Right to feel safe, or right to be safe?


PDA






guitarguy314
January 1, 2013, 01:32 PM
I hear a lot of anti gun people say that they don't feel safe with civilians concealing weapons in public. They use this as an argument against concealed (or otherwise) carry. My question is, do they have a right to FEEL safe, or BE safe?

If someone is afraid of clowns, can they sue a nearby circus?

I interpret things as it doesn't matter what others are doing, until it hurts you or your property, you just have to grin and bear it.

Or am I off base?

If you enjoyed reading about "Right to feel safe, or right to be safe?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gbran
January 1, 2013, 01:35 PM
It's the criminal CCWers they should fear.

dab102999
January 1, 2013, 01:40 PM
Ya sometimes this is hard to approach. Just have to judge if they can have a reasonable discussion. I have. Good friend that does not want to see anyone open carry cus he feels scared of them. ( Michigan has recent bill that brought open carry to the public eye). But at the same time I ask him that he does not know who is concealed carry and his responce is if I don't see it then I feel safe. Then he has nothing to say when I say a gun in the room is a gun in the room isn't it!??

Cesiumsponge
January 1, 2013, 01:41 PM
In many of these discussions, people argue from the point of "I feel X". It usually means a personal bias has replaced rational data that might be contrary to their worldview. "I don't feel as if Y" or "I feel Z is the correct way to go".

It's probable that none of those statements have a credible foundation behind them, other than pure personal opinion. After all, personal worldviews take a lot of energy to create. It's a pain in the butt to change your worldview even if it's factually incorrect because you've invested so much into creating them. This goes for any argument or position that ceases to be objective.

PT92
January 1, 2013, 01:57 PM
I hear a lot of anti gun people say that they don't feel safe with civilians concealing weapons in public. They use this as an argument against concealed (or otherwise) carry. My question is, do they have a right to FEEL safe, or BE safe?

If someone is afraid of clowns, can they sue a nearby circus?

I interpret things as it doesn't matter what others are doing, until it hurts you or your property, you just have to grin and bear it.

Or am I off base?
Not IMO--You're square on.

However your question/statement to me is indicative of a general theme I am seeing of late in that "we" seem to be on the defensive (in some cases paranoid) as the mainstream media is desperately trying to make us look like the bad guys. I actually had a family member ask me the other day if I was going to wear my NRA hoodie as I was on my way out to run a few errands :confused:.

We just need to step back and catch our breath and then get back down to the business of doing our utmost best to support "Our" Second Amendment" of which the Founding Fathers so brilliantly crafted so that we could remain free of tyranny.

--Happy New Year

22-rimfire
January 1, 2013, 02:00 PM
I don't think Americans have the right to either be safe or feel safe. It is up to the individual through defensive measures, choice on place to live, and so forth. I of course realize that sometimes choosing the "safe" place to live is difficult and un-available to many realistically.

sota
January 1, 2013, 02:06 PM
I'm sure if you asked most victims of crime (robbery, assault, rape... can't ask dead people unfortunately) they'd say they felt safe right up until the point they were attacked. the reality was they were not safe for far longer than that. so which is more important... FEELING safe? or BEING safe? to me to be the latter you actually CAN'T *feel* safe most of the time. driving a car, walking the isles of a grocery store, with your kids at the park... BEING safe requires you to see the dangers around you. and if you're seeing them and actively mitigating them then you can't FEEL safe.

raddiver
January 1, 2013, 02:07 PM
I dont agree with the "i dont feel safe because X is has a gun" therefore we must do something about it.

Call me silly, but that's the equivalent of guilty until proven innocent. Which there is way too much of in this country already.

Cesiumsponge
January 1, 2013, 02:11 PM
Ever see people at the airport interviewed by the news? The reporter asks if they think the TSA is doing anything for them. Everyone invariably says they, "feel safer". I've never seen anyone ever say, "I know I'm safer"

22-rimfire
January 1, 2013, 02:14 PM
Unfortunately, gun owners are becoming GUILTY before any crime is committed and there is no such thing as innocent.

Morality and personal responsibilty.... it is all about those concepts. When you loose the morality by the majority and you assign personal responsibility to law enforcement, government health care, politicans, the military.... you do not have an America I want to live in.

Manco
January 1, 2013, 02:15 PM
I hear a lot of anti gun people say that they don't feel safe with civilians concealing weapons in public. They use this as an argument against concealed (or otherwise) carry.

They seem to have great difficulty viewing reality in a pragmatic way. For one thing, they have this notion that the law can stop criminals from doing things that scare or could harm them. To be sure, it is a deterrent, but there will always be criminals nevertheless who disregard these "feel-good" laws because, well, they're criminals.

