Gun Control in France...obviously...not working

[manta49]

Hard to say, but, in your case, terrorist attacks by the IRA weren't stopped because gun ownership is severely restricted. How's that workin' for ya?

The IRA were not stopped for lots of reasons, money support and firearms from America for example. But it was not because gun ownership is severely restricted in Northern Ireland. Hows that for ya. ?

The American connection is said to account for roughly 50 percent of the weapons and ammunition smuggled to the outlawed Provisional wing of the Irish Republican Army. Donald J. McGorty, head of the section on international terrorism of United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in New York, says the Provisional IRA's dependence on American support and supplies is ``tremendous.''

How times change when terrorist attacks come knocking on your own door.

There are roughly about 11,000 handguns held on firearms certificates in Northern Ireland, about 9,500 of them are held for personal protection.
AS the Department of Justice consults on proposed changes to firearms licensing laws here, The Detail can reveal information about the owners of Northern Ireland’s 153,459 legally held guns.
Almost 60,000 members of the public own over 146,000 firearms with the remaining 7,018 legally held guns belonging to serving police and prison officers.

If we take a common sense definition of terrorism (the FBI, DoJ and DoD don't agree on a definition), there really aren't that many *real* acts of terrorism in the US

I am talking about attacks like 9/11 Boston bombing, oklahoma bombing, not armed individuals stopped a robbery etc. How have being stopped by armed individuals in America. ?

[kozak6]

It's a bit obtuse to pin the resulting carnage of a coordinated terrorist attack on gun control.

Gun control en masse aside, this could have happened in the US too. It occurred in what would have been a "gun free zone" in the US. Any stadium, arena, or concert hall I've ever seen was a posted no guns building.

Bingo. Concert attendees are often patted down or maybe wanded. Carry in bars and restaurants is difficult at best, and likely unwise if not illegal if you are out drinking on Friday night.

I would also imagine that pistols are of mixed effectiveness against homemade bomb vests, and especially in a crowd.

[Pond, James Pond]

Well I'm so pleased members decided to show a little respect for the dead and dying in France by not turning this into a drum-beating... oh no, wait....

If people think that CCW would have done much to stem the carnage when there are 8 guys with fully auto AKs laying down fire, I suggest they take a reality check. Particularly as the means were either getting out of a van and opening up on a terrace of diners, or entering a crowded, noisy concert hall.

Yes, there is a chance they might have taken one out with a lucky shot to the head, other than than I can only see collateral damage as missed shots will have to stop somewhere else or in someone else.

I personally find it pretty poor taste to suggest those people are dead because France lacks CCW laws. I find it pretty poor taste to use this situation as a platform for a pro-gun agenda.
That comes from someone who is, as should be obvious, pretty pro-gun.

Hard to say, but, in your case, terrorist attacks by the IRA weren't stopped because gun ownership is severely restricted. How's that workin' for ya?

Facts check. I can remember stacks of explosions or bomb-scares. No mass-shootings. Most of the attacks on civilians, by the IRA, were bombs not guns. Guns were used against the army and targeted assassinations.
So, do let me know how an LCP against a parked car full of explosives works out for ya...

[mehavey]

...pretty poor taste to suggest those people are dead because France lacks CCW laws. I find it pretty poor taste to use this situation as a platform for a pro-gun agenda.

Ahem...

Did ANY civilian engage these terrorists at the start?
Anyone ?

Aside from the initial killings, it then took a loooong time to systematically
kill the next 90-100 in the concert.

Did anyone engage these killers?
ANYone....?

Sorry about it folks, but the scale of this massacre does have two big tap roots
-- one of which is so politically incorrect that I dare not even bring it up --
and the other being a totally defenseless citizenry in the face of pure evil.
Desperate rabbits up against a fence after a long drive across a big field.
I've never forgotten that image.

The latter is not tasteless.
It is fact.

[g.willikers]

Maybe it just comes down to:
Armed citizens = some chance of defense and survival,
Unarmed citizens = no chance.

[Nathan]

I think 8 guys gathering up a crowd of 1000's, 10% of which are active CCW holders, don't stand a chance. Just my opinion. I'm thinking they get engaged in the street and don't make it inside most likely.

Same for 1 or 2 hosing down a bar of 10% CCW holders. Let's just say their mag changes are gonna suck!

Mr. Pond, with all due respect, Americans really struggle with the idea of hope and faith anymore. Frankly, I don't hope or have faith that any gun control anywhere will be effective.

As for the people of the world affected by another terrible terrorist attack, I hope we can continue to support France with our thoughts and prayers as they figure out how to stop this in their borders and beyond.

