One strike against concealed carry permits.....

[Mo Trooper]

http://www.news-leader.com/article/2009909150342


To police and prosecutors, Charles R. Webb is a criminal, who recklessly fired a gun from his car window Friday, near a host of Springfield businesses.


But let 75-year-old Mary O'Neal tell it, and Webb is a hero.
"I think he's wonderful," O'Neal said Monday. "I would give him a reward."


It's thanks to Webb, after all, that O'Neal has her purse, and the various personal items that it contained when it was ripped from her arm Friday night.

Still, the woman can see authorities' reasons for charging Webb with unlawful use of a weapon, a class D felony.

Police say he chased the purse snatcher's gray sport utility vehicle across Moulder Avenue, to the parking lot of a Super 8 Motel, 3034 S. Moulder Ave.

A witness told police that Webb blocked the SUV in with his own car and, as the purse snatcher tried to escape, fired a 9mm handgun at the car three times.


Webb has a concealed carry permit for the weapon.


Across the road, O'Neal heard the shots.

"But he was aiming for their tires," she said. "That's what he was trying to do was just stop them."

[PipeDaddy]

So he'll end up serving more time than the purse snatcher?

[Vepr]

Stupid but the instances of things like this happening with concealed carry permit holders is few and far between when compared with the public in general.

[brantshawks]

Originally Posted by PipeDaddy

So he'll end up serving more time than the purse snatcher?

Only if he accidentally hit and killed a dog that was in the vehicle.

[PhilHartman]

The police, the ruling gang we currently have to pay protection money to, don't like competition.

[MikeyJoe]

Originally Posted by PipeDaddy

So he'll end up serving more time than the purse snatcher?

If it's ruled that he used his gun in an improper manner, don't you think discharging a firearm recklessly in public is worse than stealing a purse?

I'm in favor of concealed carry, but I think misusing it (again, not saying that's what happened here) is definitely worse than petty theft.

[Jimmie Dimmick]

anyone with a permit to carry knows that you discharge your weapon, and you'd better be clear on the laws. Hell, in some instances, you may not even want to take it out for fear of some kind of threatening/terrorism charge.

This guy is an idiot and deserves what he gets.

[LakeBull]

Too bad he didn't shoot the guy.

[brantshawks]

The biggest problem I have with this is that they don't teach permit owners to have good aim.

[Jimmie Dimmick]

Originally Posted by brantshawks

The biggest problem I have with this is that they don't teach permit owners to have good aim.

actually they do. you have to pass a shooting test before you get your permit.

Now, it would be best that when you renew your license, you have to recertify your skills, but it's one of those things that once you have it, you have it.

[Tripper Harrison]

Originally Posted by Jimmie Dimmick

actually they do. you have to pass a shooting test before you get your permit.

Now, it would be best that when you renew your license, you have to recertify your skills, but it's one of those things that once you have it, you have it.

Every two years, in Polk Co. you have to recertify. But I believe you only have to do that 2 or 3 times. Then you are exempt.

And for what its worth, I believe the average permit holder, would be more accurate, than the average LEO.

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by Tripper Harrison

Every two years, in Polk Co. you have to recertify. But I believe you only have to do that 2 or 3 times. Then you are exempt.

And for what its worth, I believe the average permit holder, would be more accurate, than the average LEO.

What's your reasoning behind that thought? Just curious.....

[Tripper Harrison]

Originally Posted by Mo Trooper

What's your reasoning behind that thought? Just curious.....

The permit holders I know, shoot frequently, as in once very couple months(at least). The LEO's I know, only shoot when they have to. I know of course, I'm generalizing, but also the fact that "going to the range", was a big reason for our county to start opening up on giving permits.

[JasperDeKimmel]

I am fascinated by labels, like this:

"Charles R. Webb is a criminal"

What does that mean? He commits crimes more than others? He does nothing but commit crimes? He has commited a crime in the past? How many does it take to be a "criminal?"

Charles R. Webb may have committed a criminal act, but why the need to define him as a "criminal?"

I once pleaded guilty to speeding. I should always be referred to as, "JasperdeKimmel, a speeder."

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by Tripper Harrison

The permit holders I know, shoot frequently, as in once very couple months(at least). The LEO's I know, only shoot when they have to. I know of course, I'm generalizing, but also the fact that "going to the range", was a big reason for our county to start opening up on giving permits.

That's probably a fair generalization and mostly true.

[brantshawks]

Originally Posted by JasperDeKimmel

I am fascinated by labels, like this:

"Charles R. Webb is a criminal"

What does that mean? He commits crimes more than others? He does nothing but commit crimes? He has commited a crime in the past? How many does it take to be a "criminal?"

