Cory Booker: 'Insane' Concealed Weapons Bill Puts Cops At Risk

WASHINGTON -- Gun control advocates are pressuring Congress to derail a bill that would facilitate what they see as a "race to the bottom" in terms of state-based concealed weapons legislation.

On Wednesday, Newark, N.J. Mayor Cory Booker, a member of the coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, released a video calling the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, which would require states that allow concealed carrying of guns to recognize each other's permits, an "insane" policy that puts civilians and police officers "at risk."

"We cannot have a situation where Congress passes a law and the next thing you know is people are showing up in your community with hidden weapons that you, your state legislature, your mayors don't want to have happen," he said.

In a separate but related move, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence placed a full-page ad in the Boston Globe on Wednesday, urging Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) to oppose any bill that would achieve nationwide concealed carry reciprocity among states.

That gun control advocates have already begun lobbying for Brown's vote says something about the politics of the issue. The House Judiciary Committee was slated to consider the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822) last week. While it never got around to a vote, a committee spokesperson said that lawmakers would consider the bill when they returned next week. It is widely expected to be both voted out of committee to the full House of Representatives and, from there, passed by a comfortable majority (it currently has 245 co-sponsors in the Republican-controlled House).

The Senate, therefore, represents a better avenue for advocates hoping to stop the legislation. The bill dictates that a person "carrying a concealed handgun" legally under his or her state law "shall be permitted to carry a handgun subject to the same conditions or limitations that apply to residents of the State who have permits issued by the State or are otherwise lawfully allowed to do so by the State."

According to gun control advocates familiar with legislative strategy on the issue, there are two prevailing concerns when it comes to the bill's trajectory in the upper chamber. The first is that it will be attached as an amendment to a more critical, larger piece of legislation -- perhaps the appropriations bill that will soon come under consideration. The second is that a number of Democrats who back the Second Amendment will feel pressured by the gun lobby to offer their support. One advocate suggested that Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) would be a likely target. Max Croes, a spokesperson for Begich, said that he has yet to consider the concealed carry amendment.

Comments

[dbrett480]

01:31 AM on 10/30/2011

The best way to stop assaults with firearms is cracking down on people who shouldn't even have guns in the first place. That means if you are a gang member, parolee, probationer, etc. and get caught with a gun, you should spend 20 years in jail. If you commit a crime with a gun it is a 20 year sentence enhancement. The focus of gun laws should be those that commit illegal acts with guns.

[G NBanner]

06:36 PM on 10/25/2011

James Madison, Jr. (March 16, 1751 – June 28, 1836) was an American statesman and political theorist. He was the fourth President of the United States (1809–1817) and is hailed as the “Father of the Constitution” for being the primary author of the United States Constitution and the author of the United States Bill of Rights.

In Madison’s Federalist Papers No. 46, he wrote about his support for the governments right to disarm the people and deny possession of arms.

“The…federal government may…force…for a sufficient period of time,…an uninterrupted…fixed plan…to…deny…the people…arms. And it is…certain…,that…they would…be able to…possess the additional advantages of local governments…and…spite…the rights of…possession.”

Feel free to use this quote when NRA Extremists Fetishists claim that they have a right to deadly assault weapons of mass destruction.

http://tinyurl.com/4k346he

[hagagaga]

02:40 PM on 10/27/2011

Gunbanner has better arguments than Guffie, DW, or U45.

[bunnieman]

04:32 PM on 10/27/2011

He is truly the poster-boy for weak-minded satire, and for its fans.

[ww745]

01:21 PM on 10/29/2011

Really? Perhaps you could get the quote with the blanks filled in.

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."

James Madison. Federalist Papers #46

[DreamWeaver2nd]

06:20 PM on 10/25/2011

We don’t want unknown, out -of -state gun totters carrying lethal weapons into our state!