[Pond, James Pond]

Did ANY civilian engage these terrorists at the start?
Anyone ?

Aside from the initial killings, it thentook a loooong time to systematically
kill the next 90-100 in the concert.

Did anyone engage these killers?
ANYone....?

In a crowded concert hall, as I said, any missed shots would probably hit others so there you've got people shot up again.

To make a CCW a valid component, you'd have had to close the gap and fired at contact distances which I don't see happening.

Sure, if you come face to face, then engage... but to go looking for them? I don't think so...

If this had happened in a US city, I believe the response would have been the same: people would hear automatic gunfire and run. like. hell.

I think 8 guys gathering up a crowd of 1000's, 10% of which are active CCW holders, don't stand a chance. Just my opinion. I'm thinking they get engaged in the street and don't make it inside most likely

You assume that all holders would get into the fight and not run for safety. You're assuming they would recognise each other as CCWers, not assailants, that they would coordinate and attack in unison. I don't think any of that realistic.

Mr. Pond, with all due respect, Americans really struggle with the idea of hope and faith anymore. Frankly, I don't hope or have faith that any gun control anywhere will be effective.

As for the people of the world affected by another terrible terrorist attack, I hope we can continue to support France with our thoughts and prayers as they figure out how to stop this in their borders and beyond.

My objections are nothing to do with supporting gun control. I am not for gun control. Nor am I advocating a dependence on "hope and faith".

I'm not even saying that having a firearm would do nothing and that there is nothing to be learnt. I'd rather have one than not, although I have no qualms in admitting that my survival in such a situation would be likely down to luck not a snub.

It is the fact that within hours of this horrific act there are members essentially saying "Well, there you go... That'll teach ya to have gun control..."

That I find tasteless.
IMHO, the time for "That's where gun control gets you" can come later.
If others find this perfectly OK, well.... what can I say?

On the other hand, the simple messages of solidarity and condolences are appreciated.

[ronl]

Survival in such situations depends on several factors, mind set, training, ability, and divine providence(I don't believe in luck). Mind set is the big one. We in the western societies have been conditioned, by the emergence of the nanny state, to having things provided for us. We expect to have the elements necessary for our basic survival to be provided for; food on the grocery store shelves; energy to run our toys, security, etc. Normalcy bias weighs heavily into this mind set. When something happens to upset the delicate balance, a majority of people will either panic, or simply acquiesce and wait for deliverance by the powers that be. Understand this clearly, gentlemen, it is up to us who are not burdened by standard sheeple mentality to be the gatekeepers. We are the ones who have to rise up and be the eyes and ears, the aware ones. It is our duty to help protect those around us. We have to develop the situational awareness, the mind set to help combat such evil as was witnessed in Paris. We do not know how many acts of unwarranted aggression are thwarted each year by the armed citizens of this country. Such stats are not kept, but I suspect they are much more than anyone realizes. Let us not lament the inaction of the majority of people, for such is to be statistically expected. Let us who are aware sharpen our skills and minds, develop our situational awareness, and be ready to react if and when we find ourselves in such a position. In such instances, it is we, the armed citizens, who are the tip of the spear.

[vito]

There are reputedly 11 million people in the U.S. licensed to carry a concealed firearm. With over 330 million people in the country that works out to about 3%. Add to that the uncounted number in states where no license is required, but reduce that number by those who are licensed but do not carry regularly and a rough estimate of 2% of the population carrying at any given time is probably valid. That could mean in a movie theater seating 500 people, there would be 10 carrying a concealed handgun. Even if all 10 drew and engaged the terrorists (who are armed with automatic long arms) there will still be mayhem and death, but likely not as much as when everyone of the victims and potential victims are unarmed. More likely in my scenario is that there is a single attacker and two or three patrons who engage the shooter. My guess is that most of the theater attendees would be able to escape in this situation.

On the negative side, most venues where large numbers of people gather are already posted as "No Guns" zones. Here in IL such postings have the force of law, and my guess is that most concealed carriers do not carry when in such a location. We know that terrorists/mass murderers do not randomly choose their intended attack site, but deliberately choose places where they are least likely to face armed opposition.

Yet despite all the obstacles to stopping a terrorist attack such as suffered in Paris, or at least limiting the scope of the attack and the number of casualties, having widespread carrying of firearms, concealed or open, seems to offer at least marginal improvement over the absence of defensive weapons. But if we ever reached a level of concealed carry closer to 20 or 25%, we might see a very different outcome, if this was combined with an ending of so-called "Gun Free Zones".

We never seem to have an attempted mass shooting at an NRA convention, or at a local gun show. I personally remember working as a waiter many, many years ago at a wedding of a police captain's daughter. When jackets were removed, a majority of the guests were clearly carrying a gun. One of my fellow waiters remarked that he had never felt so safe working an event as he did that night.