Charles R. Webb may have committed a criminal act, but why the need to define him as a "criminal?"

I once pleaded guilty to speeding. I should always be referred to as, "JasperdeKimmel, a speeder."

''Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.''



Too bad people forget this.

[MikeyJoe]

Originally Posted by brantshawks

''Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.''

Too bad people forget this.

Easily in the top 5 most frequently misquoted Bible verses.

[brantshawks]

Originally Posted by MikeyJoe

Easily in the top 5 most frequently misquoted Bible verses.

I don't know Hebrew.

[MikeyJoe]

lol, touche

[brantshawks]

And I know, we talked about this recently at church.


''He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.''

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by brantshawks

And I know, we talked about this recently at church.


''He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.''

You talk about church stuff at church?

[JasperDeKimmel]

You don't need to know Hebrew to read Greek.

[brantshawks]

Originally Posted by Mo Trooper

You talk about church stuff at church?

It's been awhile. Lately it's still our paster talking about how much he loathes the ELCA for pushing his agenda, making sure that we know he is pushing his non-agenda agenda against them.

[MikeyJoe]

Originally Posted by brantshawks

And I know, we talked about this recently at church.


''He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.''

In seriousness, what I meant was misquoted in application. Most often I hear that verse quoted to support the position that you shouldn't say that what someone is doing is sinful or wrong.

[Tripper Harrison]

Wouldn't the guy in the car be the "one without sin" in this case?

[JasperDeKimmel]

Originally Posted by Tripper Harrison

Wouldn't the guy in the car be the "one without sin" in this case?

I think the point Jesus was making that there is no one without sin, including the guy in the car. But I am a labeled atheist, so, cum grano salis.

[brantshawks]

I've successfully kicked the hell into this thread and hijacked the hell right back out.

[coff]

I don't see how this implicates concealed carry, especially in Missouri. Under the current MO statutes, you can carry a loaded handgun in your car, within reach, even if you don't have the permit. Thus, his having the gun in his car, and deciding to fire shots, had nothing to do with his having a permit. In fact, it sounds that it is directly contrary to the training he received.

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by coff

I don't see how this implicates concealed carry, especially in Missouri. Under the current MO statutes, you can carry a loaded handgun in your car, within reach, even if you don't have the permit. Thus, his having the gun in his car, and deciding to fire shots, had nothing to do with his having a permit. In fact, it sounds that it is directly contrary to the training he received.

It implies that either

a) the training wasn't adequate enough

b) They let people have CCW permits who don't have enough common sense to be in possession of a firearm

[Tripper Harrison]

Originally Posted by JasperDeKimmel

I think the point Jesus was making that there is no one without sin, including the guy in the car. But I am a labeled atheist, so, cum grano salis.

I was always told that Jesus was asking/looking for the victim, since at that time, the victim was allowed the "honor" to throw the first stone, when stoning was the appropriate punishment. But I don't read Greek or Aramaic.

[Perham1]

You let idiots have guns and get mad when they use them.

Hello?

[brantshawks]

Originally Posted by Perham1

You let idiots have guns and get mad when they use them.

Hello?

[PipeDaddy]

Originally Posted by MikeyJoe

If it's ruled that he used his gun in an improper manner, don't you think discharging a firearm recklessly in public is worse than stealing a purse?

I'm in favor of concealed carry, but I think misusing it (again, not saying that's what happened here) is definitely worse than petty theft.

Sorry I'm late getting back to this. I wasn't trying to protest - I agree. I just thought it was sort of ironic.

[xr4ticlone]

In Texas we would have given him a metal if he shot and killed the robber...but as he didn't we'd send him to training for marksmanship.

In shooting down here I was shocked to hear from LEO's that many of their coworkers didn't like guns and didn't want to shoot. One buddy of mine in particular told us about a woman Sheriff's deputy that failed the testing 4 times...finally the officer giving the test stood behind her, holding the gun in her hands, aimed the gun for her, and had her pull the trigger. My buddy kidded that it had gotten so bad with some he would be tempted to ask all other LEO's to put THEIR guns down BEFORE he dealt with an armed criminal. lol

[nolookpass]

Originally Posted by Tripper Harrison

Every two years, in Polk Co. you have to recertify. But I believe you only have to do that 2 or 3 times. Then you are exempt.

And for what its worth, I believe the average permit holder, would be more accurate, than the average LEO.

[xr4ticlone]

Originally Posted by nolookpass

My buddy down here said that he was looked down on as a "Gun Nut" because he shoots for fun and owned guns that were beyond his service weapon.

