[hurryinhoosier62]

fasteddy,

I agree. I'm NOT the one using profane language, which is prohibited in the Lobby!!

[moto-d]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

Negative. The FOP is a FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION. I can be an FOP member; I'm not a cop. As of your stats, Indiana possess 2 MILLION more residents than Wisconsin. Your stats won't hold up. My nephew did the research for his Criminal Justice classes. Per capita, Wisconsin has MORE violent crimes than Indiana. As for your language, the Lobby is a FAMILY-ORIENTED area. I would advise you to go to the CH IF you feel the need to use profane language. The moderators would probably agree. BTW....what part of "bearing arms" don't you understand??

Yes, they probably would ... like the CH, I thought it would replace certain "key" letters; I guess not.

Indiana is only about 900,000 more people than Wisconsin. And my stats are based on murders per a certain number of citizens, like "100,000". Therefore, the total population does not matter statistically. Nice try, though.

[moto-d]

OK, I made a mistake. Don't go all self-righteous, shocked nanny on me, hoosier.

[hurryinhoosier62]

What mistake? Oh, you mean mistaking the populations of Indiana and Wisconsin? Indiana has 6.4 million verse Wisconsin at 4.7 million. That's 1.7 million the way they taught us math back in the old days. I saw my nephew's research. It was based on FBI crime stats for 2005-2007. Wisconsin had a HIGHER violent crime rate due to its smaller population and lower population density. Think about this: Wisconsin has ONE major metro area: Milwaukee. Indiana has 3: Gary/Hammond (Chicago metro), Indianapolis and
Southern Indiana (Clark,Floyd and Harrison Cos.-Louisville metro). Other than Milwaukee,
I'm pretty sure than no other area in Wisconsin has to deal with the gang problems that
Gary/Hammond, Indianapolis and S.Indiana deal with. In Joel's research, if you excluded
Gary/Hammond and Indianapolis, Indiana had a 30% lower crime rate than Wisconsin. Remember this, more people live in Floyd and Clark Cos. Indiana than live in Wisconsin north of Wausau.

[moto-d]

Good heavens man, give it a rest. According to the US Census Bureau, Wisconsin had a population of 5,686,986 at the end of 2010, compared to Indiana's 6,483,802. I know the US Census Bureau's got nothing on your nephew Joel, but facts, as they say, is facts!

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/55000.html

[hurryinhoosier62]

Then Wisconsin GAINED nearly a million resident from 2000 to 2010? I lived there from 2004-2007. People weren't exactly beating a path there during the "Jerk-off Jim" Doyle administration!! I'll check the 2000 population stats.

[moto-d]

I have no idea, I didn't count 'em! I'm going by data of the US Census Bureau, to which I've provided a link! The Milwaukee-Waukesha metro and Madison metro areas account for about 2.3 million, and factor in Green Bay/Fox Cites and the western part of the state where thousands of people who work in the Twin Cities live, I know it's up there.

Additionally, the crime stats -- also from the US Census Bureau -- are based on crimes per 100,000 people, no matter HOW LARGE THE TOTAL! In other words, Wisconsin's 100,000 are compared to Indiana's 100,000 -- all things equal, Indiana had more murders than us!

[moto-d]

I used to work with a guy from Indianapolis, whose dad was a Marion County detective named Mahler. He came to Wisconsin to escape the crime, grunge and insane cost-of-living of Indiana and never looked back. So yeah, I suppose it is possible Wisconsin grew in population.

[hurryinhoosier62]

Indy has turned into a hell hole,no doubt!! We noticed the cost of living in the Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha area was about 20% HIGHER than the Louisville-S.Indiana metro area.The cost of housing and taxes weren't even comparable!!WI was WAY more expensive.BTW....Green Bay metro (3 counties) 306,241, Madison metro (12 counties)
568,593 Ft Wayne metro(4 counties) 610,015 Louisville,KY- S. Indiana metro (12 counties) 1,451,564. The Madison/Green Bay metros combined are slightly more than HALF as large as the Louisville-S. Indiana metro. I like Green Bay. Madison, on the other hand, is referred to in Milwaukee as the People's Republic of Madison. When people in a city as liberal as Milwaukee make fun of Madison, you know there has to be a problem!!