I'm not a psychologist, but if you'll permit me to dabble, based on my own observations a lot of the difference between people on either side of the CCW issue seems to be their source of fear and how they manage fear. Those who favor CCW fear the actions of criminals who may be carrying and the potential of any random person they don't know to do evil; naturally, they desire to possess the means by which to defend themselves potentially from anybody, which ameliorates their fear (because it helps provide real protection). Those who disfavor CCW (and probably guns in general), on the other hand, do not want to fear anybody, even though they do, so they sort of transfer this fear into tools, namely guns, and then try to eliminate those. The problem, of course, is that the really dangerous people are still going to be carrying weapons, but the antis don't want to think about it because they can't deal with being afraid--they fear fear so much that they'll overlook some very basic, practical facts staring them right in the face.

Enough pop psychology--the facts are actually rather simple, and their combination with the natural right of self-defense for all creatures heavily favors the right of legal CCW in a free country. If criminals are going to be carrying guns regardless of the law, and they very frequently do, then we all should have the right to be equally armed. Good luck trying to convince somebody who has transferred their fear of people to guns, though--the vast majority don't want to hear it, and will not be convinced. The ones who can be are the ones who simply went with what they'd been taught, but can still think for themselves. The best way to convince the others, unfortunately, is for a criminal to threaten them or take the life of somebody they love--when they finally lose faith in the law's ability to protect them, then they might change their minds.

My question is, do they have a right to FEEL safe, or BE safe?

To typical antis, these are one in the same. Their greatest fear is fear itself. Ignoring fear can be good when something needs to get done regardless of the risks, but ignoring facts so that you can transfer your fears away and equate real safety with merely feeling safe is downright cowardly and potentially dangerous (to yourself!).

If someone is afraid of clowns, can they sue a nearby circus?

Yes, if enough lawmakers and judges were equally afraid of clowns. That's not currently the case with clowns, but it's a situation that we potentially face as proponents of gun rights.

SuperNaut
January 1, 2013, 02:51 PM
I don't think Americans have the right to either be safe or feel safe. It is up to the individual through defensive measures, choice on place to live, and so forth. I of course realize that sometimes choosing the "safe" place to live is difficult and un-available to many realistically.
Agreed, the only right to be safe is the right to be safe from an over-reaching government codified in the restrictions laid in the BoR.

ball3006
January 1, 2013, 03:15 PM
When I am armed, which is about 98 percent of the time, I feel safe. I don't give a rat's patootie what other people think. That brings up another peeve of mine. My dad life was spent trying to impress other people. Myself, I don't give a rat's, well you know, what other people think. They just have to take me as I am, which is armed. That is why my friends are who they are, all armed. We will go out of our way to protect those around us if the time came though....chris3

CB900F
January 1, 2013, 03:20 PM
Fella's;

OK, let's face facts. There is no such thing as "safe". There is an explicit future of death for all of us. Having your life cut short is an inherent risk of being alive. Regardless if the threat to life is a giant asteroid inexorably headed towards earth, an airliner hitting the building your in, or getting bit by a mosquito carrying a noxious virus, you run the risk merely by being alive. In other words, if you are capable of exhibiting a working intellect, you know you can't be totally safe. To then express that you have the right to "feel safe" says things about your cognitive abilities that aren't favorable.

There are, of course, justifiable reductions of risk. Workplace safety laws, air traffic regulations, etc., etc.. But, to punish a very large number of Americans with new gun control legislation in order to make Joe & Jane vegetable "feel safe" is time, effort, and particularly in these times, money very very poorly spent.

At every opportunity we should make the facts of Canada's failed national registration known. The actual costs of that legislative idiocy exceeded projections by an incredibly large margin. Furthermore, I've been told that the actual compliance percentage might have been 50%. That in Canada, a culture who's laws and culture are based on the English model of subjects, not citizens.

900F

MedWheeler
January 1, 2013, 03:24 PM
I've asked people who were apprehensive about lawfully-armed citizens this: "If I take my firearm off and hand it to you, will you suddenly become a dangerous person driven to acts of violence?" I have not yet had anyone answer in the affirmative, so I then make sure they understand that they are coming off as someone who trusts themselves, but no one else, and that that can be offensive.

yokel
January 1, 2013, 03:24 PM
As absurd as it sounds, some gun control and confiscation cretins truly believe in a “social liberty” where no one has to worry.

Another ugly form of collectivism that gives priority to "group" rights over individual rights and individuals sacrificing themselves for the "group" or "greater good".

The forced equality of the convict camp.

