Concealed Carry & Homeland Threats?


PDA






papaone
August 17, 2004, 05:23 PM
I am sure that many of us have thought about concealed carry and homeland terrorism. Care to express any of your thoughts and the part we ,as legal carry citizens, might play if it breaks out in our cities on a large scale?

Thanks for your input
Dennis:) :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Concealed Carry & Homeland Threats?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
cerberus
August 17, 2004, 05:28 PM
I always will feel better being armed today it's each persons duty to be ready to defend yourself and family. Just think if the people on that airline over PA back on 9/11 had been armed. Just maybe they might be alive today.:) I know it's never ever going to happen our Goverment allowing us to fly armed but I for one think it just might be a real good idea.:)

armoredman
August 17, 2004, 05:29 PM
It is highly unlikely we will be able to affect terrorism with our concealed handguns - 155gr 9mm JHP is notoriously ineffective against airliners. Also,many, if not all major terrorist targets are NO FIREARMS signed. Oh, well, I don't go to those places anyway.
However, terrorist bombers have been thwarted in Israel by armed citizens. Get as much training as you can, to use those CCW peices appropriately as possible, on the wild chance that it will be up to you, and you alone, to save two thousand lives.

Rickstir
August 17, 2004, 05:40 PM
Call me a profiler. I work in a college town that is hip-deep with Arabs. I make a concious effort to actually look at the drivers of vehicles, particularly vans and uhaul types. Got 911 on my speed dial. It takes me about 5 minutes to get out of town on my way home (another 55 mins.). I am watchful while close to town. There is a nuclear reactor in town at the college and another commercial one about 40 miles on the other side of town, away from the direction I travel. If I lived down there I would be parnoide even more.

kulika
August 17, 2004, 06:10 PM
quote:

It is highly unlikely we will be able to affect terrorism with our concealed handguns

___________________________________________________

Read Clancy's Teeth of the Tiger (now out in paperback) for what is a very likely scenario. It is my belief that terrorists will create far more fear by hitting us where we least expect and are least prepared, such as middle America malls. I shudder to think that my family will be "protected" in the mall by the 60ish rent-a-cop and his radio.

I can only hope that if we do get hit as described in this book that various statelegislatures will realize that an armed, prepared citizenry is our final defense. Unfortunately, our knuckleheaded representatives will probably believe that additional terrorist attacks can only be prevented by further limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Small spoiler coming: I think Utah residents will be heartened by the response the terrorists receive in the Utah mall

papaone
August 17, 2004, 06:41 PM
My worry also is that the gun liberals may use attacks as an excuse to disarm us. Well, the protection of my family is a #1 priority as is yours. You can be sure the liberals will be protected by somebody's firearms. No doubt they feel their hide is worth more than ours.

Standing Wolf
August 17, 2004, 07:02 PM
It is highly unlikely we will be able to affect terrorism with our concealed handguns

Small odds are still better than none.

dairycreek
August 17, 2004, 08:29 PM
That's why I carry. Don't know where terrorists might or might not fit into that mindset. Good shooting;)

Preacherman
August 17, 2004, 08:36 PM
Watch the Al Qaeda training tapes that have been circulating for a couple of years. The concensus LE opinion on those tapes is that if you're taken hostage by these types, you have little to no chance of surviving, despite anything they may say. That being the case, you have nothing to lose - and are not posing any greater risk to other hostages - by fighting back at the earliest opportunity. If you're armed, you can fight back rather more effectively than with your bare hands...

If I have to cross the river, I'll take an AQ escort with me, thank you very much! :fire:

Old Dog
August 17, 2004, 10:15 PM
You just never know ... I live up in the glorious Pacific NorthWest, where once an alert customs agent at a small town ferry terminal noticed a slightly nervous driver getting off a car ferry from Canada ... you know the rest ... lots of explosives in his car trunk ... Yep, he was Al Qaida. Turns out, the Space Needle (Seattle) was in fact a prospective target. It could just be John Q. Citizen who alertly notices something not quite right, and averts the next Oklahoma City-type bombing. It was just an average Joe who noticed the car Malvo and Muhammed (the "D.C. snipers") in a rest stop and got them caught.

