Guns... my rant. (Feel free to beat me up... figuratively)

First, let me start by saying that I'm pretty supportive when it comes to the inherent (and legislative) right to defend yourself in the event it becomes necessary. I also support a lethal means to an end, if necessary... so naturally, guns (and ownership) don't pose too much of a problem for me.

I don't think "taking away guns" is the answer, because current realities make it a dangerous suggestion once the criminal element is considered. Say what you want about the right-wing, but this is where they've got the debate cornered. There are tons of illegal weaponry on the street that are fairly simple to obtain... and if outlawing abortion won't stop them, the same goes for guns. Still, here's my only issue with guns:

I think being a casual carrier is problematic. When I say that, I mean that i think it takes a keen mind to carry a weapon without subconsciously looking for reasons to employ it (or mistaken an otherwise mild incident for an opportunity to employ it). The closest parallel I can think of are hobbyist photographers. They like to have cameras on them just in case they find something photo-worthy. You're not exactly going to forget you're carrying it... it's a foreign object to your body, so it's easy to feel/remember. Odds are they'd be pissed if they didn't have it with them when it mattered, but not every shot (no pun intended) is kept/stored... simply because (in hindsight) the instances weren't what they appeared to be when the stills were taken. Obviously, a lot more goes into pulling a gun vs. pulling a camera, so don't think that I've overlooked that analogical fallacy... I'm only using cameras to explain awareness and how it may/may not correlate with propensity.

I say all that to say that I don't think some (or even most) people are capable of simply concealing a weapon and going on about their business as if it isn't there, and knowing it's there creates a mentality that subconsciously scans for opportunity to use it... even if matters can be handled in less-lethal ways. I'm most certain that someone here will provide a statistic (or hell, two) that detail an estimated amount of weapon carriers and a low-use ratio... which is a fair point to bring into the argument (and would bury my thoughts on this if it weren't for the reality that public conflict isn't that common an occurrence to start with). At risk of derailing my own thread, this Dunn incident (and others like it) seem like fair examples to point to when explaining this argument. Um... I think I've typed enough, so I'll save what more I have to say for any responses that ask for clarification and/or challenge the thoughts.

Also, please refrain from any "So, what are you SAYING?!??11?" openings. I'm not saying anything, nor am I advocating any calls to disarm a public. I'm merely attempting to pick your brains on the subject on responsible ownership/employment of firearms.

 

I don't CCW. I haven't chosen to take on that responsibility.

I may do so in the future but so far, no.

I don't practice enough. Like at least a box of ammo every month.

And I haven't taken a class.

Those are two things I'd want to do, although if I felt the immediate need I wouldn't allow the lack of a CCW course or practice on the range to stop me.

I fired and qualified with the M-16 in the Army (also shot shotgun, M-60 machine gun, LAW rocket and two kinds of grenade launchers).

I got 'shooting for the fun of shooting' out of my system.

Oh, I have a rifle and a 9mm handgun at home for protection and if a SHTF situation arises. And I know how to use them well enough if need be. But i don't feel that NEED to shoot them just because I can. I've owned both for more than seven years and haven't fired them since they came home.

I dry fire them and fondle them a bit, but that's all.

If I lived in a big city I would make sure that whatever city it was, their carry laws were in line with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment. And i would carry. I've lived in big cities and was robbed at gunpoint and was in line at a bank when a robber came in and demanded money from a teller.

In neither situation would I have felt justified in using the weapon because they were gone very quickly from sight after they ran off with our loot. And in the bank the only thing we could do is stand still until he left. He had the drop on all of us.

The 71 year old former police chief in the movie theater had no excuse.

Dunn, the guy at the convenience store who killed the kid, had no excuse.

But I guess I'm saying it takes some maturity to have it and not use it recklessly. I'd like to think that an approved CCW course would cover the when's and when not's of drawing the weapon. And of course you only draw when you are willing to shoot something or someone.

Getting to that point takes some education and good sound judgment.