Our lives, our laws:

Law enforcement officials know what the law should be in their states; they’ve worked with their legislatures to craft those public safety laws. And they want Washington to stay out of it:

“H.R. 822 would severely undermine state concealed carry licensing systems…states and localities should have the right to determine who is eligible to carry firearms in their communities.”
-Mark A. Marshall, President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police

“Ambiguity to the legality of firearm possession could lead to confusion among police officers that could result in catastrophic incidences. Congress should be working to make the job of a police officer more safe, not less.”
-Hubert Williams, President of the Police Foundation

“This legislation would be an enormous mistake.”
-Charles H. Ramsey, Philadelphia Police Commissioner and President of the Major Cities Chiefs’ Association

http://www.ourlivesourlaws.org/people-who-care

International Association of Chiefs of Police
Major Cities Chiefs Association, which represents police executives of 63 of the largest urban areas in the United States
Police Foundation
National Black Police Association
National Latino Peace Officers Association
National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives

Others against this dangerous legislation include:
Alabama Association of Chiefs of Police
California Police Chiefs Association
Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police
Connecticut Police Chiefs Association
Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police
Wisconsin Association of Chiefs of Police

[Rooster Coburn]

08:27 PM on 10/25/2011

Actually, more police were killed in accidents in 2009 than were killed by criminals with guns.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 18, 2010

According to information released today by the FBI, 48 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty last year; 47 officers died in accidents while performing their duties . . . Offenders used firearms to kill 45 of the officers . . .  http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2009/summary_leoka.html

[David Carson]

05:53 PM on 10/26/2011

wrong--our lives, our firearms and our rights, and at this point, what you support is unConstitutional and political suicide

[hagagaga]

06:50 AM on 10/25/2011

http://responsiblecitizensofcalifornia.org/profiles/blogs/the-common-factor-terrorists

[DreamWeaver2nd]

09:39 PM on 10/24/2011

The number of officers killed in the line of duty is on the increase. Firearms killed 55 of the 56 murdered officers 2010.

FBI Releases 2010 Statistics on Law Enforcement
Officers Killed and Assaulted
10/24/11

2010 – 56 officers feloniously killed
2009 – 48 officers feloniously killed

http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2010-statistics-on-law-enforcement-officers-killed

Of the 56 officers feloniously killed, 15 were ambushed; 14 of the slain officers were involved in arrest situations; eight were investigating suspicious persons/circumstances; seven were performing traffic stops/pursuits; six were answering disturbance calls; three were involved in tactical situations (e.g., high-risk entry); two were conducting investigative activity such as surveillance, searches, or interviews; and one officer was killed while transporting or maintaining custody of prisoners.

Weapons:

Offenders used firearms to kill 55 of the 56 victim officers. Of these 55 officers, 38 were slain with handguns, 15 with rifles, and two with shotguns. One officer was killed with a vehicle used as a weapon.

http://www2.fbi.gov/¬ucr/killed¬/2009/feloniouslykilled.html

In 2009, 48 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty.

Line-of-duty deaths occurred in 18 states and Puerto Rico.
Twenty-one officers lost their lives in the South.
Thirteen of the officers died in the West, 7 died in the Northeast, and 5 officers who were feloniously slain were employed in the Midwest.

[David Carson]

10:08 PM on 10/24/2011

DW--this post DOES NOT PROVE that I was wrong--so you are still not credible--what I challenged you to prove was that CCW holders killed more LEOs than their fellow LEOs. BTW DW--you seem to have great difficulty in backing your claims

[DreamWeaver2nd]

02:38 AM on 10/25/2011

Those who are not "credible" to the NRA and the gun lobby, are those who disagree with the gun lobby's irresponsible lethal activity.

The NRA claims are based first on the lie that a gun is a "right" and all history, quotes, etc., have to be revised and changed in the attempt to prove a lie is not a lie. It's insane.

A challenge? From a denier, falsifier?

[DreamWeaver2nd]

08:04 PM on 10/27/2011

David Carson:

A law abiding gun owner isn't a felon until he is -- when he shots someone.
Then the gun owner becomes a felon, and that's how he's listed in crime stats.

Your circular thinking, your begging the question, is alarming in its limitation. I cannot recall a comment of yours based in truth. Not one. Your NRA talking points, and juvenile, petty insults against other posters, prove nothing but lack.

The numbers here can be found on the FBI's website.

536 feloniously killed officers between 2000 - 2009.
33 accidental deaths between 2000 - 2008 by crossfire, mistaken for subject, and other mishap detailed below.

FBI publishes Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted each year

Accidental shooting 2009
Total – 2
Crossfire, mistaken for subject, firearm mishap – 2
Training session – 0
Self-inflicted, cleaning mishap – 0

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2009/data/table_62.html

Accidental shooting 2000 – 2008
Total – 33
Crossfire, mistaken for subject, firearm mishap – 21
Training session – 5
Self-inflicted, cleaning mishap (not apparent or confirmed suicide) - 7
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2009/data/table_61.html

Number of victim officers feloniously killed:
Total 2000 – 2009: 536

[ElmCreekSmith]

10:22 PM on 10/24/2011

Two years doesn't reflect a trend, DW. Why don't you post the numbers from previous years?

