Guy in front of me today had a gun strapped to his belt.....

[BrendaBrick]

at the gas station. I was right behind him. He evidently was having some problems with his debit/credit card which gave me ample time to just stare at that deadly metal thing on his right hip. Like what...is THIS the Wild, Wild West all of a sudden?

After he left, the cashier and I both looked at each other like...what was THAT all about? She said that he was a regular customer and gestured with a swirling to one of her ears as if to motion (you know) the universal "crazy" signal and I said something to the effect of - Oh No! NOT a good combination!

Now. Here is the reason I am posting this: Normally (and initially) I would just go all OFF the deep end..thinking - OMG...this guy is a ticking time bomb. Frustrated with the way this world is headed and no one is being accountable etc...Based only upon his rather scrawny and lackluster appearance...I ASSUMED that like...what? He's going to be the one to just "SNAP" and kill a bunch of innocent bystanders in a moments notice.

See ya'll...here's my lesson here, albeit it hindsight and 20/20. I'll never really KNOW FOR SURE...his "intentions" at all.

A) COULD BE that he actually IS a walking, ticking time-bomb and could just SNAP any minute because of all the injustices as of late!

B) COULD BE that he only just wants to look like a bad-ass toting some heat just cause he can - and it is nothing more than that.

C) COULD BE that he has a job where he needs to carry it to kill some, I dunno rabid raccoons or other vermin or something.

D) COULD BE that he is just ready to participate in some kind of target shooting practice/event at the drop of the hat.

Again...see ya'll...THIS is the lesson...ya just never can tell! For me, I opted for "A"..in my mind...but I will never know for sure and hence, the reason I am posting this. (Please learn from my ignorance).

HAD I known and figured out what I know now..examples: A-D options...I would have opted for none at all! Keeping an open mind. I think that I would have just casually walked up to him in an unassuming manner and just simply asked, Hey! - What cha got there? (with authentic interest) Unassuming-like. Is that a .38 or .44? Remington, Smith & Wesson, Colt? Full metal jacket or hollow point?

See, from there I figure that I could have maybe (possibly) got into his head as to just what the heck he is doing with a gun strapped to hip and more importantly...just WHY..and his motivations.

If his reasoning was logical and such and NOT an immediate threat that he was like going to - all of a sudden - "snap" at any minute...no biggie.

But...and this is a BIG BUT....if it did appear as if he might sway towards the ends as being a little unstable...whacko or something - well here's the kicker and where the ultimate judgement call lies. Here is where all of us must rally to the side of prevention.

Which is the REAL REASON for me posting this to begin with!

But it is a bit of a slippery process. Let's not slip over the innocents...but by the same token...not ignore potential danger either.

[Kennah]

1. I carry concealed, so you'll never even know

[Tunkamerica]

4. i just wonder if you tell everyone you carry a concealed weapon or just random people on the

internet. Kind of defeats the purpose, don't you think? Unless the purpose is something else.

[Kennah]

21. I'm selective

People by and large do not notice.

For the ones who will notice, you might as well carry openly because they know regardless.

[Starboard Tack]

127. So, the purpose is just to deceive those who don't notice these things

All about deception. Thanks for being so anonymously honest about that. we all feel very reassured.

[X_Digger]

153. How can it be deception, if as you've said in the past, there's no obligation to notify?

Do you have pockets? How dare you deceive everyone about what you might or might not have in your pockets.

There you go, disrupting the social cohesion again.

[Starboard Tack]

174. I don't carry a gun or other weapon in my pocket

If I did, I would wear a very large pointy hat with a very large red "G" on it and a T-shirt that said "I'M A BIG DOOFUS!" on the front and "SHOOT ME!" on the back. But that's me, reckless fool that I am.

Now to your question "How can it be deception?" Do you think deception can only be achieved when there exists an "obligation to notify"? And that obligation would have to be a legal obligation, of course. Not an obligation of common courtesy, like do you mind if I smoke?
By hiding your weapon and presenting yourself as apparently unarmed you are creating a subterfuge, a deception. You can try dancing around it all day long, but it changes nothing. The purpose of HIDING is to DECEIVE. To give an impression very different from the truth.

[GreenStormCloud]

181. Keeping a secret is NOT deception.

Other people who know the laws of Texas know that I may or may not be armed. I deceive no one. I am not stating that I am unarmed, I am simply making no statement.

[Starboard Tack]

184. That's called deception through omission and the state condones your behavior.

You are under no legal obligation to expose yourself as an armed individual, but I still think the pointy hat would be a nice gesture on your part.

[GreenStormCloud]

189. No deception. Simply silence. I am not responsible for whatever conclusion you may draw. N/T

[AtheistCrusader]

288. The poster is simply working the opposite angle of the 'oh my gosh, you're threatening people by O/C

etc.

[GreenStormCloud]

192. It is NONE of your business, it is my PRIVATE business.

It is no deception to withold from you information that is my business and not yours. You know under the laws that it is possible that I may be armed and that is all you need to know.

[Starboard Tack]

224. Yeah, but the pointy hat would still be nice.

[oneshooter]

230. So you agree with the Nazi way of marking the unwanted in the country.

[Starboard Tack]

285. Do you feel unwanted? Poor baby. Is that why you carry a gun?

I don't think the Nazis are coming for you, meine freunde, unless they're recruiting.
You dealt that hand.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

335. That's pretty rude...

...and quite uncalled for.

[Starboard Tack]

337. Actually quite called for. Welcome to the gungeon

[X_Digger]

200. Oh, so it only applies to whatever criteria *you* choose. How convenient.

I love this moral whip you keep spreading, in the absence of any kind of fact.

It just goes to show what you're left with- emotwaddle flailing.

I have no moral or legal responsibility to declare the contents of my pockets to you, much as that bothers you.



Do they make a fat free version of that?

[Starboard Tack]

217. Did I mention morals. I don't think so.

Seems to be your obsession. I don't care what is in your pockets. But if you are going to carry a hidden gun around others you might want to consider the pointy hat. Just saying.

[X_Digger]

236. No, you're somewhat adept at insinuation and innuendo..

Never show your cards, my man.

Let's review.. you don't have a factual basis to back up your belief that concealed carry is 'destructive to society', you don't have a logical argument to present, what facts you present don't apply to those who concealed carry ('30,000 deaths, be afwaid!'), so you rely on emotional garbage.. you're sounding more and more like a religious fundy all the time, railing about whatever cause currently puts a bug up their ass.

[Starboard Tack]

259. Nope, not that complicated. I'm just pointing out silly behavior. Not immoral, just silly

I don't think for one minute their is anything immoral about toting concealed. I don't think the deceit is motivated by a deficiency in morals. On the contrary, I think many toters hold high moral standards. I think their sense of self worth is the motivating factor for toting, and it is probably a mixture of being either too high or too low, depending on the individual. Now, the concealing, hiding part, I think, is motivated by sheer embarrassment and fear of social rejection.

[X_Digger]

262. There's a saying in the community..

'Concealed means concealed'.

There's nothing to do with embarrassment, or social rejection- it's to do with the advantage that such concealment may provide.

If I were with a crowd of people who knew I carried at a restaurant, and some idiot came in waving a gun, the last thing I want is for everyone in my crowd to yell for me to 'take care of it'. (I'm being facetious, but you get the idea.)

No, without any valid reason for the general public to know I'm armed (and their feelings aren't demonstrably valid), I see no reason to lose any tactical advantage I gain by carrying concealed. I'm under no obligation to 'play fair' with someone who's threatening my life, so I won't.

[Starboard Tack]

304. OK, let's suspend our disbelief here for a moment and go with this

Our latest screenplay - we should submit these to Hollywood (Tarantino comes to mind)
Anyway, you are in the restaurant with a crowd of people and some idiot comes in waving a gun. Nobody yells for you to take care of it. You remain cool, calm, collected, assessing the risks, watching the guy. Very good so far. Now, let's say the idiot is getting really out of hand, pointing the gun at people, the situation escalates, he verbally threatens to shoot someone or you just see the obvious signs that he's about to start shooting. What do you do? And what do any other possible toters in the bar do, maybe in response to what you do and if the situation goes south how many lives are in danger and what if the idiot had a fake or unloaded gun? Get my drift. I don't want to be in that restaurant and if I am, I don't want to be anywhere near you. Nothing personal, just the way you dress.

[X_Digger]

313. Unless and until he gives me reason to believe that he's likely to shoot,

I'll be a good witness. I'm not a cop, it's not my job to stop this guy.

It really doesn't matter whether or not the gun is fake or unloaded. If he gives reason to think that it's real, that's good enough-- would a reasonable person, given the situation, fear grievous bodily harm or death. A finger in a pocket has gotten more than one attempted robber shot.

If he does start shooting, I'll seek cover and / or concealment, and assess the situation. Likely, I'd remove my gun from my holster and evaluate- where is the guy, is he coming toward me, or is he running away, what's behind him, what are the chances of shooting him cleanly without endangering anyone behind him.

Surely if the fear you articulate were statistically relevant, you can show examples of CHL holders killing innocent bystanders, right?

[oneshooter]

242. Still pushing your nazi agenda. n/t

[Euromutt]

301. You mentioned them by implication

The way you've been harping on about how it's "all about deception," it's clear you intend to imply that carrying concealed is deceitful, and thus dishonest. And being dishonest is generally morally wrong.

Otherwise, what point is there to your assertion?

[DWC]

201. "But that's me, reckless fool that I am."

Your words, not mine:)

In truth, it saddens me that there are honest, well intentioned, responsible citizens that do not trust other honest, well intentioned, responsible citizens with the freedom to exercise their Constitutional Rights.

It seems you feel if all honest, well intentioned, responsible citizens are disarmed then all will be equally subject to the force of the predators thus reducing your personal exposure as just another member of the defenseless herd.

That way you don't have to outrun everyone to be safe, just those too old or young or weak to keep up.

Herds of animals; schools of fish; flocks of birds; and disarmed people all share one thing in common. Their only defense is to hide in the group and hope for the best.

But wait, what if a violent criminal or crazy catches you seperated from the herd with no place to hide? Well, predators and crazies have needs too.

Semper Fi,

[Starboard Tack]

220. Show me the enumerated right to carry a CONCEALED handgun.

Where did I say "disarm"? I suggested, if you're not openly carrying, then a large pointy hat with a "G" would be appropriate. That way, everyone can be happy.

[Name removed]

232. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DWC]

234. Yoou asked for it.

The Bill of Rights

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


Amendment II enumerates the civil right to carry arms WITHOUT FEDERAL CONTROL
Amendment X enumerates the civil right to carry arms anyway desired WITHOUT FEDERAL CONTROL. However, States may impose regulations.

My enumerated right to carry a CONCEALED handgun is found in TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE CH. 411, Subch. H.

Now, if you can get all of the bad guys to ware pointy hats with a big G on them, I might change my tune.

Semper Fi,

[Starboard Tack]

266. I think the pointy hat thing should be voluntary

[X_Digger]

249. Let's ask Justice Ginsburg..

Muscarello v US, 524 U. S. 125 (1998) -

“surely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment indicates: ‘wear, bear, or carry … upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose … of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’ ”

[Starboard Tack]

267. She just forgot to mention the pointy hat

[X_Digger]

271. Take it up with her..

I'm sure you can convince her.

[Kennah]

257. You obviously stopped reading at 8 and never made it to 9

[We_Have_A_Problem]

369. You don't get it, do you?

An enumerated right to carry a firearm, openly or concealed, is no more necessary than an enumerated right to wear a blue t-shirt on Tuesday.

Unless the Constitution grants government the authority to restrict it, the government has no legal business acting in that area.

[Kennah]

258. With or without a hat, your comments make you sound like a doofus.

[Starboard Tack]

300. Thankfully, not all would agree with you, but I thank you for your time and recognition

[Hoopla Phil]

314. Instead of trying to impose your will on others perhaps you should try a different strategy.

Get people apposed to concealed carry to ware there own recognized hat or lapel pin. Start your movement of volunteers. If you can get everyone NOT carrying to ware your special (and moral) lapel pin then you'd know who was carrying by the omission of said pen. And as a bonus the criminal would know who to target so they would not get shot in the act. Talk about a win win for everybody.

[Starboard Tack]

322. Not a terrible idea in theory, but totally impractical because CC toters deceive

So they would obviously wear the pins themselves. Otherwise they would be the first targets.
If the pointy hat thing doesn't work for you, how about a shiny blue helmet (like the UN soldiers wear) with a nice white "G" on it?
More stylish to go with the other fashionista toting accoutrement and it's practical headgear in case there is a gunfight.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

363. it isnt deception...

...its the freakin law.

When carrying concealed, you are required by law to keep it concealed and not make the existence of it known. Violating that carries some stiff penalties in some states.

[friendly_iconoclast]

367. Violate the law, or violate his sensibilities? I'll go with the law on this one.

I rather doubt he'll be contributing to the defense of someone charged with openly carrying in a CC-only state.

[Starboard Tack]

373. The law endorses decption. Doesn't mean you have to be deceptive

You are not required by law to carry a handgun around. What is wrong with you?

[PavePusher]

375. SNEAKING!!

[Euromutt]

289. Oh come OFF it

Is it "deception" that I carry my driver's license and bank cards in my wallet, rather than pinned to my shirt? Is it "deception" if I wear a sweater or jacket that covers the Leatherman multitool on my belt? Is it "deception" that I keep my cell phone in a pocket rather than in a holder on my belt? That I carry any number of items (particularly valuable ones) in places where they are not readily visible or accessible to a casual observer?

In short, how is it "deception" when I don't let you know something that isn't your business to begin with?

[friendly_iconoclast]

292. To an "improver", EVERYTHING is their business, and no dissent is legitimate.

Look at the DUers who did a Stalin-worthy 180 on the Patriot Act when guns entered the equation, or our interlocutors' repeated assertion that "sane" people share his views about guns.

