I recently read your article on your opposition to the Second Amendment and wanting to have all those who have concealed permits disclosed and published.
Several years ago one of my family members was assaulted while attending an event out in rural Deschutes County. I could not defend the family member and law enforcement was over 20 minutes away. There are times where we cannot count on law enforcement to protect ourselves and thus the reason I applied and secured a concealed permit. I do not fear that co-workers, neighbors and others may carry a handgun, as that is a given right by our government. We have rights, just as you have the right to publish a weekly liberal “fish wrapper” and you cannot pick and choose which rights we keep and those we should change – it is all in or all out.
If you are afraid of those who may carry, why stop there, let’s publish a list of all those who “touch” kids, have HIV, or drive drunk all the time, they are more of a threat to our safety than those who have an approved permit.
Just remember, Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my gun!!!
Anonymous
Editor’s note: Ted Kennedy’s car notwithstanding, there were 31,000 gun related deaths in the United States in 2005, the last year for which the Center for Disease Control has numbers. That’s a statistical rate of about 14 deaths per 100,000 people – the highest in the developed world and more than triple the rate in Canada and more than ten times the rate in Ireland and Spain. Researchers have also found that homes with firearms are at least five times more likely to see a suicide than those without guns, even when other risk factors are considered. In other words Anonymous, the person who you pose the greater danger to is yourself . And as a matter of clarification, we never claimed that we would publish the list of names, we simply asked to see it. In addition, the story did not take issue with the Second Amendment as you say, it focused on concealed carry laws. Nobody is trying to take your gun away, Haus. We just want to know if you’re bringing it to work.
This article appears in Jul 31 – Aug 6, 2008.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
You are so good at quoting the statistics you select, how about this? I have a concealed carry permit. How many crimes were committed by us with permits. With all the training and background checks we go thru the public should feel safer knowing how many of us are nearby and have even saved lives when no law enforcement was nearby. I wish our concealed carry group would grow exponetially. We are the good guys!!
Come on, editors–the way the ‘argument’ you just posed is structured implies that 31000 gun deaths are somehow related to concealed carry permits. Unless felons, gang members, and psychotics have suddenly been able to latch on to permits, you’re wrong. Since you brought it up–how many of those gun related deaths involved individuals with concealed carry permits? If you cannot provide the information and if the anti-gun lobby cannot provide it the reason may be that the stats just don’t jive with what your position. Perhaps the NRA has some info available for you?
Editors note: I have searched the world over and I can’t find anywhere that it is any of your Goddamn left wing anti-gun business whether I’m packing at work or anywhere else. Concealed carry is concealed carry. Is it any of my business if you wear girls thong panties concealed under your trousers while at work? No! And it’s none of your damn business what is under my trousers…The only reason you want to know who might be packing at work is so that you can make some kind of off the wall anti-gun twisted issue out of it. Your kind doesn’t make these kinds of inquiries without a seriously bent left wing agenda motivating it. This is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an “inquiring minds want to know,” kind of publication. If you had a shred of honesty, you would have revealed WHY you wanted to know…
If the person we pose the greatest danger to is ourselves…how did ‘myself’ get to be any of your freaking long nosed left wing business? Hell will long since have frozen over before I need the likes of you losing sleep over my supposed welfare. The day you ‘worry’ about us, the great unwashed, is the same day you are promoting your own agenda.
I’ve been packing a handgun for over fifty years. It has saved my life twice. In that half a century, it has not harmed me once. Those that wish to commit suicide have a number of venues open to them. I suggest you go ask those that used a gun to do it, if they would have used another method if they didn’t. Get back to me on that. Ask Obama, talking to the dead, I’m sure, is just one of the Anointed One’s many fantastic abilities….
I love my country,But it`s crazy that the liberal`s try to take away law abiding tax payers guns away and protect illegal mexicans that is in our country illegal.I pray that GOD gives our government common sence to see what there doing to law abiding tax payers and relizes that there are alot more law abiding tax payers that would die before giving up there guns.GOD BLESS.
Nanny Editor: How many died by automobile? How many died by alcohol? How many died from salt? How many were killed by motorcycle? How many died from ATVs? How many died from melanoma? How many died from self induced heart disease? How many died from self induced cancer? How many died from breathing the tobacco smoke of others? How many died from over eating? How many died from apoplexy reading freedom reducing nanny state promoting publications like this one?
If your concern is with saving lives (it’s not) wouldn’t it be appropriate to start at the top of the list where your uninvited left wing elitist nanny efforts would yield the greatest life saving results? BUT, that is not your agenda, is it?
Trans fats kill about 29 times the number of people that guns do. Start there, nanny, if you are sincere.
You also fail to mention that many gun deaths are assholes that the world is far better off without, like gang-bangers…Also you fail to note that the common, ordinary citizenry are not the folks doing the shooting…the vast majority of gun related deaths are from the folks that legally cannot own a gun. Take THEIR guns away, nannyass.
Editor: “we just want to know if you are bringing it to work.” That is an outright lie. There is no way to know from a name and address and permit number who is packing at work. Because you can, doesn’t mean you are. What a pathetic Goddamn lie.
