I know your not gonna believe this

[Michael Tee]

<<I know of no states where hollow point ammo is illegal. Perhaps you can enlighten me?>>

Don't think I can.  I'm not sure where I picked up this little nugget of misinformation, probably in some half-forgotten conversation or maybe just something I misinterpreted in a story I read.  It seemed to make a lot of sense to me at the time, because I figured the real "point" of hollow-point was to maim or kill, as opposed to sport shooting, and so it was outlawed for that purpose.  I stand corrected.  Thank you

[Amianthus]

It seemed to make a lot of sense to me at the time, because I figured the real "point" of hollow-point was to maim or kill, as opposed to sport shooting, and so it was outlawed for that purpose.  I stand corrected.  Thank you

In most places they are illegal to use for hunting game. Soft tips or ball ammo are generally used for hunting. But the goals of self-defense and hunting are different, so different regulations apply.

[kimba1]

concealed gun??
I only know one man who has a concealed gun permit(my supervisor)
it`s extremely hard and not profitable to have one
very few jobs require it.
are their states that allow concealed guns permit to the general public?
unless it`s for work,I just don`t see a need for one.

[Amianthus]

are their states that allow concealed guns permit to the general public?

No.

[sirs]

concealed gun??...it`s extremely hard and not profitable to have one  very few jobs require it.

My occupation never "required it", yet I had one.  Now you can also understand that a permit to carry a concelaed weapon is less a "profit" oritented move and more a "self defense" rationale

are their states that allow concealed guns permit to the general public?

Yes, most states in fact.  There are fairly hefty training regimines involved, appropriately so.  Some states/locales are very restrictive, such as DC & NY.  And certain counties are more stringent than other counties.  AND, funny thing here, violent crimes are less in areas with more permissive CCW laws, than those with very strict gun regulations.  It's like ami said before, criminals are more likely to hang around locales where the populace is less likely to be armed and shoot them as they commit their crime.  

unless it`s for work,I just don`t see a need for one.

Self defense would be one

[Amianthus]

are their states that allow concealed guns permit to the general public?

Yes, most states in fact.  There are fairly hefty training regimines involved, appropriately so.  Some states/locales are very restrictive, such as DC & NY.  And certain counties are more stringent than other counties.  AND, funny thing here, violent crimes are less in areas with more permissive CCW laws, than those with very strict gun regulations.  It's like ami said before, criminals are more likely to hang around locales where the populace is less likely to be armed and shoot them as they commit their crime. 

"General public" implies that no standards or training requirements need be met. Anytime you are required to meet certain qualifications, it is no longer available to the "general public."

[sirs]

"General public" implies that no standards or training requirements need be met. Anytime you are required to meet certain qualifications, it is no longer available to the "general public."

Ahh, then we're simply reading the question differently, since I take it as "general public" as implying anyone in the country that's not legally prevented from possessing or carrying a weapon.  But to apply and hold a CCW the "general public" is then required to go thru some extensive background checks, training, and frequently whatever other whims of the local sheriff might have

[kimba1]

the reason it`s not profitable is concealed weapons guards cost more.
so their will be less of a demand for them.
so generally it`s not worth the trouble to get the permit.
moneywise
now a guardcard is a whole other matter.
it`s worth more than it`s weight in gold.
that piece of paper allows you to work in the majority of security jobs out there.
even if i stop doing security,I`ll still keep my card active .
I know 85 year olds who keep theirs so they can make pocket money.

p.s. general public-I met anybody whose not required to have one for work.
I had a gun permit because of my job
but If I apllied for one for personnel reason,I will be denied in california.

[sirs]

I had a gun permit because of my job but If I apllied for one for personnel reason, I will be denied in california.

Why would you be?  Or is that too personal a question?  I had one in Califonia

[_JS]

AND, funny thing here, violent crimes are less in areas with more permissive CCW laws, than those with very strict gun regulations.  It's like ami said before, criminals are more likely to hang around locales where the populace is less likely to be armed and shoot them as they commit their crime.

You seem to be drawing a conclusion from a possible set of statistics. You are making the logical fallacy of cum hoc ergo propter hoc.

By the same reasoning you provide, I could also argue that areas with low violent crime rates are more likely to allow permissive gun regulation. Therefore it isn't that criminals are more likely to go where they won't get shot, but that violent criminals were never in those areas in the first place.

See?

The same set of events as you describe, with just as likely a conclusion. You haven't proven that a more armed populace necessarily equates to lower violent crime at all.

[sirs]

AND, funny thing here, violent crimes are less in areas with more permissive CCW laws, than those with very strict gun regulations.  It's like ami said before, criminals are more likely to hang around locales where the populace is less likely to be armed and shoot them as they commit their crime.

By the same reasoning you provide, I could also argue that areas with low violent crime rates are more likely to allow permissive gun regulation. Therefore it isn't that criminals are more likely to go where they won't get shot, but that violent criminals were never in those areas in the first place.  See?

LOL....yea, that sounds so much more logical       

[Amianthus]

By the same reasoning you provide, I could also argue that areas with low violent crime rates are more likely to allow permissive gun regulation. Therefore it isn't that criminals are more likely to go where they won't get shot, but that violent criminals were never in those areas in the first place.

Except that there are areas where the violent crime rates shifted after gun regulations changed. It seems that the criminals respond to the legislation, not the other way around.

[_JS]

Surely you can see why your argument fails Sirs?

Go beyond NRA literature and partisan hackery. I'm not someone who wants to pass laws to try and take away firearms from responsible owners.

My problem here is that you and Ami are presenting a correlation as causation. You can act the fool, but the reality is that you are making the logical error.

[_JS]

Except that there are areas where the violent crime rates shifted after gun regulations changed. It seems that the criminals respond to the legislation, not the other way around.

And all other variables remained constant or were accounted for?

This was true across a wide swath of area, for a diverse group of people?

There was no common national trend of declining violent crime?

The rates shifted to a significant degree and the correlation was statistically significant?

[Amianthus]

And all other variables remained constant or were accounted for?

This was true across a wide swath of area, for a diverse group of people?

There was no common national trend of declining violent crime?

The rates shifted to a significant degree and the correlation was statistically significant?

Yes, yes, accounted for, yes.