Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
>
>
> > I'm sure you wouldn't agree, but many people probably feel that, if you
> > already have a city with a high rate of crime, it makes perfect sense to
> > restrict the number of people carrying loaded guns in public. While on the
> > other hand, if you live in East Peapod, Wyoming, where everyone knows their
> > neighbors and people feel safe enough not to lock their doors, why not let
> > everyone pack if they want to? Makes sense to me.
>
> As I'm sure Mike will point out as well, DC and NY have /not/ restricted
> the number of people carrying weapons--they've only passed laws against
> it, decreasing the number of non-policemen and non-politicians carrying
> weapons legally (the ruling class still has this privilege). I don't
> think there are any accurate stats on whether the actual number of
> weapons went up or down (per capita) after the laws.
There are plenty of large cities where concealed carry is completely
legal for law abiding citizens. If Zero had actually read John Lott's
book he'd know that his statement is completely false. But then again,
you can't confuse a gun controller with the facts. Facts are made for
denying, obfuscating, revising, misstating. I'm sure Lott's book is one
he'd like to burn if he had the chance.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:57 MDT