Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!brooks
From: brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.flame,net.legal
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Personal Defense
Message-ID: <537@lll-crg.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 21-Apr-85 18:12:47 EST
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.537
Posted: Sun Apr 21 18:12:47 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Apr-85 06:56:29 EST
References: <350@idis.UUCP> <497@abnji.UUCP> <572@ahuta.UUCP> <498@lll-crg.ARPA> <419@utai.UUCP> <430@usl.UUCP>
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG group
Lines: 49
Xref: watmath net.politics:8637 net.flame:9456 net.legal:1592

> 
> In article <419@utai.UUCP> west@utai.UUCP (Thomas L. West) writes:
> 
> >Eugene D. Brooks III writes:
> >>I agree that the probability of good citizens getting hurt accidentally
> >>goes up by epsilon each time a good citizen carries a weapon.  You are
> >>missing an important factor that offsets this negative.  A good citizen
> >>carrying a weapon is in a position to help someone else being attacked.
> >>The probability of a well trained individual helping another is far greater
> >>than hurting someone by accident.
> >
> >   Hold it right there.  Do you have *any* facts, figures, articles or
> >*anything* to back this up.  My strong guess is that you are 180 degrees
> >out, and that far more people are injured by "good citizens" than are
> >"saved" by other "good citizens" coming to their rescue.  All I ask for
> >
> >   Tom West
> >ihnp4!utcsri!west
> 
> My  own feeling is that weapons, whatever they may be (including martial
> arts), are dangerous not only to other local citizens, but even to one's
> self  if one is UNTRAINED in using them.  My personal experience is that
> most people ARE  pretty  inexperienced  with  the  weapons  they  carry.
> *Especially* guns.
> 
I have no data on good citizens rescuing others but there is data on the number
of criminals that are justifibly killed during the the commision of a crime,
such as armed robbery, breaking into a home at night etc.  The ratio is
something like 3 times as many are killed by armed citizens as by police.
I can hunt down the exact figures and the nature of the survey if desired.

It seems that the policeman is not waiting in your home at night for the
criminal to break in.  The armed robbers also do not bother to hold up a
uniformed officer.  There is some truth to the adage "There is never a policeman
around when you need one."   Society can not afford to put a policeman on every
street corner.  The police are an after the fact solution to the crime problem.
They arrest the culprit AFTER he has done his deed.  For the armed robber who
likes to kill/rape his victims an after the fact solution to the problem is a
little too late for the victim.  The only cost effective solution to the problem
is for citizens to have weapons that are needed to ensure their security.

I strongly agree with the point made above concerning the level of training
needed by a citizen carrying a pistol.  Why not make the training required
as a condition of having a concealed weapons permit?  A permit holder could be
required to take periodic training (perhaps every six months or year) which is
organized and sponsored by the police.  You can even have the permit holder
foot the cost of this.  I would certainly pay the cost of training in return
for the right to carry a concealed weapon to ensure the protection of myself
and my family.