Smurfslayer
August 18, 2004, 02:02 PM
in the event of an attack - or coordinated attacks - just how out of hand the overreaction by fed, state and local gov't will be...

The harsh reality is that as gun owners, those who carry regularly are but a small minority... As citizens, gun owners are but a small minority...

Unfortunately, some terrorists aren't as stupid as others. They're going to pick a target that will have the most chance of demoralizing us. A target that is weak or perceived that way, and one which is symbolic. Likely, they will aim to kill and injure as many women and children as they can due to the 'higher' value we as a society place there.

I'm sure we'll see new and improved "sterile areas" erected for "safety" and much more... These convenient new restrictions will nullify pretty much all of the area's armed citizens.

jdege
August 18, 2004, 02:32 PM
Armed civilians might be effective against certain types of terrorist attack, and will be ineffective against others.

Consider the Luxor attack in 1997 - armed civilians might have made a difference.

But then think about the attack on the WTC in 1993 - what difference would it have made if you'd been carrying while the terrorists drove a truck bomb into the parking garage?

HankB
August 18, 2004, 02:33 PM
It is highly unlikely we will be able to affect terrorism with our concealed handguns. When terrorists were hitting schools in Israel, arming teachers reputedly helped quite a bit.

A concealed handgun is not a talisman that confers invincibility on the person who wields it. What it DOES is help to balance the odds - at least partially - against a violent opponent who expects no resistance from a helpless victim. So concealed carry may help. It certainly won't hurt.

I agree that our "leaders" - and I use the term loosely - would probably react in exactly the wrong manner and attempt to render Americans even more helpless and disarmed in the face of armed terror threats - I mean, just look at the opposition the airline pilots are getting in their quest to be armed from a supposedly pro-gun Bush administration. Imagine what a Kerry administration would do. :what: :barf:

Ala Dan
August 18, 2004, 03:01 PM
The director of the State Of Alabama'a homeland security has
identified at least five targets within the state, that possibly
are terroists targets. In this day and age one never knows
what (or where) the perpetrator might strike? Some targets
within this state, lie in rural type areas; not in the big cities
like Birmingham, Huntsville, Montgomery, or Mobile. I think
its the responsibility of us as citizens to be prepared to
defend our homeland.

I too pay particular attention to detail, enlight of the 911
attacks on U.S. soil. When out and about, I'm always ready
to Rock N' Roll.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

El Tejon
August 18, 2004, 03:20 PM
During WWII the Gov. of California urged its citizens to carry firearms in case of Japanese raids. Why should this war be different?

That said, the Base's hit list with the exception of Miami is full of unarmed sheople. It's not like they will be attacking some mall in Indiana or Utah.

Be ready, but understand that terrorist targets are controlled by Leftists who want to maintain their power over their citizens more than they wish to defeat our enemies.

Damon
August 18, 2004, 04:20 PM
In general, people carry concealed for "just in case" scenarios. Whether it is a criminal or terrorist act, it does not matter. The only thing important is that you are prepared.

Top_Notch
August 18, 2004, 04:31 PM
Well, if the terrorists were smart, they'd start right here in Hellinois where average Joe is a criminal if he equips himself for self preservation in any public place, let alone Chicago where average Joe can't even own a handgun.

A CCW public may not stop a terrorist, but I'd like to at least have the chance. In my mind, the biggest terrorists we have here are the politicians leading us to slaughter.
:cuss:

Dave R
August 18, 2004, 05:13 PM
I think there is a very slim chance that an armed citizen could catch a terrorist group in the midst of preparing or transporting or setting a bomb, or getiing set up for an attack.

Very slim chance.

But what a story to tell the grandkids, eh?

papaone
August 18, 2004, 06:02 PM
About all we can do is to be ready ourselves. I not only have a concealed carry permit but have an SKS in the trunck of my car. Hopefully it will never be used but I have to live with myself to feel I have done what I know how to do. May have a rear end collision but that is just part of it.