Of course, every form collectivism is linked to statism and the diminution of freedom when political authority is used to advance collectivist goals.

ApacheCoTodd
January 1, 2013, 03:50 PM
Reminds me of a dingus and his wife walking past my property years back as I was doing outdoor stuff and my rottweiller was following me about as rottweillers do. She never moved towards them, never stepped anywhere near off the property and still dingus makes a point of telling me she is supposed to be on a leash.

I'm thinkin' - whatever, move on - but let him know that that is not in fact the case as she was on my property and he should have a nice day.

He then proceeds to debate about cops, regs fences and the like but ends with the fact that my dog was scaring his wife. Note that by now they would have been a quarter mile away - a fact neither lost on nor ignored by me.

So, in flash of instinct which usually comes later with a "why didn't I think of that then?" I say to the fella:

I wonder how you come to believe that I'm responsible for what you fear?

beatledog7
January 1, 2013, 03:52 PM
CB900F has it right: "safe" is relative at best. Complete safety is unachievable.

It is also a fact that there is no inherent right to feel safe, nor is there an inherent right to feel anything. But let's say there were, and that I don't feel safe in "gun-free" zones. Since I have a right to enter them and in many cases am even required to enter them, they should be eliminated because they violate my inherent right to feel safe.

You can easily demonstrate how utterly silly this notion of a right to feel safe is. Somebody above mentioned fear of clowns. There are lots of people who are afraid of the dark, of dogs, of closed places, of open places, of water, of bridges, etc. And we have to admit, people have died in situations involving all of these things (except maybe clowns). So they can feel safe, we must create an environment in which people can live their lives without ever encountering a clown, the dark, a dog, an open space, a bridge...

See how silly that is?

PT92
January 1, 2013, 04:39 PM
Ever see people at the airport interviewed by the news? The reporter asks if they think the TSA is doing anything for them. Everyone invariably says they, "feel safer". I've never seen anyone ever say, "I know I'm safer"
Reminds me of an old "All in the Family" episode where Archie does a PSA concerning hijacking (early 70's it was real common). He suggests that the airlines provide a revolver to each passenger as they board the plane--his theory is that the potential 'hijacker' would think twice about taking over the plane if they feared getting shot...? Of course, the show was produced by an extremely liberal Gary Marshall so it always made "conservative" Archie out to look like a loon and liberal "Meat-head & Gloria" look like brain-surgeons.

Pardon if I veered off on a tangent (I'm in my 40's so maybe some of you here are not even familiar with the show).

--Happy New Year

Inebriated
January 1, 2013, 05:02 PM
It isn't unreasonable for people to feel unsafe with others around them carrying a gun. Hell, I'm not particularly fond of being around anyone with a gun who's training background I don't know... But the important thing for people to realize is that ccw-related accidents are so absolutely miniscule that it's like mentioning how many times someone gets in their car at the post office, and accidentally drives into the post office. I could throw out some analogies, make some points about pros of ccw for the bystander, etc... but I'd be preaching to the choir...

Slipknot_Slim
January 1, 2013, 05:24 PM
If you ask most of these people if they would feel safe around a uniformed police officer, what do you think their answer would be? Yet, you and I both know that there have been times when police officer's have had negligent discharges of their weapons. Yet, most people still feel safe.

Frankly, there are people who open carry that I don't feel safe around and others that I don't give a second thought. Working in a store that sells firearms and ammo, I see quite a few people carrying guns. Some people I don't give a second thought and others worry me to death until they get out of the store.

As far as concealed carry, if you're doing it right....nobody but you should know.

armedandsafe
January 1, 2013, 05:34 PM
My common response to the "I don't feel safe with people who are carrying guns" is a little different from what I'm seeing here.

My response is, "I don't feel as safe when I'm with people who don't carry guns. I prefer to have back up from people who have taken the effort to defend themselves."

Pops

cfullgraf
January 1, 2013, 05:47 PM
Ever see people at the airport interviewed by the news? The reporter asks if they think the TSA is doing anything for them. Everyone invariably says they, "feel safer". I've never seen anyone ever say, "I know I'm safer"

Veering off topic a little, TSA does not make me safer, TSA does not make me feel safer. It only serves to make people think the government is doing something while wasting tax dollars and my/their time.

I am more concerned of the risk of being injured or killed when traveling in Europe than in the United States.

k_dawg
January 1, 2013, 06:29 PM
Remember, one of the primary motivations for "Black Only Water Fountains" and for blacks to sit in the back of the bus; was for the "proper sophisticated white people' would 'feel' safe.

It is all bigotry at its core.

Manco
January 1, 2013, 07:29 PM
It is also a fact that there is no inherent right to feel safe, nor is there an inherent right to feel anything.