ECS

[David Carson]

10:54 PM on 10/24/2011

and she also does not disprove my statement that more LEOs are killed by other LEOs than by CCW holders

[DreamWeaver2nd]

02:42 AM on 10/25/2011

Stats are readily available. Look them up yourself.

[Parachute Shirt Moe]

01:08 PM on 10/23/2011

I have to laugh as I watch this video. I am a current CCW holder and i believe that people should be allowed resoprocity in other states. There are backround check to get a carry permit. How about being more concerned about thugs getting them as apposed to innocent people being able to protect themseklves and theuir familes god forbid the situation arrises. All anti gun activists say it will become the wild west. Thats bs. Look at NJ strictt laws to get a permit now. Mayor booker should step out of cloud nine and look at reality. Also what affect does this have on police. if someone wants to carry a gone legally or not they will. I could go on and on but I wont because the liberals obvioulsy have the wheel spinning but the gerbil is not home.

[bunnieman]

03:47 PM on 10/23/2011

Eloquently stated, "Moe". It is apparent from your comment that only the best and the brightest are granted the honor and the responsibility of carrying a concealed firearm. I can't imagine what is worrying those who advocate against it.

[Nanjing03]

04:06 PM on 10/23/2011

The "best and the brightest," or perhaps the "connected and the privileged?" Had to ask you know. High crime Third World juntas operate that way too.

[enlightened45]

06:06 PM on 10/23/2011

The NRA thanks god and those "rights" he gave certain people that there is no literacy test required for ownership of a personal arsenal.

[DreamWeaver2nd]

10:05 PM on 10/24/2011

The NRA works to continue private gun sales with no background checks. A lot of guns are at large. Anyone can get a gun because of our lax gun laws. As you well know.

We've got more people in prison - private prisons, now. And they seem to get their time extended more and more now that prisons are private, not public.

USA has 25 percent of the world's total number of prisoners locked up, while we are only 5 percent of the world's overall population.

Talking about "thugs" getting guns is a red herring. Anyone can get a gun in our nation with no check. Laws are lax.

We are a nation of laws, not men. At least that's how it used to be.
We need our gun supply well-regulated by law. No everyone ought to be able to purchase a lethal weapon. That's the problem.

Your commentary is irresponsible because it lacks seriousness about a very serious problem in our nation. Too many guns in too many of the wrong, dangerous hands.

[Mark0]

10:29 PM on 10/24/2011

"We need our gun supply well-regul­ated by law. "

Specifically which regulations are you proposing/supporting?

You make no mention of possible/plausible solutions.

[David Carson]

10:37 PM on 10/24/2011

DW--you once again demonstrate your ignorance of history--the NICS came about BECAUSE of NRA support--the BC just wanted waiting periods

[Dennis Santiago]

02:12 PM on 10/22/2011

Why is it again that cops are more special than citizens when it comes to civil rights? Last I checked the keystone sentence in this country still ends with "for all".

[Nanjing03]

02:42 PM on 10/22/2011

You are correct Dennis. Cops are not special when it comes to basic fundamental rights. Those of us who were, or are still in law enforcement recognize that, and we stand shoulder to shoulder with our fellow citizens on the 2nd Amendment. There are a few heavy handed, heavily unionized and liberal urban departments and administrators like those seen in Chicago and NYC who think that their careers will be put in jeopardy if law abiding citizens can once again defend themselves, but they are a ragged edge minority and getting ever smaller.

[bunnieman]

07:23 AM on 10/23/2011

You're both so right. Why should cops be allowed to exceed speed limits, under the flimsy pretense of "pursuing criminals", or "responding to emergencies", while law-abiding civilians are forbidden from doing so? I'll bet that inequity is also the work of unionized liberals.

[Dennis Santiago]

12:05 AM on 10/24/2011

I concur that in real life the cops that truly fear guns are in the minority. That's a good thing seeing that guns are an everyday fact of life in police work. If you aren't comfortable around the things you really need to take up another line of work. Contrary to what people may believe, most departments have training about how to properly interact within the law with the public about it in the form of policy bulletins and scenario training exercises. The truth about command policy is that the concerns are more about balancing respecting rights, effective enforcement and avoiding lawsuits. Everyone knows if you go rogue on people and it'll be on tape because your car has eyes, your vest is wired and it is evidence that can and will be used against you.

