this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
344 points (96.0% liked)

News

22625 readers
3636 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A US appeals court Saturday paved the way for a California law banning the concealed carry of firearms in “sensitive places” to go into effect January 1, despite a federal judge’s ruling that it is “repugnant to the Second Amendment.”

The law – Senate Bill 2 – had been blocked last week by an injunction from District Judge Cormac Carney, but a three-judge panel filed an order Saturday temporarily blocking that injunction, clearing the path for the law to take effect.

The court issued an administrative stay, meaning the appeals judges did not consider the merits of the case, but delayed the judge’s order to give the court more time to consider the arguments of both sides. “In granting an administrative stay, we do not intend to constrain the merits panel’s consideration of the merits of these appeals in any way,” the judges wrote.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 54 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (11 children)

I'm sure gun people will be pissed at me for this, but wanting to have a concealed gun on you doesn't really make much sense to me if guns are supposed to be a deterrent. You aren't deterring anyone with your gun if no one knows you have it. Shouldn't you want to wear it where everyone can see it so they know not to try anything funny?

[–] [email protected] 35 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (13 children)

I don't think guns are supposed to be a deterrent. Someone running to mug you isn't thinking clearly about the possible complications or repercussions.

A carried gun is a commitment to kill someone before you are killed in a life or death situation. Not too feel cool or show off, or brandish as a warning.

Plus if you dress like a cowboy, someone might try to mug you FOR that gun, making you a bigger target.

That's all pretty heavy, and the odds are low that you'd encounter that situation. So not a lot of people are willing to complicate their lives for it.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The deterrent is the uncertainty of who may and may not have a gun on them. A lot of self defense is making yourself a harder target, the knowledge that a firearm might come into play and the victim may be proficient at using it makes anyone and everyone a harder target. It doesn’t mean desperate criminals won’t still make a move, but it should decrease the number of crimes attempted.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago (10 children)

Again, it is already uncertain who may and may not have a gun on them.

but it should decrease the number of crimes attempted.

Is there any data to that effect or is that just wishful thinking?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's not good data on anything related to guns and it's frustrating.

Intuitively it makes sense that if there might be a bear in the woods some people aren't going to go into the woods because they're afraid of getting mauled by a bear. It almost certainly has an effect, but quantifying it is going to be hard and subject to bias and the real effect will always be subject to other unrecorded factors (e.g. maybe when they tested one group the bears were hibernating).

I personally don't think many people who aren't into gun culture or traumatized by guns give much thought to whether or not someone is going to have a gun in XYZ place ... which probably translates to a lot of crimes of passion or desperation (e.g. I need drug money so I'm going to go rob this gas station).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

I personally don’t think many people who aren’t into gun culture or traumatized by guns give much thought to whether or not someone is going to have a gun in XYZ place … which probably translates to a lot of crimes of passion or desperation (e.g. I need drug money so I’m going to go rob this gas station).

Very well said and I am in agreement.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 7 months ago

The deterrent is supposed to be the possibility of armed people. The idea is supposed to be that allowing people to legally carry concealed weapons means that any potential victim might have a gun.

On the other hand, many gun owners who support concealed carry oppose open carry for several reasons.

First off, they don't want to make them or their gun a target. They don't want someone trying to steal their gun, and they don't want to flag themselves as the first target for any kind of attack.

But another huge reason is that they feel like the only reason to carry openly in public is to make a political statement and carry around an implied threat. Most people who carry concealed consider themselves pretty normal people and they aren't interested in making statements or threatening others. They just carry a gun.

I'll occasionally carry my target postil concealed just to keep the gun secure while transporting it. It's usually in a safe at the house, but when I'm going to the range or leaving town I'll take it with me, and it's less-likely to get stolen off my hip than it is by having my car window smashed. Keeping it hidden on my person is just another part of firearm safety.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 7 months ago (15 children)

I know you're getting blasted with replies. It's not supposed to be a deterrent. You carry concealed so that you can defend your life with deadly force without having to walk around pretending to be a badass all the time. Carrying a gun doesn't stop crime, it stops people when they make an attempt on your life.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Codilingus 18 points 7 months ago (35 children)

Everyone I know that carries does so concealed. They don't care about deterrents or whatever, they're just taking a precaution they hope to never use. Like being mugged or attacked. Source: Texas.

load more comments (35 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A gun person might say open carry can also make you a target.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Then guns are definitely not a deterrent.

There is no such thing as a deterrent that deters people who don't know about its existence, and if you're a target by openly carrying the thing you call a deterrent, that doesn't deter people either.

