Open Carry at the RNC?

[Padawanbater2]

Hey, I was just wondering if you guys knew the policy on open carry at the 2016 Republican National Convention? It's being held in Cleveland and according to Google, "It is 100% legal to openly carry firearms in the state of Ohio as long as you follow the rules and procedures that go along with it.", so I would imagine it'll be allowed, can anyone confirm?

 

[UncleBuck]

LOLOLOL

 

[Diabolical666]

let us know how it turns out for you Pad

 

[see4]

That's a scary notion.

 

[Padawanbater2]

That's a scary notion.

What could possibly go wrong?

More guns = More safety

 

[ThickStemz]

I live in a state where it's a safe assumption that everyone is armed out in public.

It isn't that there are negative consequences of this reality of allowing guns to be carried almost everywhere. One can even carry in a bar here.

But yes, occasionally someone in legal possession of a firearm uses it in an illegal way.

But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society. There are more crimes prevented by an armed population than caused by it.

 

[Padawanbater2]

But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society.

Actually statistics show the complete opposite of that

 

[Northern Spark]

A room filled with poorly trained/untrained and armed imbeciles... I see no problem there.

 

[Padawanbater2]

A room filled with poorly trained/untrained and armed imbeciles... I see no problem there.

But the logic works if you increase the amount of people to 320 million and size of the arena to the United States

/s

 

[ChesusRice]

PWNED

 

[ThickStemz]

Actually statistics show the complete opposite of that

No, they don't.

Statistics...http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/09/matt-gaetz/violent-crime-lower-states-open-carry/

States that allow open carry have 23% less violent crime.

Even the detractors of this position can only counter it by saying it doesn't make any difference if we allow it or not.

So there can't be evidence showing it's more dangerous to allow it

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, they don't.

Statistics...http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/09/matt-gaetz/violent-crime-lower-states-open-carry/

States that allow open carry have 23% less violent crime.

Even the detractors of this position can only counter it by saying it doesn't make any difference if we allow it or not.

So there can't be evidence showing it's more dangerous to allow it

You said;

But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society.

So why are societies that are less armed largely safer than the US, statistically speaking?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

 

[ChesusRice]

No, they don't.

Statistics...http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/oct/09/matt-gaetz/violent-crime-lower-states-open-carry/

States that allow open carry have 23% less violent crime.

Even the detractors of this position can only counter it by saying it doesn't make any difference if we allow it or not.

So there can't be evidence showing it's more dangerous to allow it

TRUMP RALLY!!
BRING YOUR GUNS!!!

 

[ThickStemz]

You said;

So why are societies that are less armed largely safer than the US, statistically speaking?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Your stats are less meaningful than mine.
Honestly I've not seen any statistics on this subject that has very solid methodology and data. The jury is still out to a great extent.

It's very hard to compare the US to any other country. There are so many variables. Population demographics. Many of the countries with lower rates than the US are homogeneous in culture and population. Where there is diversity there is strife.

I think I would say that if we could start over without the gun as a consumer good we would be safer. But that genie is out of the bottle. Given the reality of our situation allowing law abiding citizens the ability to carry and defend themselves hasn't shown to increase violence where it has been implemented in the US.

You're letting best be the enemy of better. We can't get rid of guns. They're here to stay.

We do have data to suggest that states that allow their citizens to be armed are safer than their neighbors who don't. That means more than comparing us to countries without guns because we will never be without guns.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Your stats are less meaningful than mine.
Honestly I've not seen any statistics on this subject that has very solid methodology and data. The jury is still out to a great extent.

It's very hard to compare the US to any other country. There are so many variables. Population demographics. Many of the countries with lower rates than the US are homogeneous in culture and population. Where there is diversity there is strife.

I think I would say that if we could start over without the gun as a consumer good we would be safer. But that genie is out of the bottle. Given the reality of our situation allowing law abiding citizens the ability to carry and defend themselves hasn't shown to increase violence where it has been implemented in the US.

You're letting best be the enemy of better. We can't get rid of guns. They're here to stay.

We do have data to suggest that states that allow their citizens to be armed are safer than their neighbors who don't. That means more than comparing us to countries without guns because we will never be without guns.

Again, this is exactly what you said;

But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society.

You didn't say "But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society... except in the United States."

Before we go any further, I would like for you to acknowledge the statement you made is incorrect and that you are now moving the goalposts to mean something else. I'm not a fan of talking at people

 

[ThickStemz]

Again, this is exactly what you said;
You didn't say "But statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society... except in the United States."

Before we go any further, I would like for you to acknowledge the statement you made is incorrect and that you are now moving the goalposts to mean something else. I'm not a fan of talking at people

The statement I made was meant to apply to the United states.

It gets much more complex when you go international becuase there are countries on that list that make it illegal for private citizens to own guns yet they have a much higher rate of violence than we do.

The US compared to an advanced democratic country with a homogeneous population. Yeah they're safer without guns.

A multi cultural country that bans all guns, well those tend to be more violent.

 

[GranolaCornhola]

"That's a scary notion"? Funny as hell. For Christs sakes, the next thing you know they might just exercise other constitutional rights. What happens if its the first amendment and they utter words I disagree with? We can't have that, they must be stopped!

Obama, the clitons and their exteded families surrounded by highly armed guards 24/7? Well, that's different of course, their families lives matter, yours? Not so much. Only lying, elitist dochebag fucks get constitutional rights, you peons? Go eat your fucking cake, and kow your place.

 

[ttystikk]

A room filled with poorly trained/untrained and armed imbeciles... I see no problem there.

I'm thinking a serious case of Darwinian gene pool cleansing.

I see no problem there.

 

[Padawanbater2]

The statement I made was meant to apply to the United states.

So is the claim "statistics show that an armed population makes for a safer society." right or wrong?

there are countries on that list that make it illegal for private citizens to own guns yet they have a much higher rate of violence than we do.

There are also countries that have no gun control that have much higher rates of violence than the US, and none in the western world with higher rates of gun deaths. Countries in the west with less guns have less deaths, fact

 

[UncleBuck]

...countries with lower rates than the US are homogeneous in culture and population. Where there is diversity there is strife.

wow. did you copy that verbatim from david duke?