Well, if we have the right to life and liberty, I think it is reasonable to argue that we have the right to be safe--only to a degree, of course, because as you said complete safety is unachievable. The questions are the means and who decides how, as well as what is real safety versus merely fooling oneself into feeling safe. In a free country, the people should have the right to defend themselves using the most effective tools--this comes from the virtue of being a living creature, born of nature. It provides the most possible real safety as opposed to merely feeling safe, and it promotes the most liberty and self-determination, which should be the American way, while the other way that makes some people "feel safe" is the opposite, working against liberty, which is un-American.

But let's say there were, and that I don't feel safe in "gun-free" zones. Since I have a right to enter them and in many cases am even required to enter them, they should be eliminated because they violate my inherent right to feel safe.

That's a good point. While I argued above that we had some right to BE safe, through a combination of sensible laws (e.g. murder being illegal), effective law enforcement, and allowing the people to arm themselves as they individually deem fit, there is no right to FEEL safe--that is, you're free to feel any way you want, but there is no guarantee of how you'll feel. If the means are available to let you BE safe (as much as possible) as well as free, then that's all that matters. If a person irrationally fears guns and the idea of an armed populace--besides criminals who are armed anyway--then they're free to seek help, as well as take classes in reasoning and logic, but they shouldn't try to take away the fundamental, inalienable natural rights of the people.

You can easily demonstrate how utterly silly this notion of a right to feel safe is. Somebody above mentioned fear of clowns. There are lots of people who are afraid of the dark, of dogs, of closed places, of open places, of water, of bridges, etc. And we have to admit, people have died in situations involving all of these things (except maybe clowns). So they can feel safe, we must create an environment in which people can live their lives without ever encountering a clown, the dark, a dog, an open space, a bridge...

See how silly that is?

The human mind largely works on association, and it can be quite difficult for some people to logically separate certain things and ideas from one another when necessary. For instance, guns are, quite frankly, designed to kill living things, and killing people is generally considered a bad thing. This association, for some people, is virtually unbreakable--guns kill, killing is bad, so guns are bad, period. It doesn't matter how much logic you apply to the issue, this association will stubbornly persist nonetheless, especially after people transfer their fear of others to guns, as described above.

While the example you just gave may sound silly to a person who can reason to the point of breaking strong associations like this when presented with the facts, it's not so silly to others when GUNS specifically are involved. In short, they're fixated on guns as murder machines.

Ragnar Danneskjold
January 1, 2013, 08:40 PM
guitarguy314, the answer to your question is neither.

As an American, you have the right to be free. Safety is irrelevant. The US was never intended or promised to be a safe country, in feeling or in effect. It was promised and intended to be a free country. Sometimes liberty is a little dangerous. Living in this nation is an acceptance of that fact. If one wants to be safer, they are also free to find another nation to live in. One with fewer protections of liberties.

arizona98tj
January 1, 2013, 10:22 PM
The best way to convince the others, unfortunately, is for a criminal to threaten them or take the life of somebody they love--when they finally lose faith in the law's ability to protect them, then they might change their minds.
It took the raping of her friend before my buddy's wife decided him CCWing wasn't such a silly idea after all. It is indeed sad that some people require such a thing to happen before they understand. :(

barnbwt
January 2, 2013, 12:04 AM
The best way to convince the others, unfortunately, is for a criminal to threaten them or take the life of somebody they love--when they finally lose faith in the law's ability to protect them, then they might change their minds.
I don't think something so drastic is necessary in most cases, if you can get the person to do some Method Acting and imagine how they would feel in such a scenario. Ask them if they feel they or others should be able to retaliate in kind when threatened, in a just world. If it would be fair for a woman to retaliate against a rapist with an equal or greater force as he. If the teachers found slumped over their students at Sandy Hook should have had something in their hands to defend themselves with, in a just world. Then describe the only contrivence that has been invented that allows for this (guns :rolleyes:).

Too often the "gun" itself is tied to negative emotions (usually from propaganda) for people, and purity of emotional feeling is what drives many peoples' opinions, making the question too complicated to answer without blaming the gun. So try to get them to imagine force/force conflicts without guns present. If the person can suspend their focus on firearms (i.e. if they are even receptive to discussion) they should readily find there is no better alternative (which is why we have all chosen guns as effective fighting implements for centuries now). Most gun-evasive (not hostile) people I've talked to simply find it "uncomfortable" to talk about self defense because they've never had to defend anything, and find it sort of a "jinx." That talking about it makes it more likely to happen. Just like many have a phobia of writing a Will or buying life insurance. Even I initially found all the talk of self-defense on here extremely morbid (and still find tactical discussions somewhat unseemly, if occaisionally enlightening).

