Arming anti family members


PDA

Alan Fud
February 12, 2003, 10:10 AM
With all of this talk of possible terrorist attack and with our national alert status at it's highest level since the system was introduced, I was wondering ... :rolleyes:

If things hit the fan in your part of the woods, would you arm an anti family member (assuming you had the spare gun / ammo to do so)?

In my particular case, my wife and I would take our child and her two sisters and seek safety. My wife and I shoot and have our CCW's. My two sister-in-laws don't and are even AGAINST firearms. I have the spare firearms & ammo but I would think that having a gun in hand, they might be more of a danger to us (because they wouldn't have proper safety procedures instilled in their brains) than a possible enemy.

So my initial answer is 'no' but them what happens if shots actually have to be fired? Would the situation be improved with having them armed?

What would others do?

http://fud-files.netfirms.com/image/port2-jj.jpg (http://www.FamilyFriendsFirearms.com/) » www.FamilyFriendsFirearms.com (http://www.FamilyFriendsFirearms.com) «
Alligator Al: Share What You Know & Learn What You Don't.

If you enjoyed reading about "Arming anti family members" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
foghornl
February 12, 2003, 10:16 AM
No, but mainly because I probably wouldn't have time to teach said person the safety rules and manual-of-arms. I would, however, bring one into my home, and have that one do the logistical things needed..... i.e double checking food/water/ other supplies, bring up ammo from basement, making sure doors/windows locked, etc.

10-Ring
February 12, 2003, 10:17 AM
I would provide the option, not force it on them. But I'm sure if it came down to an ability to defend themselves or not, they'd take defending themselves.

Greg L
February 12, 2003, 10:33 AM
Most of my family is to far away for this to be a problem for me so I'll substitute "friend" for "family".

IF I did (and it is a big if) it would be something simple like a revolver or a bolt action rifle. As someone else mentioned I would probably put them to work doing other things as needed rather than arming them. This is assuming that we are in one spot and not moving. If we had to move somewhere then I don't know. I would probably have them do the driving rather than the "riding shotgun".

Greg

muddyboots
February 12, 2003, 10:49 AM
The instinct for self-preservation does not automatically segue into self-defense. I know a number of people who would immediately roll on their backs, expose their necks, and hope for the best.

Arcli9ht
February 12, 2003, 10:53 AM
It would be my plan to have more than enough weapons to go around with the few people with me. I don't know anyone who would be with me who is staunchly anti gun, just people who are uneducated, so I agree with Greg. Give them something simple (like a revolver) and assign them to inventory (be sure to show them the basics of gun safety tho). After they get over their anti gun sentiment because getting smacked by reality, then teach them safety and how to really shoot well in depth.

/Arcli9ht

Jack19
February 12, 2003, 11:03 AM
Most of my family are NGOs (Non-Gun-Owners) as opposed to Antis. If the SHTF, there are a couple Yugo M48s, and enough ammo, available.

Funny how facing death makes one give up those liberal philosophies.

Don Gwinn
February 12, 2003, 11:12 AM
At the moment I have literally no anti-gun friends. Closest thing would be my father-in-law. I really believe he'd be on the phone trying to get the police to come save him as the Al Qaeda Mall Ninja team broke down his door. He wouldn't take a gun if I handed it to him.
Luckily, I don't see anything of that nature happening in his lifetime. But if it does, he's dead and there's nothing I can do about it.

mpthole
February 12, 2003, 11:33 AM
No.

Since my family is over 150 miles away the only way I'd even be able to lend them a hand is if they showed up on my doorstep. Basically, I feel that if they haven't armed themselves already, then they haven't been listening to what I've been telling them for the last 3 years. Additionally, if they are unwilling to arm themselves, then they are probably unwilling to perform any other necessary preparations.

However, if it was TEOTWAWKI... I'd probably do what I could for them.

mdsteele
February 12, 2003, 11:36 AM
I don't have any anti family members but the answer is still NO!
If I know that a person is anti and has ever used the ballot box , pen, phone to further gun control, no matter who they are, absolutely NOT!
On this issue, you're either with me or against me. No fence sitters allowed.

Blackhawk
February 12, 2003, 11:42 AM
No.

If they're anti, it would just be an exercise in giving a BG a gun courtesy of the relative. A gun is REALLY dangerous in the hands of somebody who's absolutely opposed to using it. Better to leave it in the safe where it's harder for the BG to get at it.

Note that there's a BIG difference between being an anti and just being scared. Fear of guns can be overcome in a nanosecond if something far more fearsome comes up.

goon
February 12, 2003, 11:53 AM
No. If they are opposed to guns and are unwilling to use one, then what would be the point of having one. I thought about it before I started carrying, and I decided that I would be willing to drop the hammer under the right circumstances. There would be no sense in my carrying if I wasn't willing to use it.

