• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

John R. Lott, Jr., CPRSC. Should schools have teachers carry guns? AAHB Health Behavior Research December 2018

JohnLott

New member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
9
JohnLott said:
One benefit of having permits is that it allows you to track how law-abiding general citizens are in carrying concealed handguns.
JohnLott said:
I have no problem with Constitutional Carry from a safety perspective, but I am telling you from a practical debating perspective on how to deal with safety issues that the data is on your side, but that the only way you will be able to gather data for some issues regarding carrying is with a permit.
Could you expound on how having a permit allows tracking of "how [people] are in carrying concealed?"
Could you expound on how having a permit allows "[gathering of] data for some issues regarding carrying [concealed]?"

What are some of those "issues" you are referencing and how would that data be collected? I've been carrying for 29 years and have yet to have a contact with LE that involved my gun (except when I carried on the job as a LEO for 3 years). So, the only "data" they (the government) have on me is that I have a carry permit and the info on the application. I'm just sayin'

Thanks

In More Guns, Less Crime, The War on Guns, The Bias Against Guns, and in my many op-eds and other writings, I have continually pointed out how extremely law-abiding concealed handgun permit holders are. How do I show that? By comparing the rate that permit holders are convicted or crimes or that they have their permits revoked to the number of permit holders. I can only do that if I know the number of concealed handgun permit holders. It allows me to fight back against claims about the danger of concealed handgun permit holders by Bloomberg's Everytown and groups such as the Violence Policy Center. Here is one of many examples:

 

JohnLott

New member
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
9
Unfortunately, few on this platform appears to be obviously familiar with the safety arguments involving guns. If you want to include safety arguments in your discussion, you might possibly find the emails that we send out of some use.

 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
717
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
Unfortunately, few on this platform appears to be obviously familiar with the safety arguments involving guns. If you want to include safety arguments in your discussion, you might possibly find the emails that we send out of some use.

https://crimepreventionresearchcenter.nationbuilder.com/subscribe
Welcome Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. Thank you and God Bless you for all that you do. I have been a fan, a follower, and a sometimes donor since the first edition of More Guns, Less Crime.
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
717
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan
Dear Doug: I am not sure why you posted the link to the piece so that it bypasses the download count. If you don't want other academics to see what research is getting the most attention, that is your choice, but I think that it is extremely short-sighted.

https://newprairiepress.org/hbr/vol1/iss3/3/#
To keep the focus on the article. There are very few academics posting here, most posters are activists. It is my opinion that disrupters here use Internet / forum subtleties to distract. If some one wants to see the download count then they can find it. Some here regard counts and kudos as measures of credibility.

I pray that your presence and posts here will elevate the rhetoric, and overcome the eristic.

I have gotten much value from James Franklin’s The Science of Conjecture: Evidence and Probability Before Pascal (JHU, 2001), particularly the concept of eristic.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
Dear Hammer6: I suspect that you haven't actually read the research that I wrote up, and before you comment you might want to read it. The paper never says anything about others being able to carry on school grounds. Indeed, there are many states that allow parents or others with permits to carry on school grounds even though teachers can't carry. So it is often the teachers who are being discriminated against in terms of being able to carry guns. Yet, it is teachers who are at the school all day long and who will most likely be present if an attack were to occur. The current debate is over teachers carrying and that is what the piece addresses. Most people in the middle of the debate over guns care about safety and not 2A rights, and if you just make arguments that convince yourself, you are going to lose this debate.


Please read before you attack.

I'm not attacking anyone. Safety over Liberty isn't good. "Allowing" teachers infers the government has the authority to limit certain people from carrying. The gun community ignorantly reacts to "safety" over liberty, every time.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
In More Guns, Less Crime, The War on Guns, The Bias Against Guns, and in my many op-eds and other writings, I have continually pointed out how extremely law-abiding concealed handgun permit holders are. How do I show that? By comparing the rate that permit holders are convicted or crimes or that they have their permits revoked to the number of permit holders. I can only do that if I know the number of concealed handgun permit holders. It allows me to fight back against claims about the danger of concealed handgun permit holders by Bloomberg's Everytown and groups such as the Violence Policy Center. Here is one of many examples:

Tennessee requires a "permit" to carry, OC or CC.