TCB

OptimusPrime
January 2, 2013, 12:10 AM
I'm with Ragnar, no one has a right to safety because unfortunately, individual safety is usually dependent upon others. But, we are free to choose, that's our right. I'm happy to choose to defend myself, individually. And luckily my wife has agreed to exercise her right to the same, BEFORE anything bad has happened close to her. It is always sad when we learn things post-trauma; happens far too often. :(

12131
January 2, 2013, 01:08 AM
Feeling safe is not a right. Being safe is.

ETA: I have a personal right to be safe, and I take personal responsibility and measures to protect myself. I have no right to ask or demand another person to ensure that I am safe.

Ragnar Danneskjold
January 2, 2013, 01:10 AM
Define being safe.

justice06rr
January 2, 2013, 01:12 AM
IMO you only have the right to feel/be safe in your own home/property. When you are in public--anything goes. It is up to you as a responsible adult to take charge of your own safety regardless of where you are.

Its not the law-abiding CCW-er's people should worry about, but the criminals and bad guys among us.

JRH6856
January 2, 2013, 04:43 AM
Ever hear of the Four Freedoms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms)?

1 Freedom of speech
2 Freedom of worship
3 Freedom from want
4 Freedom from fear

FDR said it. All too many people actually believe it.

Ragnar Danneskjold
January 2, 2013, 05:00 AM
FDR was the worst president in American history, for many many reasons.

Manco
January 2, 2013, 03:59 PM
Define being safe.

For one thing, individuals should have the right to provide for their own safety using the most effective tools, namely firearms. Supplementing this are laws against crimes such as murder and assault, along with law enforcement agencies and prisons. Nothing can be absolutely guaranteed, of course, but such steps can help improve the people's odds of maintaining their right to life, as well as leading productive and happy lives if they so choose. To this extent, government can help the people BE reasonably safe and still free--less would take society toward anarchy, and more would take society toward statism and tyranny.

As for FEELING safe, that's really all in the mind, and government has no business meddling with how people actually feel--only the real conditions may be addressed (and allowed to be addressed by the people themselves), and even if some people don't feel safe, there is never a justification for compromising liberty and real safety just to fool some people into FEELING safe. No fully-developed reasoning adult human mind would approve of such actions from so-called leaders (except for the deceivers in the government who desire more power, of course), being coddled and tricked into a false sense of security like so many sheep.

Baba Louie
January 2, 2013, 08:58 PM
We have a right to self defense. It's supposedly one of those unalienable thingies our forefathers wrote about that pre-exist any form of government. But a right to feel safe or right to be safe? That's stretching it.Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. -- Helen Keller Sad but true. Utopia does not exist, no matter how hard some try to convince themselves or pass laws prohibiting this or that in an effort to "make things safe".

Tho there are some examples where laws do work to make some things we consume safe(r), or places we work at, cars we drive, etc. All come at a cost.

barnbwt
January 4, 2013, 08:25 PM
I think we have more of a right to make ourselves safe (read: pursuing Life) than we do a right to be made safe. Granted, security is the primary purpose of government (at least, it used to be), but we have no inherent God-given right to this benefit of civilization. Instead, we are given the right to construct a government (in our case, a Constitutional Republic) that best provides this service to us citizens as part of the Social Contract theory.

As has been seen countless times, we citizens are not always the wisest at deciding the best method for securing our own safety, but it is ultimately our decision who safeguards us (a government, ourselves, or no one).

TCB

9MMare
January 4, 2013, 10:02 PM
Well, if we have the right to life and liberty, I think it is reasonable to argue that we have the right to be safe--only to a degree, of course, because as you said complete safety is unachievable. .

American citizens have many options for taking their individual and family safety into *their own hands* and be responsible for it. (anti-gun people would like to remove some of those options).

And yes, there is no guarantee, no matter what you...or the govt...does.

Please see my signature (2nd one.)

9MMare
January 4, 2013, 10:03 PM
I think we have more of a right to make ourselves safe (read: pursuing Life) than we do a right to be made safe. Granted, security is the primary purpose of government (at least, it used to be), but we have no inherent God-given right to this benefit of civilization. Instead, we are given the right to construct a government (in our case, a Constitutional Republic) that best provides this service to us citizens as part of the Social Contract theory.

As has been seen countless times, we citizens are not always the best at deciding the best method for securing our own safety, but it is ultimately our decision who safeguards us (a government, ourselves, or no one).

TCB

Thank you! Well said.

If you enjoyed reading about "Right to feel safe, or right to be safe?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!