Carrying Guns

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Where did you get the impression that I thought Canada was immune to gun violence? Mass shootings by mentally ill (mostly) white men are routine in the US. It's a fact.

Hmm..well as I'm not the only one who had that impression you should probably look towards your own quote.

And again when you say routine..

Honestly you've got your viewpoint and that's fine. But don't go the low route and just keep on insulting. You already made your viewpoint several pages back how you see guns in the U.S.

*This is why I really don't like when people dilute it to country against country. You're not going to hear from me Canada has this Canada has that in a insulting way despite me not agreeing with everything the country does/has/etc. It's not the route I personally want to go.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

By the way, this is actually a t-shirt...

https://www.teepublic.com/t-shirt/1779846-stupid-judy

I want one!

Aww now see why did you have to go and make me miss that ride all over again...I was this close to moving on

(no really I do actually miss that ride )

 

[dreiwhit]

Listen you said "first of all mass shootings are an American phenomenon."

I said it has also happened in Canada as well as "Now yes the number isn't near what the U.S. has had but it still has had them."

To add to what you said, everyone should keep in mind that mass shootings are not an every day occurance. They are a statistically rare event. You have a much better chance of being involved in a car accident on your way home today than being in a mass shooting event.

Mass shootings are given a large amount of publicity, an amount so large that it is disproportionate to the number of shootings. Media coverage will make you believe they are an every day occurance. There's a serious school of thought that the huge media coverage actually encourages the mentally disturbed "lone wolf" individuals to commit a crime like that so that they will be able to get publicity and "go out in a blaze of glory."

"American gun culture" and easily availability of firearms has been blamed for this, but keep in mind that in the past, the availablilty of firearms was much easier in this country. Prior to 1934, any person could order belt fed machine guns and submachine guns through the mail with the only restriction being the purchase price. Prior to 1968, you could order any handgun, rifle or pistol through the mail - again with no restrictions. Many schools had rifle teams, with the students bringing their rifles to school. Mass shootings were almost non existant during that time - Charles Whitman in 1966 was an exception. I digress, but my personal belief that its caused by a decline in values and morality - people no longer value human life or care about each other - and a very seriously broken mental health system where folks who need help can't get it or are discouraged from getting help. In fact, a police officer friend of mine told me last Sunday that the last three felony assaults with weapons that he investigated were all caused by mentally disturbed individuals who were not getting treatment. He said their weapon of choice was a knife, by the way.

 

[Magpie]

Yes really, what I said was between myself and that poster. You don't have to agree with it, or like it but I'm not going to apologize or not call her out in this thread.

And interesting that your assumption was that she fell into the "stupid" group.

Ah, I see what you're doing here. Clever!

 

[meggiebeth]

People who leave their guns where other people can easily get them especially children who may not know it's real much less that it can kill someone are not responsible no matter which way you put it. It's not gun laws that allowed that to happen; it's people not being responsible.

FWIW I hate hearing the stories of children killing their siblings or their friends, etc simply because they found daddy's gun on a chair. But it is 'daddy' who put that gun irresponsibly on that chair to begin with not the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun.

It is ultimately the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun that allow these types of incidents to happen. Yes a gun owner might be directly irresponsible but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened. Tragedies like that are a direct result of allowing citizens to have guns- because, let’s face it, many, many citizens can’t be trusted. Every week I see another news story about an American shooting- that very, very rarely happens in countries where people can’t own guns. You’re safer in a country where no one has a gun, without a gun, than in a country where many, many people have guns and you have one.

 

[CdnCarrie]

That happened in California although the weapon was legal and openly carried. The bear actually slashed at him and he shot at the bear with the .45 he was carrying. In a campground where it could have hit another camper. The reason why the bear was there was that he set a cooler with food on top of his campsite’s picnic table and left it there overnight. He covered the table with one of those tent covers, but that’s not going to keep out a bear. This wasn’t a place where bears break into cars, but they had bear boxes anyways.

http://www.mtdemocrat.com/archived-stories/Bear_attacks_camper_at_Union_Valley/

There really was no need to shoot at it. And improper food storage was the reason the bear came.

Too bad someone so stupid made the bear get killed. People are stupid. Leave food out overnight? Geez.

This is how you deal with them Canadian style.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It is ultimately the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun that allow these types of incidents to happen. Yes a gun owner might be directly irresponsible but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened. Tragedies like that are a direct result of allowing citizens to have guns- because, let’s face it, many, many citizens can’t be trusted. Every week I see another news story about an American shooting- that very, very rarely happens in countries where people can’t own guns. You’re safer in a country where no one has a gun, without a gun, than in a country where many, many people have guns and you have one.

The thoughtprocess of banning every and all guns isn't realistic in a country the size as the U.S., etc. Unless you're personally going to be the one going door to door searching everyone's home, etc

If your opinion is guns of any kind should be outlawed that's fine. You do however need to be 100% sure that no one can never ever find a gun period in order for your "but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened." statement to be true.