I would find people who weren't opposed to owning a gun, just unprepared. I would arm them, after I had given them proper instruction and I was sure that they wouldn't end up shooting their neighbors kids because they got scared and used the old spray-and-pray.

As far as the ultra pacifists, all I can say is go ahead and be that way. As long as the bad guys are coming after you, they won't risk their lives attacking me and mine. I would come to your aid just as you were about to be killed. That way,you would still be alive the next time to act as a buffer zone between me and them.
If I could get the timing down right, I might never have to fire a shot.;)

Betty
February 12, 2003, 12:24 PM
No.

My loved ones are already armed or living with one who is, and my friends are not antis. I won't associate with antis.

Also, as the other posters have stated, with owning a firearm comes great responsibility. It takes proper mindset and training to use one effectively.

An anti might scramble for a gun as a quick feel-good solution to their terror, and then leave it in their dresser drawer. When the terror blows over, they say, "See? I didn't need a gun anyway. Nobody needs a gun."

Leatherneck
February 12, 2003, 01:05 PM
Well, I wouldn't PUSH it on them, but if requested, I'd cough up a spare or two along with whatever basic/emergency instruction was possible, depending on the urgency of the need.

TC
TFL Survivor

dairycreek
February 12, 2003, 01:22 PM
People who handle firearms must have good decision making skills when they might have to use them . Here the emphasis is on the word might! To place a loaded firearm in the hands of anybody who is not sufficiently skilled/schooled in its use is inviting disaster. If a situation arises the person who carries the gun must be able to assess it and make an appropriate decision else disaster is an extreme possibility. I would not choose to put a loaded firearm in the hands of any person who is not equipped to use it properly and effectively. Anti family has little to do with it per se. FWIW, Good shooting;)

Pheonix
February 12, 2003, 01:30 PM
No, I don't have any loved ones who are anti's. I do have some that ask "Why so many guns?"

Pilgrim
February 12, 2003, 01:37 PM
My favorite brother and his wife are a bit yuppie in their personalities. They like to shoot, but they just don't see the need to own guns. They live in a nice neighborhood in Huntington Beach (southwest of Los Angeles) and their house has a complete security alarm system which produces an armed response if activated.

My brother is too young to rememer the 1965 Watts riot and far enough removed from the 1992 Rodney King riot to not have been worried about it. After the attack on the World Trade Center, I asked him if he was sufficiently moved to get a gun. His answer was that he didn't see the Taliban marching down Beach Blvd so he didn't think he needed a gun.

While I don't consider him and his wife to be full blown liberals, they do see my requirement to be armed at all times as somewhat odd.

If something terrible happens, they will have to find their way to my doorstep which is about 230 road miles from their home and the route takes them through the nastier parts of Los Angeles. By then I expect their views on being armed will have changed....if they survive the trip.

Bruce

Neal Bloom
February 12, 2003, 01:38 PM
The few antigun relatives I have would probably run to my house seeking protection in a crisis. If that happens they had better take up arms or they are just useless ballast.

jmbg29
February 12, 2003, 01:40 PM
No.

They can load magazines or cook or something. If they want a gun, they can just take one from the bad guys. That will save the well known step of the bad guy taking the gun from them.:rolleyes: :uhoh: :scrutiny: :cuss:

Thank God that the relatives that matter are pro-gun.

One ex-brother-in-law idiot is an anti because he tried to kill himself by shooting himself in the stomach :banghead: :cuss: :fire: when the Army was closing in on him for being AWOL. He can't be trusted, ergo the rest of the human race should be dragged down to his near-animal existence.

Guess what loser-boy does for a living now frequent fliers? That's right, he is a FEDERAL AIRPORT BAGGAGE SCREENER!!!!!

Happy flying!

Mike Irwin
February 12, 2003, 01:50 PM
Live by the plowshare, die by the plowshare.

If they're anti-gun on moral/ethical grounds, let them choke on their sense of social consciouness.

Kalvan
February 12, 2003, 04:26 PM
Would the situation be improved with having them armed?
I don't think so. As the saying goes, people don't rise to the occasion, they revert to their level of training. I don't believe that they are going to suddenly acquire the judgement, tactical knowledge, and skill-at-arms necessary for success in the middle of a firefight where the higher-brain functions will have essentially been switched off.

BerettaNut92
February 12, 2003, 05:21 PM
Out of their own safety, no.

I may go back and help defend the fortress if possible, but that's about as reasonable as handing someone an accordion if they wanna jam all of the sudden, or tossing them the keys to a Cessna 172.

The chances they may hurt someone is great. The chances they will hurt someone else is even greater.