Best
Dennis:)

xdoctor
August 18, 2004, 06:38 PM
In general, people carry concealed for "just in case" scenarios. Whether it is a criminal or terrorist act, it does not matter. The only thing important is that you are prepared.



Okay, I'm curious now. Out of all the regular carrying people reading this, how many of us were Boy Scouts?

hso
August 18, 2004, 07:15 PM
Unrealistic to consider that CCW will have a positive impact on terrorists.

Please remember that a single individual using hazardous materials, explosives, mass transit as force multipliers will create much more damage and fear than 3 individuals armed with AKs in a shoping mall.

Thoughts of citizens with firearms stopping terrorists are Matt Helm fantasies.

Double Maduro
August 18, 2004, 08:36 PM
All of you who think that armed citizens would be useless against terrorists should study the Israeli's.

The LA riots were an example of this country's armed citizens helping to control terrorists.

The armed citizens of this country defeated terrorist attacks by the most powerful nation on earth in 1775.

The armed citizens of this country helped defend it against terrorists from Mexico led by Pancho Villa.

The armed citizens of this country will probably be in a position, more readily at hand, than the police, National Guard or army.

Not saying that it will make a difference in every case but in enough to give them pause.

The UN_armed citizens of this country kept the last airliner from hitting the White House. If they had been armed they may still be alive.

Sorry, I'm a little grumpy today.

DM

rde
August 18, 2004, 09:09 PM
How many people will call someone in as a potential terrorist because they were somehow identified as legally carrying (CCW). Possibly printed or flashed somehow by accident...or for whatever reason...someone somehow noticed that they had a firearm. Given the terrorist around the corner on every block mentality of today I suspect that some of us that CCW are invariably going to get "the business." Which of course futher's the liberals cause. (In some people's eyes this will be an opportunity to go beyond stating we are evil gun owners...but terrorists as well)

But, in regards to the original question I agree that a CCW is not going to stop a lot of determined terrorist attacks..no different then stopping any type of crime...but as noted above in Israel..it has and will stop some.

Akusp
August 18, 2004, 09:24 PM
I might not be able to stop an attack...but I might be able to end one or at least make the MF's pay.

grimlock
August 18, 2004, 09:47 PM
xdoctor said:
Okay, I'm curious now. Out of all the regular carrying people reading this, how many of us were Boy Scouts?

*raises hand*

Eagle Scout and Order of the Arrow.

carebear
August 18, 2004, 10:06 PM
Cub Scout, got my Wolf badge thingie

juggler
August 19, 2004, 07:32 AM
One reason why I carry is that most places I go are 1hour+ away from home (downside of rural living is that EVERYWHERE is far away).

So it's not so much where I AM as where I AM NOT......as in at/near where the firearms/supplies are stored. Take out a couple of bridges and gridlock some roads and it's a long walk home.

So I have a backpack with gear in both vehicles that stays with the respective driver (his/hers). The firearms aren't to shoot down airplanes or take on suicide bombers, more along the line of the Clancy scenario that kulika mentioned.

Thoughts of citizens with firearms stopping terrorists are Matt Helm fantasies.
Only if you think you will save the world and get the girl in the end. Otherwise, what do have against being prepared?

Terrorists will stop what they are doing if enough people hit what they are aiming at......:evil:

Browns Fan
August 19, 2004, 08:21 AM
Double Manduro,
Go ahead, be grumpy. Preach it, brother! ;)

jamz
August 19, 2004, 08:23 AM
Well, it strikes me that CCW in the event of a terrorist attack is precisely like CCW in the event of a crime.



In x amount of the situation, the CCW will help. In x number of situations, it won't.


I think we all know the odds, roughly. Knowing that the odds are slim usually makes no difference to those of us who like to be prepared anyway. :)

-=JAmes

GEM
August 19, 2004, 10:38 AM
Matt Helm - good books in their time. I recall he never gave up.