Now I'm not a LEO...and I respect them all...but if I was I would be a LOT better with a gun than I currently am...and I"m not that bad as it is. IF I was putting my life on the line every day and could potentially called on to use my weapon as part of my job I would shoot every week. Heck I'd do it every week if someone would supply the ammo...and I could do it during work when my wife wouldn't be telling me that it was distracting from my time 'with the family'. .

[nolookpass]

Originally Posted by xr4ticlone

My buddy down here said that he was looked down on as a "Gun Nut" because he shoots for fun and owned guns that were beyond his service weapon.

Now I'm not a LEO...and I respect them all...but if I was I would be a LOT better with a gun than I currently am...and I"m not that bad as it is. IF I was putting my life on the line every day and could potentially called on to use my weapon as part of my job I would shoot every week. Heck I'd do it every week if someone would supply the ammo...and I could do it during work when my wife wouldn't be telling me that it was distracting from my time 'with the family'. .

some cops are lousy shots, theres no doubt. And some departments' training leaves a lot to be desired. But I doubt the average permit holder goes thru "shoot, dont shoot" training with simulators or other modern training tools. And I would guess that the average "test" for gun owners doesnt consists of timed trials.

It's one thing to be a paper tiger on the range with stationary targets, quite another to be firing rounds on the street with live targets.

[Tripper Harrison]

Originally Posted by nolookpass

some cops are lousy shots, theres no doubt. And some departments' training leaves a lot to be desired. But I doubt the average permit holder goes thru "shoot, dont shoot" training with simulators or other modern training tools. And I would guess that the average "test" for gun owners doesnt consists of timed trials.

It's one thing to be a paper tiger on the range with stationary targets, quite another to be firing rounds on the street with live targets.

I agree, to some extent. Polk co.'s shooting tests are timed. I feel that in Iowa especially, people aren't getting permits because they are afraid. But they feel it an obligation, and take it seriously. The LEOs I know, only carry and shoot when they have to. Permit carriers have the same targets, and times as LEOs, in Polk co. The instructor for permits also works for the DMPD. People recertfying their permits don't need a second chance according to him. 25% of the PD need 2 and 3rd chances. I'm just saying. Maybe DMPD don't feel the need to rely on their weapons, afterall its Des Moines, not the JJ Evans projects of Chicago.

Who is more likely to have a hobby of shooting weapons? A police officer, or someone who wants a Permit to Carry? I think its the latter. The majority of permit holders aren't little old ladies. They are veterans, hunters, and LEO wannabees. Of course I have no data on hand to back up my claims. I don't like Jim Croce, and I'm simply spitting into the wind, with my 9 as back-up.

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by Tripper Harrison

I agree, to some extent. Polk co.'s shooting tests are timed. I feel that in Iowa especially, people aren't getting permits because they are afraid. But they feel it an obligation, and take it seriously. The LEOs I know, only carry and shoot when they have to. Permit carriers have the same targets, and times as LEOs, in Polk co. The instructor for permits also works for the DMPD. People recertfying their permits don't need a second chance according to him. 25% of the PD need 2 and 3rd chances. I'm just saying. Maybe DMPD don't feel the need to rely on their weapons, afterall its Des Moines, not the JJ Evans projects of Chicago.

Who is more likely to have a hobby of shooting weapons? A police officer, or someone who wants a Permit to Carry? I think its the former. The majority of permit holders aren't little old ladies. They are veterans, hunters, and LEO wannabees. Of course I have no data on hand to back up my claims. I don't like Jim Croce, and I'm simply spitting into the wind, with my 9 as back-up.

I think there is definitely something to this. I don't particularly like shooting. Doing 1,000's of rounds during training takes the fun out of it. Most of the people I work with are exactly the same.

If I were to go up against some 4H kid who shoots at targets, I would probably lose.

However, real-life training and legal knowledge are more important in these types of situations.

[Tripper Harrison]

Originally Posted by Mo Trooper

However, real-life training and legal knowledge are more important in these types of situations.

I couldn't agree more.

[Perham1]

Originally Posted by brantshawks

We don't get mad when our idiots use their guns.

Hello?

[coff]

Originally Posted by Mo Trooper

It implies that either

a) the training wasn't adequate enough

b) They let people have CCW permits who don't have enough common sense to be in possession of a firearm

Uh, no, it doesn't. Like I said, he would not even need the CCW permit or training to have the gun in his car. Second, you ignore the most likely possibility: That he simply failed to follow the training.

CCW permits are just like a driver's license in one sense: You cannot screen everybody who shouldn't have one, especially on the issue of the ability to make correct judgments in the future. Of course, you know that the police training you have does not insure that all police officers will follow it, and make the right calls in the line of duty. You simply cannot let the exception create the rule.