Lastly, here's a reality check for those of you that have never hung out inside of a police station, after discussing work scheduling and who's going for what slot that's opening up, the banter about what kind of personal guns to buy is pretty high on the list of topics. And you better believe that includes the chiefs, commanders and captains.

[enlightened45]

09:20 AM on 10/23/2011

As I ponder the meaning of life and asymmetric provocateur, I encounter the conflict of man on man interactions and have discerned that man with gun on man conflicts provides a macho presence and an undeserved smugness that one so possessed of false security is in desperate need of a mental re-set in order to confront and control the spinning platitudes of gun gospel.

Dennis, just one question, are you in favor of equal rights for citizens when the shameless military flaunts their obvious advantage over "for all" with their missiles, bombs, tanks, and fighter planes?

[David Carson]

12:34 PM on 10/23/2011

U45--grow up, civilian disarmament lost with Heller and McDonald

[Nanjing03]

03:07 PM on 10/23/2011

During a home invasion of your dwelling, would you "ponder the meaning of life" -- or perhaps reach for your "enlightened .45?" Just wondering.

[Nanjing03]

11:09 PM on 10/21/2011

Where has Mayor Booker been for the last twenty years? His sense of urgency does not correspond with what most of us already know. Responsible gun ownership and gun possession by law abiding citizens leads to a safer society. That has already been proven in almost every state in America.

I am a 17 year veteran of law enforcement with experience in investigations, administration, and training. Perhaps the good mayor should consider these facts: Today, about 40 states have provisions for "shall issue" concealed carry permits, 5 states -- including New Jersey -- offer the more arbitrary and unworkable "may issue," and 4 states are unrestricted. In the "shall issue" and "unrestricted" states, according to the U.S. Department of Justice's own National Institute of Justice /Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the FBI Uniform Crime Report, every year for the last two decades, there are fewer violent crimes and fewer gun accidents where law abiding citizens are allowed to keep and bear arms. Essentially, according to NIJ/BJS and the FBI, more guns = less crime.

Just as the DOJ, NIJ/BJS, and the FBI are the undisputed hallmarks in credibility, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence, the Violence Policy Center, and Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Handguns shamelessly cite discredited studies, or simply pull numbers out of thin air to promote more worthless gun control. Gun control in America was a chronic failure. It’s time to bury it where it falls and move forward.

[bunnieman]

06:09 AM on 10/22/2011

Your "undisputed hallmarks in credibility" do not live up to that laughable hyperbole. That aside, they would certainly concur that your contention is inaccurate. There is no correlation between gun proliferation and reduced crime rates. And if gun control in America is a chronic failure, it is thanks to the campaigning of people such as yourself, who see to it that laws remain ineffective enough that psychopaths and felons are easily able to obtain weapons, and that the marketplace remains glutted with plenty of untraceable choices.

[Nanjing03]

09:40 AM on 10/22/2011

Laughable? Hyperbole? Inaccurate? Really Bunns, you'll need more than buzz words in this debate. I might ask, just where have you been in the last twenty years when concealed carry provisions swept the nation -- the same twenty years that saw a reduction in violent crime and gun accidents where law abiding citizens were allowed to keep and bear arms? Oh yeah, you were sleeping under the same tree as "Mayor Rip Van Booker." Look, if you have what it takes to dispute the comprehensive NIJ/BJS studies and the FBI stats, then bring it on. From reading the rest of your tired posts, your taking on water and sinking fast. Nice try though.

Enjoy your new liberties Bunns … oh, and let us know if you see the "streets running red with blood" … we’re still waiting for that one too.

[mike102]

03:02 PM on 10/22/2011

"Your "undispute­d hallmarks in credibilit­y" do not live up to that laughable hyperbole."

Your willful ignorance is the only thing I find "laughable".

Do have more credible sources than the DOJ/FBI to cite, or are you just going to continue waving vague references (vague, because you don't actually bother retaining what you skim-read), which are based on bebunked Kellermann pseudo-research, paid for by George Soros/Joyce Foundation? Incidentally, the JF also funds Mayor of Newak, Booker's/Michael Bloomburg's 'Mayors Against Illegal Guns'.