Anyway, the role of the armed citizen clearly depends on the type of attack. You aren't going to down a hijacked Airbus with a J frame. I also doubt that any administration will push for CCW on planes.

However, with homocide bombers or gun based terrorist attacks, the evidence is clear.

1. You may recall the Texas Tower snipe at UT. Whitman killed many folk but was then taken under fire by citizens and according to a definitive history of the incident, no further kills occurred after that.

2. In three school shootings, armed folks stopped the incident from progressing. Sorry to forget the exact places and too lazy to look them up but, roughly:

PA - homeowner with shotgun apprehends school shooter
Vice principal retrieves 1911 and apprehends school shooter
Univeristy shooting - two guys (law officers but could have been CCW) retrieve guns from car and stop school shooter - played down in the media

3. Nazi attack on the Jewish Day Care in CA - dude picks that target as another Jewish site had armed guards.

4. Israel - citizens stop both gun attacks and homocide bombers - well researched by Don Kates

5. Anti-abortion terrorist attacks clinic - one of Ayoob's students was there as a security guard - easily could be an armed citizen - and stops further killing

6. Deacons for Defense - African-Americans arm themselves to fight off Klan-racist terrorists.

Thus, history is clear - armed folks have stopped terrorism. I recently heard a DOD expert talk about how we may see armed attacks in the USA or homocide bombers. He was a strong advocate of armed citizenry.

What more is there to be said?

We've seen the Al-Qaeda tapes - they attack and overwhelm sheep. But you know what, even if you get killed but shoot one of them in the process, is that a better outcome then being beheaded on the TV? Your choice!

bogie
August 19, 2004, 01:44 PM
The terrorists seemed to be into symbolism, but at the same time, I suspect that they also noticed the damage done to our economy... I can see them attacking schools, shopping malls, large discount stores, etc... They're not going to need to do the homicide bomb thing - I can see a half-dozen of 'em walking into a shopping mall, and doing serious damage, and being able to leave before the police even react. I don't like to go to large gatherings of people...

papaone
August 19, 2004, 03:02 PM
oooops! Don't know the definition of a troll. Please help.

I appreciate:confused: :confused:

hso
August 19, 2004, 04:22 PM
The point is that these folks aren't stupid and they understand the need to get the greatest return on the investment in limited resources they have here in the U.S. When a single individual equiped with explosives or a tanker truck and a zippo can can kill hundreds at once and stike terror into everyone that sits in rush hour grid lock or enters a shopping mall why waste the lives of the few willing to die for your cause killing only a few dozen in a guns blazing waste. Each of those terrorists represent resources. Each of them represents a bomb or truck or plane or whatever force-multiplier you want to think of. Each with readily available resources can kill as many all by themselves as a suicide team of gun weilding terrorists.

If they get down shooting up malls then we know that they are out of better options and resources.

Havegunjoe
August 19, 2004, 04:56 PM
I said I thought many of us would be willing, as part of the Malitia, to volunteer to make periodic checks on areas, buildings etc. that are considered targets. Also we should be trained and allowed to carry on planes when we travel. Of course I won't do any of this without being able to carry my gun. I of course keep my eyes open wherever I am these days, but I don't do anything formal in the way of checking out target ares. What a waste of resources I think. This doesn't have to be complicated, and we don't have to have sky marshall training.

Like I said, what a waste of a great resource for fighting terrorists.

kulika
August 19, 2004, 06:42 PM
The mall scenario I mentioned before is fiction, but it fits with the goals of the terrorists on several levels.

1. They would be striking at an icon of our society (shopping malls and consumerism).

2. They would be demonstrating that they can hit anywhere and any time.

3. People would then be afraid to go out in public to large gathering places.

4. The economic impact would be devastating since people would stay away from the stores, especially as we approach the holiday shopping season.

Remember Bin Laden himself was surprised by the fact the Towers came down as they did. He certainly wanted to strike the Towers as a symbol of America as well as the Pentagon and a capitol landmark (the plane that was taken back by the passengers), but even the sight of the Towers collapsing was a surprise to him.