Look at the other side: Suppose there is a story about a non-CCW permitted citizen who used excellent judgment and stopped a murder. Would that then mean that we should arm all citizens without requiring CCW training?

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by coff

Uh, no, it doesn't. Like I said, he would not even need the CCW permit or training to have the gun in his car. Second, you ignore the most likely possibility: That he simply failed to follow the training.

CCW permits are just like a driver's license in one sense: You cannot screen everybody who shouldn't have one, especially on the issue of the ability to make correct judgments in the future. Of course, you know that the police training you have does not insure that all police officers will follow it, and make the right calls in the line of duty. You simply cannot let the exception create the rule.

Look at the other side: Suppose there is a story about a non-CCW permitted citizen who used excellent judgment and stopped a murder. Would that then mean that we should arm all citizens without requiring CCW training?

So, "B" doesn't apply in this case???

I understand people can have a gun in their car. But, this is a case of a CCW permit holder, who failed to use common sense. Regardless of the training received, he failed to use common sense. Do you really think that 8 hours of classroom is adequate for a CCW permit?

[Gushawk]

What percentage of concealed carry holders actively fantasize about situations like this? I'd say most of the ones I know do, but the sample size is fairly small and not particularly mentally balanced. I'm also not sure whether it's a good thing, a bad thing, or something that I should be ambivalent towards. Generally, I think the "hero" fantasy is pretty common, but it seems that introducing a gun to it might not be the best idea.

[coff]

Originally Posted by Mo Trooper

So, "B" doesn't apply in this case???

I understand people can have a gun in their car. But, this is a case of a CCW permit holder, who failed to use common sense. Regardless of the training received, he failed to use common sense. Do you really think that 8 hours of classroom is adequate for a CCW permit?

I think it would be difficult for any amount of training or screening to be a fool-proof way to measure common sense. Do you suggest that the extensive training police officers get is 100% effective in screening those who lack the judgment, in all situtations, to have firearms? So, in addition to the other requirements, I think that 8 hours training is probably sufficient. You certainly cannot use this one instance, compared to the huge population of CCW permit holders who do not use their weapons in this way, as a blanket condemnation of CCW.

[coff]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

What percentage of concealed carry holders actively fantasize about situations like this? I'd say most of the ones I know do, but the sample size is fairly small and not particularly mentally balanced. I'm also not sure whether it's a good thing, a bad thing, or something that I should be ambivalent towards. Generally, I think the "hero" fantasy is pretty common, but it seems that introducing a gun to it might not be the best idea.

Nothing like a little dishonest liberal prejudice and bigotry to make a thread interesting. Of course, since you have such a solid scientific basis for this...

[Mo Trooper]

Originally Posted by coff

I think it would be difficult for any amount of training or screening to be a fool-proof way to measure common sense. Do you suggest that the extensive training police officers get is 100% effective in screening those who lack the judgment, in all situtations, to have firearms? So, in addition to the other requirements, I think that 8 hours training is probably sufficient. You certainly cannot use this one instance, compared to the huge population of CCW permit holders who do not use their weapons in this way, as a blanket condemnation of CCW.

I actually agree with CCW, and have no real issues with it. Most of the people I know with a CCW permit are good people. But, there is a big crowd down here that is treating this guy like a hero. What he did was really stupid, and against the law.

[Gushawk]

Originally Posted by coff

Nothing like a little dishonest liberal prejudice and bigotry to make a thread interesting. Of course, since you have such a solid scientific basis for this...

It isn't "dishonest," though my experience may be an unrepresentative anecdote, which I admitted up front. I don't think it's prejudice or bigotry either, unless it represents unconscious self-loathing wrought of a under the surface guilt attributable to my own gun ownership.

[Vepr]

Originally Posted by Gushawk

What percentage of concealed carry holders actively fantasize about situations like this? I'd say most of the ones I know do, but the sample size is fairly small and not particularly mentally balanced. I'm also not sure whether it's a good thing, a bad thing, or something that I should be ambivalent towards. Generally, I think the "hero" fantasy is pretty common, but it seems that introducing a gun to it might not be the best idea.

I own a CCL. I hope I never have cause to use a firearm for self defense because that means someones life is in danger likely my own or someone I love. There are a few morons like the guy in this story but they are the exception not the rule. If everyone that owned a CCL was like this guy then these stories would be in the news every week.

[Jimmie Dimmick]

I'd recommend that anyone obtaining a permit to carry join this group, and actively attend their events. The first time I went through one of their 'obstacle courses', I killed about 20 civilians. I'd recommend it for anyone else too, it's pretty fun.

http://www.idpa.com/