3 ms·

It's illegal in Florida to conceal carry in a bar or any establishment that derives more than 50% of it's revenue from the sale of alcohol. Also, it's a big as

It's illegal in Florida to conceal carry in a bar or any establishment that derives more than 50% of it's revenue from the sale of alcohol. Also, it's a big assumption that gun ownership = gun carrying. There are a lot of people who have 2-3 guns (shotgun, rifle, pistol) at home, and never carry them unless specifically heading to a shooting range or hunting. Also, as others have pointed out, personal firearm carrying is highly restricted on active duty military bases. You'd probably find more guns in cars at a Texas Walmart than you would at a Texas military barracks.

throwaway5752 9y ago
"it's a big assumption that gun ownership = gun carrying" ... seems like one is an obvious prerequisite to the other, so you'd at least expect some degree of correlation, correct? I'm certainly not suggesting there aren't responsible gun owners (in fact I believe they are a large majority). I personally know many people just like you describe (generally do not carry, otherwise stored unloaded in a safe). To go back a bit, why didn't a CCL bystander intervene, though, in the Orlando shooting even if nobody was armed in the club? I just think the asymmetry of active shooter situations renders an armed population basically useless most of the time, and people apt to grossly overestimate how effective they would be. My suspicion is that the risk from death (all cause and homicide only) from firearm is highly correlated with degree of gun ownership. And the real discussion is how much should people give away in the balance of their right to stay alive vs other peoples' liberty to own firearms. It think that is not a bad faith reduction. Firearm deaths will never be zero, and there are and must be restrictions on ownership of weapons (NBC weapons, artillery) at some level. I'm slightly guilty of bad faith with asking a bad faith question. I know the CDC is prevented by law from doing this sort of epidemiological study, so we are sort of left in a state arguing without facts (and that seems intentional).

throwaway5752 9y ago

"it's a big assumption that gun ownership = gun carrying" ... seems like one is an obvious prerequisite to the other, so you'd at least expect some degree of correlation, correct? I'm certainly not suggesting there aren't responsible gun owners (in fact I believe they are a large majority). I personally know many people just like you describe (generally do not carry, otherwise stored unloaded in a safe). To go back a bit, why didn't a CCL bystander intervene, though, in the Orlando shooting even if nobody was armed in the club? I just think the asymmetry of active shooter situations renders an armed population basically useless most of the time, and people apt to grossly overestimate how effective they would be. My suspicion is that the risk from death (all cause and homicide only) from firearm is highly correlated with degree of gun ownership. And the real discussion is how much should people give away in the balance of their right to stay alive vs other peoples' liberty to own firearms. It think that is not a bad faith reduction. Firearm deaths will never be zero, and there are and must be restrictions on ownership of weapons (NBC weapons, artillery) at some level. I'm slightly guilty of bad faith with asking a bad faith question. I know the CDC is prevented by law from doing this sort of epidemiological study, so we are sort of left in a state arguing without facts (and that seems intentional).