It is not necessary for the terrorists to strike high profile targets to create even more chaos than we experienced on September 11th. We avoid bad neighborhoods because they are not safe. What happens when we do not feel that the supermarket is safe?

It is not uncommon for father to walk his child to school in Israel with an automatic weapon strapped across the father's back. We are lucky that we are not in that same level of constant peril.

Strings
August 19, 2004, 06:59 PM
Umm... does anyone remember the upheaval in the DC area during the whole "Beltway Bushwacker" business? Now imagine a similar scenario, only nationally...:what:

Walosi
August 19, 2004, 09:06 PM
One tactic, described along with the shots from the AQ training clips, sticks in my mind. Five-man teams, with a vehicle (a "technical" pickup with a bed-mounted M60). These were used in a couple of the attacks on compounds in Saudi Arabia. The teams shot up gate and patrol security, while the "hero" drove his bomb into the populated part of the compound. Substitute "mall" for "compound" and "Wal Mart Supercenter" for the populated section, and you have a recipe for a strike in the soft part of safe, secure, small town America. While the wife has dredged through the stores, I have often stayed in the car, observing local life ... OK, girlwatching. In addition to the obvious, I've noticed that at any one time there may be one to three local LEOs in, or moving through the area. Also, I often recognize people from my CCDW classes - five in one short period one Saturday afternoon but one or two almost always. Too many other variables to predict the outcome of an attack, but the guns may be there, and the people who have them are certainly of a mind to be prepared.

Sam Adams
August 20, 2004, 04:38 PM
It is highly unlikely we will be able to affect terrorism with our concealed handguns

Better to be prepared and not need to be, than to need to be and not be armed.

The impetus to finally get my CHL was the 9/11 incidents. I'm Jewish, and every time I attend synogogue I'm in a room full of prime targets for Moslem extremists (and others as well, but I'm only realistically concerned about the Moslem variety). Several others that I know of are also armed (and, I'm sure, several that I don't know about). Even our rabbi carries (though, in his case, not on Saturdays, as that would violate the Sabbath-but rest assured, many of us carry on Saturdays anyway).

I may never need to use my carry gun to fend off an attack or actually shoot some SOB, and I sincerely hope that this is the case, but you never know. Packing a gun is like wearing a seatbelt: most people never need them, but those who do REALLY do. Since we don't know whether we will fall into the "need" or "won't need" catagory during any point in our future, I prefer to follow the Boy Scouts motto: Be prepared. (and, no, I was never in the BS).

dobbs23
August 21, 2004, 01:59 PM
I think there should be more education going on regarding this thread.
One idea would be more classes at ranges dealing with operating different types of firearms (how to operate the safeties, clearing jams, etc) just in case one is able to get his/her hands on a more powerful (read dead terrorist's) weapon. I know many people who are very well educated concerning the firearms they own, but know next to nothing about other firearms....
Another thing I'd like to see would be the gov't (or, for that matter, anyone who knows about such things) coming out and educating us about methods and operating procedures of suicide bombers. They don't just use trucks you know!
What would a bomber wearing one of those bomb vests look like? What clues can we be looking out for? What do the cases they put bombs in look like? What are the typical fuse devices? Some things I've seen from Israel appear that the detonator is outside of the bag, and the bomber must yank it to set off the device.
Granted, you're going to be in the ?????s if you have to deal with this scenario, but it could be a little better with some useful info.
Of course, I doubt that we'll ever see info like this, as it can be used by others in nefarious ways, but I thought I'd just put it out there....

dobbs23
August 21, 2004, 02:06 PM
One other thing....
One may want to check out Krav Maga, a hand to hand combat system used by the IDF (www.kravamaga.com).
They deal with hand to hand, hand vs. knife, hand vs. firearm, and even hand vs. grenade (!!!!!) :what:
You never know....always try to have an edge:evil:

If you enjoyed reading about "Concealed Carry & Homeland Threats?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!