TexasCHLforum.com

...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;

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

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.

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.

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

Very well put. They better wake up fast.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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!!

The Annoyed Man wrote: With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source)

TAM
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

The Annoyed Man wrote:

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.

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.

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?

TAM 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.

em added

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.

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source)

TAM
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

When quote population. One has to include adults above 21. Merely 80% of the population.

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.

Beiruty wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: With something over 300,000 CHLs active in 2009 (source)

TAM
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

When quote population. One has to include adults above 21. Merely 80% of the population.

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.