So maybe the argument that guns are a deterrent should be dropped by the people who want to carry their gun concealed about their person.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Well, I believe the idea is that if you are wanting to start something and you know people are definitely carrying, but you don’t know who or how many is the deterrent.

I am not here to convince you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

"I don't know if someone around me has a gun" doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent so far since that's the status quo regardless of the legality.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (7 children)

Let me start by saying I appreciate this hasn’t devolved and does seem to be a civil discussion.

The idea is most citizens are law abiding and if it is illegal to conceal carry or barred by the establishment to carry then only three types of people would be a threat to someone who intends to cause violence. First a law enforcement officer, second another person intended to break the law with a weapon and last would be an individual with the attitude’rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6’. The possibility of those types being in the vicinity is much lower than when everyone can be capable of self defense with a firearm.

There are many more nuances involved: does the person carrying have training? Can the person carrying be more of a danger than the danger their presence prevents? Is the criminal logical/smart enough to know and understand that there is a risk of an armed populace when they enact their crimes? And many more variables that can be put into play that aren’t part of this discussion.

Thanks for reading.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I agree. Nukes only work as a deterrent (for example) because the countries that have them "open carry" them. A concealed-program nuke is only good for after the fact revenge on a country that attacks you or an ally/neighbor. Just like a gun.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (15 children)

If a person with a gun decides they're going to start shooting, are they going to shoot the other person with a gun first, or last?

A law like this doesn't stop criminals so much as it let's them not worry about being shot at. It doesn't stop a criminal from having a gun. It stops everyone else from having a gun.

Explain to me how it makes a park safer to not allow concealed weapons in it. I'll listen to your reasoning. No big wall of text with 50 reasons that would take ages to go over. Just explain to me how a law that stops a law abiding citizen from having a concealed weapon in a park will make it safer.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

LOL, "I'm willing to listen to reasoning, but only if you format it in a way that I'm willing to read."

For real, though, fewer guns means fewer gun crimes. The whole 'then only outlaws will have guns' is really a myth. Statistics have shown over and over again that the vast majority of criminals who purchase guns do so legally. If they can't purchase one locally, they just go a state over where the laws are lax. The whole 'black market' gun stores thing is just a false argument.

The idea that a 'good guy with a gun' will make everyone safer is also pretty well debunked. Just look at John Hurley - the 'good guy with a gun' who was posthumously branded a hero after he was shot by the police.

Guns are inherently unsafe. We're never getting rid of them in military applications, but any reasonable restrictions for private ownership should be a no-brainer.

All the arguments for 'private gun ownership makes us safer' fall apart under any scrutiny. So does the constitutional argument. The only real, provable argument you have is that your personal freedom to own a killing machine is more important to you than public safety.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Shooting a weapon is always a risk. Not allowing weapons takes that risk away.

A concealed gun isn't going to do shit when the mugger is already holding you at gunpoint.

I've never understood why you'd want a gun. The risks of guns being everywhere just seems a lot more obvious than the rare situations where they'd actually be useful.
Guns are far more likely to be used for bad than good, that's why you want as little as possible guns around...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Story incoming...

When I was about 12 my family, a long with my uncle, went on a camping trip in Gorman California. The sun had just gone down and we had a fire and we're listening to the radio. My mom was in the trailer with my other siblings and my dad, uncle and I were heating up hot dogs by the fire.

These 2 men walk up to our fire out of the dark and sit down and start being super belligerent and creepy. They have knives and who the hell else knows what. They demand beer and hotdogs. My dad, asks them to leave after giving them both a beer and dog. They don't and keep getting more aggressive. They start talking about things like coming in to the trailer and what what else they can have.

My uncle starts to get brave and tell them to get the fuck out. They don't like that and become more aggressive and get out their seats to hurt him. MY Dad tells them he has more to drink in the trailer. He walks into the trailer and walks back out with 2 hand guns and points them at they guys and tells them to get the fuck out or die. I'd like to say it felt heroic seeing him do this, but I was so freaking scared out of my mind. The men leave and you can hear their motorcycles start up and they drive away.

Earlier that day my uncle kept making fun of my dad for being his guns. And telling him he doesn't need them. In the end, we absolutely did need them and it may have even saved our lives at most.

I don't have a moral of the story here. Just a story. I don't carry in public. I'm not even a huge gun guy. But I have one. And it goes with me camping.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

It doesn't make sense to do all this at once: hate cops, hate guns, and be unable to defend yourself.

That's just asking to be taken advantage of by those with more power than you. Expecting people to do the right thing is an innocent and childish view of the world.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So they blocked the block blocking the Glock?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›