With that I don't think there is much trouble in staying out of trouble.

Without the course, yeah, Dunn situations can happen every day by uneducated fools who are always thinking about where they can feel justified in plugging someone.

Dunn shouldn't have had a gun at all, IMO. He wasn't mature enough to use it wisely.

But that's our system.

 

I grew up around firearms, so they don't bother me per se. I got bored with playing with them before I even made it to the 10th grade. I own a shotgun and a revolver. The revolver's role for the last 30 years is as a fairly decent paperweight.

I don't have a problem with registration of firearms, and have no problem with automatic weapons being restricted. In the days when revolvers and regular rifles were the norm, the kinds of mass shootings we have today wouldn't have been possible for the most part, so I have no problem with restricting high magazine capacities and the like, nor do I have a problem with background checks on buyers, and requiring a real training program for CCW permits is okay with me as well. As the population density grows, along with a majority of people now born and raised in urban areas rather than rural areas, the latter is even more important. With population growth comes more nutjobs, and combining this fact with high capacity magazines is indeed a reason to regulate them strictly, imo; but then I also support literacy tests and civics tests in order to get a voter registration card as well. But, without strict border controls, any kind of firearms regulations are pointless, as it only leaves criminals better armed than citizens, so until that is actually enforced and criminal possession of firearms is stringently dealt with I'm not in favor of such restrictions on honest citizens.

 

The large network off owners I know who carry concealed and myself would beg the differ. As someone who carries regularly it becomes natural, almost an extension of yourself. It is not our objective to become "heroes", therefor we are not "scanning for a reason to use it". I carry for one reason and one reason only, to protect my family at all cost from even the slightest chance of anything. Even when something happens, the first instinct is not to shoot but to get my family to safety.
The way I was taught from owners like I am now is to carry a loaded gun without 1 in the chamber and safety on at first. Once you become more comfortable carry how you feel necessary.

 

I am in agreement with you until the line about not having one in the chamber and safety on at first. NO issue with the safety at all, first time or even after years of carrying, as that is just common sense IF your pistol has one, but without one in the chamber IF you ever had to use it I hope you have enough time to rack the slide otherwise you just have an expensive brick.

 

Reason being for not having one in the chamber at first is to ensure that your gun/holster combo is comfortable an secure enough, especially if you are carrying a heavier gun like I do(1911, now an SR45 full size) and to ensure that you can exercise proper trigger discipline. Honestly half way through the day is about all you need then yes, ALWAYS keep one in the chamber.

 

I think E Pluribus Venom's post was a good one. I think there are those who are looking for a reason to use their gun. Unfortunately, there are a number of law enforcment officers who suffer from exactly that malady.

My concealed carry training emphasized backing away from conflicts, not being macho.

 

So I would simply ask one question in response to your post. What are the statistics for casual CCW carriers going out looking for reasons to employ it? Without understanding the numbers you just don't make a compelling case for me to consider your opinion. In my world the numbers add up to exactly the opposite, hundreds of thousands if not more carry concealed and go on about their business otherwise don't you think the media would be reporting the blood in the streets Armageddon always predicted by the antigun crowd?

 

From the OP:

but let me elaborate on this portion, which I assume is the focus of your response:

Meaning (with a gun on our person) our subconscious may trigger responses that mistaken "general conflict" for "serious harm or death" if lethal self-defense isn't actuated. I couldn't give you the statistic you're asking for, because it would only be valid if people carrying concealed weapons were challenged on a daily basis. The closest alternative would be to observe known instances, and measure the public response. If we're to use a recent scenario, people are all over the place with this Dunn verdict... which to me seems like an open & shut case. Although I hate to use it as a summary, I can only wonder what those (who agree with the self-defense plea) would do in a similar instance if armed. Once more, I really wouldn't like this to be a statistic thread... sometimes it's okay to just speculate. I liked a couple of the responses from experiences carriers in this thread, so I'm very open to my current opinion taking a change.

