments.

The facts do not support your assertions, which are mere hyperbole and appeal-to-emotion, as well as attempting to compare apples (a cop shooting by two incompetents) to oranges (CCW citizens).
 
Here's a little factoid about CCW in TX last year:
Convictions for Concealed Handgun License Holders: Texas 2012

Total offenses 63,679 crimes 120 by TX CHL holders 0.1884% of the total.

Folks need to realize that in so far as skill is concerned, beat-cops are just regular people who carry a gun and practice once in a while. The badge does not confer superhuman powers at arms.
 
Last edited:
Here's a little factoid about CCW in TX last year:


Folks need to realize that in so far as skill is concerned, beat-cops are just regular people who carry a gun and practice once in a while. The badge does not confer superhuman powers at arms.


As an ex-LEO I strongly endorse this statement. As a part-time firearms instructor, I'll say plainly that I've known many civilian CCW'ers that were far better marksman than the average LEO.
 
As an ex-LEO I strongly endorse this statement. As a part-time firearms instructor, I'll say plainly that I've known many civilian CCW'ers that were far better marksman than the average LEO.

I'm not surprised. And I don't mean that in any negative way.
 
As an ex-LEO I strongly endorse this statement. As a part-time firearms instructor, I'll say plainly that I've known many civilian CCW'ers that were far better marksman than the average LEO.
On a related note to this news story and the risk every CCW takes in facing a civil lawsuit over a missed shot: Do you have, or do you know anyone who has an Umbrella Liability Policy? I've been looking into it recently and I'd like to know if they cover firearms related liability in addition to car/home accidents.
 
On a related note to this news story and the risk every CCW takes in facing a civil lawsuit over a missed shot: Do you have, or do you know anyone who has an Umbrella Liability Policy? I've been looking into it recently and I'd like to know if they cover firearms related liability in addition to car/home accidents.

I know some guys that teach full time, they probably have something like that, but I haven't looked into it personally. I could ask when I get a chance.
 
Again, you’re not citing your source for this “police” information, so I have trouble taking it at face value.

The OP says nothing critical of the police in any way: that’s the way you want to read it. The title of the thread and the OP point out, that if professional people have half of there shots going wild and hitting people, what chance does the average guy have of doing any better? And since it’s not likely that “average Joe” is going to any better, the notion of open or concealed carry for just anyone who can apply and qualify is a very dangerous ting for society at large.

You haven't cited any evidence for that, except a youtube video of police officers getting a gun pulled on them.
 
uh because every study I have read shows that CCW holders are better shots

8 feet-16 shots, 9 wounded bystanders

Do you realize how badly that SUCKS

Of course it's bad. What's going to happen however if open and CCW is allowed for anyone who wants it? That's the point.
 
Not merely wrong, but very, very wrong.

Concealed carry already "permiates" about 40 states that have some version of "shall issue", with tens of thousands to millions of CCW'ers in each state... and yet incidents like this one with the NYC police have NOT happened with CCW'ers any frequency. To this point, CCW'ers have shown far less inclination to shoot the wrong person or hit bystanders in those states than the NYPD or many other police departments.

The facts do not support your assertions, which are mere hyperbole and appeal-to-emotion, as well as attempting to compare apples (a cop shooting by two incompetents) to oranges (CCW citizens).

Concealed carry isn't open however to just anybody who wants it.
 
You haven't cited any evidence for that, except a youtube video of police officers getting a gun pulled on them.

(chuckle)

The Youtube video is my evidence. My argument is: if well trained and experienced cops "in the heat of the moment" lose 9 shots, what do you think any Joeblow who wants to carry is going to do "in the heat of the moment"?

It's really very simple.
 
(chuckle)

The Youtube video is my evidence. My argument is: if well trained and experienced cops "in the heat of the moment" lose 9 shots, what do you think any Joeblow who wants to carry is going to do "in the heat of the moment"?

It's really very simple.

That's also where your argument fails. Why not show data on actual handgun owners with conceal carry permits, instead of pointing out what two cops did one day?
 
Back
Top Bottom