Newark is the crime capital of NJ. For decades, there have been more guns in Newark than there are in Iraq. NJ almost never issues carry permits. So, I don't think Mayor Booker is really concerned about carry permits from Alaska.

But hey, at least he's getting his name in the papers.

[DreamWeaver2nd]

10:47 PM on 10/24/2011

Your comment is so familiar sounding, like the same old song and dance -- as are you fallacious pro gun lobbyist claims.

Uniform Crime Report: Former credibility disputed. Police precincts have been underreporting crimes for years because of pressure to look as if they were handling crime better each year. This has caused corruption and many other problems. Accurate stats will show an increase in violent crime.

New York City, for example: http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-08-25/news/nypd-tapes-5-the-corroboration/4/

Gun control and violence control in the USA ought to be more like it is in Canada and Europe, less like Somalia and other Third World nations.

[David Carson]

11:05 PM on 10/24/2011

DW--the civilian disarmament you support is not going to fly Constitutionally or politically

[Grumpy Man]

09:07 PM on 10/21/2011

Mayor Cory Booker has no rational facts to back up his insane claim that CCW puts officers at risk. In fact there are cases where CCW holders have rescued police officers in dire situations.

Booker is a purveyor of falsehoods.

[bunnieman]

10:10 PM on 10/21/2011

Since 2007, 11 police officers have been shot and killed by "CCW holders". Could you provide for us a similarly documentable statistic which confirms that an equal number of police officers, during that time frame, were rescued by "CCW holders"?

[rikilii]

10:42 PM on 10/21/2011

Since 2007, 14 police officers have been shot and killed, accidentally, by themselves or other officers.  Who knows how many were shot on purpose.  Maybe if we just took away their guns and left it up to CCW holders, the police would be a lot safer.

[Rooster Coburn]

10:48 PM on 10/21/2011

U.S. Congresswoman Sandy Adams of Florida is herself a retired L.E.O. and one of the prime backers of H.R. 822 in the House of Representatives. Why would she support a law which would endanger the police?

[DreamWeaver2nd]

04:07 PM on 10/24/2011

Mayor Cory Booker is one of our finest. The gun lobby is a small group of political snipers out to malign those who dispute their lethal distortion of fact.

[David Carson]

09:16 PM on 10/24/2011

DW--and where are those FBI stats you promised? You make Josephine Isuzu look credible.

[David Carson]

09:29 PM on 10/24/2011

and DW--if you are going to claim people are liars--it is important to have proof in hand

[Old Jarhead]

09:05 PM on 10/21/2011

Something I don't understand, and hopefully someone who opposes this legislation will be kind enough to explain the logic.

The Brady Campaign, and others are staunch supporters of such federal legislation as;

*Assault weapons bans

*Assault "clips" bans (whatever those are)

*Enhanced background checks

*Waiting periods

*Federal bans on legal concealed carry in National Parks

*Federal bans on transporting firearms in secure luggage aboard trains

And many of their followers advocate such things as mental evaluations, complete bans on firearms, and other such silliness.

So, with all these proposed laws that would violate the states power to regulate firearms within their own borders, why are they now screaming, loudly and hypocritically, that this law would violate states rights?

[bunnieman]

09:17 PM on 10/21/2011

Um, could it be that one set of laws would reduce the number of guns on the streets, while the other would increase it? Just guessing.

[Old Jarhead]

09:23 PM on 10/21/2011

Um, no, since statistically, CHL carriers are vastly more law abiding than the average non CHL citizen, and are arrested at a rate to be statistically insignificant. Now, of course, if you have different statistics, lets see them.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

Besides, they are screaming STATES RIGHTS, yet ignore those same rights when it would gore their ox. Why?

[rikilii]

10:39 PM on 10/21/2011

So it's not about state's rights then.  Glad we cleared that up.

[todfrapri]

07:33 PM on 10/21/2011

Can we expect a Police Officer to understand if that person who has a gun hidden is only going to use it for legal reasons?

[Grumpy Man]

08:52 PM on 10/21/2011

Damnit. Accidently marked as favorite. Meant to hit "Reply."

Permitted persons are trained to notify any officer they come in contact with that they are armed.

I've been a LEO for more than 26 years and have never, not once, had a problem with a permitted carrier.

They're usually very compliant and eager to prove that they're not a "problem." Heck, I wish every encounter I have or have had with the public was as friendly as the typical encounters I've had with the CCW permitted persons I've interacted with professionally.