 

[LYSE]

It is ultimately the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun that allow these types of incidents to happen. Yes a gun owner might be directly irresponsible but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened. Tragedies like that are a direct result of allowing citizens to have guns- because, let’s face it, many, many citizens can’t be trusted. Every week I see another news story about an American shooting- that very, very rarely happens in countries where people can’t own guns. You’re safer in a country where no one has a gun, without a gun, than in a country where many, many people have guns and you have one.

So by that logic in country's that outlaw guns or conceal carry would it be the fault of the law makers every single time someone is a victim of a violent attack?

Would that rape victim have chosen to carry concealed if allowed but instead had to rely on a freaking rape whistle?

I didn't really want to get into it since the OP's question was simply about Disney Policy and how it applies but...
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf
All firearm deaths 2011 2010
• Firearm deaths by suicide:.......................................... 19,766..................19,392
• Firearm deaths by accident:........................................8 51......................606
• Firearm deaths caused by LEO (non-accidental):.............258...................... 412

• Firearm deaths by homicide (total):...............................11,101..... .............11,078
• Firearm homicides (gang related and included in total):......8,880 (80%)...........8,862 (80%)
• Firearm homicides (non gang and included in total):...........2,220 (20%)...........2,215 (20%)
• Firearm deaths of self defense*
and undetermined intent:........................................... ..4,224....................4,656

As you can see we have a gang violence problem, once we get rid of the suicides and gang violence we are actually pretty safe considering our population.

 

[bonjing]

You know, the only real scenario is the one that actually played out? Some guys drinking in the back of their car, warning a stranger about raccoons. (In my neighbourhood, you really don't want to mess with the raccoons! Unless you really want stitches and rabies shots, that is.)

You didn't bluff your way out of anything. You didn't survive a life threatening encounter with a pack of villains. You simply asked a question and they answered and off you went.

When I'm out, I nod and smile at people as I pass them. I say, hi, or "nice day, eh?" As a woman, yes, it's smart to be alert and aware of my environment. But, I also like people, so it's a win-win for all of us.

When I'm out, people ask me the time of day. They ask me when the next bus is. They strike up conversations when I'm waiting outside a store with my dog, or waiting for a bus. I'm not "on alert" for imminent attack, though I am, of course, alert and aware. There's nothing odd about being spoken to in public.

I think we live in very different worlds. And I'm glad I don't have to view every unplanned encounter with another human being as a potential attack on me or my loved ones.

Agreed. there is no problem with a smile and a wave, a smile and how you doin', or someone starting a conversation with "this weather, huh" There is a big difference when someone starts a conversation with, you better watch out. I've warned people about things and talked to people in the streets but my conversations usually start out with an excuse sir/mam.

 

[meggiebeth]

So by that logic in country's that outlaw guns or conceal carry would it be the fault of the law makers every single time someone is a victim of a violent attack?

Would that rape victim have chosen to carry concealed if allowed but instead had to rely on a freaking rape whistle?

No, but you cannot deny that as a result of a country’s law allowing guns, these tragedies have happened. It’s much easier to defend yourself from a non-gun attack than a gun attack. It isn’t a case of fault, but please look at other western countries who have implemented tough gun laws as there is a direct correlation between the number of guns in a country and the number of homicides and gun crime.

 

[meggiebeth]

The thoughtprocess of banning every and all guns isn't realistic in a country the size as the U.S., etc. Unless you're personally going to be the one going door to door searching everyone's home, etc

If your opinion is guns of any kind should be outlawed that's fine. You do however need to be 100% sure that no one can never ever find a gun period in order for your "but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened." statement to be true.

I’m not saying all guns- they are allowed in some cases in Britain for recreational purposes. But hand guns are strictly limited- most of our police officers don’t even have them! This is reflected in the much lower homicide rate.

 

[LYSE]

No, but you cannot deny that as a result of a country’s law allowing guns, these tragedies have happened. It’s much easier to defend yourself from a non-gun attack than a gun attack. It isn’t a case of fault, but please look at other western countries who have implemented tough gun laws as there is a direct correlation between the number of guns in a country and the number of homicides and gun crime.

sorry looks like i edited my post to add info while you replied...

No it's not easier to defend yourself form a non gun attack than a gun attack, guns are the great equalizer it means someone who is old and not physically fit or much smaller than there attacker can actually be on pretty equal footing if they have a firearm.

I have looked at other countries, the UK didn't actually experience a drop in homicides the average trend continued as was expected..what it did do was shift criminal behavior, Australia's ban did the same thing...actually their numbers remained relatively flat according to two government studies.

And why wouldn't it be the politicians fault that a rape victim wasn't able to defend themselves against an attacker weighing 2-3x their own weight? Especially if say that victim would have likely been armed otherwise (like we have students here disarming to go to universities)

 

[Domo]

I think you'd be surprised. lol

Anyway, even a four year old knows that guns are for killing.

I own a gun. I acknowledge that it has the immense power to inflict much pain and indeed, death. I further know that as such, it needs to be treated with great respect.

I think it's a cultural thing. In the USA, there is approximately one gun for ever man, woman and child. This is the greatest rate in the world. In second place we find Serbia, with 58.21 firearms per 100 residents. My country is way down the list. We just don't see the need or appeal. As I said, a cultural thing.