Anyway, liberals are not arguing the danger of citizen's with guns, they are arguing that guns are dangerous. Do not respect the liberal argument, do not engage liberals in any form of civilized debate where inalienable rights are concerned. Liberty minded folks already know "the truth about guns" and the results are listed in the link above. As well is the evidence cited at the website regarding constitutional carry states. Please note the states with virtually no issued permits and their majority political position...liberal. Write them off. The Sullivan Act remains on the books post Heller and McDonald....all ya need to know about liberals in NY.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Mr. Lott. Welcome to the forum.

I've read some of your writings.

I realize that to use the route of research you do you must have gun carriers have permits.

That however doesn't change the fact they are infringement. And no reason to support requiring permits so researchers have a tool to use.

I also submit that while you may be pro RTKABA, your writings using permit holders doesn't advance the RTKABA,. It advances the false narrative that somehow having permit schemes in place make the person carrying a gun safer.

Everytown , Moms having hysterics etc use that narrative to their advantage everytime a state tries to rid itself of unconstitutional permit schemes.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Dear Solos [sic]
If you read my research, such as in More Guns, Less Crime or if you subscribe to the CPRC's email list, you would surely know that I haven't from benefits from mandated training and that in recent work at the CPRC you would know that we show that people get training even when it isn't mandated.

Given that work, I haven't advocated mandatory training. Nor have I ever equated increased mandatory training with safety. Unlike buying any of my books, being on the email list is free.


My only disappointment here is how little people seem to know about what I have written.

Thanks.

Then this reader of your works as well as a member who often articulates your positive work to various community entities is equally disappointed Dr. Lott you feel the need to shoot your blunderbuss so broadly across this forum’s platform towards its membership after such a short time associated with this diverse group of firearm advocates.

Forgive this observation Dr. Lott, the tome you cited was written when? Oh ya, 1998 with the next one regarding firearms 2003.

Here is a quote Dr. Lott about yourself which I presume you authored for the media blurb, “...Lott proposes that if adults are allowed carry concealed and registered weapons...Unquote https://www.famouseconomists.net/john-lott

So your premise is citizen’s weapons [used term weapons, really] should be registered?

Sorry Dr Lott, seems my hero worship is becoming a bit tarnished the more i pull back what specifics my hero believes in for this nation’s citizens.

Don’t equate training, yet every state w/o issues privilage carry permits/licensure mandate training?
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I have not been around for awhile. Busy proof reading legal briefs and writing a white paper on no duty to retreat in a self-defense situation. With that said, I've taken a little time out of my schedule and looked over this thread. John Lott's statements intrigue me. What I glean from his comments is if the second amendment was truly honored, no license or permission slip to carry, concealed or openly, Mr. Lott would have little to write about.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
I have not been around for awhile. Busy proof reading legal briefs and writing a white paper on no duty to retreat in a self-defense situation. With that said, I've taken a little time out of my schedule and looked over this thread. John Lott's statements intrigue me. What I glean from his comments is if the second amendment was truly honored, no license or permission slip to carry, concealed or openly, Mr. Lott would have little to write about.

haha thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule for that lol. made my night ;)
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I have not been around for awhile. Busy proof reading legal briefs and writing a white paper on no duty to retreat in a self-defense situation. With that said, I've taken a little time out of my schedule and looked over this thread. John Lott's statements intrigue me. What I glean from his comments is if the second amendment was truly honored, no license or permission slip to carry, concealed or openly, Mr. Lott would have little to write about.
Also, this site would not exist, and we would have little to write about, and nothing to write here.

Antis make statistical arguments against carry. We need competent people making the statistical argument for carry. Thank God for Dr. Lott.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Actually the site is primarily about OC. In most states that doesn't require a permit at all. So this site would still be here so the "tactical advantage" folk could chastise OC lol.

One could say the same of the NRA. It's why they support anti gun bills from time to time . Financial survival.


Fact remains, one who supports requiring training, background checks, permits or fees to carry a gun does not support the RTKABA or even the 2A.

The 2A prohibits any limiting or interference with the RTKABA.

One either supports that as written, or one supports gov permission to keep and bear arms. Can't do both at once.

The unfortunate indoctrination of way to many gun owners that permits etc have anything to do with the RTKABA is why we now only have gov permission to keep and bear arms.

We are defending nothing because we have already lost the RTKABA.
Some are fighting to get it back.
Most don't even understand it's already been lost.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Bad logic.

If the 2A “was truly honored” (the precise wording that allegedly rendered anything Dr. Lott had to say as moot), then OC would have remained legal sans license, and this site would never have existed, as OC would have remained the default position.