[bunnieman]

09:12 PM on 10/21/2011

Since 2007, 11 "LEO"s have interacted professionally with CCW permitted persons, and have been subsequently murdered by them.

[Old Jarhead]

09:19 PM on 10/21/2011

I am not a police officer, but I know many who carry concealed. Doctors, some nurses, administrative managers and supervisors, at least a few lawyers, several local and state police officers, and more farmers than I can name, as well as many other PROFESSIONAL people. These ladies and gentleman are some of the most polite, considerate, and thoughtful people you could imagine.

Of course, right now, by TX law, the medical personnel are not allowed to carry a firearm at work, unless they have their own private offices, like my personal physician. It seems as if most police here in TX most definitely think a legal CHL will use their weapons only for self protection or protection of others. I have had a very few interactions with police, and have never had a single problem. Once I have showed my CHL, most relax and become quite friendly. I have never even been disarmed by any officer.

[OdinsEye]

09:30 PM on 10/21/2011

If the person has a CCW permit, then there is no reason for the police to assume that the person is up to anything nefarious.

[bunnieman]

10:32 PM on 10/21/2011

Why would they not? A "CCW permit" means that the holder has not been convicted of a felony or forcibly treated for mental illness. Nothing more. Undiagnosed psychotics and criminals clever enough to escape detection can easily qualify for such a permit, and, having done so, wander the streets with a hidden weapon as they please.

[Iconcoclast]

01:06 AM on 10/22/2011

Particularly when the ccw holder declares that they are armed. Something that probably doesn't occur very often when dealing with criminals.

My state has a "shall issue" requirement without any training and, after searching the Brady campaign scare publication on crimes committed by ccw holders could find only two crimes. One of which would have occurred with or without the ccw (murder/suicide).

[Dahveed1]

11:37 PM on 10/20/2011

Most police officers support concealed permit holders, so clearly they do not feel threatened by them. Crazy politicians, on the other hand, are clearly a threat to everybody.

I guess Mr. Booker is only representing his constituents who are crooks, murderers and rapists. These people like to prey on un-armed victims and wish to keep the odds in their favor by keeping the victims defenseless.

[ScorpioTop]

02:29 PM on 10/21/2011

Most Americans are outraged that 30,000 Americans lose their lives to gun use killings yearly.

[hagagaga]

03:06 PM on 10/21/2011

Most Americans are outraged that you can't seem to post anything but this, which is usually a non-sequitur and always involves misleading use of statistics.

[Nanjing03]

11:38 PM on 10/21/2011

Hmmm, well at least one American is outraged that you are off by about 21,000 in your stats. The number is closer to 9,000. You must be including "justifiable" homicides by police, and intended victims who had the foresight to be armed. Perhaps you threw in swimming pool and ATV accidents for good measure too?

[eco124]

07:55 PM on 10/20/2011

Criminals will continue to conceal carry as they have always done, no matter what the law is.
It's the law-abiding citizens that wish to remain so that seems to be a problem with the Mayor and gun control advocates.

[frank day]

08:04 PM on 10/20/2011

Only criminals conceal weapons.

[eaglespark]

08:16 PM on 10/20/2011

"Only criminals conceal weapons"

With an obviously false statement like that, I am not sure, but...
Are you by chance trolling us?...

[hagagaga]

10:10 PM on 10/20/2011

blatantly false

[bunnieman]

08:11 PM on 10/20/2011

Anybody who hasn't been convicted of a felony or forcibly institutionalized for treatment of mental illness can easily obtain a concealed carry permit. Drug addicts, wife beaters, alcoholics and undiagnosed psychopaths, among others, can lie on the application form, sit through a couple of hours of cursory training, and waltz out with permission to sneak around with hidden weapons. That is what "seems to be a problem with the Mayor and gun control advocate".

[eaglespark]

08:47 PM on 10/20/2011

"Waltz out"... "sneak around"... ;>)

[eco124]

11:03 PM on 10/20/2011

The people you mentioned are also more likely to ignore the laws and carry anyway.

[rikilii]

03:10 PM on 10/20/2011

...Puts Cops At Risk...

This is a fascinating claim.  This mayor is apparently operating under the typical NJ meme that, with very few exceptions, only police officers should be permitted to carry firearms in public.  Other than cops, the NJ approach goes, the only people who should be allowed to carry are former cops and people who have a "really good reason".  Reasons typically include things like:  "works as a security guard:, "works as an armored car driver", "works as an admissions officer at [a school where the permit issuing official wants to send his kids]", or "donated $50k to Mayor Booker's campaign". 