[Starboard Tack]

302. It is a deception when you present yourself as one type of person, and you are really

something completely different. The person you present to the world is unarmed and yet you are armed. This is deceit. Accept it, live with it. It doesn't make you a bad person, just a deceitful one. You know you are a good person. Your friends and family know you are a good person. You don't feel the need, I'm sure, to hide your gun from those close to you, just strangers. Why you choose to do that, only you may know> I don't care why. I care that people do it as a habit, not just when they're out to shoot someone or work a homicide detail, but to the bar or restaurant. I think any bar or restaurant should have the right to be gun free and cities and towns should have those rights and schools and churches and you guys can gather in gun friendly places and hide your guns from each other or show them to each other, whatever your fancy.
So don't give me all this crap about driver' licenses and bank cards. Go to the bank card forum with that shit. We're here to talk about fucking guns and hiding them and whether that act is deceitful to the public, which I think it is.

[friendly_iconoclast]

306. "I can't stop you, but I'm certainly going to moralize the hell out of you"

Still working the "good cop, bad cop" routine with the "Open carry is intimidating" crowd?

No worries- in a few years you and your allies will be providing weirdly amusing op-eds, right next to the anti-flouridationists
and the "drug test welfare recipients" sorts....

[Starboard Tack]

323. Are you quoting something I said or something you said?

Don't know what you mean about the "good cop, bad cop" thing. Of course, OC is intimidating, just not sneaky.
Let's use the battlefield analogy. Lot's of you guys were in combat. Would you rather deal with an enemy who is dressed to kill, or one who looks like a goatherd or farm peasant? Well, the rules should be the same on battlefield America.
If cops can show their guns, why can't you? If it's because of state law, get it changed. Don't come whining to me.

[oneshooter]

339. Sounds to me like you are the one doing all the whining. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

353. Whining , moi? LOL

I just love winding you guys up a little. Life really isn't that bad, you know. A lot of gunnies seem to take things a tad too seriously. What's that all about?

[Euromutt]

348. So you don't really have an answer, except another deepity

The person you present to the world is unarmed and yet you are armed. This is deceit. Accept it, live with it.

I don't see why I should accept it, not least because you're not bothering to make a reasoned argument why this should be the case. And you don't get to hand-wave away my counter-examples just because they're inconvenient to your claims. If the best you can muster is "I think it is," I can simply retort "I think it's not," and there's no reason ceteris paribus why your opinion should weigh more heavily than mine.

I no more present myself to the world as an unarmed person than I present myself as an unlicensed driver or a person who doesn't own a cell phone, merely because I don't walk around with my driver's license or my cell phone on display for everyone to see. I don't walk around with my sexual orientation, religious beliefs and exact age on display either. Because of my upbringing, I speak English with (what most closely resembles) an English Home Counties accent, but in doing so, I'm not actively trying to present myself as a British national--I actually hold dual citizenship, Dutch by birth and American by naturalization--and while a person who doesn't bother to ask might be misled into thinking I am British, it's not due to active and deliberate deceit on my part.

Very simply, there are aspects about myself I don't reveal to all and sundry unless and until there is a reason for me to do so. There's nothing deceitful about maintaining your privacy. Your claims about deception are a deepity in that they are, in one sense, true but trivial (in that a person who's unaware that you're armed might think you aren't), but in another, significant but false.

[Starboard Tack]

355. Alright, let me be clear. Not an opinion, just the facts

You equate carrying a hidden handgun around with carrying a cellphone. Let's just stop and consider the absurdity of that. Handgun users kill thousands upon thousands of people annually. Cellphone users kill how many? Not to mention people with British accents.
Am I stupid? I think not. Are the legislators that allow you to do that stupid? Unbelievably stupid! Ridiculously stupid!
This is a fact, not an opinion.

Do you ever listen to yourself, or read the gibberish you write?
"Your claims about deception are a deepity in that they are, in one sense, true but trivial (in that a person who's unaware that you're armed might think you aren't), but in another, significant but false."
The arrogance "True but trivial" Trivial in your fucking mind, not everyone's. But most of all TRUE and I applaud you for at least admitting to the deception, as trivial as you may consider it, a deception, nevertheless.
You seem to be the only toter with the balls to acknowledge that.
You just think the deception doesn't exist as long as you get away with it.

Good job I am not a moralist or I could really run with that one. But, as an aside, why would a Dutchman or a Brit ever buy into this gun toting crap? Too much telly if you ask me. Now go and have a nice cup of tea and think carefully about all we've been talking about.
Bottom line, you're not allowed to tote a gun with a British accent. OK? Work on the accent or lose the gun.

[Euromutt]

357. For someone who constantly claims he didn't say a particular thing...

...you're awfully good at reading things into other people's words that aren't actually there.

I do not equate ("equates, that is the same thing as") carrying a concealed handgun with carrying a concealed cell phone. What I am doing is drawing an analogy between the carrying of various items without advertising that fact. There is a subtle but crucial difference between not informing others I'm armed on the one hand, and actively giving people reason to believe I'm unarmed on the other. The latter would be deceit on my part; the former is not.

Hence what I am asserting is "true but trivial" is that people may be deceived into thinking I'm unarmed, whereas what is "significant but false" is that these people's being deceived is due to an active effort on my part to deceive, to the same extent that I am not actively trying to make people think I don't have a cell phone by keeping it in a pocket. The only way my not letting them know I'm armed would be deceit is if I had some obligation to inform them that I was, or if I entered a location where possessing a firearm is legally prohibited (such as an establishment declared by the Washington State Liquor Control Board to be off-limits to persons under 21) while armed.

Am I stupid? I think not.

Since you asked, I'm increasingly inclined to disagree with you. As Michael Shermer has put it, "smart people are very good at rationalizing beliefs they hold for non-smart reasons," but in your case, it goes further, to the point that you deliberately misinterpret what other people say in order to make their words conform to your beliefs. And allowing your intelligence to be subverted by your cognitive bias is, in my opinion at least, pretty stupid.

As for why a person who is born and mostly raised in the Netherlands, partly in the UK, would "buy into this gun toting crap," you might read this.

[Starboard Tack]

370. Then you need to be more careful with your analogies.

I read your autobiographical piece. Very interesting, but I find no justification for making the leap from supporting private ownership of firearms, which I also support, to carrying a concealed handgun on a regular basis.

[Euromutt]

378. Maybe you need to read what people say, not what you want them to have said

I'm by no means the only person to whom you have responded with a tendentious misinterpretation of their words; any post in which you use a line to the effect of "thanks for admitting that..." qualifies.

As for why the "leap" to carrying in public (I'm not opposed to open carry, but I generally prefer not to myself), part of it is that a sizable percentage of violent crime--and an overwhelming majority of violent crime between strangers--takes place outside the home, and I have occasion to visit some moderately rough areas in the vicinity. More of it is that my son (then just short of 3 years old) has been threatened, and my wife actually attacked, on the street by loose dogs in our general neighborhood, and while I carry pepper spray as a first resort, I rather like having a backup in case the pepper spray proves less than satisfactory.

The "on a regular basis" part is because muggers, loose dogs, and the like have an annoying tendency not to give advance notification of where and when they intend to attack you or your loved ones, and precognition doesn't actually exist, so it's rather difficult to carry only when you know you'll need it. Besides, as various pro-RKBA posters (spin in particular, IIRC) have remarked many times on this forum, "if I knew in advance where and when I was going to get into a situation where I actually needed a firearm, I'd avoid that place at that time."

[Starboard Tack]

382. If I were so disoriented I would probably tote too.

I can just imagine some guy in Europe explaining why he carries a gun around.
3 reasons:
1. To protect my 3 year old who has been receiving death threats
2. To shoot stray dogs
3. In case I wander into the wrong part of town.

Welcome to America!

[Straw Man]

354. The Person You Present to the World

It is a deception when you present yourself as one type of person, and you are really something completely different. This is deceit.

So if you are trained in a martial art, is it deceitful to not wear a sign on your back that says "These Hands Are Lethal Weapons"? Or would it be sufficient to simply wear your gi in public at all times?

[Starboard Tack]

356. Now you're being really silly. Go stand in the corner and think about it.

Headline: "Pregnant mother and her five children killed by stray karate kick in restaurant"

[Straw Man]

376. What, no dunce cap?

Now you're being really silly. Go stand in the corner and think about it.

Headline: "Pregnant mother and her five children killed by stray karate kick in restaurant"

Pardon me -- I thought we were talking about the danger posed by psychopaths who may snap and start killing people. Is it only accidental killings that concern you?

Is your boat posted with signs proclaiming "I've got a flare gun, and I won't hesitate to use it"? Failure to do so would be deceitful, don't you think? Before I put my boat in that marina, I have a right to know of the potential for a disastrous fire due to someone's poor choice of defensive weapon.

[Starboard Tack]

377. Every boat has one. It's the law. I'd be fined if I didn't have one.

Now you can put the dunce hat on. I'm sure it will fit perfectly.

[Straw Man]

381. What the Law Requires

Every boat has one. It's the law. I'd be fined if I didn't have one.

The law doesn't require you to use it in self-defense, as you have expressed the willingness to do.

Fired vertically as a distress signal, a flare will burn out before falling back to ground (or sea), and in most marine applications would land in water anyway. However, fired horizontally at a nearby target, it presents an extreme fire hazard. Additionally, the use of incendiary projectiles as anti-personnel weapons is generally considered inhumane even in wartime:

http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule85

Now you can put the dunce hat on. I'm sure it will fit perfectly.

Why so nasty? We're just having a friendly little discussion here.

[Starboard Tack]

383. You need to relocate your sense of humor

Do you really think I carry a flare gun for self defense? The dunce hat was your idea, mine had a G on it, but if the hat fits, you know what they say.

[Straw Man]

384. Nope, I think it's pretty much where it belongs.

Do you really think I carry a flare gun for self defense?

Not "carry," but you have said you would use it to defend your domicile, a plan that is ill-advised, IMO.

The dunce hat was your idea, mine had a G on it, but if the hat fits, you know what they say.

My "dunce cap" comment was in response to your admonition to go and stand in the corner. The small amount of humor in that particular salvo couldn't bear the weight of the condescension. So no, all things considered, it wasn't that funny, which is usually a prerequisite for humor. But keep trying, and don't give up your day job.

[Starboard Tack]

385. Well we call it carry, as in "carry on board"

not carry like tote on my person. That would be really silly. but actually it would serve as an excellent weapon of defense in a pinch. Much better than a pistol, which would be more likely to put a hole in the boat, not to mention kill someone. A flare gun is a heck of a deterrent to someone trying to board your vessel, though a shotgun is by far the best.
I didn't mean you were a dunce when suggesting you stand in a corner. It's always a good place to think, especially about where you might be going wrong.

[Hoopla Phil]

315. Instead of trying to impose your will on others perhaps you should

Get people apposed to concealed carry to ware there own recognized hat or lapel pin. Start your movement of volunteers. If you can get everyone NOT carrying to ware your special (and moral) lapel pin then you'd know who was carrying by the omission of said pen. And as a bonus the criminal would know who to target so they would not get shot in the act. Talk about a win win for everybody.

[Callisto32]

186. No.

It's to keep the ignorant from going batshit-fucking-insane because "ZOMG MaNw!tHuHGUN!!1ONE!" I carry concealed to help maintain social order when I venture out among those that would place their personal safety in the hands of others that probably won't be there when you need them.

[Starboard Tack]

247. This keeps getting better

You carry concealed to stop the "ignorant", you mean regular folk, sane. You carry concealed to maintain social order, not for self defense. You carry a gun to "maintain social order" Well that makes us all feel very safe knowing that you are out there MAINTAINING SOCIAL ORDER.
What were we thinking when we elected the sheriff? We could have had you. I'm tempted to say Sieg Heil, but I won't.

[friendly_iconoclast]

291. And *still* you persist in poisoning the well...

..by begging the question of whether the practice of carrying a gun is 'sane'

http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Logical%20Fallacies.htm#poisoning the wells

Poisoning the wells -- This entry comes from an article by Albury Castell titled "Analyzing A Fallacy," which was included in the book Readings In Speech, edited by Haig Bosmajian (Harper & Row, 1965). Here is the full quote: "During the last century a famous controversy took place between Charles Kingsley and Cardinal Newman. It began, I believe, by Kingsley suggesting that truth did not possess the highest value for a Roman Catholic priest; that some things were prized above truth. Newman protested that such a remark made it impossible for an opponent to state his case. How could Newman prove to Kingsley that he did have more regard for truth than for anything else, if Kingsley argued from the premise that he did not? It is not merely a question of two persons entertaining contradictory opinions. It is subtler than that. To put it baldly, Newman would be logically 'hamstrung.' Any argument he might use to prove that he did entertain a high regard for truth was automatically ruled out by Kingsley's hypothesis that he did not. Newman coined the expression poisoning the wells for such unfair tactics...The phrase poisoning the wells exactly hits off the difficulty. If the well is poisoned, no water drawn from it can be used. If a case is so stated that contrary evidence is automatically precluded, no arguments against it can be used."

"Maintaining social order" as in "not upsetting the muppets with phobias about inanimate objects" is not an ignoble motive.

[Starboard Tack]

299. What on earth are you talking about? What did I say that begs such a question.

You are now bringing up the sanity issue. I avoid that, because it is against the rules. How about that? Only you can raise that, but having raised it, I have to wonder why. I used the word "sane" in a response to post 186, which actually said "...to keep the ignorant from going batshit-fucking-insane...". So maybe your well was already poisoned.

[Euromutt]

298. I thought it was fairly evident what Callisto meant

By "maintaining social order," he meant he's avoiding the kind of disturbance caused by certain individuals who get their knickers in a twist at the mere sight of a private citizen carrying a firearm. Not the wording I'd have chosen, but it was fairly evident to anyone not predisposed to interpret his words in the most tendentious manner possible that he wasn't stating he was acting as Freelance Police.

[Starboard Tack]

332. What? You pinch hitting now?

I think he expressed himself quite clearly, but we thank you for your loyalty an support. I'm sure you'll be there in the bunker at the end.

[AtheistCrusader]

287. Beats getting shot in the back of the head before you even know a robbery is going down

if a prospective robber sees your gun on your hip, decides to rob the place anyway, and announces hostilities by firing without any warning at all, from behind/etc.