 

E Pluribus Venom, you may be too sensible for this forum, or even for this website.

 

Thank you.

 

Fair enough. I will respect your intention about statistical threads and will take issue with your opinion by providing mine...given in the same spirit of course. You could substitute knife, bat, car, fists in your first sentence and come up with the same conclusion. I believe...my opinion if you will is that it isn't the instrument that may trigger an excessive response. That lies solely with the person and their moral and ethical upbringing. As adults during the course of our lives we have many opportunities to let our emotions get the best of us, the lions share do not let the fact that they have some means of taking a life over-ride their understanding that they may not be justified...giving them pause. My basic observation of human behavior with regard to using some sort of force is that humans mostly err on the side of caution. I am an experienced carrier FYI.

 

Not too long after Texas acquired CCW, my wife and I both took the course for our concealed carry permits ( have let both expire due to Texas Castle Doctrine now including your vehicle ) and the one thing stressed beyond all others; you can only employ enough deadly force to stop an attack. Once the threat of attack is over, you had best ease the hammer down and get on with your getting on. No shooting to kill or wound, simply shooting to stop the attack.

At my age, I am seriously considering reapplying for a CCW simply to be on the safe side. When traveling, my friend is with me; if I go to the cemetery to visit my folks, my friend is in the seat next to me covered with a towel as I have to travel through a bad part of town. Other than that, my weapon is in my nightstand, loaded, chambered, and safety on.

 

I carry a firearm, and I do not look for trouble.

Imagine that.

I call bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

There have been innumerable studies done over the years as far as Guns and Hand Guns and the one single thing that keeps on popping up is this one undeniable truth......

.........Heavily Armed Communities have a much lower crime rate by far than communities that are NOT Heavily Armed.

As well....communities such as the one I grew up in Western Massachusetts....that run a NRA Supported Weapons Safety Course as in my community when a kid turns 13 and both Boy's and Girl's participate...the Police, Local Fish and Game...and local Sportsmen Stores all get together for a multiple day course on teaching Weapon Safety and if a kid who comes down with his or her Mom or Dad or both....finishes the course they then can get their FID.

All us kids were so excited and everyone in my community would pitch in and teach kid's and anyone else who wanted to learn...FOR FREE...all about Handguns, Shotguns, Rifles, Bows, Compound Bows, Knives...etc....and it was over multiple days....6 if I can remember and we first were taught safety and law at the Police Station and eventually we went to the local Fish and Game which had all sorts of Ranges for Bows, Rifle, Shotguns and Handguns....and with the Police, Fire, NRA Members, Parents and others were taught everything there was to know about such weapons and how to always hold them as if they were loaded and we were allowed to shoot all weapons and also learn about Bows and Recurves and Compound Bows and eve how to dress a Deer.

Because of this multiple decade long running program.....THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SINGLE CHILD OR TEEN DEATH DUE TO ACCIDENTAL GUNSHOT WOUNDS......EVER!!!

As well....we have an almost ZERO CRIME RATE....and our town is right next to a Major Massachusetts City.

Criminals are aware of exactly WHAT our Community stands for...and they avoid it like the plague.

AboveAlpha

 

