Alarming new trend with some CCWs

[Evergreen]

In a police state, the police are much safer, but the population is much less. In a free country ruled by majority rule and a constitution to protect the rights of the people, the police will have more dangerous jobs. Unlike some countries, the police don't have to take these jobs. However, police should understand the situation that arises from living in a country where citizens have so many rights. In a lot of ways, I think police get abused by the system quite a bit too. However, it goes both ways. The OP has proven that with this post. Police should be there to find solutions to our problems while helping protect the rights of the people, rather than try to do away with them.

I agree with Art about gangbangers joining the military. That seems to be something I have a concern with, as there have been reports of gangs joining the military to increase their combat training for their gangs. I really think when it comes to the military, that they should screen heavily for people with gang affiliations, including terrorist groups. My thoughts are there is no 100% solution to all these problems without taking away our freedoms. Freedom comes with a price, but the alternative is much worse.

Considering, how politicians have abused the system with gun rights, I don't advocate any personality profiling on non-criminals who want CHLs. I highly doubt congress will ever ban people joining the military en masse. As we need people to serve int he arm forces to protect the country. My father was denied sub duty in Vietnam, because his mother came from Belarus. Do I feel he was abused? No. I think when it comes to the safety of our soldiers, some precautions can be taken to keep potentially volatile people out of the military. For example, the Islamist who tried to murder people at Fort this week.

 

[Art Eatman]

"Take the current example, why would a CCW permit holder pall around with a bunch of gang members, and loan them weapons?"

Could be that the CHL person is a gang member?

 

[NavyLCDR]

Could be that the CHL person is a gang member?

Or hired by the BATFE....

 

[we are not amused]

The whole story could be a fake too!
It certainly doesn't sound very likely.
And even if it is, how is it different than a gang member giving his gun to girlfriend or other acquaintance?
It sounds like another anti-CCW story by a bunch of anti-gun nuts. Maybe the guy who posted it, who is apparently a police officer, believes it, but I have heard too many wild stories from cops over the years to put too much stock in wild stories. I remember a couple of decades ago when wild stories about witchcraft and satanism were making the rounds in the Law Enforcement Community. In the Nineties it was every Conservative was suddenly a militia member and plotting to kill cops, now it CCW holders who are supplying guns to gang members. (Yawn!) It's late, enough with the conspiracy theories.

 

[BullfrogKen]

This is not a new trend.


Gangs use members without records to do things those with records can't do all the time. It's not limited to finding ways to lawfully carry guns for the gang.

They'll use them to visit people in prison. Gets jobs that require criminal background checks. Etc.

This isn't anything new. Or really all that surprising.

 

[Weevil]

Well if a CHL holder breaks the law then charge him with a crime and if he's convicted he won't be a CHL holder anymore.

Isn't that the whole idea of requiring a CHL, to keep "convicted" felons from "legally" carrying a concealed gun.


Hasving a CHL doesn't guarantee someone will always obey the law, that's why it can be revoked.

I'm sure there are more than a few CHL holders who made bad decisions and lost their right to legally carry a concealed firearm.

Just as I'm sure more than a few cops have lost their jobs for making bad decisions.


There's always a few bad apples in any group.

 

[hso]

While I have no first hand experience with this I have been told by people on both sides of the issue that do have first hand experience of specific instances in which a female or minor was carrying a weapon for someone that was either a felon or gang member. Every one of the people telling me this explained that the penalty was much less serious for the person with the gun than it would have been for the felon/gang member.

I also know a large number of LE and I also know that there are a number of instances in which they've told me about incidents in which they didn't arrest someone, but did intervene in the situation to keep it from becoming more dangerous. Typical actions were to oder someone to leave an area to force deescalation when the parties were too emotional to exercise good judgement. A couple have told me about taking guns and knives to be picked up the next day until the owner "cooled down". Are these purely Constitutional? The officers telling me about these instances wanted to prevent the situation from becoming dangerous without having to charge anyone. They usually expressed it as "avoiding all that paperwork" or "not wanting to make it worse" for the individual by arresting them. That isn't very unusual outside of big cities.

Is it purely Constitutional? No. Is it unusual? Not in my area. Is it intended to deprive the citizen of their property? Temporarily, Yes. Permanently, No.

 

[Pilot]

So how is this a trend? Criminals do illegal things whether it be with a CCW holders weapon or not. I don't usually post negative thoughts here, but I think this is one of the most ridiculous threads I have read on a gun forum. Sorry, but that is how I feel after wasting time reading it.

 

[TCB in TN]

I'm amazed your department has been able to keep this under wraps. Normally, the media would be all over something like this and you would have a plethora of news links to post.

While we do hear lots more about the things that happen today, there are still plenty of things that happen that don't see the light of day. IMHO most PD are pretty good about keeping things quiet, and most people involved with incidents don't publicize them all that much.

I see an issue with immediately walking back into a bar after I have been in a fight, with or without a gun. I agree that I have the legal right to defend myself, the problem that I have with it is knowingly taking a chance where Physics might trump my rights to self-defense.

I agree in some levels, but have been in positions where I felt threatened but was not able to go (Job). The plant I worked at had several incidents with employees crazy ex's threatening to kill everyone. The lady who was the clerk in my department was one of them. Her ex came, I had to ask him to leave, then threaten to call the police. He threatened to kill me, her, anyone else, but left. In that case would I have been wrong to arm myself, but stay? I don't think so........

 

[EddieNFL]

While we do hear lots more about the things that happen today, there are still plenty of things that happen that don't see the light of day. IMHO most PD are pretty good about keeping things quiet, and most people involved with incidents don't publicize them all that much.

Can't speak for others, but the local daily rag has a reporter that reviews the local police, sheriff and FHP blotters. Maybe the officers never filed a report.