[shireen]

22. well, he's not disclosing his identity -- all you know is his username and town. nt

[Missy Vixen]

8. Well, till you want to brag about it. n/t

[SteveM]

75. 'Many concealed-carry people bragged to you about it? nt

[iverglas]

91. since that was in reply to post 1

that seems to make one who did, and one about whom it was noted.

[Starboard Tack]

128. Only anonymously. Wonder why that is.

Wouldn't want the regular folk thinking they were ticking time bombs, would they? At least the freakoid at the gas station wasn't ashamed or embarrassed by his behavior.

[rl6214]

142. In Texas open carry is not legal, only concealed carry

so your line about deceiving is a steaming pile of horse manure.

[friendly_iconoclast]

149. Factual accuracy is disposable when making a faith-based argument.

It's like listening to a creationist expound on natural selection or carbon-14 dating....

[Starboard Tack]

175. It's still deceiving. What does that law have to do with it?

Are they making you carry? Or are you seriously telling me you would carry open if they let you? If so, good for you and you wouldn't need to wear the big pointy hat, you could just wear a regular stetson. If it means that much, you could move. Believe it or not there are some states that are crazier than Texas.

[oneshooter]

233. It is the STATE, not the FEDERAL government that decides HOW you can carry. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

284. But it is you who makes the ultimate decision

Your state apparently tells you that the only legal way is the sneaky way and you go with that. Your choice. You want to carry openly, move to Arizona. I hear they have no rules there. Or, of course, you could just live like the rest of us poor defenseless, terrified folk.

[oneshooter]

340. Or YOU could move to Hawaii or any other state that does not allow CC. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

352. Thanks. Good suggestion, but I'm way ahead of you there. No CC where I am. No OC either.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

359. Ah - so you live in Illinois...

Damn shame for you that when the state gets done wasting your money on frivolous un-winnable lawsuits, you're going to have one or the other - or both.

[Starboard Tack]

362. Not even close. I live in a place where I know everybody and handguns have no place

They aren't prohibited, just pointless, as they are just about anywhere.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

364. So you really DON'T know if anybody is carrying...

..you just tell yourself that they aren't, and go about your way in blissful ignorance.

You must also never stray very far from your home.

[Starboard Tack]

371. I don't give a shit who is carrying as long as they don't shoot anyone.

I wonder at the mentality of those who say "just tell yourself that they aren't, and go about your way in blissful ignorance." and similar condescending comments.
My home is the world, much of which I have covered and continue to. I have no fixed abode.

[friendly_iconoclast]

366. Unless you "open carry" a metal detector, you *don't* know that for sure.

Willful ignorance on display.....

[Starboard Tack]

372. Yeah, you're right. I'm wrong. How would I have any idea about where I live?

Silly me.

[Missy Vixen]

208. It's happened multiple times now. n/t

[Dappleganger]

29. Same here.

Not all of the time, but quite often. And concealed is concealed...you'll never know it.

[Iggo]

38. Uh-huh.

I can just look at the G on your conical hat.

B-)

[Starboard Tack]

126. Aren't you a sneaky one?

Of course the sneaky ones are never "ticking time bombs" All the statistics prove that.

[X_Digger]

158. Feel free to demonstrate it.

Should be a statistically relevant figure around here somewhere, right?

*whistles*


*taps foot*


*twiddles thumbs*

[Starboard Tack]

173. Exactly! I can't demonstrate it. Can you?

[X_Digger]

197. Yup..

Even if you assume a 50% recitivism rate (50% of all crimes by the general public were by someone with a previous record) CHL holders *still* come out multiple times less likely than the general public to be convicted of *any* crime.

[Starboard Tack]

216. Isn't it somewhat obvious that CHL holders would be less likely to commit crime

What is your point?
If convicted felons did what CHL holders do they would be committing a crime. Catch 22

[X_Digger]

229. So, how many "ticking time bombs" are there among CHL holders?

Damned few, if actual data, not emotional flailing is the criteria.

[ileus]

246. everyone here knows that all toters are just waiting to go on a killing spree...

It's been well documented here 100's of times.

[X_Digger]

253. If we could just hook up generators to all that emotional flailing..

We wouldn't be worrying about peak oil or alternative energy sources.

[ileus]

280. Or I could convert the jeep over to propane injection...

[Starboard Tack]

254. I don't know. Hopefully none. One would be way too many.

But if you're right about the anger management thing, odds are there will be more than one out there eventually, especially as the ranks of toters swell. I guess we'll hope you are right. I like to stay positive. Guess that's why I don't carry.

[X_Digger]

256. TX has had 16 years of CHL..

If your concern were valid, there'd be *something* to back it up.

You keep up with the 'any day now' schtick. I'm sure you're fooling someone, somewhere, sometimes.

[enough]

2. What kind of prevention do you have in mind. It seems to me the best form of prevention

in a situation like this is to walk away entirely. Why do we have to stand around trying to analyze the mental state of every asshole who decides he wants to exhibit a gun in public?

[BrendaBrick]

6. As far as I am concerned...

never hurts to ask honestly, sincerely and inquisitively with an approach of one-on-one active, non-judgmental listening. Believe me, this genuine energy exudes and permeates. I am talking about "REAL" listening. ESPECIALLY when you sense that person might be unstable.

Yeah. It takes some real courage to DO THAT, to be sure. I guess the prevention I am talking about is trusting your gut feelings when presented with the other "Timothy McVeys" lurking out there who maybe are really, really desperate and only need someone to take a moment out of their lives to just fucking give a sincere shit...thus perhaps preventing the slaughter of innocent victims.

That's where I am coming from!

[enough]

30. Brenda, I appreciate your open-minded, pragmatic, in-the-moment approach.

However, within the last six weeks a situation arose in which five people were shot (three killed, two critically wounded) all of whom were closely related to a good friend of mine. I don't know exactly how this person was able to shoot five people in the head, but knowing the people, I'm certain there was quite a bit of honest, sincere and inquisitive one-on-one active non-judgmental listening with a genuine energy of the kind that exudes and permeates. I am talking about "REAL" listening. Knowing the people involved, I can say that they were trusting their gut feelings and also fucking giving a sincere shit, which is what these people did all their lives until they were killed.

[SteveM]

77. Was the killer wearing openly? This seems important to some. nt

[iverglas]

82. I'm confused

and I admit to not having read the entire thread so maybe I'm lagging behind ... but are you saying that you think asking a total stranger why he has a firearm displayed on his person is an appropriate thing to do?

If he was one of the kind of people who tend to travel in packs around Ohio doing this in fast-food restaurants, the answer would have been: Because I have a right to.

It's not an answer of course. If somebody asks you why you are about to jump off a bridge, it wouldn't occur to you to say "because I have a right to". Because that isn't actually why you are jumping off a bridge, mainly.

But anyhow, you'd be no further ahead. Anybody could tell you they're displaying a firearm on their person because they have a right to.

Sincere listening to someone who has problems is a nice idea, but actually, intervention with people with certain types of problems should be handled by professionals and only professionals. If the problems are the kind that might result in someone getting shot, then they're the kind that call for psychiatric and police professionals. An amateur stranger butting in and accosting an "unstable" individual is likely to endanger themself and others.

If you live somewhere where it is legal to wander around in public festooned in firearms, you're stuck. You have no way of knowing the unknown person's reasons or predicting their behaviour. If you call police, you'll be the pearl-clutching puritan -- not that this matters, it's just fun to note the short shrift given to your concerns by such people. If police try to ascertain the nature of the situation, they'll be given equally short shrift: they are actually prohibited from requiring that a person with a firearm on display in public so much as identify themself.

So indeed, unfortunate and socially negligent as it sounds, getting the hell out of there is probably your best if not only option if you are concerned.

[PavePusher]

85. You seem to be assuming that someone who carries a gun...

is automatically unstable.

Where do you get that quaint notion from?

[iverglas]

106. you seem to be alleging that someone said something she didn't

You're having a lot of problems here, aren't you?

If you read the opening post, as I must assume you did, you saw that the poster was clearly told by the cashier that the person with the gun was




Now you say:

You seem to be assuming that someone who carries a gun...
is automatically unstable.

Very oddly, you seem to be assuming that the poster has suddenly run off to talk about something other than what she was talking about, and alleging that she is assuming something you have no basis for alleging she has assumed.

If I may ask:

Where do you get that really very strange notion from?

[X_Digger]

160. Did you miss the 'Normally (and initially)'?

Here, let me quote it for you..

Now. Here is the reason I am posting this: Normally (and initially) I would just go all OFF the deep end..thinking - OMG...this guy is a ticking time bomb. Frustrated with the way this world is headed and no one is being accountable etc...Based only upon his rather scrawny and lackluster appearance...I ASSUMED that like...what? He's going to be the one to just "SNAP" and kill a bunch of innocent bystanders in a moments notice.

I fail to see where the OP based her judgement on the cashier's gesture.

[PavePusher]

374. Jello all the way down, eh? n/t

[PavePusher]

84. Why must you assume he's an "asshole"?

Any other Civil Rights that work you into the same level of moral outrage?

[iverglas]

99. I can help you out here

Any other Civil Rights that work you into the same level of moral outrage?

Oh, but excuse me, first we must rework your question. The "asshole" comment was made about someone displaying a firearm on his person: exercising a right, for the sake of argument. Not about a right, civil or otherwise. About a person. A person who is doing a particular thing.

So me, I'd say the same thing about quite a lot of people doing a number of perfectly legal things, i.e. exercising various rights.

Makers and purveyors of pornography that treats and depicts women in degrading ways come to mind. Assholes. Big assholes.

You've heard of that fundamental right called freedom of speech?

That's me exercising mine. As did the poster you addressed.

Wassamatta, don't like that one? It's in the very first amendment to your constitution, you know.

If you don't like something someone says, are you not able to say so? Is there some reason you first have to pretend they said something they didn't?

[PavePusher]

104. Jello. n/t

[iverglas]

108. there are actually people in this thread who aren't Guns forum regulars

I assume the thead got flushed from somewhere else.

I'm sure the visitors will be mightily impressed by your display of wit. Maybe about as impressed as others are the twentieth time you post the same really very idiotic noise every day.

Here's your cue, then. It's time to say "Jello". Ready, set ...

[ileus]

248. Typical anti think...asshole is mild compared to what they really think.

[Starboard Tack]

130. Now if only the toters understood that concept - walk away - brilliant idea

Then they wouldn't be spending all those hard earned dollars buying guns to protect their guns and safes to keep their guns in and more guns to protect the safes they keep their guns in and fashionista holsters to hide their guns in. Damn, makes you think the economy might be doing better in gun country.

[X_Digger]

161. And that's a 100% guaranteed solution, right?

You've been here long enough, if you've been paying attention, to have seen regulars talking about 'avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation'.

One of the topics that frequently come up with regulars is 'situational awareness' -- making eye contact with people, paying attention to your surroundings, etc. Why? Because this breaks out of the 'easy pickings' victim profile- deterring criminals.

There have also been threads by regulars about how their behavior has changed since they started to carry. They avoid confrontation whenever possible, ignoring assholes in traffic or slights / insults. In some of those same threads, they talk about walking away from insults, therefore de-escalating a potentially violent situation.

But hey, you've already convinced yourself that concealed carriers are out to kill someone, 'why carry if not to shoot someone', 'potential killers', etc, so I expect those posts just didn't lodge in your memory.

[Starboard Tack]

177. Yeah, I know about 'avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation'

All good stuff. And I've read about the CC toting as a form of medication for anger management. It's all very reassuring, knowing that many people now feel less confrontational because they have a gun. Do you people actually buy this drivel? "Oh, I used to get in fights all the time. Couldn't control my temper. But now I have the responsibility of carrying a gun so I'm cured." No disaster waiting to happen there. Is there? These "anger challenged", "responsibility deprived" individuals need some serious professional help if they are self medicating by carrying a gun.

[X_Digger]

198. My, what a spin.

No, taking on additional responsibility and accountability for one's actions does not equate to 'self-medication'.

Modifying one's behavior *because* you know you'll be held to a higher standard- gee, that couldn't be because it's part of the curriculum for the state-mandated training, nooo.

*snort*

[Starboard Tack]

222. You brought it up

"There have also been threads by regulars about how their behavior has changed since they started to carry. They avoid confrontation whenever possible, ignoring assholes in traffic or slights / insults. In some of those same threads, they talk about walking away from insults, therefore de-escalating a potentially violent situation."

I would hope it is part of the training. Most of us behave that way normally, without having to carry a gun to give us that added sense of responsibility. It's called being a rational civilized adult.
"In some of these threads they talk about walking away from insults" WOW! You're kidding me? They walk away from insults? WTF did they do before they had a gun? Wished they had one? Glad they got that training about walking away. So are you saying it isn't a form of self-medication, but state mandated therapy?

[X_Digger]

235. Ooh look, a false dichotomy

Class, here we have the perfect example..

So are you saying it isn't a form of self-medication, but state mandated therapy?

And for reference..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black-and-white thinking or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options (sometimes shades of grey between the extremes).

It is neither of your choices. If you are held to a higher standard, it makes sense to abide by that standard. Being especially cognizant of conflict, and attempting to avoid it in no way means that one was previously disposed to such conflict.

Nice try. Want to have a go without the logical fallacy?

[iverglas]

245. hahahahaha

At least ST had the decency to ask an ACTUAL QUESTION rather than one of those little falsehoods with a question mark pinned on its rear.

It wasn't a false dilemma. It did not assert that there are only two possibilities. It was a question, offering two options, both of which could be rejected.

All you had to say to that question was "no". So simple, so very simple ...

[X_Digger]

255. Aren't you the one to castigate others for..

"So are you saying.."-isms?

I do seem to recall it.. ah well, not worth searching.

[iverglas]

270. nope, not me

It's the "so YOU ARE saying"-isms that I object to. Question mark or no. Or any other format that insinuates that something was said or meant or implied that wasn't, e.g. "so" followed by a statement of something that it is insinuated follows logically from something that was said when it does no such thing.

You, you got asked a question. A not unreasonable one, if amusing.

