Another assault on the Met Branch Trail

[PotomacCyclist]

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Woman-Grabbed-Robbed-and-Struck-Along-Metropolitan-Branch-Trail-281869351.html

There needs to be a permanent solution to the crime problem. More active development along the trail or something. I don’t recall hearing about as many attacks on other area trails.

Topic

[hozn]

@GB 99202 wrote:

Fall back? This is ‘murica, shooting is hardly the fall back option, seems to be the go to solution.

Well, it is the easy option. And shooting is sport … so win win?

Yes, surprised this thread took such a left turn. Let’s talk about bicycles.

[americancyclo]

@hozn 99204 wrote:

Well, it is the easy option. And shooting is sport … so win win?

Yes, surprised this thread took such a left turn. Let’s talk about bicycles.

Isn’t it right turn?

Squirrel Bike!

[baiskeli]

@Raymo853 99194 wrote:

Taking mixed martial arts courses for a year or two will result in you being much safer than any firearm, mace, tazer, etc.

Unless the other guy has a firearm, mace, tazer, etc.

[DismalScientist]

@americancyclo 99205 wrote:

Isn’t it right turn?

Given the overall responses, the original and the followup, it was most definitely a left turn. As usual…

[baiskeli]

@DismalScientist 99283 wrote:

Given the overall responses, the original and the followup, it was most definitely a left turn. As usual…

I’d say it was fair and balanced.

[Terpfan]

@vern 99161 wrote:

No, it wouldn’t, and there’s not really any objective evidence to demonstrate this.

Of course, given the varying factors the converse would also apply if you use that logic. (FWIW, the comparable statewide violent crime rate in VA is half that of Maryland’s violent crime rate, even in comparable urban areas. Causation or correlation? That’s probably the big question and I wouldn’t profess to know the “right” answer.).

It’s an interesting philosophical discussion. DC will never do anything more than the court orders it to do.

[DismalScientist]

Actually, there are a lot of empirical evaluations of concealed carry laws on crime rates.
Given the corruption of my profession, one might argue that there can be no “objective” studies.

[lordofthemark]

I wonder how they handle this in Singapore?

[Raymo853]

@skins_brew 99195 wrote:

I will stick with my Glock.

Without basic ability to react to a physical close quarters assault, you’ll never get it out and aimed in time.

[skins_brew]

@Raymo853 99325 wrote:

Without basic ability to react to a physical close quarters assault, you’ll never get it out and aimed in time.

100% not true. I am not going to mention the cases because people will go nuts, but there are several cases that exist where close quarter struggles have ensued and a concealed carry weapon has saved it’s owner from gross bodily harm.

[dasgeh]

@skins_brew 99332 wrote:

100% not true. I am not going to mention the cases because people will go nuts, but there are several cases that exist where close quarter struggles have ensued and a concealed carry weapon has saved it’s owner from gross bodily harm.

And there are other cases where close quarter struggles have ensued and a concealed carry weapons have injured or killed innocent bystanders and still others where the weapons have been used against the original victim. This is why anecdotal evidence is not particularly useful — you can usually find a few stories to prove your point. As Dismal mentioned, there are plenty of empirically based analyses of the issue, some even from nonbiased sources. I’m not aware of any from non-biased sources that support the assertion that concealed carry is a good thing.

[mstone]

Good grief, can’t we talk about lights?

[skins_brew]

@mstone 99335 wrote:

Good grief, can’t we talk about lights?

These are healthy conversations and we are actually talking about the pros and cons of a presented solution to a known problem. No one is forcing you to look at this thread.

[DismalScientist]

@dasgeh 99334 wrote:

As Dismal mentioned, there are plenty of empirically based analyses of the issue, some even from nonbiased sources. I’m not aware of any from non-biased sources that support the assertion that concealed carry is a good thing.

Which is precisely why I added my parenthetical. I don’t automatically call a study biased if it doesn’t reach my preconceived notion.

[NicDiesel]

@skins_brew 99332 wrote:

100% not true. I am not going to mention the cases because people will go nuts, but there are several cases that exist where close quarter struggles have ensued and a concealed carry weapon has saved it’s owner from gross bodily harm.

List them or it didn’t happen.

[Author]

Replies