Maybe someday our society will wake up and take to heart the expression that "an armed society is a polite society". Imagine if concealed carry were close to universal, and open carry permitted so that a typical movie theater or sports arena or public school would have multiple armed individuals around, including some with rifles or shotguns openly carried. Mass shootings and terrorist attacks would not be so easy to accomplish or likely be so effective as they are today.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Several comments:

1. Let us avoid blaming the victims.

2. Carry issues:

a. You might shoot an innocent. There is a natural inclination to avoid hurting an innocent even to save more. This is the trolley car problem

However, shooting one innocent to save 100 - the rational calculation says this is acceptable.

b. You won't be effective. That depends, we have cases of such being effective as in the Colorado church. We have had long distance shots made as with the AF policeman who took out a killer at 75 yards. We don't know what will happen till it happens.

c. Carry and the public - it is a reasonable statement that carry rates are quite low. I know TX well and a survey found that 80% of CHLs don't carry. They want a 'car' gun. That's stupid I grant you as we got the CHL law because Dr. Gratia-Hupp had a car gun and it was useless.

Furthermore most CHLs have little training. They may shoot a rock in the boonies or be trained by 'Daddy'. Sigh.

Reasonable trained folks could disrupt a group of 4 to 5 terrorists. Would some guy with his Taurus 85 that he shot at a B-27 at 3 yards be optimal? No.

At the Kenya mall - when the Kenyan forces were paralyzed by indecision, politics and incompetence, folks with handguns did aid the situation.

If CCW or CHL is conceptualized as an LCP to scare away a mugger - then that's a failed world view in my opinion. There is more too it.

I would hope that carriers would come up to speed. I'm not saying that you shouldn't just run your butt to safety. However, to handle a firearm competently is a standard folks should try for.

[kilimanjaro]

Vito, your post is entirely valid. I just want to say that about half of that 330 million US population is adult, the remainder being minors or illegal aliens not allowed to possess a firearm. So that would make the percentage of adults who are licensed to carry closer to 6% or 8%, and your final figure also correspondingly higher.

Let's not forget that in some locales and times the national percentage could very well be nearly zero, or double or triple the average.

And of course, many licensees carry their weapon in the glove box of their car.

[manta49]

Doint forget the atackers were carrying suicide vests, if people started shooting back, like when the french police did they would have blew themselvs up killing a lot of people. I asked the question erlier how manny terrorist atacks have being disrupted in America by civilians with firearms. ? If the rerrorists thought that people would be armed then they would just change their tactics car bombs etc. There are a lot of naive comments on this thread, doint make the mistake of thinking these people are stupit.

[Mike38]

How manny terrorist atacks have being stopped in America by armed citizens. ?

My guess would be dozens, scores even. But you won't hear about it in the media.

The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Happens daily in the USA, but again, you won't hear about it in the media.

[dakota.potts]

There have been terrorist attacks stopped by gunmen (Garland, TX comes to mind) but I'm less than optimistic about that being the answer in this situation.

Do I think it's morally wrong for a government to take away your tools for self defense or put up massive road blocks to owning them? Yes.

Do I think it would have made a difference here? Probably not. We're talking about one or two citizens armed with maybe a .38 revolver or a S&W Shield with maybe enough ammo for a reload or two versus a coordinated team of guys with automatic rifles and bombs. CCW might have allowed a single hostage a fighting edge to resist long enough to escape or get their family out, and for that I think it's worth carrying regardless. As far as stopping or even making a dent in the damages caused in this attack? I don't see it happening. When someone's got it out for you, you sometimes don't have much of a say in the matter. Most of us here train hard just to get the slight advantage over a crack head with a Raven .25, because even that's not a guarantee

[Glenn E. Meyer]

They were killing people anyway and would use the vests in any circumstance. So if they got shot, maybe they couldn't pull the switch?

I don't understand the mentality of denying oneself the option to resist an attack. Sure, tactics might change but for those who can be stopped it would be nice to have a chance.

[rickyrick]

This comes up a lot. But the CCWer saving the day in this type of situation is a pipe dream.

Now I know the numbers have changed in the last couple of years but, the Texas DPS estimated that about 1 in 300 people might actually have a license; couple that with the fact that most people who have a license don't actually carry. A concert venue or sporting venue probably could be counted a zero probability that a citizen is armed.

The issue is that terrorists were able to move guns and explosives around the city. This is in a country that Americans are lead to believe has gun control.


One of our big media news commentator said during the coverage "this is the price of a free and open society" I don't remember which one tho, I was flipping back and fourth.