[Starboard Tack]

283. Thank you again for your support. What are you my TA now?

Make up your mind Mr. X
You are the one who presented this. First you explained the therapeutic anecdotal evidence from fellow toters, then when I suggested that it may be a form of self medication/anger management, you appeared to support that by stating that it was , in fact, state mandated.
So, where would the false dichotomy be?

Now you are saying it is neither of the reasons you suggested, but that toters are held to a "higher standard" than the rest of us, presumably because they have decided to carry killing tools upon their person. And the carrying of these killing tools somehow makes them more cognizant of conflict. "and attempting to avoid it in no way means that one was previously disposed to such conflict." if so, why did you mention that it had changed many toters behavior regarding conflict, inferring that their previous behavior had been more volatile, to put it mildly?

I hope you are more careful with your gun than you are with your statements.

[X_Digger]

286. You're the one who claimed the 'therapeutic' role..

I mentioned that many people who carry tend to go out of their way to avoid conflict. For some, the first exposure to this expectation is in the state mandated classes they take. In every CHL class I've taken, the instructors are very adamant that those who are licensed to carry will be held to a standard higher than the general public. Many take that lesson to heart. Feel free to try to play 'gotcha' games, but they're transparent.

And no, carrying doesn't 'make' them more cognizant-- please stick to things that did actually come from my keyboard.

"and attempting to avoid it in no way means that one was previously disposed to such conflict." if so, why did you mention that it had changed many toters behavior regarding conflict, inferring that their previous behavior had been more volatile, to put it mildly?

I mentioned that many go out of their way to avoid conflict. The default position is not giving it much though, rather than being predisposed to get into conflict, or volatile.

[iverglas]

241. yeah, eh?

There have also been threads by regulars about how their behavior has changed since they started to carry. They avoid confrontation whenever possible, ignoring assholes in traffic or slights / insults. In some of those same threads, they talk about walking away from insults, therefore de-escalating a potentially violent situation.

You gotta wonder what they were like before ... and how successfully they really do manage to suppress those urges after ...

Maybe the gun works like a kind of talisman, like snapping an elastic band on your wrist to remind yourself not to try to inflict bodily harm on somebody who insults you. You just put your hand on the thing strapped to your hip ...

[X_Digger]

260. Do try and keep up, yes?

Being especially cognizant of conflict, and attempting to avoid it in no way means that one was previously disposed to such conflict.

[iverglas]

269. how big is your blind spot?

Mine's over to the inner edge of my right eye, recent optic nerve damage from glaucoma from that cataract surgery ... having minor surgery tomorrow to help prevent more ...

Anyhow, yours obviously prevented you from seeing what was in my post, quoted from some previous post -- I add emphasis in case your blind spot prevents you from seeing what's in front of your nose:

There have also been threads by regulars about how their behavior has changed since they started to carry. They avoid confrontation whenever possible, ignoring assholes in traffic or slights / insults. In some of those same threads, they talk about walking away from insults, therefore de-escalating a potentially violent situation.

So we all give up, what DID they do BEFORE they started toting guns around?? If their behaviour CHANGED then it must have been DIFFERENT.

[X_Digger]

274. Changed?

They could have *not* made any special attempt to avoid conflict. No more than any average person does.

No, dear heart, that does not mean that they were prone to conflict before, no matter how much you huff and puff and wish and hope.

[gravity556]

386. Carrying a gun means you have to take MORE shit-not less.

You can't let some drooling moron suck you into even a verbal argument. It might even mean taking a punch and walking away, but the crucial matter is to walk away from the confrontation if possible. Of course, a can of fox labs facilitates walking away after a punch, but for the most part, polite and courteous is the appropriate manner.

Sadly, manners are a rare thing to encounter these days. Fortunately, here in AZ, open carry-even in the PHX metro area isn't all that rare, so on the rare occasions I do openly carry a firearm, the majority of folks who notice it (and few do-folks have their heads in their phone or up their ass, completely unaware of everything around them) are usually just curious. Only once have I had the misfortune of slipping in a puddle of urine left behind by some ninny who spotted my sidearm and screamed "GgggggGUN!!!!". Freaking tourists.

[Missy Vixen]

209. That's one of the funnier things I've read in 11 years here

>They avoid confrontation whenever possible, ignoring assholes in traffic or slights / insults.<

Oh, definitely. I've seen it myself. After all, I've never met anyone who carried who could not resist bragging about it, showing off the gun, or otherwise letting everyone in the vicinity know. It's a form of intimidation. After all, don't piss off the guy who got himself a gun!

I can recount incident after incident after incident after incident with those who believe their right to carry supersedes anyone else's peace of mind or safety. To a man, EVERY person I have ever met who insisted on carrying was a hothead at the least, and at worst, possessed an explosive temper. Guess what happened when he got mad? The gun came out! After all, he wasn't to be messed with...

My last experience with someone who insisted on carrying: We were at a work-related summer BBQ, complete with about ten pre-teen kids present. One of the other guests had waaaaay too much to drink and got a little bored. Of course it was the perfect time to disassemble his pistol for everyone's amusement.

You might try another argument than self-medication of personality flaws via firearm. It's one of the more ridiculous I've ever read.

[X_Digger]

212. Here let me fix that for ya.. 'anecdote after anecdote'..

Hint: those three topics are part of the state mandated training in most CHL classes.

But hey..

[Euromutt]

303. I see a small problem with your claim

I've never met anyone who carried who could not resist bragging about it, showing off the gun, or otherwise letting everyone in the vicinity know.

How do you know you've never met someone like that? After all, if such a person was able to resist bragging about it etc. it follows ipso facto that you wouldn't know he was carrying. Therefore, you have no way of knowing how representative your sample of idiots is of concealed carriers in general.

[friendly_iconoclast]

307. Damn you and your logic! You messed up a perfectly cromulent anecdote. n/t

[gravity556]

392. Well, maybe you should reconsider the caliber of company you keep.

I don't associate with hotheads, nor do I choose to pass time or even be in the vicinity of drunks. I notice your outrage that the irresponsible ass who decided to disassemble his firearm while drunk, but did you not contact law enforcement? In many states, it is illegal to carry a firearm under the influence of alcohol, and you might also have kept him from putting countless others at risk when he drove home impaired.

As to the gentleman with the anger issues, I would hope that you contacted law enforcement when "the gun came out" when he was mad. Brandishing is a crime, and in some states it is a felony. Keep in mind that there is a difference between brandishing and defensive display.

Defensive display is when Johnny Robber threatens violence in an effort to further a crime (robbery, carjacking, rape, assault) and the law abiding gun owner either sweeps his cover garment back to show that he is armed or draws his sidearm. Quite often, the assailant decides to look for easier meat elsewhere (or in the absolute worse case scenario, the assailant continues the assault, resulting in a defensive shooting) A defensive display is legal.

Brandishing is when some self important, belligerent asshole enjoys bullying people and figures out that since most people believe the cops can protect them, they go around unarmed. And what better way to bully some poor unarmed schlub than with copious verbal threats, violent behavior and the willingness to flash a gun around when verbal threats of violence and displays of anger aren't enough. Brandishing is illegal, and the cops should have been called immediately. Though if the universe balances, rage boy will brandish in the presence of a responsible and well trained gun owner and get himself selected out.

And if you didn't stand up and do the right thing-call the cops-during either of those dangerous situations, you should be ashamed of yourself. You generalize that gun owners are somehow all bad because of the few turds that you've encountered and you carry that predjudice-predjudice over an event that you saw as definitive. Enough so that you now deride everyone who carries as needing "self-medication of personality flaws via firearm", but you didn't see it a critical enough to have the courage of your convictions and call the cops on a genuinely dangerous situation.

[ileus]

231. pretty much sums up every person I've ever met that carried...well said

[Skip Intro]

3. Could be he carries for protection. I have no problem with that.

I visit a particular liquor store now and then and the owner has a piece strapped to his waist for all to see. No problem with that either. Great deterrent at a minimum, great self-protection otherwise.

[Brickbat]

5. This just seems like a lot of extra work.

[cliffordu]

7. I carry a knife. Inside 18 feet more effective than a gun.

Just ask the FBI.

That is, unless the dick with the gun has extensive training in close quarters combat - a veteran of Gunsite training or the like.

By the way - most gunfights occur with the parties blazing away at about 12 feet. At least that's what the FBI used to say.

As usual, because this is the inner tubes, YMMV.

I'd be more worried about a nut with a fucking Stanley knife. (box cutter).

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. I carry running shoes. Open carry. In fact I wear them.

Take that, knife-wielding 18-feet-away guy.

[cliffordu]

40. I specified a dude with a gun, intent upon harm......

do you have FMJ or hollow points in your sneakers??

[lumberjack_jeff]

114. Full nylon jacket, baby. n/t

[SteveM]

79. Good defense! I'm 63 and rather average in my Dr. Marten sandals.

[Kennah]

23. If it's holstered, inside of 25+ feet, and that usually requires foot movement

[formercia]

47. 9 Inch Rapala for me.

Very sharp and gives me a few more inches of reach.

"You call that a Knife?" :rofl:

[bluestate10]

24. Most people don't realize the fact that you just gave. With a knife at close

range, the only limiter is fear.

[cliffordu]

32. Yep. Fucked up but true.

You REALLY have to be in the top .5% to stop, draw and fire in three or so seconds.....

I couldn't do it. So I have the false bravado of the knife.

Fact is, we are as safe as the fates allow, pretty much.

[E-Mag]

45. So you think

You can defend yourself with a knife in that small amount of time? I think the point of the 21' rule is that action beats reaction. You could be armed with anything and lose to the guy the handgun is not the limiting factor it is your reaction time

[cliffordu]

66. People here are talking about reactions. The time it takes to REACT to

a threat - Can you draw, aim and fire in the time it takes for a motivated moran with a knife to cover 18 feet???

[Hoopla Phil]

63. I've been thinking about taking up IPSC again.

and jogging

and weight training

and that p-90x thing

and. . .

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

67. I'd take a real P-90 over P-90X any day...

Hell on the wallet to keep the magazines fed, but sure beats sweating and beating yourself up.
I hear P-90X is pretty insane.

[spin]

78. Have you had training in knife fighting?

It is a form of a martial art.

I also carry a knife, currently I am carrying a fixed blade Northwoods Compact Utility with a 3.775 Inche blade length. I often carry this knife in public in the rural area of North Florida where I live. It attracts little attention and most of the attention is simple curiosity.



I am not a knife fighter as I have no training. I carry knifes as a convenient tool. It is amazing how many times I use my knife during each day. I like fixed blade knives as I often use mine for food prep and it is easier to clean than a folder.

I also carry a folding Spyderco Endura with a fully serrated blade for tougher jobs including opening cardboard boxes. I rarely have to sharpen it.

[tortoise1956]

282. I don't carry a knife...

Because I have no training or desire to use a knife as a self-defense weapon. I can't guarantee that a bigger or younger attacker won't take the knife away and put it somewhere that would hurt a whole lot.

I have been thinking about getting a CCW, as Las Vegas is getting uglier every day. Right now, when I walk the dog I bring a utility wedge along, just in case. (I might change to a sand wedge, more bounce...)

And before anyone jumps on me about paranoia, there have been several burglaries and a drive-by in the neighborhood in the past year. I don't like the idea of being another victim.

[burrfoot]

350. Slighty off topic, but I find this interesting-

as of my CCW class, about four years ago now; they were saying gun fights are, as a statistical average, "3/3/3" Three shots in three seconds at three yards or less.


:toast:

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Imajika]

10. He didn't shoot you or the clerk, so what's the problem?

More and more people open carry and conceal carry and crime has not gone up. Law abiding citizens who do this almost never hurt anyone.

Your getting worked up over nothing.

[Bill McBlueState]

13. that's the problem

"If nobody got shot, there wasn't a problem" is setting the bar kind of low in terms of the kind of society we want to have.

[Imajika]

16. If nobody got shot, what difference does it make?

It's like your crying about guns for the sake of crying about guns.

Law abiding citizens who open carry or conceal carry don't generally hurt a soul. Almost every state allows this now and the crime rate has gown DOWN, not up.

Gun control is dead, for the love of god just let it go.

[Control-Z]

25. What about intimidation? eom

[Imajika]

27. Are you really that intimidated?

If someone wants to hurt you they can do it with their fists, a knife, a rock on the side of the road, etc.

Again, most states now allow open carry and/or concealed carry and we're not suffering some crime epidemic - especially not one by otherwise law abiding citizens. Crime rates are going down. There is not a problem.

[a la izquierda]

50. I'm not intimidated by people who openly carry...

I just wonder what in their life went so fucking wrong that they're that afraid all the time. Must be a shitty way to live one's life (and I'm a tiny woman who's lived in some unsavory areas).
Before all of you attack, I don't even care if people do own guns (because I'll probably end up getting some if I move to the country). But folks walking around packing heat make me wonder...

[LibertyFox]

58. Here we go again!

Starting with the erroneous premise that people carry out of fear.

If you wonder, why not try asking people and listen to their answers instead of making them up in your head?

[Starboard Tack]

138. No need to ask, they express their fears all the time in this forum.

They fear for themselves. They carry for their self protection against thugs, young guys with big muscles, people with knives. And of course, others with GUNS. Now, they aren't afraid of guns, just people. Afraid of getting hurt or killed by others and "defending" themselves, in their minds, by toting a gun around. Pretty funny when you think about it.
Why else would they carry, unless it's part of their job?

[friendly_iconoclast]

141. Odd that the expansion of the practice that you are "concerned" about....

...has coincided with a decline in violent crime.

But then, you can always claim that carrying a gun "causes moral harm". Or has a bad effect on "social cohesion". Or is a sign of "deliquency" or "hooliganism". All marvelously fungible synonyms for "something that I don't like"....

[Starboard Tack]

178. I think your needle is sticking I think your needle is sticking I think your needle is sticking

I think your needle is sticking I think your needle is sticking I think your needle is sticking I think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is stickingI think your needle is sticking

[rl6214]

145. Like he said

making things up.

