Yes, such unfortunate incidents are receiving a lot of air time, and that's for a reason. But they are extremely rare. The real problem these days is violent crime, which occurs many, many times more frequently..
How can you know that?
Constitutional Carry Is It A Good Idea?
- Thread starter WisBorn
- Start date
- Status
And how does all the people with good self control refraining from carrying guns help curb violence from those with poor self control and a gun?
JN01
Member
That is the same arguement used by the gun control lobbyists -if you have a gun in the home, murder will occur, so we need to eliminate those guns.
In the example you cited, how do you know that he was a good man? He killed someone over nothing, so I doubt that was the case.
N555
Member
Thus post is a microcosm of how gun control happens.
Corpral_Agarn
Member
And if the victims had been carrying?
What then?
Your premise that the crime would not have been committed if bad guy didn't have a gun is off. You can't possibly know that.
"Oh jeez, I wanted to murder those folks but darn it I can't find my gun... I guess I'll be a nice guy now instead..."
Corpral_Agarn
Member
Hang on.
Are we getting trolled?
Are we getting trolled?
Heir Kommt Die Sonne
Member
Highly doubt AlexanderA is a troll.
He obviously reads the news that tells us people are shooting each other like the wild west, left and right.
I live around DFW area and ive seen people on this forum say that road rage shootings happen ALL the time in Texas. Even have family back in my home state that express concern for us. But living here, the only tragic thing I see happen every day is accidents on the I15. Maybe in time, crime will increase to the population boom.
You should ask those posters to define exactly what they mean by "ALL the time". All of the time is a lot of time. I've been to Texas several times and never saw a road rage shooting, so clearly it's not literally "all of the time". I suspect that the folks whose posts you are reading are engaging in a bit of rather extreme exaggeration.
JR24
Member
Undoubtedly it’s confirmation bias plus sensational news coverage combined with failing to remember just how many people live in the country and are interacting with each other all the time.
One or two “bad” stories influences one to disregard the millions of interactions that don’t go bad at any given moment.
We do it for many things, even here with us that do like to CCW. Sure there are plenty of stories out there that show bad guys doing bad things to innocent folks, but the reality is most of us will never have to deal with anything like that in our lives, doubly so for us who live away from high crime areas.
I still prefer to be prepared if I happen to be the anomaly (because someone has the be that unlucky person) but acknowledge, at least to myself, the astronomically low chances of needing my CCW considering my lifestyle and area in which I live.
C-grunt
Member
Ive been a patrol cop in Phoenix for 16 years. Arizona passed constitutional carry 13 years ago. So Ive worked under both systems. I havent seen any difference.
The idea that a 6 to 8 hour class one time and having a stupid simple qualification makes someone better is incredibly flawed.
Ive seen CCW holders makes bad decisions in self defense situations and Ive seen completely untrained (professionally trained) citizens make really good decisions. From my experience it is far far more dependent on the individual person than whether or not they took a class or not.
The idea that a 6 to 8 hour class one time and having a stupid simple qualification makes someone better is incredibly flawed.
Ive seen CCW holders makes bad decisions in self defense situations and Ive seen completely untrained (professionally trained) citizens make really good decisions. From my experience it is far far more dependent on the individual person than whether or not they took a class or not.
Sadly, no. Example other than this thread:
#72
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-default-setting.918386/page-3#post-12611907
This happened in my home town. A friend of mine that does work for the sheriff's office told me about it the day after it happened. (Destroyed lives, the dude was like 78. It was almost over for him and the rest of them.)
Three questions:
Do you think someone that prone to violence would have voluntarily not carried, because AlexanderA said it's a bad idea?
Do you think if there were one of these stories all year in the entire country that it wouldn't have been broadcast by a media industry that makes money from ratings?
Do you think it would have been a bad idea for the victims to be carrying even though there wasn't a specific identifiable threat when they left their condo that morning?
Heir Kommt Die Sonne
Member
This thread has gone on for too long, and I just want to make one more post in this thread before it closes.
Ultimately, we carry because it's a shield, not a weapon. Guns are the great equalizer, and have been essential in making society more humane. I'd rather be in a world where I can get shot at, rather in a world where they're more likely to stab, hang or drown you.
And I have really withheld myself from posting this bit of humor here, but because it's closing soon I might as well do it now:
We should only carry guns if we have enough 'prep time' (practically what everyone has been arguing about)
The scariest people to fear are those who have nothing left to loose, or everything to loose. Those inbetween can still be bargained with.
Answer is no. Someone who already idolizes violence as a first resort (And perhaps this is what he has been intending to say this whole time) is someone who's bound to hurt someone at some point. Bascially, someone who's already violently prone is going to view violence as a appropriate first response. You shouldn't carry if you're one of these people, if using a gun is your FIRST answer to a stressful scenario. But this isn't hard to filter out, people like that are probably likely to have committed a aggressive crime at some point and thus are barred from carrying. I really like AlexanderA , but I assume this is what he is projecting unto the issue at large, that some of those who carry guns voluntary are lifelong companions to violence. I personally have no comment on this issue, as in my first comment on this thread, I haven't been around too many such people (and hope I never am).
Ultimately, we carry because it's a shield, not a weapon. Guns are the great equalizer, and have been essential in making society more humane. I'd rather be in a world where I can get shot at, rather in a world where they're more likely to stab, hang or drown you.
And I have really withheld myself from posting this bit of humor here, but because it's closing soon I might as well do it now:
We should only carry guns if we have enough 'prep time' (practically what everyone has been arguing about)
Old Dog
Member
My responses to your comments were in red, bolded, inside the quote box. Maybe check again?
