If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
...on a national/non-restricted basis...what will???
Quick summary: al-quaeda magazine publishes tips on how to kill Americans, one of those is to open-fire on Washington DC area restaurants...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... rkers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... icans.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Quick summary: al-quaeda magazine publishes tips on how to kill Americans, one of those is to open-fire on Washington DC area restaurants...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... rkers.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... icans.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
They're fanatics but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They know they probably get a higher body count in DC, NYC, LA and other places the victims are disarmed for the bad guys benefit.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
- The Annoyed Man
- Senior Member
- Posts: 26885
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
- Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
- Contact:
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source) in a 2009 population of 24,873,773 (source), there was then a little over 1.2% of the population with CHLs. That percentage is marginally higher in the past year. So let's go crazy and say it is 2% (I don't think it is, but let's say it is for the sake of argument). That would mean that if terrorists wielding automatic weapons and explosives, or even semi-auto rifles and explosives were to attack a restaurant that had 100 patrons in it, there would be a chance that 2 patrons would be in possession of a pistol - which could mean anything from a .45 to a .32 Keltec.... against a crew of 2 or more terrorists spraying the place with AKs or ARs.Bart wrote:They're fanatics but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They know they probably get a higher body count in DC, NYC, LA and other places the victims are disarmed for the bad guys benefit.
Not much odds in the good guys' favor.
Now imagine that this is taking place in DC, where despite the Supreme Court, the city government continues to frustrate the personal defense needs of their citizens.... The terrorists are going to win every time. EVERY time.
Why? Because they don't care if they die in the attempt. They go into it assuming it to be a suicide mission. A lucky shot from a CCW permit holder might kill one of them, but won't kill both - at least not before they have killed 20 or 30. A suicide attacker who kills 20 or 30 victims before dying himself has just had a successful mission.
That is why it is beyond retarded and irresponsible when the feckless imbeciles in the administration make announcements that "we" can absorb more terror attacks here in the U.S...... because they won't do the absorbing. They've got armies of body guards.
This is why it is critical to kill terrorists where they live and train, outside of our borders, and this is why it is immoral for government to disarm citizens.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1919
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:42 pm
- Location: NE TX
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
The Annoyed Man wrote:With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source) in a 2009 population of 24,873,773 (source), there was then a little over 1.2% of the population with CHLs. That percentage is marginally higher in the past year. So let's go crazy and say it is 2% (I don't think it is, but let's say it is for the sake of argument). That would mean that if terrorists wielding automatic weapons and explosives, or even semi-auto rifles and explosives were to attack a restaurant that had 100 patrons in it, there would be a chance that 2 patrons would be in possession of a pistol - which could mean anything from a .45 to a .32 Keltec.... against a crew of 2 or more terrorists spraying the place with AKs or ARs.Bart wrote:They're fanatics but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They know they probably get a higher body count in DC, NYC, LA and other places the victims are disarmed for the bad guys benefit.
Not much odds in the good guys' favor.
Now imagine that this is taking place in DC, where despite the Supreme Court, the city government continues to frustrate the personal defense needs of their citizens.... The terrorists are going to win every time. EVERY time.
Why? Because they don't care if they die in the attempt. They go into it assuming it to be a suicide mission. A lucky shot from a CCW permit holder might kill one of them, but won't kill both - at least not before they have killed 20 or 30. A suicide attacker who kills 20 or 30 victims before dying himself has just had a successful mission.
That is why it is beyond retarded and irresponsible when the feckless imbeciles in the administration make announcements that "we" can absorb more terror attacks here in the U.S...... because they won't do the absorbing. They've got armies of body guards.
This is why it is critical to kill terrorists where they live and train, outside of our borders, and this is why it is immoral for government to disarm citizens.
BINGO
It's not gun control that we need, it's soul control!
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
Very well put. They better wake up fast.
If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. – The Dalai Lama
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...

Cougars are shy, reclusive, and downright mysterious... 

Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
It's also immoral for the government to ignore the problem in the hope that it will go away and attempt to appease those for whom appeasement is merely encouragement to kill more people.The Annoyed Man wrote:This is why it is critical to kill terrorists where they live and train, outside of our borders, and this is why it is immoral for government to disarm citizens.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
The Annoyed Man wrote:With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source) in a 2009 population of 24,873,773 (source), there was then a little over 1.2% of the population with CHLs. That percentage is marginally higher in the past year. So let's go crazy and say it is 2% (I don't think it is, but let's say it is for the sake of argument). That would mean that if terrorists wielding automatic weapons and explosives, or even semi-auto rifles and explosives were to attack a restaurant that had 100 patrons in it, there would be a chance that 2 patrons would be in possession of a pistol - which could mean anything from a .45 to a .32 Keltec.... against a crew of 2 or more terrorists spraying the place with AKs or ARs.Bart wrote:They're fanatics but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They know they probably get a higher body count in DC, NYC, LA and other places the victims are disarmed for the bad guys benefit.
Not much odds in the good guys' favor.
Now imagine that this is taking place in DC, where despite the Supreme Court, the city government continues to frustrate the personal defense needs of their citizens.... The terrorists are going to win every time. EVERY time.
Why? Because they don't care if they die in the attempt. They go into it assuming it to be a suicide mission. A lucky shot from a CCW permit holder might kill one of them, but won't kill both - at least not before they have killed 20 or 30. A suicide attacker who kills 20 or 30 victims before dying himself has just had a successful mission.
That is why it is beyond retarded and irresponsible when the feckless imbeciles in the administration make announcements that "we" can absorb more terror attacks here in the U.S...... because they won't do the absorbing. They've got armies of body guards.
This is why it is critical to kill terrorists where they live and train, outside of our borders, and this is why it is immoral for government to disarm citizens.
Well Said!!
NRA Certified Rifle, Pistol & Shotgun Instructor, NRA Certified RSO
NRA Life Member, TSRA Member
Jet Noise, the Sound of Freedom!!
NRA Life Member, TSRA Member
Jet Noise, the Sound of Freedom!!
- sjfcontrol
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:14 am
- Location: Flint, TX
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
TAMThe Annoyed Man wrote: With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source)
As of 12/31/2009 there were 402,914 active Texas CHL licensees source .
And Charles has stated that the current number is approaching 450,000
Range Rule: "The front gate lock is not an acceptable target."
Never Forget.
Never Forget.

Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
The Annoyed Man wrote:With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source) in a 2009 population of 24,873,773 (source), there was then a little over 1.2% of the population with CHLs. That percentage is marginally higher in the past year. So let's go crazy and say it is 2% (I don't think it is, but let's say it is for the sake of argument). That would mean that if terrorists wielding automatic weapons and explosives, or even semi-auto rifles and explosives were to attack a restaurant that had 100 patrons in it, there would be a chance that 2 patrons would be in possession of a pistol - which could mean anything from a .45 to a .32 Keltec.... against a crew of 2 or more terrorists spraying the place with AKs or ARs.Bart wrote:They're fanatics but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They know they probably get a higher body count in DC, NYC, LA and other places the victims are disarmed for the bad guys benefit.
Not much odds in the good guys' favor.
Now imagine that this is taking place in DC, where despite the Supreme Court, the city government continues to frustrate the personal defense needs of their citizens.... The terrorists are going to win every time. EVERY time.
Why? Because they don't care if they die in the attempt. They go into it assuming it to be a suicide mission. A lucky shot from a CCW permit holder might kill one of them, but won't kill both - at least not before they have killed 20 or 30. A suicide attacker who kills 20 or 30 victims before dying himself has just had a successful mission.
That is why it is beyond retarded and irresponsible when the feckless imbeciles in the administration make announcements that "we" can absorb more terror attacks here in the U.S...... because they won't do the absorbing. They've got armies of body guards.
This is why it is critical to kill terrorists where they live and train, outside of our borders, and this is why it is immoral for government to disarm citizens.
Tisk, tisk, tisk.
You must be one of the unwashed masses that is klinging to his religion and guns. Don't you know that the gubmit can take care of all your needs?
[Insert pithy witicism here]
Proudly carrying since 09/10.
Proudly carrying since 09/10.
- Dragonfighter
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2315
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
em addedTAM wrote:That would mean that if terrorists wielding automatic weapons and explosives, or even semi-auto rifles and explosives were to attack a restaurant that had 100 patrons in it, there would be a chance that 2 patrons would be in possession of a pistol - which could mean anything from a .45 to a .32 Keltec.... against a crew of 2 or more terrorists spraying the place with AKs or ARs.
A chance indeed, probability is a whole different issue. There is a distinct disparity of coverage and frequency of carry depending on where you are. So it might be six or eight in some areas and probably none in others. The only real advantage is that the BG's don't know which is which and they are after body counts...so DC is a more viable target than say, Fort Worth.
I Thess 5:21
Disclaimer: IANAL, IANYL, IDNPOOTV, IDNSIAHIE and IANROFL
"There is no situation so bad that you can't make it worse." - Chris Hadfield, NASA ISS Astronaut
Disclaimer: IANAL, IANYL, IDNPOOTV, IDNSIAHIE and IANROFL
"There is no situation so bad that you can't make it worse." - Chris Hadfield, NASA ISS Astronaut
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
When quote population. One has to include adults above 21. Merely 80% of the population.
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
A nightmare scenario is to attack a packed mall on the eve of a shopping holiday weekend with at leas 2-3 armed subjects per entrance. The outcome would be hellish.
This is why I avoid all crowded malls at all cost unless I have to be there for short time.
This is why I avoid all crowded malls at all cost unless I have to be there for short time.
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
- sjfcontrol
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:14 am
- Location: Flint, TX
Re: If this doesn't serve as a "wake-up call" for CHL...
That depends on what you're trying to demonstrate. Dividing total license holders by total population gives an overall percentage which would be valid for a target population including minors, for example, the population of a shopping mall. However, if you're predicting the license holders in a population of, say, a bar -- an adult-only ratio would be more accurate. However, as pointed out, the licensed population is not evenly distributed, so neither ratio could be expected to be a particularly accurate predictor for any specific location.Beiruty wrote:
When quote population. One has to include adults above 21. Merely 80% of the population.
Range Rule: "The front gate lock is not an acceptable target."
Never Forget.
Never Forget.