[a la izquierda]

194. Oh, do tell me, Mr./Ms. Liberty.

Do tell me why people carry around guns. I must be educated. Do you have a pressing need to be a superhero and come to the rescue? Are you afraid some thug is going to pop a cap in your ass?
Please. Tell me. I'm dying of curiosity. I grew up in a house with guns, as my dad hunted. But I'm pretty sure you don't hunt with a .45 clipped to your belt.
:crazy:

[ileus]

196. And you would be wrong about that...I carry a compact 45 hunting/fishing.

A sidearm is just like any other safety device except it's easily portable. It's part of the life safety triangle...

[Name removed]

239. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ileus]

244. You said it not me...

[a la izquierda]

279. You carry a pistol to hunt?

Weird, but I guess you learn something new every day. Well played. I grew up, as I mentioned, in a hunting household. I, however, have been a vegetarian since I was 17 and don't have use for (but do respect) hunting. I would have no idea what y'all use besides crossbows and rifles.

[Euromutt]

305. What's weird about it?

I'll concede it depends on what kind of hunting you're doing, but I myself took up turkey hunting this year. This involves sitting with your back to a tree or boulder trying to lure a randy tom to within shotgun range by making noises like an available hen. One of the risks in this activity is that randy toms aren't the only thing attracted to the sound of a plump, juicy turkey hen, and you might find yourself on the receiving end of the unwelcome attentions of, say, a hungry coyote or two. Sure, you've got a shotgun, but not only is it loaded with birdshot, it also has a (very tight) turkey choke screwed into the muzzle, which makes it potentially hazardous to fire larger sizes of shot (there's a phenomenon known as "bridging" in which larger sized shot can bunch of in a too tight choke and blow open the barrel). So in the event that I do run into something hostile that may not be stopped by #5 birdshot, I carry both pepper spray and a 1911 in .45 ACP.

[a la izquierda]

309. Hmm, I don't know, it just seems...weird.

Obviously since I don't know, it doesn't seem wrong or anything. Well, I guess I'm picturing someone hunting with a Deringer, and it kind of makes me laugh out loud...

[oneshooter]

341. I like to hunt feral hogs with a Ruger SA in 45 Colt . Nothing strange about that. n/t

[gejohnston]

349. I used to hunt small game with a revolver as a kid

Some people hunt deer with handguns. Not with anything Glock makes, but one powerful enough.

[X_Digger]

60. Is someone who carries a bottle of aspirin afraid of heart attacks?

Is someone who carries a fire extinguisher in their car afraid of fire?

I have a first aid kit, fire extinguisher, a bottle of water, and an energy drink in my truck. Am I afraid of cuts, fire, thirst, starvation?

Nah, I just prefer to be more prepared for an unlikely but possibly serious event (breaking down on the side of the road, coming across an accident, etc).

:shrug:

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Starboard Tack]

140. That's what fear is. Not panic fear, just plain old what if fear.

Is it that hard to own up to it. We all feel fear. It's normal. How we deal with it is what counts.
Toting a gun doesn't make you more or less afraid, it just reinforces existing fear. And fear is a deadly disease.

[friendly_iconoclast]

144. Telepsychology? Diagnosing people you don't know and have never met?

A new definition of "distance learning", one supposes....

[Starboard Tack]

179. Not difficult when dealing with a syndrome

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byctRkDF8cI

or maybe this one, which is really quite interesting
"Prevalence of Asperger's Syndrome Among Gun Nuts"
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-118826.html

[spin]

223. I found the reference to Asperger's Syndrome interesting ...

You do realize that many people who have Asperger's Syndrome are proud of that fact and are very successful in life.

Autistic people have advocated a shift in perception of autism spectrum disorders as complex syndromes rather than diseases that must be cured. Proponents of this view reject the notion that there is an "ideal" brain configuration and that any deviation from the norm is pathological; they promote tolerance for what they call neurodiversity.<105> These views are the basis for the autistic rights and autistic pride movements.<106> There is a contrast between the attitude of adults with self-identified AS, who typically do not want to be cured and are proud of their identity, and parents of children with AS, who typically seek assistance and a cure for their children.<107>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome#Speech_and_language

Before I go on, I should state that I have taken several tests on the internet to see if I have Asperger's Syndrome and failed everyone of them. I have to admit that I am disappointed that I am not an aspie. I keep trying but I can only come close to passing. Fortunately, my son in law keeps insisting that I have Asperger's Syndrome and he has a fair amount of ability at analyzing people even though he is just a truck driver. I probably have some of the characteristics and I did work successfully in a highly technical field before I retired.

It is interesting to research the subject. For example there are a lot of historical figures that are suspected to have had Asperger's Syndrome. That list includes Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, Thomas Jefferson, Stanley Kubrick, Isaac Newton, Michelangelo, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Andy Warhol. The list also includes Jeffrey Dahmer, Adolf Hitler.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_speculated_to_have_been_autistic

There have been rumors that Bill Gates, one of the richest men in the world is an aspie.

It's a familiar joke in the industry that many of the hardcore programmers in IT strongholds like Intel, Adobe, and Silicon Graphics - coming to work early, leaving late, sucking down Big Gulps in their cubicles while they code for hours - are residing somewhere in Asperger's domain. Kathryn Stewart, director of the Orion Academy, a high school for high-functioning kids in Moraga, California, calls Asperger's syndrome "the engineers' disorder." Bill Gates is regularly diagnosed in the press: His single-minded focus on technical minutiae, rocking motions, and flat tone of voice are all suggestive of an adult with some trace of the disorder. Dov's father told me that his friends in the Valley say many of their coworkers "could be diagnosed with ODD - they're odd." In Microserfs, novelist Douglas Coupland observes, "I think all tech people are slightly autistic."emphasis added

Though no one has tried to convince the Valley's best and brightest to sign up for batteries of tests, the culture of the area has subtly evolved to meet the social needs of adults in high-functioning regions of the spectrum. In the geek warrens of engineering and R&D, social graces are beside the point. You can be as off-the-wall as you want to be, but if your code is bulletproof, no one's going to point out that you've been wearing the same shirt for two weeks. Autistic people have a hard time multitasking - particularly when one of the channels is face-to-face communication. Replacing the hubbub of the traditional office with a screen and an email address inserts a controllable interface between a programmer and the chaos of everyday life. Flattened workplace hierarchies are more comfortable for those who find it hard to read social cues. A WYSIWYG world, where respect and rewards are based strictly on merit, is an Asperger's dream.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aspergers_pr.html

Since there are 80 million gun owners in the United States it makes sense that a number have Asperger's Syndrome, but there probably are a lot of people with Asperger's Syndrome who drive a Ford Taurus.

I think it might be wise for you to admit that not all people who differ from you on various subjects are not suffering from a form of mental illness. If everybody were the same and held the same views on all subjects this would be a very boring world and we probably would still be living in caves.

Possibly the most famous aspie that most illustrates the symdrome is Spock.

Spock Has Asperger's



Spock is high on logic, struggles with a limited understanding of social interaction, wears the same blue shirt, and has a highly specialized job as Science Officer on the Enterprise. Many speak of Asperger’s as a disorder, but without it, we would probably not understand gravity (Sir Isaac Newton), have some of our most vivid movie experiences (Tim Burton), or even have the postal service (Benjamin Franklin), just to name a few ways these folks have enhanced our lives. Individuals with Asperger's have already made the world a better place.

While my comments are purely speculative, I think it possible that Asperger’s is our next forward leap in evolution with Spock being the end result. Many of my Aspie clients are capable of things I could never achieve. These amazing kids include a computer graphics animator (age 13), an accomplished concert pianist (age 12), and a state chess champion (age 10). My adult Aspie friends are satellite programmers, physicians, and computer programmers.emphasis added

With the advent of technology and specialized sciences since the industrial revolution, these gifted and interesting individuals have advanced our society in profound ways. In the past they may have been termed nerds, geeks, or even retarded, but they are increasingly the drivers of our technological future. While highly speculative, you might consider Bill Gates’ role in our lives.

We often seek a name or label for what’s wrong with someone. With the concept of neuro-diversity in mind, I urge us to consider what’s “right” with people first and build toward their strengths rather than focusing on their defects or shortcomings. I think we ought to be elevating and praising some of our "Spocks" rather than disguising or labeling them as disordered. My guess is that it would make the world an even better place.
http://southeastpsych.blogspot.com/2009/07/spock-has-aspergers.html

[Starboard Tack]

225. Fascinating stuff

[spin]

226. Thanks, It is a fascinating subject. (n/t)

[X_Digger]

166. Fear is an emotional reaction. Preparation is not.

Are you seriously claiming that anything that one prepares for represents a fear?

If so, I have to question your ability to reason.

If I had a fire in my home, I would very likely experience fear. However, the purchase of a fire extinguisher on a trip to home depot would not be accompanied by nor prompted by fear.

[Starboard Tack]

182. You fear for my sanity? I fear you are wrong

You fear for your safety, ergo you tote a gun. I fear it may rain, ergo I tote an umbrella. I'm afraid we're all afraid of lots of things. How we react to those fears demonstrates how connected to reality we are.

Fear not your fear too much. Let it control you and the next thing you know you'll be toting a gun everywhere.

[X_Digger]

199. Lol, semantic perturbation..

You 'fear' the rain? Really?

No, you're just playing with the definition- "To consider probable; expect: I fear you are wrong.".

[a la izquierda]

195. Nope, and those are all logical things to carry in a car.

As a matter of fact, I carry them in my car. I also have an emergency kit in my home. Those things make sense, as I travel very long distances by myself, and I live in tornado country.

Carrying a gun...for what? For fun? If you think carrying around a deadly weapon for fun is just the living end, then jeez...have at it, but stay away from me. If it's for protection, then what exactly are people so fucking scared of? I do not walk around thinking "I must have a gun. Someone may harm me or someone else." I just don't. It's not logical to me to carry around that much concern (at least, considering I survived living in California and various parts of Mexico). Okay, I'll call it concern.
I must have been a real lunatic to walk around Mexico without a gun. Oy. Own your guns, I don't give a fuck. But I do reserve the right to think that someone who MUST HAVE THEIR GUN on them at all times has fear issues. Or delusions of grandeur of being a hero.

[X_Digger]

205. We've come to different decisions about our level of preparedness.

I don't call you a 'paranoid survivalist nut' for your choice to maintain an emergency kit. You see that as a rational response to an unlikely but possible event.

The exact same reason that I frequently carry concealed.

In the US there are 400,000 residential fires every year, and there are ~105,000,000 homes. Odds of a home fire? 1 in 263.

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Fire-Prevention/fires-factsheet.html

According to the DOJ, the rate of being the victim of a violent crime is 20 / 1,000 overall (as high as 27 / 1,000 for some groups like african americans.) That comes out to 1 in 50.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1743

[a la izquierda]

310. Thanks for an informed post.

I see your point.

[iverglas]

317. 110. Brawk! Polly wanna dumb analogy that isn't analogy at all?

I'm posting it again because it broke no rule, and any moderator who gets an alert on this will want to consider whether the alert/alerter is itself/themself the problem.



Step right up! Git yer dumb analogies here, folks! This here is the Guns forum, where any nonsense you can spit out ... over and over and over and over again, world without end, no matter how often and how soundly the dumbness of the analogy is demonstrated ... must be revered as the gospel according to the gun that it is.

People are killed by other people's fire extinguishers all the time. And aspirin bottles. And first aid kits and energy drinks. Why if someone sees you carrying a bottle of aspirin into the mall, they wouldn't know what to think; for all they know, you're going to hold up the bank with it!

In any event. Note that nobody carts any of those things around in order to ward off evil spirits, or muggers and ... oh yeah, rapists, the way the gun toters do.

None of your "analogous" items are carried around to use against other people. It's really very simple, I think.

Me, I want to carry around a suitcase of nuclear waste. Just because I never know when I might need it, and who are you to say I won't?



Yes, some people carry aspirin around because they are afraid of heart attacks. And fire extinguishers because they are afraid of fire. Etc. Duh. What's the problem with just saying so?

Next?

[X_Digger]

319. If 'thing A' were the same as 'thing B' it wouldn't be an analogy, it would be equivalence.

The fact that you studiously ignore their analogous uses in favor of non-analogous ones is your problem, not mine.

I carry many things on a regular basis in my car or on my person for the purposes of being prepared should the situation present itself.

Whether the tool carried is to use on myself or others is immaterial to the utility and preparedness expressed by deciding to have them available, or how such items compare to others carried for similarly rare events.

Try again.

[iverglas]

320. and what kills an analogy dead

is the huge and relevant distinction between Thing A and Thing B.

The Things A here are used to limit damage after an event has occurred: aspirin to treat a heart attack, fire extinguisher to treat a fire, etc. (And don't try on taking aspirin to ward off heart attack: nobody fires off bullets daily to ward off anything, or randomly shoots off fire extinguishers around their home.)

Firearms are used ... well, up to you to make your analogy. Whatever it is, it won't be.


Whether the tool carried is to use on myself or others is immaterial to the utility and preparedness expressed by deciding to have them available, or how such items compare to others carried for similarly rare events.

Well there you go. The "how" just kills that one.


I'd say that toting a gun around in public is kind of like keeping a barrel of toxic waste in your garage.

You just never know when you might want to lob some toxic waste at an intruder.

Nonetheless, you generally won't be permitted to keep that barrel in that garage.

[X_Digger]

321. What was that about 'huge and relevant distinctions' again?

I'd say that toting a gun around in public is kind of like keeping a barrel of toxic waste in your garage.

Sauce, goose, gander.

[iverglas]

360. are you claiming one?

Better point it out. I'm not seeing it.

[X_Digger]

361. Seriously?? I know you're recovering from eye surgery, let me point it out..

Toxic waste is generally a byproduct of industrial, petrochemical, or power generation processes. Many substances in this group are heavy metals, chemoreactive salts, radioactive isotopes, flammable liquids, carcinogens, or dangerous gases in a solution. Typically they have been reduced, stripped of recoverable compounds, and/or rendered as inert as possible, given the nature of the waste. Sometimes this involves binding with other compounds. Even rendered inert, however, some of these waste products are still considered dangerous- not because of the bound compounds themselves, but because they can be separated from the binding agent via simple chemical processes.