 

[bikerdoc]

Drama. opinion, and Hearsay, aside, bottom line is accessory before the fact is a crime.
A ccw is yours to lose by bad decisions, and bad decisions have consequences.

 

[Redlg155]

I agree that criminals/gangs have often used individuals with no records to help provide information and facilitate crimes. They utilize family membes and recruited and /or comprimised members in law enforcement, corrections and other state agencies such as the department of motor vehicles. Certain biker gangs have networks of legal professionals that are either members of affiliated with them to help in trouble situations.

Many states flag individuals who utilize the NCIC and state criminal registries in an attempt to identify LEOs and Corrections. Run a DMV check on a state or unmarked vehicle and the plates will often come up with a ficticious business.

 

[we are not amused]

I agree with Art about gangbangers joining the military. That seems to be something I have a concern with, as there have been reports of gangs joining the military to increase their combat training for their gangs.

Considering, how politicians have abused the system with gun rights, I don't advocate any personality profiling on non-criminals who want CHLs.

I am aware of the flurry of news media reports about "gang" members joining the military to learn military tactics for their gangs. I thought it was a bunch of hooie then, and I still do. Most of the small unit tactics used by the military are not applicable to gang warfare, and those that are, were probably already being used. Most of those people "associated" with the gangs who joined the military, probably did so because they wanted out of the gangs.
Did some bad guys join the military, and then return to the gangs? Probably, but it wasn't any great number, there have always been criminals in the military, just as there have always been criminals in every other large organization including the police.
The idea that the gangs are recruiting large numbers of CHLs, to carry guns for them is quite frankly preposterous on the face of it. Did they recruit a few? Quite possibly, just as they have members and relatives who join the police departments to give them inside help.
This sounds like one of those wild stories that get circulated by Law Enforcement types, where they take one atypical case and turn it into a disturbing trend nation wide without any real evidence. Kind of like that silly memo put out by the Missouri Dept. Of Public Safety titled "The Modern Militia Movement"http://http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Missouri_retracts_police_memo_which_labeled_0326.html

 

[teumessian_fox]

as it appeared he was returning to re-start the fight

Yeah, I think I saw that movie. It was called "The Young Savages" with Burt Lancaster.

And as others have noted, the OP observed a single occurance of this. That doesn't make it a "trend."

 

[Hoppes Love Potion]

If it's a 'trend", it isn't a recent one. Old-time mobsters used to use a "gun moll" - a woman with no record, to carry the heater and hand it to the gangster when he needs it.

 

[Oathkeeper1775]

Relativity

Any suggestion that a law abiding citizen committed a crime will have to be backed up with a conviction in a court of law.

Simply stero-typing a segment of the population with a broad stroke is always take negatively.

Example: The unfortunate incident in Arizona where one Former Marine was shot 60 times by a team of LEOs; really? A man who never took his weapon off safe was shot 60 times?

I am alarmed at the amount of bias toward regular citizens protecting themselves; we have to be "trapped" or be in a situation with no other course of action but to save our lives....how many times has anyone heard of somebody being shot by an LEO for simply displaying a pocket knife from 30 feet away? Portland police killed a retarded man for urinating in public a couple years ago........

Another "alarming" new trend?

While most LEOs are doing a great service to our communities, they are in NO position to judge, it takes a judge.

Lets not even bring up the "Professional courtesy" LEOs offer each other.

http://www.lvrj.com/news/police-inq...arrest-beating-of-videographer-126438953.html

 

[Millwright]

And these are "new" criminal tactics ......how ?

Just another example of why the hoplophobes' techno-fantasies won't work, IMO. >MW

 

[mp510]

If it's a 'trend", it isn't a recent one. Old-time mobsters used to use a "gun moll" - a woman with no record, to carry the heater and hand it to the gangster when he needs it.

Which is not indifferent from practices that are common in a number of Asian countries where firearms are heavily regulated/ outright prohibited. In those places, a low level gang member will often carry the weapon on behalf of a ranking member- and take the rap if something goes down.

 

[firemedic2000]

Hello new on this forum. This is an interesting post about gun treads. I to would like to see some documentation on this new tread.

 

[bigfatdave]

I'm not going to worry too much about extreme off-body carry, and I highly doubt this is an actual "trend" (or "tread" for that matter)

Scumbags don't care about CC laws, and most of them are aware of the small number of times they'll be searched in any given day. If some LEO decides that I'm shifty because of the trouble I went through to get my permit, (s)he simply reveals themself to be something other than a "peace officer" and if they confiscate my property they'll be facing a big public spectacle if not a lawsuit.

 

[Cosmoline]

If the CCW'er is caught after the crime he can't be ID'd as the suspect because he didn't commit the crime and because he has a permit to carry he is lawfully possessing the firearm.

He just has a firearm that can be linked directly with a murder. Which means he goes to prison for life, or he rats out the actual killer and goes for a little less than that.

I don't see what the nogoodnicks think they're going to gain from this plan.

 

[EddieNFL]

I don't see what the nogoodnicks think they're going to gain from this plan.

No one accused them of being smart.

 

[forgetitohio]

firemedic2000 welcome to THR.

I to would like to see some documentation on this new tread. .........

You and about 1000 other people. Myself inclued.
I haven't read anything about it in Ohio ....yet. LOL

The central problem of our age is how to act decisively in the absence of certainty. - Bertrand Russell

 

[rocky branch]

Sounds like an introduction in to "Street smarts 101"
Old and basic stuff.

 

[Acelaw]

I'm pretty skeptical that gangs are using CCWs as gun holders. I'm pretty skeptical about the claim that gangs are entering the military for "training" too. I guess it depends on how you define "trend." Sounds like BS to me.