[moto-d]

I work in Green Bay, right downtown. Meh, it's OK, sorta ugly once you get 3 blocks from Lambeau; Appleton is nicer, which is why I choose to live there. Actually Waukesha is wayyyyy conservative ... tipped the scales in Judge Prosser's favor last year! But Madison, yes, too crunchy for even me -- the crunch being Granola.

[moto-d]

Too bad about Indy ... my boy and I were there for the Brickyard 400 about 5 years ago and downtown is scenic ... don't know how safe! I stopped at a liquor store not to far from the Speedway to pick up a twelver after the race and let's just say I felt a little ... uncomfortable

[hurryinhoosier62]

Stan,

I used to live on the west side (Rockville Rd area). I was about 3 miles from the Speedway. It was an OK neighborhood back in the early 90's. Today, you couldn't pay me to live there!! Same with the Castleton area. Don't go into the near westside of Indy after dark. IT'S UGLY!!! Stay downtown and you should be alright. IPD and ISP keep a lid on things there.

[hurryinhoosier62]

Waukesha conservative? NO!!!! Most of Racine Co. (especially in Wind Point and Burlington) is slightly to the right of Attila the Hun. Racine itself is so "nutjob" liberal it's starting to resemble Madison.

[hurryinhoosier62]

IF you want a REAL "thrill", go into North Milwaukee sometime. The company my wife worked for had a facility there. They(her staff) were FORBIDDEN to be there after dark. She wouldn't go there unless I went with her....ARMED!!!

[moto-d]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

IF you want a REAL "thrill", go into North Milwaukee sometime. The company my wife worked for had a facility there. They(her staff) were FORBIDDEN to be there after dark. She wouldn't go there unless I went with her....ARMED!!!

Oh, I've been to parts of Milwaukee I hesitate to venture into during the day, less the night. The downtown/Third Ward area, and the east side by the lake are very nice, but yeah, you get around Brown Deer and that area. Spooky.

[Nomadac]

Originally Posted by moto-d

Then where is the preventative benefit of which you brag? They allow themselves to be attacked so they can use their gun? Wouldn't it make more sense to carry open, if carrying at all is the issue?

You apparently have not read much on this subject both Pro and Con, and do not understand why concealed is a deterrent. If a robber decides to holdup a store, or individual, they do not know who is carrying. With open carry the first person a criminal is going to shoot is the armed person. Surveys of criminals have confirmed they choose their victim based on who they believe is vulnerable and incapable of harming them.

It appears that you did not read the link to the facts I posted before. Maybe if you did more research on this subject you might be enlightened.

[moto-d]

Originally Posted by Nomadac

You apparently have not read much on this subject both Pro and Con, and do not understand why concealed is a deterrent. If a robber decides to holdup a store, or individual, they do not know who is carrying. With open carry the first person a criminal is going to shoot is the armed person. Surveys of criminals have confirmed they choose their victim based on who they believe is vulnerable and incapable of harming them.

It appears that you did not read the link to the facts I posted before. Maybe if you did more research on this subject you might be enlightened.

Ha, that makes so little sense, I shouldn't even reply. So, let's see if I'm getting you right ... they target the armed person because they can SEE they're armed, but not the person with no gun showing because they MIGHT, maybe, possibly be armed. Hmmm. OK.

Then, you switch gears and tell me they choose people who are "vulnerable and incapable of harming them," which I would assume you mean to be the person open-carrying, based on your claim above. So a guy with a Glock 9 strapped to his waist is vulnerable and incapable or harming anyone. I see.

And this is the theory you want to stick with?

[moto-d]

My theory, on the other hand, is that an armed robber sees a guy with a gun strapped to his waist, says to himself "holy s***" and moves on.

[Nomadac]

Originally Posted by moto-d

My theory, on the other hand, is that an armed robber sees a guy with a gun strapped to his waist, says to himself "holy s***" and moves on.

Your proposition is for open carry to prevent crime as posted. Maybe you should research how many states allow Open Carry? With the Anti-Gun crowd you must be kidding, as they panic at the sight of a firearm.

You have convinced us you do not support CCW's and do not feel the need to go unarmed. That is your choice. But it seems that many are of a different opinion, as the number of CCW's is increasing along with sales of firearms.

Maybe you should stick to car topics, as you do not appear to be as informed concerning Firearms and CCW's for protection.

[moto-d]

Originally Posted by Nomadac

Your proposition is for open carry to prevent crime as posted. Maybe you should research how many states allow Open Carry?

Most: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...-11-guns_N.htm