Now, how would you imagine stopping an intruder with a heavy metal compound? If you were splashed in the face with chromium oxide-tainted water, you'd think it tasted a bit off, but it wouldn't stop you. Nor would many of the chemoreactive salts (unless your surface temperature were in the hundreds of degrees, and then the toxicity of the resulting compound would vary). Many of the flammable liquids might sting a bit, but few would stop you in your tracks. Radioactive isotopes? Wouldn't stop an attacker. Carcinogens/mutagens? I guess you could splash someone with one and wait around a few years. Not a terribly effective strategy to minimize harm from a violent attack.

Toxic waste is not used recreationally. Nobody sets up a paper target and throws toxic waste at it. Nobody takes toxic waste on a hunting trip. There is no merit badge from the boy scouts for toxic waste handling.

There is no analogous use for toxic waste when compared to carrying a firearm.

'huge and relevant distinction' indeed.

[iverglas]

388. well gosh darn it, aren't you the anti-rights one?

I want CHOICE when it comes to what kind of stuff I keep in my own home and what I choose to use it for, and how I choose to defend myself.

[X_Digger]

389. Can't admit you were hoist with your own petard, can you? n/t

[iverglas]

390. can't admit you don't have a leg to stand on, can you?

[X_Digger]

391. If you can't see it, I think you need to sue your opthalmic surgeon. n/t

[PavePusher]

90. Assumptions, insinuations, assertions and your own paranoia.

Is that all you brought today?

[iverglas]

111. damn! forgot the gun!

Never bring your own words to a discussion about guns.

They will be shot down in a hail of misrepresentation.

:rofl:

[PavePusher]

124. More Jello.

Now in new Butt-in-ski flavor!

[rl6214]

147. No, she never butts in

She will rail against others for getting into the middle of a thread she is in but it's a-ok for her.

[Starboard Tack]

143. Starting to feel the heat from the regular folk who stumbled in here?

[friendly_iconoclast]

146. "regular folk"? Poisoning the well again, I see... n/t

[Starboard Tack]

180. "regular folk" would mean infrequent visitors to this den of iniquity

I think the post started in GD. Always interesting when that happens.
Oh, and the well? Poisoned? Nah! Impossible.

[a la izquierda]

193. I was commenting on someone else's post.

Why would I be paranoid? I'M NOT THE ONE CARRYING A GUN all the fucking time, now am I? And as I also mentioned, I don't even care if people own guns, as long as they're legal and responsible.
So, my gun-toting friend (I'll assume this, because I suspect we've had this conversation before), go bother people who truly want to take away your precious toys. I don't.

[Control-Z]

116. THAT intimidated?

Are you implying that some levels of intimidation are acceptable? That right there justifies my feelings. No one has a right to intimidate me even a little. So yes. Yes. I am. When there is someone standing next to me with a gun strapped to his body I notice, and I am intimidated by it.

And if that person were to make ANY request of me I would feel I had no choice but to acquiesce. And you know that, as does anyone who carries.

[oneshooter]

118. What about when you can't see it? Concealed is Concealed. n/t

[Control-Z]

329. That would obviously be

a different story.

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Control-Z]

328. It is against DU rules

to fling insults and it does nothing to strengthen your opinion. So why don't you tell me the reason people open carry. Maybe I'll be less intimidated once I'm aware of a legitimate reason.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

379. There are a variety of reasons...

For example:

Summertime - with the clothing people wear in the summer, open carry can be more comfortable.

The person may be out in the open all day doing work and it is easier to have the gun on his hip than concealed

The person may have chosen to carry a larger firearm than can be easily concealed

Concealment holster could be damaged

Physical issues may prevent the person from easily drawing from a concealed location

And most importantly - it is legal in his state and he feels like it - which ultimately is all the reason you need.

[rl6214]

148. So you start shaking every time a cop is near you?

"When there is someone standing next to me with a gun strapped to his body I notice, and I am intimidated by it."

[Control-Z]

326. I do notice a cop's weapon

when one is standing next to me and usually find myself thinking, on some level, about the cop's stability.

So maybe you can tell me what the reason or intent is to open carry? Perhaps if I knew a rational reason it would not be as intimidating to me.

[X_Digger]

167. And I'm sure a little racist tool is intimidated when a big aa man stands behind him in line..

Doesn't mean it's rational, or that his 'intimidation' is grounds for action.

You feeling intimidated doesn't mean intimidation is the purpose or intent.

Some idiots are intimidated by people with a diverse vocabulary. Should we all speak like children in an effort to avoid intimidating them? There is no obligation, moral or legal, to accommodate your irrational feelings.

[iverglas]

238. ah, I love the smell of equivocation on a Sunday afternoon

Some idiots are intimidated by people with a diverse vocabulary.

Yes, they are apprehensive about the safety of themselves and others when someone says, oh, "equivocation".

:rofl:

I guess a lot of people get away with crap like this in real life. They must make a point of hanging out with people who don't understand big words.

[X_Digger]

263. Oh, I'm wounded. Your barb has struck me to the quick..

Or some-such.

I like how you ignored the other example- one where a person with a preconceived notion not backed up by fact is intimidated by a person minding their own business.

[Control-Z]

324. I'm really not sure.

What is the reason or intent to open carry? Perhaps if I knew a rational reason it would not intimidate me so.

[X_Digger]

327. For many it's convenience.

Carrying concealed means modifying your wardrobe to accommodate. In cold climates, that can mean placing it under quite a few layers of clothing, where it may be less accessible. In warm climates, it means adding additional garments to insure complete concealment.

Texas isn't an open carry state, so I only have second-hand experience with the practice.

[Control-Z]

330. Seriously?

That's your answer? Convenience? I find it hard to believe that carrying a gun is so important some would actually change/alter their clothing to do so.

Let's try this a different way. What is the reason to carry at all. Concealed or open? (And I'm not talking about someone whose job requires a weapon.)

[X_Digger]

334. Actually, that's a large part of the community..

In addition to all the legality-
-under what conditions is it legally and morally appropriate to draw and potentially fire
-what are the legal ramifications of doing so
-where and under what conditions is it not legal to carry

There's also the logistics-
-what gun to carry (caliber, model, reliability, stopping power v weight)
-what holster to use (material, inside the waistband, outside the waistband, shoulder holster)
-what clothing to wear (appropriate stiff belt if IWB/OWB, length and cut of cover garment that balances concealment with accessibility)
-what other items should one carry (cell phone, pepper spray, extra magazines, flashlight, multi-tool/knife)

As to your last question (Why carry?):

I carry because it's an attempt to mitigate the risk of harm to myself should I be the target of a violent crime.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

380. Concealed or open

You have to change your clothing to do so.

Concealed requires clothing which can conceal a weapon - think additional layers and/or a waistband larger than you would normally wear to allow the gun to be inside of it.

Open carry would require at least a belt which can support a firearm. No - the typical belt is not going to support a gun.

Its like anything else - you dress appropriately.

[GreenStormCloud]

183. You do not have a right to not feel intimidated.

You are setting the bar for feeling intimidated way too low. The person with the gun is not intimidating you, regardless of your feelings. For him to intimidate you he has to make some overt threat. Merely wearing a gun, if legal for him in his state, is not an overt threat to you, regardless of your feelings.

[Control-Z]

331. Sad, isn't it? -eom

[SteveM]

83. Actually, if someone is intimidating you, you have recourse...

But merely carrying a gun is not intimidation. The law has some rather specific standards for intimidation. On opening day of hunting season, there are guns all over in the bird fields, but there is no intimidation, only politeness. "Brandishing" can be intimidation, because that is taking the arm in-hand and pointing it at someone or waving it about at someone. This is permissible when one is threatened, as in your home or on the street when attacked, but is not permitted when there is no threat. In other words wearing a gun is not brandishing or intimidation.

Personally, I can't stand someone who (I have only run into a single person) who says he has a gun and has no hesitation about using it against someone who wants to "take his rights away." (Someone who advocates "taking rights away" is no threat.) When this happened to me, I told him his gun was irrelevant, as I had my own.

[PavePusher]

88. Why in the world would you be "intimidated" by someone minding their own business?

Ms. Grundy, much?

[iverglas]

109. hello hello!

Never fear! Gun militants are always standing on guard for the poor weak little women amnog them!

Women who are abused by their intimate partners, for instance, are never intimidated by men with guns trying to control them or prevent them from leaving. Or worse.

Nooo. Guns are what women need to protect themselves against such brutes! Because every woman is going to shoot the husband, boyfriend ... or father, brother, date, friend, boss, co-worker ... abusing or assaulting her ...

And people who swagger the streets with guns displayed on their persons are not trying to intimidate anybody. No. That's why they display them. So no one will be intimidated.

If they wanted to intimidate people with their guns, they'd leave them at home! They swagger around displaying them so people won't be intimidated.

Guns are not used to intimidate.

Not by the good guys ... and if you can't tell the good guys from the bad guys, well too bad!

Don't feel bad if you feel a headache coming on, now.

[RSillsbee]

131. What is it about a gun in a holster that you find intimidating ?

The only person who has ever commented about my gun when I open carry is my barber and all she said was "nice gun"

[ProgressiveProfessor]

293. There is no rational reason to be intimidated

I for one feel no motivation to accommodate most others unreasonable fears or phobias.

[Starboard Tack]

136. Considering your avatar, why don't we all have nuclear weapons in our basement

nothing to worry about as long as they aren't detonated?
You really believe gun control is dead? Don't hold your breath on that one. It's just stalled.
Sanity usually prevails, even in America. Just takes a little longer here.
And God has nothing to do with it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

139. I see you've added "poisoning the well" to the "argumentum ad populum"

You *do* realize that's one of the markers for cultural warfare? It goes with a feigned concern about "social cohesion" or
"delinquency" or "hooliganism" or "moral harm". All nebulously defined 'bad' things to trot out when you don't have something
concrete...

Can the associational and genetic fallacies be far behind?

[GreenStormCloud]

185. So far this year we pro-RKBA people have racked up a lot of legislative victories.

I even have a thread on it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x445475

The last significant victory your side had was in 1994. Since then our side has had victory after victory. 41 states are now shall-issue or constitution-carry. Over half of the House and almost half of the Senate has an NRA rating of "A". Your side is losing badly.

[friendly_iconoclast]

297. You must admit, people like him have helped immensely.

The bitter-enders, due to their near-complete inability to grasp the idea of 'counterproductive', have helped make gun laws
in states like Ohio and Wisconsin far more lax than they might been.

And let's not forget the millions of dollars taxpayers have provided to Alan Gura, the NRA, et al, by choosing to defy
the Supreme Court and lesser courts long past the point of reason.

Thirdly, the hate and bitterness evinced here and elsewhere can only reinforce the drive to see their "gun-free" dreams
ground into the finest of dusts and blown away on the winds of history...

[cliffordu]

33. Dance with the one you brung. Too bad we don't have the society we want.

[SteveM]

80. Concerning "...the kind of society we want to have:"

I don't think the society "we want" is going to much affected by whether or not someone wants to carry openly, concealed, or not carry at all. The RKBA, in terms of personal/home defense, is an eminently personal right and not social policy. This is the problem I have when the debate over "gun control" hinges on societal benefits. Perhaps in the future someone will develop a means to measure the effect of per capita gun ownership, or concealed-carry on the crime rate, but that is not the real issue. Neither is the devolution of society into some kind of "wild west" splatter fest.

Fact is, our violent crime rate has been in decline for years, now, even as the # of guns in civilian hands has gone up by over 100,000,000. Even that is not an argument for carrying guns, or having them in your house, or not having guns at all. The issue is self-defense in a society which still has a significant violent crime rate, and in a nation which guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Note, the "militia clause" is within the Second to enable the federal government to carry out its charge (in the Articles) of calling up a militia; it is merely the government's reason for defending the right. The "right of the people" is free-standing and guaranteed against "infringement."

[PavePusher]

87. Yeah those stupid Civil Rights...

If there isn't a problem... that's a problem.

:silly:

[Euromutt]

107. The bar's actually a bit higher than that

It's not set at "nobody got shot," nor at "no shots were fired." It's not even set at "no guns were drawn." It is set at "no intimidating references were made to a firearm in the course of a conversation, no hands placed on grips" and various other things.

[BrendaBrick]

15. Yeah but.....

during the heat of road-rage...a middle finger is much more preferable than an easily accessible gun! Believe me, I think I know where you are coming from. I have been a long-time supporter of the NRA for over 20 years. Thing is...most folks fuses nowadays seem to be much more shorter than before...which is why this is giving me cause for concern!

[Imajika]

18. The crime rate is going DOWN...

We are not having an epidemic of law abiding citizens who open carry or conceal carry offing people because of road rage. It's just not happening. There are always a few irresponsible people out there, but most people that open carry or conceal carry take the right to do that very seriously. If you get shot in a road rage incident, I can pretty much guarantee you it won't be from a law abiding citizen who obtained their gun and whatever license they may have needed legally.

[SteveM]

86. Goddam T.V. news makes it seem crime rate is up. nt

[Starboard Tack]

150. If the crime rate is going down and all is hunky dory

why are people buying more guns? Who's peddling the fear? Or are they all just thinking "Hell, we're in a deep recession, I'll go drop a few hundred dollars on a gun because it's my right."
I don't know what world you live in, but most new gun buyers and most toters are scared of something. Many are scared of having their "rights" taken away, as if that would make any difference. Giffords gets shot in AZ and gun sales go through the roof because the NRA and it's stooges say "You'd better arm up now before the government clamps down."

[X_Digger]

169. What makes you think buying guns has anything to do with fear?

I don't know what world you live in, but most new gun buyers and most toters are scared of something.

More fact free telepsychology?

Giffords gets shot in AZ and gun sales go through the roof because the NRA and it's stooges say "You'd better arm up now before the government clamps down."

Have the sales figures to prove it? Or is this just more conjecture? NICS checks don't back up your 'feeling'..

Rep. Giffords was shot on 1/8/11..

