But the rest of you peasants aren't important.
But the rest of you peasants aren't important.
How many death threats do you routinely get?
Straw man argument...
I can conceal carry. Who cares about that bill?
You can leousa carry in all 50 states? Lucky you. Not all citizens are created equal.
How so? Judges and prosecutors, and heck, even some defense attorneys are routinely threatened and targeted buy "unhappy clients," to say the least.
I love it when politicians or whoever say they need substantial armed protection because "they face more of a threat." Why? Because of these undeniable, provable facts:
Correct? If you think not, let's debate the point further.
- VASTLY more non-politicians, non-prosecutors, non-judges, etc. are murdered every year, by orders of magnitude, than politicians, etc.
- So if the armed security is so freaking good that it provides protection on the order or 100 or 1000 times, then all of us should get the protection.
- Since the great unwashed taxpayers are not worthy of getting taxpayer funded protection, they should certainly be allowed to pay for it themselves via armed guards or ...
- Their own weapons, which the data seem to show prevent those protected from getting killed by orders of magnitude.
Um, the flaw in your argument is that there are vastly FEWER judicial officials than the general public.
"A 1999 survey of 1,029 Pennsylvania state judges found that 51.8 percent reported being the target of an IC&C sometime during the previous year. In addition, more than 25 percent of the 1,029 state judges were physically approached, 1.2 percent were assaulted, and—more disturbing—more than one third admitted that they had changed their judicial conduct as a result of the experience."
The "average" homicide victim is killed by someone they know, during a domestic assault or acquaintance assault, hence the rest of your argument is moot. No one has said that the average person should be denied ccw rights.
A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, meanwhile the proper idea of argument under discussion was not addressed or properly refuted. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
Clear enough for you?
To be honest it seems daily watching the news the last few months cause I am White, Christian, Employed (well, retired), stand for my anthem, salute my flag, know I am a male etc etc etc
I can carry in every state I want to or will ever go to. All citizens are not my problem. If morons want to live in or venture to states where they can’t carry that is their problem, not mine. They get the state government they deserve.
I thought this was already in place.
Well then if the vast amount of murders are of someone you know then they shouldn't need a gun. They should pick who they know better.
All the time. The leftists are threatening the normal people every day.
For Christ's sake, just make a bill granting concealed carry reciprocity to all 50 states and be done with this.
And that is why we lose. California creep coming your way soon enough. Then what
Get ready for it. Americans are embracing marxists.
The question I have , is the new LEOSA reform act going to pass and what is in the bill. The “old” LEOSA reform bill that seemed to get stalled in committee had new provisions that would overrule some of the restrictions that local and state governments ( some private commercial properties too) put on LEOSA carry. I think that’s why it wasn’t going anywhere before the new push .
Does the new “push” take more restrictions off of LEOSA carry? Or does it just include judges to the list of LEOSA qualified people?
I think that depends if he voices his opinion on the internet. Apparently saying silly things like "my life matters" can get you death threats on the internet.
My initial thought is it's a good thing for the judges/prosecutors......and, will be arrows in our quiver for getting the rest of us peasants the same allowance.....
Unless I'm missing something, why can't they go through the same process as everyone else to get a permit/license to carry? Other than, you know, "the rules are for thee and not for me".
But wait, if the reason is because of their occupation, then why not extend it to say... repo men... and lawyers... and bouncers... and private detectives... aren't all those people subject to more threats etc. than your average 9-5 worker?
Judges and prosecutors cannot already jump through the hoops the rest of us have to do in order to get a CWP??? I reckon they are special.
Or, heck, we have at least one example of how saying "all lives matter" can get you killed in the street.
True, but I think the point is these people will be carrying in places that you and I can't carry.....even with our legally obtained permits.........
......Still, I see it as a good thing, and am all for it......because it is good for our cause to have "constitutional carry" for everyone....eventually!
Give one of those cool "Gun Free Zone" signs..
There are a few problems that a federal judge has over a regular person or local cop. They have to enter a federal courthouse all the time. Regular local LEOs and permit holders can’t carry there . Many federal judges live in a different state in which they serve. A SDNY ( southern district of New York) district judge might live in New Jersey for example.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they just become a special class that won’t support the average joe cause they have theirs already.
To me they are in no way shape or form special. That goes all the way to POTUS. They are just another schmuck going about their lives doing a job they chose to do. Just like you, me... everyone else.
People either have a right to defend themselves or they don’t.
I might add parole officers to the list if they don’t already have authorization to carry for SD.
Judges, prosecutors and parole officers must deal with bad people every day in the normal course of business, and I want them to be emboldened to do their jobs well, without being intimidated.
I don't think all retired cops should be able to conceal carry, have you seen the drunks/dopers/basic criminals that are retired cops. They should all have to pass through the same background checks as the rest of us do.
Although I can and do carry under LEOSA, Constitutional carry should be the law of the land, as in everywhere in the United States, period. States, and territories. Shall not be infringed.
Why do judges and prosecutors need PDW when they have squads of armed Police as escorts?