The response of mine that you quoted was (labeled as} a response to one of AlexanderA's remarks.
Elkins45
Member
OK, so then you’re one of the people who is opposed to making it as easy as possible for people to know the laws? I continue to be unable to find a valid rationale for this viewpoint.
Honestly I don't know why this even makes news. Three jerks all met up and removed themselves from society. Three people who had already lived full lives.
The world mourns the loss of a HOA president? Really? Whose biggest problem in the world is a laundry door? And her jerk husband who escalated it? And a jerk who shot them over HOA bull crap?
Three jerks gone. And I kinda feel sorry for the one lady who's left, but I bet she doesn't forget to shut the laundry door again.
The world mourns the loss of a HOA president? Really? Whose biggest problem in the world is a laundry door? And her jerk husband who escalated it? And a jerk who shot them over HOA bull crap?
Three jerks gone. And I kinda feel sorry for the one lady who's left, but I bet she doesn't forget to shut the laundry door again.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,214
I carry a pistol whenever I leave home. Now a days you can become a victim anywhere. I conceal carry and open carry. I have no plans to ever shoot anyone unless I absolutely have to. I have an LTC in the Constitutional Carry State of Texas and support Constitutional Carry 100 percent. We already have over 22,000 infringements when there are supposed to be Zero and are constantly having to fight to prevent more. Guns are not the problem and never have been. Criminals are and always have been. The only viable solution is criminal control and better mental health care.
Old Dog
Member
Did you actually read my first response to your comment?
I said: One of the presumptions of citizenship is that there is an expectation that our citizens will exercise their rights responsibly. This would include the notion that citizens take seriously the right to bear arms in self-defense and defense of another, which implies that it is incumbent upon the citizen to exercise the right responsibly and understand the laws.
Inasmuch as (and others noted this as well), all the applicable state laws are easily found on-line; if one doesn't like to do the internet thingy, there's always public libraries.
I don't know how much easier it could be made "for people to know the laws." Unless you also are advocating for the government to mandate training for the citizens and force-feed them the laws. Which, as pointed out, is not required for any other natural/civil rights, much less those affirmed in the Bill of Rights.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,214
Yep I live here too and hear about an occasional road rage incident. But there are far more defensive uses of firearms every year a cross the country. Law abiding people are the good guys criminals should never be allowed to dictate their rights.
Elkins45
Member
What I advocated for is my state making their CCW course training materials available to everyone online, not just to people who are applying for a permit, now that we have permitless carry. I didn’t advocate for anything else. These training materials already exist and they make the KY self-defense laws much easier to learn as compared to digging thru the Kentucky Revised Statutes to find all the different places where firearms and self-defense are covered.
That’s all I said. No mandates, no restrictions. And yet you and at least one other found this troublesome somehow.
Last edited:
I believe that everyone who carries a weapon or who has one at home should have a basic knowledge of use of force laws.
What's wrong with that? Well, it would apply, obviously, to everyone. It never occurred to a friend of mine who took Missouri's CCCW permit class that the laws that apply to the use of his J=Frame revolver apply to his Louisville Slugger and to his crowbar. He had assumed that he could lawfully use them on someone who was defacing his neighbor's GMC Suburban.
What should be done? I'm not sure, but we should at least make use of force law better known to gun owners.
Some time ago, the State of Florida had some good materials available for concealed carriers,. Years ago, an Arizona white paper written by an attorney named Michael Anthony was available for people there.
Both could be improved. I visualize something along the lines the graphic page that is available form the Law of Self Defense that covers the basis of lawful self defense, expanded to say something about threatening with a weapon, protection of property, detaining a suspect, etc.
I do not believe that preventing someone who may need to defend themselves to have the means of doing so is a good idea.
What's wrong with that? Well, it would apply, obviously, to everyone. It never occurred to a friend of mine who took Missouri's CCCW permit class that the laws that apply to the use of his J=Frame revolver apply to his Louisville Slugger and to his crowbar. He had assumed that he could lawfully use them on someone who was defacing his neighbor's GMC Suburban.
What should be done? I'm not sure, but we should at least make use of force law better known to gun owners.
Some time ago, the State of Florida had some good materials available for concealed carriers,. Years ago, an Arizona white paper written by an attorney named Michael Anthony was available for people there.
Both could be improved. I visualize something along the lines the graphic page that is available form the Law of Self Defense that covers the basis of lawful self defense, expanded to say something about threatening with a weapon, protection of property, detaining a suspect, etc.
I do not believe that preventing someone who may need to defend themselves to have the means of doing so is a good idea.
These laws aren't exclusive to people who carry firearms. They're not even exclusive to people who own firearms.
You mentioned a baseball bat. Every home has some kind of a weapon that could be used in self defense.
At one point it was suggested in this thread that firearms safety might be taught to schoolchildren. It might make sense to teach some basic law to high school or middle school kids.
WrongHanded
Member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,771
Not better. Less ignorant. Big difference.
C-grunt
Member
Tomato tomato. Still not seeing any issues. The fears of blood running in the streets and all these bad shootings happening.... just isnt happening.
I cant think of a single "bad shoot" Ive been apart of. There have been a couple that were getting into the grey areas but the victim/shooter wasnt prosecuted. The shooter was acting in accordance with the law, but it isnt a shoot you'd want to use as the poster child. And both of those the victim had a CCW permit.
The only "bad shoots" that I have been apart of have involved some sort of criminal activity. Hell, even much of the shootings involving criminals, the shooter had a solid claim of self defense.
- Status
Similar threads