The VPC and BC are fond of pointing out that, over the past four and a half years, 11 police officers have been killed by CCW permit holders. 

Interestingly enough, in roughly the same time frame, more cops were killed by OTHER COPS, than by CCW permit holders, and that's just counting the accidental shootings.  It doesn't take into account those who might have been murdered by another cop, the number of which incidents would be harder or even impossible to determine.

Similarly, a small amount of searching will reveal that cops killed as many or more innocent people who weren't cops, on purpose or by accident, in that same time period.

Now, if we take a closer look at those incidents that the VPC and BC are so fond of citing, we learn that only 4 are even arguably attributable to the fact that the killer had a CCW permit.  The rest were the result of planned attacks, took place in the home of the killer, or otherwise involved circumstances in which the fact that the shooter had a permit was totally irrelevant.  Of those 4, only 3 involved on-duty cops (the other one involved an off-duty Border Patrol Agent road raging on the shooter who, incidentally, has been out on $10,000 bail for the past three years with no trial in sight). Of those remaining 3, one involved a former police officer, precisely the type of person that even NJ feels is entitled to a CCW permit.

Then we must take into account that CCW permit holders are some 5-7 times more numerous than police officers.

So, once the numbers are crunched (not that we actually need to crunch them, since the uncrunched numbers are convincing enough), who is it that endangers cops, and who is it that's doing the endangering?

[eaglespark]

05:22 PM on 10/20/2011

I have always wondered about that "good reason" thing for allowing carry, myself. If defense of my life is not a "really good reason" for doing something, then I don't know what else is. "Allow" me to be able to defend myself and my family from violent criminals? Mister Mayor, Booker sir: If you want a good example of "insane", examine that attitude, please.

[ScorpioTop]

06:23 PM on 10/20/2011

30,000 Americans are killed by gun use yearly. What do you want? More unnecessary gun use killings?

[plebian43]

08:15 PM on 10/20/2011

Nothing is more innate than the right to protect one's family, property, and person. Either Mayor Booker is irredeemably stupid or completely disingenuous.

In any case he is apparently unfamiliar with the axiom "when seconds count, the police will be there in minutes".

[DreamWeaver2nd]

09:53 PM on 10/24/2011

No, it is not a "fascinating" claim. The US has more gun violence than all the other industrialized nations combined. Cops are at risk because there are more and more guns loose in our nation -- that puts us all at risk. Private sales of lethal weapons with no background checks go on every day. The well-funded gun lobby, including you, I believe, has political clout because all that money corrupts politics -- producing dangerous gun legislation that disadvantages law enforcement as well as We The People. (Profitable to the gun industry, the NRA and other gun lobbyists; and potentially useful as political intimidation.) No, that's not "fascinating." It's something else entirely different, it's ugly, and it's lethal.

[David Carson]

11:23 PM on 10/24/2011

DW--to get where you want to go, you will need to repeal the 2nd amendment

[Iconcoclast]

02:50 PM on 10/20/2011

I don't know what is funnier--the implication that no Democrat could possibly support this bill (or virtually any 2A rights bill) and must be arm-twisted by the evil NRA for support or the notion that there is an epidemic of violence by legal concealed pistol carriers.

So there is a race to the ludicrous bottom between the cargo-cultists who believe that firearms have godlike powers to corrupt and the goose-steppers who believe that membership as a Democrat requires suspension of all other beliefs.

[eaglespark]

02:57 PM on 10/20/2011

Yeah... you might have point, there. I have been an Oregon Democrat for 40 years now and I carry a gun, too. ;>)

[Iconcoclast]

02:17 AM on 10/22/2011

Your party is left you a long time ago when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.

[ScorpioTop]

06:21 PM on 10/20/2011

Thank you for calling the NRA evil. NRA policies have killed more Americans than any terrorist group.

[eaglespark]

08:32 PM on 10/20/2011

"NRA policies have killed more Americans than any terrorist group."

Thanks for the laugh. But seriously, can you back up that bizarre statement with... anything at all? You said it, so you should be the one to prove it.

[hagagaga]

10:12 PM on 10/20/2011

No, the terrorist group whose policies have killed the most Americans is the Brady Campaign.