larsgesing wrote:mloamiller wrote:larsgesing wrote:Hello,
I am a producer for German TV in the U.S., and given the topic of this discussion, I thought I'd share a story we are working on. Given the wall-to-wall coverage of student gun reform protests recently, we are working on a story about high school students/teenagres who are arguing to defend the 2nd Amendment and who are against more regulations of gun purchases. I will be in Dallas this week for the NRA convention. Is there somebody here who could put me in touch with students who can talk about their positive feelings toward guns? We feel like this perspective falls way short in the national media coverage, and we would like to do our part to change that. So if anybody can help, I'd appreciate any leads. My email address is
lgesing@ard-usa.com.
Best,
Lars
A few things for you to consider as you research this subject:
1. Statistics over the past couple of decades overwhelming demonstrate that individuals who hold a license to carry a firearm are one of the most - if not THE most - law-abiding segment of our society. This is true in Texas as well as nationwide.
2. If you read through this forum, you'll see a lot of people complaining about not being able to carry their legally-licensed pistol into the venue where the VP and POTUS are speaking - at a convention to support our 2nd Amendment rights. You've seen many people explain how nonsensical that is. What you have NOT seen is anyone advocating that we should just carry anyway - i.e. violate the law. In fact, many will likely choose not to attend, rather than violate the law. See #1.
Common sense (and recent events) will tell you that if someone intends to do harm to one of those speakers, the fact that the law says firearms are not allowed will have ZERO IMPACT on their plans. In fact, the safest place those two gentlemen could possibly be - outside a bunker - is in Texas, in a room full of LTC holders.
Many thanks for this background! In fact, the NRA has banned all foreign media from even entering the exhibit - making our job to report that much harder. As you can see from my original post, that does not stop us investing substantial resources to send a team to Dallas anyway to find 2nd amendment proponents outside the convention center to have them tell their stories.
Some relevant information for you about how law-abiding LTC (License to Carry) holders are:
https://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/compa ... t-holders/
So putting the police numbers at an annual rate gives you a rate of 0.01%. Both 0.01% or 0.0003% are both extremely low and the violations might not be comparable in that the private individuals might run into problems that a police officer (even one off duty might not run into), but the rate for police is still 23 times higher.
For all misdemeanors and felonies by police, the rate is 703 yearly average/683,396 full-time officers = 0.102%. By contrast, for Texas in 2015, it was 108/1 million permit holders = 0.0102%. For Florida, between October 1, 1987 and March 31, 2017, 10,868 concealed handgun permits were permanently revoked for misdemeanors, felonies, certain physical infirmities, incapacitation, or involuntarily committed for mental illness. This is an annual rate of 10.3 per 100,000 people who had a permit during that period – still a mere tenth of the rate at which officers commit misdemeanors and felonies.
The raw data on convictions for LTC holders is published annually here:
https://www.dps.texas.gov/rsd/LTC/reports/convrates.htm
We basically never commit crime. In discussing the subject of LTC holders with police, when they pull over a LTC and see them hold two licenses out the window, it generally puts them at ease. Feel free to ask any uniformed Law Enforcement Officer what they are thinking when they pull over a LTC for a traffic infringement and find out they have a firearm, they will very likely repeat the same thing. It puts them at ease.
That is why basically unanimously on this forum we disagree with gun-free zones. (Like schools). There is no
real security keeping anyone safe and all the sign does is keep us 'good guys' out of the school (or make us disarm to go in). A school shooter / mass shooter has already decided to break the law, and the sign means nothing to them.
As far as the VP and President are concerned, I am ok with a true "Gun Free Zone" as the Secret Service has a job to do. If you wanted to assassinate the President of the United States, and licensed concealed carry is permitted in the venue, it wouldn't be impossible to obtain a 'fake' ID, carry a firearm and get up to the front row for a shot. The License to Carry cards that we have are made with the exact same tools as a normal driver's license here. It would be possible for a dedicated enough person to make or obtain a fake license (but it wouldn't help if a law enforcement officer ran it against the database). That is why I'm fine with a gun free zone around the President (or really anywhere with 'real' security), because the inherently higher risks dictate special needs for that event.
Obviously, some here disagree, but I doubt they are the majority.
Thats my 2 cents (as we say), take it for what it is worth. :)