Not unless they were willing to give me a weekend to train them. Not like I can equip them with SKSs and train them in the back yard in suburban LA.

gryphon
February 12, 2003, 05:36 PM
I second the Skunk-man's response.

Still Learning
February 12, 2003, 05:40 PM
Borrow a tactic from the Iraqis and use the sheeple as human shields.:neener:

hutch24
February 12, 2003, 07:05 PM
You mean you guys have relatives that don't own guns??? :confused:

Jack19
February 12, 2003, 07:11 PM
I dunno guys, there are a lot of No answers here.

Personally, when the chips are waaaay waaaaay down, I'd rather hand a rifle to a recently former Anti, give them the 5 minute operations course, and show them in which direction to point it, than to take on whatever threat has caused them to suddenly become Pro-gun on my own.

:scrutiny:

4thHorseman
February 12, 2003, 07:26 PM
It's tough, but I would say probably no. I would not go out of my way for them and risk any of my immediate family health or life for them. Sorry but if they are to stupid to defend themselves now, what good would they be to me except to leech off of those that will defend themselves.
If he/she is a TRUE pro-gunner, they will not take up arms to defend themselves or my family.
Our family has made a decission long ago, they did also. So be it.

Hkmp5sd
February 12, 2003, 07:32 PM
I don't have any anti- family members or any family members that do not own guns. I might have to supply a little extra ammo on an "as needed" basis to some of them. :)

geekWithA.45
February 12, 2003, 07:43 PM
Here's the general breakdown, but the deeper the S gets, all bets are off.


Wife: Has her own. :)
Nuff said.

Dad: Yes.
My Dad has always been a reasonable guy: he personally detests guns, but supports everyone's right to have them, and supported me when I was younger. He's ex-navy, level headed, and trained.

Mom: No.
Freezes in a crisis, undependable judgement.

Sisters: Yes.
Classic left wingers, votes democrat, but have good heads on their shoulders, can hold her own in a fight.

Best Friend: Not initially. Innability to focus, still hasn't internalized the trigger rule :what: He needs work.

Other Best Friend: Has his own :)
Other Best Friends' Wife: Has her own :)

Other Other Best Friend: Probably, if he can keep his wife from screaming her head off (eeeeeeek! guns everywhere!) and giving away our position.

------------------------------------------------

Deployment:

Sisters, Other Other Best friend in reserve/guarding the kids, under the command of Wife.

Me, Dad, Other best friend & his wife rotate walking the walls, off duty guys in reserve.

-------------------------------------------------
Probability of this scenario ever needing to be put into play: ZERO.

Dave R
February 12, 2003, 08:15 PM
What Jack19 said.

Since they have no training, I would only arm them for a last-ditch stand. Give them the simplest weapons (revolver, SXS, etc.) and the simplest instructions.

Anything other than last-ditch is probably wasted ammo at best, and life-threatening accident or tactical error at worst.

Oleg Volk
February 12, 2003, 08:54 PM
Train NGOs, time permitting. Give them guns once they are trained.

Do not give guns or anything else to antis. I don't associate with such people, but if any were around, I'd tell them to go away. Don't like them and consider them a dangerous liability anyplace close to me.

.45Ruger
February 12, 2003, 09:55 PM
My wife isn't really pro or anti. She does not really care.

4v50 Gary
February 12, 2003, 09:59 PM
Worse case scenario I'll arm not only my relatives who are antis, but also all those who would stand by my side and join me in the fight.

Now, exactly who we're fighting against isn't clear. It's not one of those situations where we're barricaded against some sort of monsters that eat people or snatch bodies, is it?

WhoKnowsWho
February 13, 2003, 08:53 AM
My wife and I would of course be armed. But we do have a roommate who is very anti. He said if it came down to it, he would rather die, or let someone else die, before he pulled the trigger to kill someone else. So not only is he anti guns, he is very much a pacifist, or just not driven enough to act.

So alas, if worse comes to worse, he will be a decoy or human shield... I wish I could change it, but he hasn't budged.

meathammer
February 13, 2003, 12:58 PM
It would definitely depend on the given situation. If the person in question is Anti, they probably have a strong fear/ignorance of firearms. Time might not pemit you to properly teach them safety, functionality, aiming, etc. Because I have a big heart :) , I would give them an alternative to an evil gun. "Let's see, 20" katana, machete, camp axe, wrist-rocket, ...take your pick! :evil:

sm
February 13, 2003, 01:18 PM
NO
Immediate family is pro-gun...though majority don't shoot much. Dad has his own, and military experience. Sibs...all but one has guns, Sis-well- she is 4 hrs away, in a DV situation, and her dope head father of her kids stole her gun for dope...sorry Sis...tough love.

Friends, I hang with like minded ,pro-guns, we would assist each other..