We do go through a background, along with firing a real qualification course, unlike the Joke CCW course. In AZ the qual course is the same as the state and local officers fire and a judgement test is required. LEOSA requires annual qualification, paying a fee, and dealing with state government to get your “permission slip” annually. If those drunks/dopers/basic criminals are carrying, they more than likely aren’t doing so under LEOSA.
Your post is very insulting. Retired cops as opposed to fired cops have a lower arrest rate than CCW. And cops go thru a harder background check and are monitored for years than a normal CCW holder.
A lot of equal animals getting even more equal right here on the farm.........
Good news is this bill has no chance of passage in remaining 4 months.
I an surprised that they didn't already have A license to carry, they deal with wackos and thugs on a daily basis. Can't always hsve a Marshal around.
I described in detail why your analysis is demonstrably false. I will try again - follow along here. The following points are irrefutable:
So I repeat - the data show that arming the citizenry adds significant defense against being murdered.
- A tiny, puny fraction of judges are murdered. Puny. Less than 0.1%. From what I found, 4 Federal judges murdered over the past 50 years, of a total of at least 8,500 judges (including bankruptcy judges, magistrates, etc.).
- 4 out of 8500 = 0.047%
- Total number of Americans murdered past 50 years = approximately 625,000, or an average of 12,500 per year. The totals were much higher in 1982-1985, and were 15,700 in 2017, so that number is pretty reasonable as an estimate.
- As noted, I did not actually total up the FBI murder stats for every year 1969-2019, but the estimate of 12,500 per year is reliable.
- So among a total of approximately 450 million Americans who lived 1969- present (330 million currently, 120 million who died or 2.6 million per year currently, slightly less when population lower in the 1960's and 1970's), an estimated 625,000 have been murdered.
- That works out to 0.14%.
- So the murder rate for the average non-judiciary American is 0.14%, and for members of the judiciary just 0.05%, or about 1/3 as high.
- That even where according to your data, members of the judiciary are subjected to threats at a higher rate than the average American. (I presume that was your point.)
- Why such a lower murder rate despite the increased threat level?
- Because of armed guards - guns prevent murders.
That's the argument of ignorance.
So how many death threats have you gotten?
Yep, I’m in favor of national LTC and drivers licenses.
Why is that good news? Does it effect you? Would you deny someone something because you can’t get it? So if a national reciprocity Bill was introduced, people in NJ should be against it because they can’t get permits in the first place?
LEOSA is already here but needs improvements. And if you want LEOSA privileges, there are ways you could get it too. Go become a reserve police officer or a police officer , put up with the BS that comes with it. And if you do that for every working day for 10 years or more, you can have the privilege in retirement if you requalify each year.
And many LEOSA requalification “services” will not requal a police retiree who doesn’t have a CCW permit as well.
Well non- Prosecutors and Judges are most likely to be murdered by people who most Citizens would say should have been in prison for numerous prior crimes, if not for soft prosecutors and judges...
Come to think of it, maybe prosecutors and judges should be the only people NOT allowed to conceal carry
So by your statement you’re saying my right to carry a firearm to defend myself is predicated on death threats?
Do you think they go try to kill “soft” prosecutors or judges? Or the ones that are tough on them.
The hell with the nobility let the peasants be armed also.
It is good news because I am against it.
LEOSA is for folks who carry/carried a gun everyday as part of the job. Everyone else can get an LTC. No reason a judge or prosecutor cant. And in my state (TX), Judge and prosecutor get special privileges, so it is preferable over LEOSA.
Exactly my point. Thanks for making it. If a judge or prosecutor wants LEOSA privileges, then they can go become a reserve officer.
Well, judges don’t usually join gangs and roam around ghettos getting into gun fights over drugs (or just wearing the crip hat in the blood neighborhood) so maybe that explains your statistics?
The points made:
- Judicial officers are looking for legislation to allow them to carry because of the threats they face.
- I showed that judicial officers are much less likely to be murdered than the average American, threats or no.
- Further, despite the reported myriad of threats to them, judicial officers get murdered at less than 1/3 the rate of other Americans.
- So apparently their current protections (armed guards in courts) give protection already.
- All of us should get the same protection, no?
- So a national right-to-carry, concealed-carry law for all eligible is the way to make us all safer.
- That includes people who need the protection most, i.e., those who live in bad areas.
I understand people being upset about this proposal. I got my LTC just like anyone else in my state, there is a special provision for judges and prosecutors on the books. it does expand my ability to carry in some off limit places. I support all law abiding citizens the ability to carry, but i also dont feel bad that because of my job i have some expanded areas that i can carry. we get threats, people trying to intimidate us, wait for prosecutors to leave work, to name a few. you make defendants angry, their loved ones, not to mention victims and their families.
I dont think I'm special but i do think more people with violent tendencies might not think highly of me and many are walking around free on bond. A bond i might have apposed strongly as they stood next to me in a court room. Its not uncommon to see people I deal with professionally when i go out in everyday life.
Likely not as much difference as you would think. If it’s the first felony and they get sent up they are mad. if they are finally sent up after 17 “warnings” they are mad.