Folks here are chasing away an amazing resource because he goes about advocacy using different tactics than most of us do. That is a moronic thing to do. We all need to make the moral and the statistical argument.

I hope that Dr. Lott is not throwing his hands up in the air in frustration, but instead continues to share his research with us here.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,265
Location
Kentucky
Bad logic.

If the 2A “was truly honored” (the precise wording that allegedly rendered anything Dr. Lott had to say as moot), then OC would have remained legal sans license, and this site would never have existed, as OC would have remained the default position.

Folks here are chasing away an amazing resource because he goes about advocacy using different tactics than most of us do. That is a moronic thing to do. We all need to make the moral and the statistical argument.

I hope that Dr. Lott is not throwing his hands up in the air in frustration, but instead continues to share his research with us here.

Perfect logic.

Know any states where either state or fed regulation or both do not violate the 2ND AMENDMENT.? I thought not.

Advancing the idea that permits are not infringement, and permit holders "safer" gives the antis all they need to shriek "doing away with permits is dangerous, no training required blah blah. Even the gun carry experts like doctor Lott agree".

Bad logic is believing one can be on the side trying to regain a lost human right while at the same time advocating for infringing that right.

Actually lack of common sense as well.

An aside. Most states don't require a permit to OC. It has in fact mostly remained legal with no permit required.

My state is that way as is yours.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Also, this site would not exist, and we would have little to write about, and nothing to write here.

Antis make statistical arguments against carry. We need competent people making the statistical argument for carry. Thank God for Dr. Lott.

Really, you are tying your 2A hopes & dreams on someone who publically is advocating in his bio, citizens ‘CARRY CONCEALED REGISTERED WEAPONS’?
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Bad logic.

If the 2A “was truly honored” (the precise wording that allegedly rendered anything Dr. Lott had to say as moot), then OC would have remained legal sans license, and this site would never have existed, as OC would have remained the default position.

Folks here are chasing away an amazing resource because he goes about advocacy using different tactics than most of us do. That is a moronic thing to do. We all need to make the moral and the statistical argument.

I hope that Dr. Lott is not throwing his hands up in the air in frustration, but instead continues to share his research with us here.

This forum has existed for a day or two...the good advocate joined the 24th of Feb 2019 and immediately lambasted dougie and all other members with his self-promoted of his website, olde tomes and expressed his disappointment towards us all!

What specific insightfull information did you glean from Dr. Lott’s 9 succinct posts eye95?
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Dr. Lott can address our questions/concerns related to his posts here on OCDO if he chooses to do so. If he does not respond his website is available as a research resource. Remember, facts do not mater to liberals. This is where we as liberty minded individuals fail. Do not engage liberals. Defeat them at the ballot box and thus relegate them to the ivory towers of acedemia and eventually the dust bin of political history.

Engaging liberals is not productive, as Dr. Lott has illustrated here.

Post #86 sums up my singular point regarding liberals.

Recall the VCDL debacle as proof of my words.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Facts do matter to many liberals. As we do not want to be painted with a broad brush, so we should not paint our ideological opposition.

To ignore facts supporting the idea that more guns are followed by less crime is to abandon (foolishly) a tool for promoting Liberty. After all, to win some over to the idea of OC, we must first convince them, factually, that guns are not the root of violence.

Make sure that you have a screwdriver in your tool bag. Not all problems are nails.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Ignoring facts is not what liberals do, dismiss facts is what liberals do. This is evident everyday on the news.

As I stated, liberals are not arguing the danger of citizen's with guns, they are arguing that guns are dangerous. Once this is accepted by our side, including Dr. Lott, then the focus of our efforts would rightly be focused on those who may end up agreeing with Dr. Lott that having a gun is a safety issue, or not having a gun is a safety issue, and get them to vote for individual liberty which would further our idividual safety if we choose to do such a thing...opportunity to choose. Liberals do not want us to have that opportunity of choice.

I will continue to paint all liberals for what they are...liberals. They deserve not one minute of my time. We certainly appear to differ on this score, no biggie.

There are far too many who are not liberal who are also not sufficiently educated on our 2A guarantee, who would more than likely vote for the restoration of our individual liberties once they are informed of the facts, that Dr. Lott so diligently gathers and provides for free.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Some advocates want to solve the problem. Some advocates need the problem to continue to provide them a raison d’etre.

We each have to decide which we are.

Continuing to try to make my point will only degrade it.
 
Top