 

[VandVsmama]

I was just reading on a social media group that quite a few people take their guns to Disney. They were saying the policy is that you have to leave it locked up at the front desk of the resort or checked with security at the parks or left in their car. Any experiences as to this policy being strictly enforced? The group had many saying they're not following the policy & are carrying their guns around the resort. TIA!

I would recommend anyone with questions re: Disney's policies about guns on property (in WDW or Disneyland) to contact Disney directly and get the info straight from the source.

And regardless of how much that policy is being enforced by Disney, a gun owner should follow the policy 100% of the time.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

The thoughtprocess of banning every and all guns isn't realistic in a country the size as the U.S., etc. Unless you're personally going to be the one going door to door searching everyone's home, etc

If your opinion is guns of any kind should be outlawed that's fine. You do however need to be 100% sure that no one can never ever find a gun period in order for your "but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened." statement to be true.

There are estimates of about 300 million guns in the US. You better have a pretty large force if you are going to try to collect all of those. If you could even find them all.

 

[Domo]

I think it's best I bow out respectfully here, actually. This thread is destined to descend into a debate about the second amendment, lethality versus. safety and so on. No good can come of it. So I'm gently YAGE'ing right here, right now. I'll watch the thread for antics, but I doubt I'll post again. If I do there's a risk of passion creeping in and we all know what happens then... *cough*points*cough*

 

[LSUmiss]

I think there are two groups here. Those who own guns, and understand the responsibilities of them. And those who don't own guns, and don't understand them, or even want to understand them.

I didn't grow up around guns for the most part. My parents didn't own a gun. My grandfather owned a rifle, for hunting deer.

DH loves hunting (squirrel, rabbit, deer) so he owned a rifle when we first got married. Over the past 10-15 years or so he has gotten more interested in guns and now collects them. Several years ago he took the CCP class and started wearing a gun. Made me nervous at first as I wasn't used to it. But over time I got used to it and there have been situations where I've even asked him "are you carrying" and I was glad when he said he was. The way the world is going these days more and more honest law-abiding citizens are taking those classes and carrying their own gun. People need to protect themselves and their families.

I took the CCP class myself a few years ago and also have my own gun. I don't carry mine daily like DH does (although he wishes I did). To him, his gun is part of his every day wardrobe and very rarely does he not have it on him. For me, I basically wanted to learn how to use a gun, and to be prepared if I met up with a wolf or bear while out walking on our property up north. But also to have with me in our camper if I was staying up there by myself.

DH doesn't take his gun with him if we fly on vacation, but he does when we drive. A few years ago we drove to New Orleans, spent a few days there before getting on a cruise. I was glad he had his gun on him when we walked back to our hotel at night, just for our own personal safety. Thankfully nothing happened. But I'm glad we were prepared in case it did. When we left to go on the cruise he put his gun in a locked safe, in a concealed compartment with a metal cable lock in the truck.

When we go camping in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan we no longer go over the bridge into Canada because they won't allow us to bring a gun, and we choose not to be without DH's gun so we just don't go anymore.

I know what you mean about some parts of NOLA at night, but just an FYI, in Louisiana you have to have a permit in LA to conceal carry here. If he would have been caught or would have had to use it, he would have gone to jail.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I’m not saying all guns- they are allowed in some cases in Britain for recreational purposes. But hand guns are strictly limited- most of our police officers don’t even have them! This is reflected in the much lower homicide rate.

I interpreted your "but it that gun owner- in this case, a father- was never allowed to have a gun, it wouldn’t have happened." as well as "ultimately the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun that allow these types of incidents to happen." as well as "Tragedies like that are a direct result of allowing citizens to have guns" to mean you don't want guns period. People who own guns for recreational purposes are not guaranteed to responsibly lock up their guns so others do not have access to it. And just to clarify my mother-in-law and sister-in-law, my husband's prior boss from a different project, my husband's co-worker, etc all own guns--for the purpose of using them at shooting ranges (indoor and outdoor) as well as the prior boss and my husband's coworker just likes to collect them--or in other words recreational/hobby purposes.

 

[LYSE]

I know what you mean about some parts of NOLA at night, but just an FYI, in Louisiana you have to have a permit in LA to conceal carry here. If he would have been caught or would have had to use it, he would have gone to jail.

But Louisiana honors permits from most states.

Louisiana Honors Permits from these States:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

 

[bcla]

No, but you cannot deny that as a result of a country’s law allowing guns, these tragedies have happened. It’s much easier to defend yourself from a non-gun attack than a gun attack. It isn’t a case of fault, but please look at other western countries who have implemented tough gun laws as there is a direct correlation between the number of guns in a country and the number of homicides and gun crime.

I’ve seen FBI/DoJ/ATF studies that indicate that the majority of firearms used in the commission of crimes were acquired through straw purchases or theft. A straw purchase is where someone ineligible to purchase or who might run into purchase limits enlists another person to make the purchase.

In Mexico the majority of illegal firearms came from the United States.