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/080111_TotalNICSBackgroundChecks.pdf

Dec 2010....1,521,192
Jan 2011....1,323,336
Feb 2011....1,473,513
Mar 2011....1,449,724
Apr 2011....1,351,255
May 2011....1,230,953


The number of NICS checks dropped by 200k (-13%) in January, came back up in February (though still not as many as December), and continued to trickle down.

eta: font fix

[BoWanZi]

42. Speaking of road rage, if I ever carry a gun and I come across road rage...

...I am much more apt to just drop it/ignore it rather than let it get to me. When I was younger and came across road rage, I would be one of those idiots giving you the middle finger right back to you and causing tensions to rise up.

Ever since I became older, I just let it go much more often especially if I happen to be carrying my concealed handgun. A legal decent citizen who carries a handgun (open or concealed) are quite often much more aware of the responsibility that they now have and realize the consequences if they decide to use their weapon in an altercation. Just even pulling your gun out to intimidate the other party can get you into huge serious trouble so why bother with stupid shit like road rage or being annoyed at someone who does something to you that really isn't that big of a deal to you.

The vast majority of legal gun owners who legally carry one way or another feel the way I do and don't want to jeopardize their ability to carry a weapon so they would choose the time to use the weapon very wisely. That is if they ever decide to use it. I hope to die someday of old age never having to have had to pull my gun out in a situation that warrants it.

As far as open carry? Meh. Some people like to open carry, some don't. I just choose to carry concealed.

[slackmaster]

191. Former road-raging idiot checking in here!

When I was younger and came across road rage, I would be one of those idiots giving you the middle finger right back to you and causing tensions to rise up.

Me too. I got over it in the blink of an eye at age 38 after a close call with a truly insane driver who pulled a weapon on me (not a firearm, but deadly nonetheless.) Had I been carrying a firearm, justification for using it would have not have been been irrefutable because I had taken a turn escalating the conflict with the man.

I discovered that the best way to deal with asshole drivers is to quickly put as much pavement as possible between myself and them.

[X_Digger]

61. I'll just leave this here..

http://www.freep.com/article/20110731/NEWS06/107310482/10-years-after-concealed-weapons-law-unclear-why-many-state-were-gun-shy?odyssey=tab

Michigan's prosecuting attorneys association led the push against changing the law in 2001. Today, Ionia County Prosecutor Ronald Schafer, president of the group, says it's hard to remember what the fuss was about.

"I think you can look back and say, 'It was a big nothing.' "
...
Paul Long, president of the Michigan Catholic Conference, was part of the vocal opposition to CCW reform in 2001. He helped organize church-related participation in a petition drive aimed at repealing the law (the one short-circuited by a provision in the CCW legislation that made it referendum-proof).

But asked last week about his current views, Long said, "In all honesty, I don't give it much thought. It just hasn't been much of an issue."

[rl6214]

71. See how many cases you can find of concealed carry holders

losing it over road rage. You won't find many if any.

[PavePusher]

93. Not really.

1. That finger might well be the cause of the road rage...

and

2. Not shorter fuses, just instantaneous information transmission into every moment of our lives. Dog pees on someones yard in San Fran, and you here about it live, or nearly so in NYC.


Or, you could provide some indicitive data to prove your assertion... but I don't think it exists.

[iverglas]

113. why do you support an organization

that is dedicated to installing Republican governments? Apart from anything else.

That odd thing apart, yes, disputes that aren't settled by gunfire are disputes far less likely to end in death or disability.

This was posted here recently:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map

Hover over the dots and see how many homicides occurred in the context of a dispute, and how many of them involved firearms.

[RSillsbee]

133. Odd, when I come across road rage

I go out of my way to avoid a confrontation because I'm carrying a gun and I realize just how serious things can get and just how fast.

[Missy Vixen]

11. Another business owner inside the building drew when exiting each day

He was convinced he was about to be jumped by thugs in our town of 5,600, lowest crime rate in King County, thirty seconds from the police station and in broad daylight.

Imagine his happiness when the local cops showed up to charge him with brandishing towards me.

And, yes, it really happened.

[Swede]

14. If you want to walk around carrying a gun in the city,move to Mogadishu.

:shrug:

[cliffordu]

34. Now we're TALKING!!!!!!!

Well played indeed.

[Kurska]

44. If you don't like the US constitution you can move to anywhere else in the world.

This blade cuts both ways.

[Hoopla Phil]

64. That's the part so many don't get. The right to keep and BEAR arms

is in there. If you don't like it, move or try to get it changed, ignoring it (and worst of all, insisting that others ignore it) is not an option.

[iverglas]

115. hahahahahaha

the poster to whom you replied ... hahahahahaha.

The blade, sadly, was a terribly dull one.

:rofl:

[PavePusher]

95. Why>

Do you have some method of gauranteeing my personal security? What is my compensation if/when you fail?

[marions ghost]

17. Crazy people wearing guns

would be crazy to ignore.

[Hoopla Phil]

65. Your right. All "crazy" people should were a scarlet "C".

[marions ghost]

119. the store clerk

indicated he had a screw loose, if you read the OP's story. The guy don't have to wear anything but an open gun to tell me they're crazy.

Having once had a crazy person off their meds point a gun at me, I know they exist. Don't you?

[Hoopla Phil]

154. I'm sorry, I missed the part where the store clerk was qualified to make

a determination of a persons mental status - oh wait he isn't. I also doubt that your incident qualifies you either. Open carry is legal in many states. You might want to get used to it.

[cleanhippie]

345. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

The guy don't have to wear anything but an open gun to tell me they're crazy.


Good thing YOU are not in charge of anything.

[SteveM]

89. Let me know when you come across one. nt

[marions ghost]

120. I have...

you mean a crazy person with a gun? Been there.

[SteveM]

213. Well, if you've run into them, please avoid. Or call the police. nt

[cleanhippie]

346. Yet more fabricated statements.

Disgusting.

[PavePusher]

97. Who's "crazy"? n/t

[marions ghost]

121. Store clerk said the guy was crazy

crazy people openly wearing a gun? And we should think that's fine? I think you know there are crazy people with guns running around.

:crazy:

[PavePusher]

122. So, store clerks are now to be relied upon for accurate mental health assesments?

I must have missed a memo....

[marions ghost]

135. Sure

the clerk sees him all the time. Doesn't take a mental health expert to define crazy.

I think you know that any ordinary Joe who goes around wearing a gun openly in this society has got a problem. It's not normal. Paranoid, defensive, anti-social, maybe even psychopathic. Gotta display my symbol of power for people to gawk at. A gun is always a symbol of power.

Oh yeah, definitely a nutjob, even if the clerk said nothing I would think that.

[PavePusher]

137. It's quite common in some places.

And not at all what you claim.

Surely you can provide some proof, amIright?

[marions ghost]

188. Proof of what?

That some men have to go around displaying their device for killing humans?

Sorry, real men who are not police don't do this. They realize how weak and nutty it looks. You have to look at the psychology of it all. It's all about vigilantes. Study the psychology.

In a sick paranoid, brutal, fearful, narcissistic society, I guess it happens. :shrug:

[PavePusher]

202. Again, cite your evidence, please. n/t

[marions ghost]

219. Evidence for what?

--The psychology of people who go around visibly wearing guns like a macho fashion statement? Just google it.

Then you can shoot down what somebody else says. :shrug: I'm not into arguing.

[PavePusher]

264. Jello, eh? Whodathunkit... n/t

[Euromutt]

308. Your argument just completed a full circle

Post #121:

crazy people openly wearing a gun? And we should think that's fine?

And when asked how you know he's a nutjob, your response is "he's openly wearing a gun." So your conclusion is the same as your premise: Hel-lo, circular reasoning!

[cleanhippie]

347. .

[Coyote_Bandit]

19. Could be

he is a plain clothes cop or armed security guard.

In any event, I prefer open carry to concealed carry. I prefer to be able to see who around me is carrying a gun.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. this should go well

:popcorn:

[madrchsod]

26. i always thought concealed carry was stupid....

wear the gun where people can see it. plus it`s faster...

[Tuesday Afternoon]

46. care to share?

I brought some beers :toast:

[SteveM]

92. It has been.

[onehandle]

28. It's fear. nt

[rl6214]

73. You're afraid?

[Union Scribe]

31. It must be exhausting doing that.

Let's review: You saw a guy. Nothing happened. You spent goodness-knows-how-long imagining all of this and composing that post. It's not your job to try to read people's minds, let alone interrogate them to "get in their heads" who are just going about their day, so why stress out about it?

[BrendaBrick]

35. Gut Feelings.....that's why ...

For like...99.9% out there - no biggie at all. I'm talking about that rare % where approaching them in a non-judgmental manner just might save some lives.

And (shrug) gut feelings...deep down immediate gut feelings just sensing that someone is about to SNAP and just being there for them before they make that fatal leap...THIS is the prevention I am talking about!!!

[Katya Mullethov]

59. Offer him a hug

Or whatever it is that you normally (and initially) do before you go off the deep end .

[gejohnston]

76. people do not just snap

The virgin killer is very rare to nonexistent.
http://ebookbrowse.com/myth-of-the-virgin-killer-kates-polsby-pdf-d1829224
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/kates/Myth_of_the_Virgin_Killer-Kates-Polsby.pdf

[PavePusher]

98. Why do you seem to think he needs to be "approached"...

merely because he is exercising a Civil Right?

Why does this cause you so much concern and angst?

[PavePusher]

168. Based on what? n/t

[JoeyT]

36. He could just be an off duty cop.

If I wanted to find out if he was a whack job, I'd probably say "Hey, nice <make/model>. How's the accuracy on it?" or something and see if he started ranting or spouting gibberish.
Anyone open carrying is usually pretty ok with talking about it, unless you point and yell or something.

[Raine]

37. Could be he's a private detective, body guard, security guard

off duty cop etc etc etc. :shrug:

[melm00se]

39. like others

I too conceal carry and most do not notice...i have, to my knowledge, only flashed it when digging my wallet out of an extremely deep pocket.

none of your above list of fear driven "reasons" apply to me or the majority of people I know who do choose to carry within the bounds of the law).

why do I choose to carry? not to prove that I am a "man" but rather for the protection that, in 99% of cases, that the police cannot provide.

I know it is a cliche but I may have to act in my own defense in seconds when the police arrival (once called) can take minutes (the average response times according to this article is between 9 and 11 minutes). If you watch this video you can see this situation went from uncomfortable to assault in less than 30 seconds. Do you really think that there was time to (1) call the police and (2) for the police to respond before the situation was resolved?

I am happy for you that you have chosen not to carry (that is your right and decision) but do not ridicule and categorize those that do as nutjobs or compensating for something.

[PavePusher]

101. Excellent. n/t

[aikoaiko]

41. I do believe you are a liberal.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[friendly_iconoclast]

134. +1. The words "...your right to agree with them." do come to mind, don't they? n/t

[Kurska]

43. Some guy practiced a constitutionally protected right and you over reacted

Does people voting also send you into a conniption fit?

[bainz]

51. Probably depends on who they are voting for :-) n/t

[Kurska]

52. Touché n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

48. Hunting for dinner, was he? Or, just showing how afraid he is of his fellow citizens?

Funny how most of the citizens of the world seem to get along with such displays.

"America is the only country that has gone from barbarism to decadence without the usual period of civilization between." Oscar Wilde

[SteveM]

94. Oscar Wilde was taken by the U.S. He posed for pics. With a gun. nt

[iverglas]

117. so he knew whereof he spoke ...

[Union Scribe]

162. The fear lies in the response.

All this fuss about a man who did NOTHING.

[krispos42]

49. You're surrounded daily by people of all walks of life...

...in control of three-to-six-thousand pound self-powered weapons.


If you're in a stream of traffic on the highway, and you're NOT worried about the person next to you being a ticking time bomb, on the edge, frustrated, and who can kill a bunch of innocent people *snap* just like that... then ask yourself "why?"

Why doesn't this thought run through your mind every second you're driving, surrounded for hours on end by unknown people of unknown mental condition in an unknown mental state with unknown motives?




Simple. You're used to it. You're not used to civilians displaying guns in public, so you're being reactionary. But you're used to being in traffic, so you're accepting.

The difference is, of course, that due to political beliefs, you don't want to be accepting of civilians displaying guns in public.

[Ahpook]

53. See that often around here

A neighbor of mine that was an FBI agent carried everywhere he went. He was also crazy as hell.

He pulled the gun on me and another neighbor saying we broke in his house. He should know we did not since he stared out his window most of the day. Cops did nothing of course. One would think they would confiscate the damn pistol since he obviously has some mental issues.


In the end he shot himself in front of his wife.


Very sad :(

[PavePusher]

102. Ummmm, W?

How could he be an FBI agent and yet "stared out his window most of the day"?

[Ahpook]

243. Retired

[Throd]

54. Do you realize more people carry guns that you can't see, legally or otherwise?

My hunch is that people carrying illegally concealed weapons are more prone to get all shooty.

[Cleita]

55. To tell the truth, I would rather see someone carrying

out in the open instead of hidden. At least you know he has a gun and it might be loaded, which will make you cautious around that person.

[SteveM]

96. I prefer to be respectful around people who are carrying or not.

Saves a lot on speculation and tension.

[PavePusher]

103. Or you could actually observe her/him for a bit....

before leaping to unfounded assumptions...

I think they call such reasoned action... "being liberal/progressive".

YMMV

[Odin2005]

56. It's his right to carry a gun, get your nose out of other people's business.

[hunter]

57. Take out your own gun...

... point at crazy open carry dude, then take his gun.

Problem solved.

That's how the gangsters do it in my town.

I'm lucky I've never been in a situation where a gun would be useful.

But I have been in a lot of situations where a gun would have made things worse.

[SteveM]

100. Where is it that "gangsters" take "open carry dude's guns?" Is it a

common occurrence?

[friendly_iconoclast]

105. Open carriers get ripped off where you live? Cite, please.

Otherwise, I call "faith-promoting rumor"...

[friendly_iconoclast]

365. After three days w/ no examples, let me upgrade this to: Bullshit

They're reaching reeealy hard, aren't they?