I grew up with guns. When I was 7, our landlord shot me in the butt with a pellet rifle. My dad was gone to work, but I had full access to every gun we owned, which were all kept loaded. I waited 'til dad got home, and had him deal with it.
When I was 17, there was some serious ju-ju going on with people I knew and some dead kids at school. The Principal of the school and the local Chief of Detectives knew that I was carrying. That was a weird little time. I had the .357 snubbie in my pants one day when an angry cowboy came sliding up in his pick-up truck. He jumped out, blabbering something about his girl, and smacked me in the mouth. Cowboy tore outta there, and the vice principal came over, chastising me about getting hit! It was just too funny. I couldn't tell him that the real reason for his involvement didn't happen. I didn't shoot the cowboy.
In the same week, my goofy history teacher was making an example out of me in front of the class. He was talking about some hypothetical situation, then pointed at me and said "Some guy like him could come in here with a gun, and kill me!" Again, I couldn't say "well, some guy like me is in here with a gun, and you're just fine".
My point is that I knew for sure who I meant to defend myself or others against. Our bad guys did go to jail, but I didn't have to shoot them.
I never have applied for a CCW. Where I live now, open carry is legal, and I always do carry when I'm out in the wilds. I have had to shoot back at people who have shot at me. They didn't hit me, so I didn't hit them. I've had to make it perfectly clear that some men had better follow instructions or die at other times. They followed instructions.
These days, I keep what I consider to be an adequate supply of guns and ammo on hand, and I keep myself reasonably practiced with them.
That's just me, and I don't know about anyone else.

 

Well....I own many weapons....Firearms, Bows....Re-curve and Compound and when I was just a little kid both my Mom and Dad....Dad was Military and Mom was a..."CIVILIAN"....like I am....got me into THROWING KNIVES...and I had a lot of fun with that and I got very good and I am still good.

Obviously because of what I sometimes do I am extremely familiar with a variety of weapons from many different countries as well I was trained how to do quick fixes....ESPECIALLY...on the older M-16 Variants and anyone that had one was best to always have a little clear piece of plastic or sandwich baggie and a few rubber bands as to prevent...ISSUES....baggie over the end of the rifle barrel and then wrap a rubber band around that to keep mud and water from entering.

I also learned how to convert Semi-Auto AK's into Full Auto using a File and a few other things I won't list here....and this can also be done with an AR-15....but it is difficult.

I know this....many people will say they don't need a gun....UNTIL THEY NEED A GUN!

AboveAlpha

 

I teach CCW classes. There are over 8 million CCW's in America. Why do you think your fears aren't coming to fruition on a daily basis? I've never heard of a "casual" carrier. People who have chosen to make their safety a personal responsibility are taught to avoid conflict and have situational awareness so they won't have to use deadly force. We know the only time to use our firearm is when we know we (or a family member) are going to die if we don't act. We are all among concealed firearms far more than we know regularly, and yet we all go about our business unharmed.

 

As for what I think about the laws...
From my perspective, they should be as minimal as possible, and remain so for persons who prove to be responsible for their freedoms. Once a person crosses the line with a conviction for a violent crime, let the restrictions begin for those persons.
I don't like large capacity magazines, in general use, but I have them for several guns, because it's the most expedient way to carry ammo in ready condition. I prefer 20 round mags for the AR, because they're far less cumbersome than anything larger, and I still have more capacity than I need for any of my sporting uses. With the AK, 30 round mags are all that are common for it. They make the gun a bit awkward, but the whole proposition of the AK is kind of awkward to my mindset. Still, nothing else is an AK. It's a bit heavy, but with the stock folded, it hangs from the right shoulder in ready position conveniently enough to allow me to move around doing other things.
I prefer to just carry a pistol. Oddly enough, the one that I prefer, the Glock 17L, doesn't function right with the 33 round mags that work fine in my other two Glocks, but it's the most accurate. The 6" barrel makes it the most powerful as well. 17 rounds is still a fair amount. This whole matter of magazine capacity should remain a personal choice for those who don't abuse the right to bear.
I would prefer to see my State follow Arizona, with "Constitutional carry". If they did, I might choose to carry concealed a lot more often. It's another option that should remain open to those who don't abuse the right.
I get ample chances to think about things both as an unarmed person and as one who chooses to be armed. In my job, I'm not allowed to have a weapon of any kind, although I drive a cab in Las Vegas. So far, this hasn't proven difficult, but if the one situation should ever come where I know I need a gun, I'll certainly feel the lack.
As it is, it often occurs to me that I'm working on my "spidey senses". Let's say someone gets into the cab, and I feel apprehensive about them. The "usual" gamut of personal bias is useless in this, and it actually gets in the way. I can't risk making them apprehensive of me. Once in a great while, I have to find a subtle way of asking a man "why are you so scary looking?" That leads to an interesting discourse, usually, because I can be scary looking too, and it's really pretty common. Most of us don't mean to be scary looking, but we kinda' do.
When people perceive an opportunity to actually consider one another, and act on it, the perception of threat is diminished. When one or both refuse to engage that way, the threat is acknowledged. I vastly prefer to depend on social skills over combat skills, but I reserve the right to choose....