Aquaintences...tough! Sheeple...something to distract wolves for the rest of us...

buford1
February 13, 2003, 01:27 PM
Its amazing how fast a anti will become pro gun when SHTF. During the LA riots several people wanted to borrow guns or ammo. When the rioting broke out they stopped ammo sales. Told them sorry but I just cant loan out firearms or ammo. My imediate family is pro gun and avid shooters.

Mute
February 13, 2003, 01:44 PM
Let them buy their own damn gun and see how "easy" it is to just get a gun! They can even try to take advantage of the "gunshow loophole" if they want.

anchored
February 13, 2003, 02:53 PM
I said no.
My wife and I, as a sort of gedanken experiment, have an hypothetical bomb shelter and hypothetical commune. We classify all out friends and relatives in terms of who gets in each and why, based on their abilities and personalities. Nobody I know who is "in" the bomb shelter is anti-gun. A few people who would be "in" the commune are, if not anti, at least lean that way, but they have other redeeming qualities that would make them nice to live nearby. But when it comes to survival, I want people who can survive without a babysitter.

jmbg29
February 13, 2003, 02:58 PM
Initially, I said no. I did that mostly because the one or two antis within the confines of my family are worthless. Not just to me, but to the entire human race.

Here is my compromise. They can have a gun after a 7 (business) day cooling of period. If within that time period, they cool off to room temperature, no deal! 'Kaay?:neener: :evil:

illuminatus99
February 13, 2003, 03:58 PM
I don't have any anti family or friends, a few of them don't own any guns but they'd take one if they needed it. my wifes side of the family is in the woods in northern MN and the woods in spokane WA, they're all hunters and wouldn't have any problem with hunting two legged varmints. my side of the family is pretty small and close by, my mom has a single shot derringer and that's about it, I suppose it TSHTF she'd want her shotgun back :)

Kentucky Rifle
February 13, 2003, 04:17 PM
I would not give a firearm to someone with no training/experience. I would consider giving a firearm to someone, in an emergency situation, who knew the 4 rules and had a little shooting experience. There is no use at all in presenting a firearm to someone who will end up causing more damage than preventing damage.

KR

larryw
February 13, 2003, 04:58 PM
Don't have any anti friends or family. Do have several who are non-gun owners.

A gun is nothing more than a tool. Mindset and training are the difference between it being a valuable asset and a potentially deadly liability. My answer would depend on these items, with the first carrying more weight than the second: with the right mindset, training is easy. I currently have a couple guns out on loan to non-gun owners

Getting back to the question, IMO just being an anti isn't grounds for refusal. But an anti would probably have the wrong mindset and that would be hard to adjust; accordingly, they'd be nearly impossible to train. They probably wouldn't meet my requirements for the loan as a gun in their hands would be a liability.

Didn't a bunch of the liberal-elite call Heston during the LA riots several years back asking to borrow guns? As I recall, his answer was, to the effect, "No, I couldn't possibly teach you how to use it safely in such a short time."

LoneStranger
February 15, 2003, 02:25 AM
And in a TEOTWAWKI situation you must remember that the Anti's have automatically classed themselves as the future serf's of those with the wherewithal to prepare.

Wasn't this same situation involved in developement of Feudal Societies?

By yourself you might have to consider arming others for your own survival. With proper preparation you will be working in concert with other likeminded people and the necessity of arming Anti's should never come up.

ahadams
February 15, 2003, 02:54 AM
give an anti an firearm? no way! OTOH, I have a couple of Cold Steel Bushman knives that can be fastened to a stick to form a spear...I might be convinced to give an anti one of those, just prior to booting him/her/it out the front gate...

joeislove
February 15, 2003, 02:18 PM
I don't have any anti friends left. They're all intelligent, and after a couple arguments, realized their stances were purely emotional, and lacked logic.

However, I only have a couple friends that own guns.

In a SHTF situation, I would arm those around me only in a desparate case. Say if we were under attack by looters or something. I would give them something with "an easy point and click interface" and tell them to keep the muzzle pointed away from us and toward the BGs. After it was over, I would pick it up again.

If I had the time, I would give them the safety lecture and let them shoot for a while, and then arm them.

After it was all over, if they were anti before, they sure as hell wouldn't be anti anymore. All I'd have to do is say, "What do you mean guns are bad? Remember when my gun collections saved our asses during the Food Riots of 2004?"

NIGHTWATCH
February 16, 2003, 12:39 PM
No, because this question has already been answered by family and friends. If the SHTF they all say, we are coming over to you!!! :D My response is just bring food, blankets, pillows, water and batteries.

Other than that, no. Giving a firearm to a family member who has never operated them can be deadly.

If you enjoyed reading about "Arming anti family members" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!