[Hoopla Phil]

62. But did the death machine jump out and start running around going off half cocked?

I guess not or you would have posted as such. Thankfully the toter used a securing holster to keep the death machine in check, amiright?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

69. Unless it was a 1911 or single action revolver, odds are it wasn't equipped ot "go off half cocked".

just sayin' :)

[ileus]

68. OC should be the least worrysome, you can keep an ever viligient eye upon him.

Most everyone knows an OCer is the safest of all carriers. Nothing to worry about move on...

[rl6214]

70. And yet with all of this, nothing happened

As is the same with most all concealed or open carriers. Another option is could be he is/was a detective as I see many detectives here in west Texas carrying a gun with no jacket on over it because it is so damn hot. But the main point is NOTHING HAPPENED.

[GreenStormCloud]

72. That is why I prefer concealed carry. So people like you won't have panic attacks. N/T

[Hoyt]

163. 96% don't even see the need to carry. I think a bunch would support "No Carry" if

they understood who is primarily carrying, why they carry, how unprepared they are to handle a situation in public, and much more.

[X_Digger]

171. Oh, but you've got that one covered too, right, Hoyt?

Nice little "damned if you do, damned if you don't" you have there.

You've both bemoaned people not being trained, and you've also castigated people for seeking training as 'practicing to murder' someone.

Which is it, Hoyt?

Cake. (Have | Eat)

[GreenStormCloud]

187. Then why does shall-issue concealed carry continue to be a winner with voters? N/T

[GreenStormCloud]

190. The statistics show that legal carriers have an EXCELLENT record.

We, as a group, have handled situations in public extremely well. Since criminals generally prefer to attack when there aren't any others around there are rarely any innocent bystanders close by. Those of us who carry, in most states, have had to get training and pass an FBI background check. Common criminals and miscreants can't do that.

[Hoyt]

204. Folks who don't carry handle situations every day without resorting to a gun.

"Training" -- Ha. Shooting silhouette targets and posing like this guy ain't effective training.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRt_xBl7dLU&feature=related

[GreenStormCloud]

214. Throwing yourself on the mercy of a violent criminal is not a way I want to handle such a situation.

I watched the video. Nothing wrong with the guy's information or with his technique, except that it is oriented toward the northern states and cooler weather. And he left out in-the-pocket carry. I carry my S&W642 in my right trousers pocket.

You are consistently anti-self-defense. I choose to defend myself from violent crime if some thug thinks that an old man is an easy mark.

[Hoyt]

218. Not anti-defense. I am anti-gun obsessed carrying in public.

[spin]

237. There is a higher chance of getting hit by lightning in Florida ...

than getting shot by a person with a concealed weapons permit (assuming you are not attacking him).

Florida has issued 2,012,301 carry permits since 1987 and 831,169 are currently valid.

source: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html

[Hoyt]

240. Not just shooting -- gun carriers pollute the landscape and send the wrong message to folks.

Who -- besides the 3 to 4% who can't leave home without a gun or two -- want to live in an armed society?

[spin]

252. The answer is that 80 million gun owners want to live in an armed society ...

and 10 million of them have carry permits.

Polls do not support your contention that people want to live in a gun free society. You can claim anything you want but you are in the minority.

In U.S., Continuing Record-Low Support for Stricter Gun Control
Fewer than 3 in 10 support law banning handguns except for police and authorized personnel
November 22, 2010

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the second year in a row, a record-low 44% of Americans say laws governing the sale of firearms should be made more strict, while 42% say gun laws should be kept as they are now. Twelve percent say gun laws should be made less strict.




Americans' support for stricter gun control laws has gradually declined over the last two decades, from 78% when this question was first asked in 1990 to 49% in 2008, and 44% in 2009 and again this year. As support for stricter gun laws has decreased, support for keeping gun laws as they are now has increased, from 17% in 1990 to 42% now. The percentage of Americans favoring less strict gun control laws has remained relatively stable over the last 20 years, and is now at 12%.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/144887/continuing-record-low-support-stricter-gun-control.aspx

edited for typo

[PavePusher]

265. "pollute the landscape"?

Lighten up, Francis.

[X_Digger]

268. You crack me up

"pollute the landscape and send the wrong message to folks"

I've got this image in my head, of Gn++ ions floating away from firearms like a toxin, and other guns murmuring to passersby.

You should stick to fiction, it's much better than your non-fiction.

[Hoyt]

273. Bout time you show some imagination by getting your head out of your gun barrels.

Now, try to imagine a world without a boogieman behind every tree. . . . . .and the need to strap a few guns to your body before venturing out.

[X_Digger]

276. Ahh, telepsychology again..

When are you going to turn in your guns, Hoyt? Or do you have Gn++ proof shielding in your walls, so that the evil pollutants don't get out of your walls?

*snort*

[oneshooter]

342. Imagine, Hoyt showing his favorite picture. That of a cowboy with 2 guns pointed out, n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

294. All he is capable of is bad fiction

[GreenStormCloud]

251. Away from home is where mugging occur.

There is where an excellent self-defense tool may be needed. Statistics have shown that legal gun carriers aren't a social problem. So your stance is anti-self-defense. I refuse to be a passive victim and hope for mercy from a violent felon.

[Hoyt]

275. People who choose not to carry are even less of a "social problem."

[GreenStormCloud]

278. Violent criminals love them too. They are easy prey. N/T

[Hoyt]

281. So, when you leave home in the morning you strap on a gun or two because you feel like "prey?"

[GreenStormCloud]

311. Street criminals target those who look to be easy targets.

I am a fat senior citizen with a mild disability. That is the type of person who looks like an easy take-down. Any young thug could easily take me out if he decided that he wanted to rob me. Sometimes they just beat up people for fun. My gun, and situational awareness, and training gives me the ability to win such an encounter. Of course, you would be happier with me as just another crime statistic than as someone who successfully defended himself against crime.

[Hoyt]

312. No, you'd be happier if you thought rationally and didn't view yourself as "prey" needing equalizer.

[Ready4Change]

336. I have two friends who 'thought rationally.'

Didn't choose to have an equalizer. Opted to believe they lived in a safe world. Allowed that belief to let them drop their guard. In separate instances they were jumped. One was robbed at knife point by two criminals. The other was beaten up by a gang, and then robbed (as an after thought, she thinks.)

We live in a 'mostly' safe world. If you choose to live as if it is a 'totally' safe world, I hope the odds never catch up to you.

[GreenStormCloud]

338. I prefer to deal with reality and not your world of denial.

Violent street crime does exist, it can come to nice neighborhoods, and it can happen to nice people. It can even happen to people who don't have guns.

[PavePusher]

325. How can one be less of a problem than not being a problem?

You weren't/aren't too good at math, are you?

[Union Scribe]

290. "I am anti-gun obsessed..."

Yuuuuuuuup.

[SteveM]

74. 45 years ago a secretary in my Dad's steno pool was knifed to death...

I don't know if he was brandishing, wearing a knife, or had in hidden. It really didn't matter, and everyone found out his intentions -- afterward.

You may rally to "the side of prevention," but you have not shown what that "prevention" is and how it would work.

Would you have been concerned about his "snapping" had he hidden his gun from your sight? Do you really think that his wearing a gun would foment bad intentions that wouldn't have been there in the first place?

I appreciate your post. BTW, I do not publicly wear a gun. I hope my "motivations" are OK by you.:-)

[PavePusher]

81. Or maybe... just maybe.... he's read the Constitution....

and knows that Civil Rights don't require camoflauge in public, and he knows that he is both his first and last lines of his own self-defense.

Or maybe you've made the most pointless, hyperbolic, arrogant-assumption laden post on D.U. this week.

I vote... option B.

[Upton]

112. COULD BE he's just minding his own business

and exercising his constitutional right to keep and bear arms..

I don't see a problem, but then again, I never been much of a hand wringer..

[Hoyt]

125. I think "B" is the most common reason. I assume that includes people who are just very insecure,

and think they are going to protect us from some boogieman hiding behind the tree.

For fun, slap your hands loudly and watch em jump. If they pull their gun, call the police and have em arrested.

[rl6214]

151. Grow up

no one is going to protect you. No one that carries concealed wants to protect you.

[Hoyt]

155. You need to grow up and leave you friggin guns at home.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

295. Where I live in SoCal that would be the immature and dumb thing to do

[We_Have_A_Problem]

358. So now...

...the exercise of a right is childish?

Hoyt, I'm sorry you are bothered by people exercising their rights, but you really need to grow up and get over it.

[Starboard Tack]

129. Note to all toters

That's how most people react, so to the "gun hiders" better not take your jackets off and keep your fanny packs zipped up.

[friendly_iconoclast]

132. Using the word 'toters'? Claiming to know how most people feel?

Now, now- you know sock puppets are not allowed on DU, Mr. Hilsman...

[rl6214]

152. "toters"

that's supposed to be some 'secret' insult.

[Hoyt]

156. What do you suggest we call them? Please, don't respond with something related to "civil rights."

That's the biggest crock touted by those who can't leave home without a gun or two.

[rl6214]

172. Said it before but here it is again for you, I'll type it really slow

CONCEALED CARRY HOLDERS

[Hoyt]

203. Don't think that portrays them accurately. I guess it works for you, since you "are" one.

[iverglas]

318. I give up

How do you hold a concealed carry?

Perhaps you meant "concealed carry permit" holder.

And perhaps you're disregarding the fact that there are people, probably many people, who hold such permits and do NOT tote their guns around with them. Sometimes ever. I know one ...

[rl6214]

351. You're really not that dense are you?

intentionally or unintentionally

[ProgressiveProfessor]

296. So you consider basic civil rights a crock?

[Starboard Tack]

176. Don't know who Mr. Hilsman is, but I do know how most people feel

because I've done my own research across the length and breadth of this country and if you want to know I'll tell you. If not, do your own research.
I'd do my own if I were you. I don't trust hearsay too much, or books with an agenda, or groups with an agenda. I like to find these things out for myself.

[GreenStormCloud]

215. The only opinion that counts is the voters.

And people have been voting pro-gun and for CCW.

[Starboard Tack]

221. Good point. That's why I'm here. Maybe change some minds

or did you think I had nothing else going on in my life besides talking to folks about guns?
That's how we progress, exchange ideas, come up with new ones, like my tall pointy hat solution.

[friendly_iconoclast]

227. Your DUer name is a synonym for "right turn".

People like you have helped turn the electorate in just such a direction.

[Starboard Tack]

272. You obviously need an education in nautical technology

When sailing on a starboard tack, the wind comes from the starboard (right) side and the sailboat heels (leans) to the left, hence my screen name.
You sir, on the other hand, would appear to describe yourself as an amicable destroyer of cherished images and deeply held beliefs, in other words, a party pooper.

[GreenStormCloud]

250. Except that you never truly discuss. You just make sarcastic comments.

You have repeatedly demonstrated that you are poorly informed on guns, those who legally carry them, and on violent crime.

[Starboard Tack]

277. Not true. I discuss a lot and have received quite an education here. Lots of good feedback.

I get better informed every day about guns and gun issues. I have learned things even from you, whom I would describe as one of the more rigid toters here. Probably because of your professional background. I do make sarcastic comments from time to time, mostly to enhance a point and sometimes to lighten the gloom. I get the feeling that many toters, not all, are in need of a good cheering up, so any kind of humor is probably good for them. At other times I use sarcasm to counter sarcasm. I fight for what I believe in with the tools available. Better than strapping on a gun, IMO. I think toters tend to be over sensitive towards the reactions of others. I'm not surprised at people's reactions when I exhibit eccentric behavior, which I am wont to do from time to time.
I'm sure you're all very nice people and good Democrats, but this gun carrying is some weird shit and I can't help commenting on it. So shoot me (just kidding)

[oneshooter]

343. So lets see the results of this reasearch"across the length and breadth of this country "

I would also like to see any documentation, notes, and peer reviews of the final paper.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

How about people with an agenda?

[DWC]

206. Actually,

I just have to keep my pants on in public which I think is a good idea whether I am carrying or not.

Semper Fi,

[slackmaster]

157. You saw something you thought was unusual, got scared, and nothing noteworthy at all happened

[Hoyt]

164. Ha, you guys can't leave home without a gun or two, yet you call the poster "scared." Funny.

[LibertyFox]

165. ...taunts the guy who is terrified of CCWers and so demands that they be disarmed.

[PavePusher]

170. I bet he carries books! In publick! Nakedly! Teh horroreurs!!1!11! n/t

[Missy Vixen]

207. When was the last time someone was shot to death by a book? n/t

[PavePusher]

210. Jello? n/t

[rrneck]

211. Wnen was the last time

someone defended themselves from assault with a book?

[friendly_iconoclast]

228. ..and then she chatted with the clerk, got into *her* "deadly metal thing" and drove away

You're right, it is a cool story!

[gejohnston]

159. what state was this in?

If it was Florida, it was a plain clothes cop.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

261. bfd

sheesh

[We_Have_A_Problem]

316. Whatever reasons he had...

...for carrying are really none of your business.

Sorry if you don't like it, but other people's rights are not subject to your comfort level.

[Ready4Change]

333. And yet, he DID NOT snap.

Nor did anyone else at the gas station. Remember that? Nothing actually happened. Nothing.

What were you so afraid of? There were other things in that environment you could have been afraid of instead. Other things on your drive home which, statistically, put you in far greater danger. But instead you focused on someone who, apparently, calmly pumped his gas while minding his own business, and who then got in his car and drove off, just like everyone else did that day. Odds are he does that all the time. (And in most states, he could be doing so totally legally.)

Odds are, during your life, there have been plenty of people around you, legally carrying concealed guns, without your knowing a thing about it, who also haven't 'Snapped'. All those times, nothing happened. Nothing.

The fear is in your mind, not holstered on his hip. Your problem to come to terms with, not his.

[cleanhippie]

344. And nothing happened. Wow. Imagine that.

[guardian]

368. COULD BE

he was a LEO on his way to work.

[Tejas]

387. Hope you never serve on a jury, your 'intuition' is out of control.