07 May 2009

An Armed Society is a Polite Society

Here's some evidence of why Georgia's lax concealed carry laws benefit the general public. The only loser here is the crime scene clean-up crew sifting through brain matter splattered all over the keg. From WSBTV in Georgia:

Bailey said he thought it was the end of his life and the lives of the 10 people inside his apartment for a birthday party after two masked men with guns burst in through a patio door.

“They just came in and separated the men from the women and said, ‘Give me your wallets and cell phones,’” said George Williams of the College Park Police Department.

Bailey said the gunmen started counting bullets. “The other guy asked how many (bullets) he had. He said he had enough,” said Bailey.

That’s when one student grabbed a gun out of a backpack and shot at the invader who was watching the men. The gunman ran out of the apartment.

The student then ran to the room where the second gunman, identified by police as 23-year-old Calvin Lavant, was holding the women.

“Apparently the guy was getting ready to rape his girlfriend. So he told the girls to get down and he started shooting. The guy jumped out of the window,” said Bailey.


CI-Roller Dude said...

What we need are lots of "well trained" honest, decent, armed citzens...lots of them
There's alot of stats showing that the states with "must allow to carry" laws have fewer cases of violent crime.
Calif, where I live, has very tight CCW laws...and a very high rate of violent crimes-- because the pukes know most citizens are not armed.

Lisa said...

Makes for a great Dirty Harry.

But there are downsides:

[1] Everyone packing heat doesn't make for a polite society, as evidenced here.

[2] You get people shot up in the crossfire (as this girl who was shot several times, but cheerily, "will make a full recovery" (you damn well better.)

Nope, a shootout is not evidence of guns = polite society, sadly.

Average American said...

Law abiding citizens carrying guns, or just being legally able to carry guns, is the number one deterrent against criminals with guns. When and where they might run into a gun-packing citizen, they tend to be a bit pussyish compared to when and where they know citizens can't fight back.

Lisa said...

Avg. Am.,

While I tend to agree, and that is a very sad fact (not agreeing with you, but the need for guns as a deterrent against guns), I still stick to my guns that a society packing heat does not = a polite society.

It equals a society where anyone may go off on a hair trigger. That unfortunately is where we are.

LogicallyLocked said...

To be fair Lisa we could all go off on a hair trigger any way. It's not the responsible citizens with guns we have to worry about, it's the criminals. If that guy didn't have his gun in his bag there could have been WAY more people dead or injured.

I don't have all the facts in front of me (and this nasty chest cold keeps me from doing research cause I'm lazy), but there's a city in the US where everybody is (I believe) required to own a gun. The gun crime there is something like zero. That sounds pretty polite to me. ;)

The Sniper said...

Lisa, so by that rationale anyone that's say, 6'5" and strong as an ox is usually just a breath away from beating people to death as he walks through the mall? He's fully capable of killing with his bare hands, so why doesn't he? Because normal people don't think of just "offing" bystanders.

We all walked around in Afghanistan with weapons. We did not, however, just go around shooting people. Off or on the FOB, we just didn't do it unless in self defense.

The old saying goes: God made man... Sam Colt made them all equal.

The Sniper said...

Oh, and Lisa... as for the "[2] You get people shot up in the crossfire (as this girl who was shot several times, but cheerily, "will make a full recovery" (you damn well better.)"... perhaps you missed this part in the story: "Bailey said the gunmen started counting bullets. “The other guy asked how many (bullets) he had. He said he had enough,” said Bailey."

I'm guessing she's thrilled with getting caught in the crossfire vice getting raped and shot to death by the perps. I would be.

Nixon said...


Please see CI Roller Dude's comments (who works in law enforcement) because I've gotten similar feedback about CCW from other cops. Sure, it'd be ideal if no one comitted violence against one another, but I think CCW is a practical solution (if only a partial one) to the problem of crime.

Lisa said...

CI roller dude: No doubt, IF everyone were trained in correct firearm handling and possessed weapons, we'd be safer in this crazy country. But the thing is, they are mostly not trained, and therefore, scary as a loose cannon.

I am a trained gun owner, though I pray never to be in a crossfire situation.

Sniper, I never suggested only big dudes get angry. In fact, I believe that really big guys actually try to appear less threatening b/c they are aware they are intimidating.

I made the hair-trigger comment because we live in a rather stressed society (not that you guys on a FOB wouldn't be!), and having access to a gun makes one more likely to take the law into one's own hands.

A cowardly person is less likely to use their bare hands or piano wire to strangle someone -- that is a more intimate kill than using a gun.

While I am a staunch defender of all of our rights, I am more than a little jittery about every Tom, Dick and Harry toting a gun. If we could enforce the rules of gun ownership, and have safety classes, that might be another matter.

As far as thugs go -- that's just damn pathetic. It's often drug-fueled, or desperation (money) fueled. Not to justified this insanity, but aside from the odd case like this, I think most gun crime is gang-related or heat-of-the-moment sort of thing.

Most burglars would not choose to do a home invasion. That said, I'd use my gun in a heartbeat in my own home (though it would ruin the plaster.)

As for the woman being "thrilled with getting caught in the crossfire": I'm not so sure. You don't get to choose which artery might get severed.

Carotid? I'd opt for the rape (the least bad of bad options) -- at least I'd survive, and with that many people around, there is a chance someone could take him down, right?

olgreydog7 said...

Even criminals do risk assessment prior to committing a crime. You don't rob the bank that is across the street from the police station. If you ban guns, it will make things worse. If there are people with concealed carry permits out there, it makes you wonder if trying to hold a large group of people at gun point will work. I don't think it would be that hard to do. You'd need a permit, which already involves a lengthy course and training. Renew it every say 3-5 years and it works. Strict laws for those who do it without a permit to encourage people to get one. It would not result in every person carrying a gun. It would prevent alot of violent crime though.

Lisa said...


How do you see it deterring crime -- the fact that would-be criminals know some people might have guns? O.k., but that is where it stands now. Desperate/insane/high people will still take the risk.

The story about the gunman asking how many bullets they had and the answer of "enough" sounds fishy. How many bullets did they have, and what kind of weapons?

rangeragainstwar said...

Being armed or unarmed is irrelevant to being polite or impolite, IMO.

I can be armed and impolite, or vice versa. I don't need to be armed to be impolite.

The problem with the arming of the citizenry is it only keeps other polite citizens polite.