 

I'm for more for controlling violent felons, not honest citizens.

Although everyone should be aware of their surroundings, armed or not, some places are just more dangerous than others. For those than live and work in and near to very dangerous places, their "radars" should put on full alert.

A responisble person in my view is someone who thinks enough of his own life and his loved ones to take appropriate steps to defend them. Carrying a handgun around bad areas that one has trained with is just one good step.

 

That's because the community owned Glocks and not Sigs.....

 

This definitely would come from someone that either does not carry or does not trust themselves.

 

The FIRST HANDGUN I ever shot was my Dad's S&W .357 Magnum Revolver.

Absolutely BEAUTIFUL WEAPON!!!

It will take either a .357 Magnum round or a .38 round.

The weapon once fired raises and easily and comfortably settles right back down to target....and in the proper hands...mine....is accurate in the extreme.

Now...I had a debate with another person who insisted their Automatic 9 mm was more accurate and could fire 6 shots quicker and more accurately than the .357 using the .357 magnum rounds.

WRONG!!!

The problem with any Magazined Hand Gun is that once the trigger is fired there is a LOT OF MOVEMENT within the weapon as between the sliding of the top and the feeding of the next round....a damn 9 mm...ESPECIALLY A GLOCK 17 OR 19....is ALL OVER THE PLACE after a round is fired.

Now...the SIG....in MY OPINION....is a bit smoother and less Bingada-Bangada-Boom as a Glock....but both compared to a Smooth as Silk S&W .357 Magnum Revolver.....well....neither comes close!!!

AboveAlpha

 

I'll have to differ there!
I don't claim to be among the fastest or most accurate, especially when I see the guys who shoot IPSC.
Be careful about bragging unless you're a master in that game!
Where you knock the 17 and 19, these are two of my favorites. There is all the movement you mention, but it's exactly the same every time.
I think the whole shooting community is on a peculiar tangent when they discuss "recovery time", as it relates to coming back to point of aim on a stationary target, or even shooting steel, where you know the location of every target and progress through them. In a real world conflict, your adversary will almost certainly be in a different place when you regain your sight picture, so finding out where he went becomes part of that "recovery time".
When I take my Glocks out, my preferred target range is a place where others have been before me, and left a lot of range junk laying around. I shoot at random stuff, at random distances, trying hard to "take my time, quickly". I think it was Wyatt Earp who said that.
When I really want to abuse myself, I keep in mind that my cover and position has to change as well, so I can keep up with and keep away from my imaginary bad guy. Foolin' around like that is a lot of hard work!

 

Joe...this is kind of a personal joke between me and Glock.

I was issued a SIG....Glock...well Glock likes Glocks. LOL!!!

There is no external safety on a Sig as a Sig is a weapon chosen by....well....YOU can look up who uses them OK?

Anyway's....I asked Glock...who he thought would win if the two of us had equal ability and we had I think the area I described was a rectangle with a width of 25 Meters and a total length of 50 meters but on each end he and I could only move within a 10 meter long by 25 meter wide....25 meters is the width of the entire rectangle and it is 50 meters long but there is two 10 meter by 25 meter boxes on each end one for each of us and 30 meters separating each box thus the total of 50 meters in length.

I think I said we would each get 3 or 4 rounds and we would be wearing Armour and I asked who he thought would win?

Of COURSE he picked himself because of the Glock and I picked myself because of the Sig...but mine was NOT a 9mm.

AboveAlpha