I don't go to big venues any more, no opening night movies, no concerts, busy malls. I carry 100% of the time, but I know that there's little I could do in a situation such as Paris.

This is not a gun control problem. This is not an armed citizen problem. It is a terrorist problem.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

This comes up a lot. But the CCWer saving the day in this type of situation is a pipe dream.

I disagree. It is an empirical question. Can Timmy Taurus 85 take on a squad - maybe not?

Sitting a restaurant with 5 skilled shooters, all carrying full sized semis and extra mags - I do that a lot. That would be a different story.

I certainly think a reasonably trained CHL could assist in a one or two person attack. By extension, would the one policeman we see standing around as a guard be able to handle a squad. Probably not but should he or she go away? No.

I do agree that the average CHL is undertrained or might be the person that talks guns and ammo and never learns how to really use them. That's sad.

[manta49]

They were killing people anyway and would use the vests in any circumstance. So if they got shot, maybe they couldn't pull the switch?

For that you would probably need a head shot unlikely. I would not be against more people being armed, but if that was the case they would just change their tactits. Doint blame gun control blame the terrorists. People here were armed the terrorists just made sure they did not get a chance to use them. There has being terrorism here all my life i have some incite into the way they operate.

Fact Sheet on the conflict in and about Northern Ir
eland
•
Every day of the year marks the anniversary of some
one’s death
as a result of conflict in and about Northern Irela
nd.
3,725 people were killed as a result of the conflic
t.
Approximately 47,541 people were injured.

There were 36,923 shootings.
16,209 bombings were conducted.

My guess would be dozens, scores even. But you won't hear about it in the media.

I think it would be head line news.

[Pahoo]

Whenever I see terms such as "sensible" gun control actions that only addresses action on firearms and ammunition, I'm reminded of one of my real life experiences. ....

I have a friend whose wife, owned eight cats. Well one of the cats had a bad trait of wanting to beat up on the rest of the normally docile cats. the situation got so bad that they decided to de-claw the cat. After the procedure the cat continued his aggressive behavior. It did not take long before the other cats realized that the strikes didn't hurt any more and soon paid him no mind. The de-clawed cat also noted the difference. You'd think that life was better for all but that was not the case. Gradually the other cats started being more aggressive and attacking the de-clawed cat. He had nothing to defend himself with and tried to hide. They finally had to get rid of the de-clawed cat and now life was better for all; well, except for the declawed cat. ......

Be Safe !!!

[dakota.potts]

Another thing: how many places even allow you to carry in a venue such as the one the attack happened in?

[rickyrick]

Training is not readily available to the masses. To most folks. $300 for a weekend of training is costly. Many would find $50 a financial burden... I don't think that should take away their right to defend themselves.

I carry a full sized 5"barreled beretta because I can shoot it well and accurately.
I feel I owe that to the public. It's a pain to carry and can be an uncomfortable inconvenience to carry, but I do it because it's reliable, easy to shoot and I can fire it accurately...

I would not carry a pocket gun... I've seen people trying to shoot them and it's almost comical.

[Nathan]

I agree these attackers have some level of smarts. They are highly driven by success over all else.

What keeps them out of places like Japan is they don't blend in and will be stopped and searched.

What keeps the attacks down in the US is a 2 pronged approach. I honestly think that "big brother" is doing some serious data crunching with passenger lists and passports, etc. The second item is us. Yes, regular old Americans who might carry, might have their eyes open, might be concerned about a group of 6 at the public range....It is the possibility of failure that keeps them on the move.

In the US , you might need 20 to have the same impact before all are shot or taken down. You just need more people to execute here. More people are more recruits and more loose ends.

Now, I'm not saying it can't happen here. I think they are building the numbers, support, mosques, radicals, etc, but it is a harder process.

All that said, I think CCW is not a huge threat until we carry more and breakdown the gun free zones.

Frankly, I'm too far from a gun right now.

[Nathan]

I would not carry a pocket gun... I've seen people trying to shoot them and it's almost comical.

Boy, I'm not bad with my cw380. Times are nearly as good as my full size 45. Hits on paper plates under 10 yards aren't bad either...hmmm.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Many would find $50 a financial burden... I don't think that should take away their right to defend themselves.

Who said the right should be taken away? Not I. I just argue for competence. It's like voting. How many voters really study up, not many. But they should.

As far as pocket guns, I did train up on them. I guess I'm lucky to be able to.

You don't shoot them well if you don't.

[rickyrick]

I agree...

I've been shooting a long time, but feel I could benefit from good training, most would.
Many people buy a gun. Shoot a few cans... Half a box of ammo.... And off they go to face the world