OR…
What were you going to do, call each and everyone up and ask them when/where they carry? I would/will tell you to go fuck yourself…AND… the pathetic nanny horse you rode in on. Some nosy asshole on the phone asking for potentially dangerous information is the very last nosy asshole to get that info…
Pathetic… not even worth the effort to respond to the statistical garbage you put on this “article”. If anyone that reads this tripe agrees with your logic, point them to the nearest Obama rally. I am sure they will find a great deal of comfort in his “Audacity of Hope” speeches which make as much sense as your line of reasoning. A lot to say, but nothing being said…
The editor is a loser. In the same time that 31,000 died there were over a million defensive gun uses and the vast majority without firing a shot.
“…the person who you pose the greater danger to is yourself.”
Editor,
Clearly that says it all, a quite revealing comment. You claim to be protecting me from myself. Your help is not necessary nor welcome in that regard. I feel as strongly about it as some people feel they don’t want help being “protected” from having an abortion.
For both sides the issue is one of control, not altruistic good deeds. One believes they will never have need of a gun so therefore no one else should either. One believes they will never have need of an abortion so no one else should either. See how it cuts the same way?
So my opinion is keep your interest out of the concealed carry issue. I have followed it from the first article. You have clearly made misleading links to issues and statistics not related on more than one occasion. Yet you fail to document even one case where a concealed permit holder perpetrated a crime. Until you can better articulate your exact objection your editorial time is better spent on less personal issues.
RJ
When the Secret Service follows your advice, I will consider the idea that maybe the government should imprison people who carry concealed firearms.
Looking at all the responses to this letter I have just one thing to say……Thank GOD there are still some normal people in Bend.
Why don’t you anti-gun people post a sign on your front door saying—No guns in this house. You might as well put an extra pot of coffee on before you go to bed.
The “developed world” eh? I guess if you exclude several G8+5 members, only use firearms instead of all deaths and include suicides.
Most of Europe and Japan have higher suicide rates than the US.
Russia, Mexico, South Africa, Mexico, and Brazil, all considered “developed/industrialized” and ALL have higher firearm homicide rates (and overall as well) than the US. Guess what their defining characteristic is in relation to firearm laws?
http://www.daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/
People walking across the Golden Gate Bridge are 100% more likely to commit suicide by jumping off it, so according to the editor’s logic we should tear it down.
I will assume that the editorial board of this “newspaper” supports doctor assisted suicide. But what about people without health coverage? Restricting gun ownership would deprive single mothers, illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, drug addicts and pizza delivery drivers a quick and efficient alternative to the expensive doctor assisted procedure.
If the list is released you would be subjecting CHL holders to increased risk of burglary and violence. While you may not be requesting addresses along with the list, criminals could take the names and find addresses through the County’s public records (accessible for free 24-7 on the web). Almost any CHL holder who owns real property in Deschutes County would be placed in harmâ ™s way by your actions. Guns are a favorite target for thieves because there is a thriving black market for them. Since felons, the mentally unstable and people subject to restraining orders can not legally obtain firearms they have to subvert the laws through straw purchases or outright theft. Making the list of CHL holders public would have the perverse effect of stripping law abiding and upstanding citizens of their weapons to arm drug dealers, gang bangers, robbers and wife beaters. Three cheers to Sherriff Blanton for refusing to go along with this idiotic and dangerous idea.
If knowing somebody has a gun scares away the bad guys, you’d think the people with concealed carry permits would WANT everybody to know they might be packing heat.
Well I have to say that your response to the writer was misleading and insulting. You love to quote statistics but have you actually researched the stats or are you just reacting because you were called on your asinine idea?
I would have posted links to some other stats but it shows up as spam….How convenient for you. Oh well Look at the FBI’s website…Search more thoroughly on the CDC’s website and check at the World Health Orginizations website
I mean really. And instead of actually quoting statistics as an arguement why don’t you try to research them as well? I mean how many of the statistics were caused by stolen guns? Where were they stolen from? Were they shootings caused by police? Were they used in the commission of a crime?
So in short….Either use statistics correctly or quit it completely.
To better understand the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution it is helpful to consider how almost every reasonable person would interpret this amendment if it did not involve something which is considered controversial or politically incorrect by some and idolized by others. Arms in the possession of ordinary citizens meet both criteria. Let’s, for the sake of argument, suppose that the Second Amendment dealt with books, not arms or weapons, and read like this: “A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the people to own and read books, shall not be infringed.” Does anyone really believe that liberals would claim that only people who were eligible to vote should be allowed to buy and read books? Or that a person should have to have voted in the last election before the government would permit him or her to buy a book? Would the importation of books be banned if they did not meet an “educational purpose” test? Would some States limit citizens to buying “one book a month”? Would inflammatory “assault books” be banned in California?
I have to admit right off, I carry(in my car only) and dont possess a permit. Ive been carrying for years and just have not gotten around to acquiring one. Though I easily qualify for one.
A few people have seen it from the wrong side and one meth addict even knows what it sounds like. That F— now flashes me the peace sign when she sees me and has not come close to my property since.
But I do know this one fellow that works for a local airplane mfg’r that carries (legally according to the law) to work. And of all the people that I know, he should not be allowed to carry at all. He’s a nut, a real sociopath. What does he think, he’s going to get mugged at work? If anyone goes berzerk at his work place and shoots up the place it’ll be him.(hint: it’s not Columbia Air)