Man pulls CCW to stop a fight

Status
Not open for further replies.
romma - can you purchase a new handgun from a dealer without a background check? OR is that bad too?
No I cannot. Not sure exactly where to draw the line on this question of if I think it is bad or not... I think if someone is to dangerous to carry a firearm, then what are they doing out of prison in the first place? That said, have you seen the latest list of felonies, including felonies categorized by individual States that are disqualifiers for firearms ownership? How about the misdemeanors as well? What about non-violent felons that do their time, stay out of trouble for years and are denied the means to protect their families?
 
Good point, the background check IS an unnecessary infringement. Those who can't pass it will break a different law to get a gun. Those who are going to commit a crime with a gun will do it regardless of previous history, etc. etc. It's useless window dressing.

However, it is, at least, a passive restriction in that all you have to show is you have NOT done something (committed a crime, been too young) as opposed to requiring you to actively do something (show proof of meeting someone's standard of competence or training).

You "pass" a background check just by being a law-abiding citizen of age.

Competency or training requirements require active jumping through hoops.

Not quite apples and oranges, but definitely tangerines and oranges.
 
Freedom is not gauranteed safe, it is gauranteed equaly free for all. Freedom is about having choices, other countries are about taking away choices, tools, and options for statistics (which can be created to favor whoever is choosing which statistics and under what light to view them.) New government agencies created to oversee and restrict every little thing in life that people think could be done better simply leads to a lack of freedom, especialy when regarding a primary tool for safegaurding freedom like a firearm. It becomes official business detached from reality or the reality of what is governed, especialy if what is being governed is not deemed a necessity by those governing it.

Carrying a gun is a big decision, it means you are safer if you need to use it (firing or merely brandishing), but in even more danger if you are in a situation where it will be taken away if you do not use it. Armed and polite. De-escalate situations. I have had a fiery temper and got into quite a few scuffles when I was younger, never willing to be bullied, even verbaly. This has changed in no small part because responsible firearm ownership has made me much more secure as a person in letting someone else be rude and disrespectful and not feeling any wrong must be righted, even to the extent of calmy encouraging de-escalation. I now have a very firmly established boundry that is only crossed by physical harm or a danger of physical harm to myself or or another person.
When I have a firearm I am as timid as a mouse and become absolutely passive. I know any physical altercation I could be involved in could require use of the firearm for the sake of firearm retention alone. So unless I see an innocent victim that needs immediate rescue, or need to defend myself I am content in allowing others to think as they wish about my passiveness. I know putting myself in a situation to defend my ego could have lifelong altering consequences to my freedom, my safety, my rights, or at the very least my financial security. Your highest level of control in a potential situation resides in avoiding a situation altogether.
This is something I think anyone choosing to carry a firearm should consider.

Felons are subhumans in our society, forced to take whatever employment will settle for them, usualy making far less, and thus living in poor high crime neighborhoods where they are both likely to be victimized and at the same time unable to defend against being victimized because they cannot legaly have the tools to do so (but those victimizing them likely will). I do not wish to join thier ranks either. Of course once you do you might as well have the best firearms possible (full auto battle capable) if you choose to own anyways as the law no longer allows any ownership anyways, but that is a different topic, and a choice I hope never to have to make. For at that point one no longers identifies with being an American, because quite frankly they no longer are, thier rights vanish, and thier voice in politics vanish. They are an outcast with limited choices, living in a form of slavery.

Don't be stupid or put yourself in situations where you might join them. The legal system is not always fair, justice is not always the outcome. Even if your in the right, moraly and legaly, the more often you put yourself in the position to gamble with the system the worse your odds become. Be smart, leave your options in life open, and take THEHIGHROAD.
 
Zoogster......VERY WELL SAID!!!!!........Those are my feeling exactly.

Its all about what YOU choose to do in a situation......Either be cool, calm, collected and react sensibly......or Do something STUPID.........
 
When I have a firearm I am as timid as a mouse and become absolutely passive. I know any physical altercation I could be involved in could require use of the firearm for the sake of firearm retention alone. So unless I see an innocent victim that needs immediate rescue, or need to defend myself I am content in allowing others to think as they wish about my passiveness.
Aah, but there is another train of thought. If you act "wimpy", you might seem an easy mark for the criminal element, thereby possibly creating the circumstances that you fear most. On the other hand, if you carry yourself as rock solid and self-assured the criminal element has to ponder whether or not you are somebody to trifle with. In other words, a tough guy will possibly give them trouble, whereas a wimp won't. I don't think people should always change their demeanor simply because they strap on a gun.
 
Old Fuff wrote:
No...

But if you resort to using deadly force (such as pulling a gun) you'd better be able to prove that you could reasonably believe your life was in danger. The burden of proof lies on you. I'm sure we may not have all of the facts, but on the basis of what has been presented the situation did not justify pulling a gun. The only thing that saved his neck was that neither the store, or the police, pressed the issue.

Thanks for the info, Fuff.
Next question though, is the requirement "fear for your life", or is it like here in TN, where it's "fear of death or serious bodily harm"? ( I suppose I could go look it up myself, but damn... it's late and surfing legal texts is tedious on a good day. :( )

And no, as the story is presented, drawing a gun was both unnecessary and foolish.
However, we all know how many times the press gets things right. Also, as has been pointed out, witnesses aren't always all that reliable.

Anyway, I'd like to see a follow-up to this story. I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for it though... especially if it does turn out that the CCW holder turns out to be in the right. ;)


J.C.
 
If the guy really started a fight and then pulled his gun out when he was losing...he's a dirtbag and I don't think extra training would have helped. People get training in order to get a driver's license..that doesn't keep some people from driving like idiots and endangering people's lives.
I'm against any training in order to posess a firearm...I know it's sounds sensible to have mandatory training but does it really prevent crime & accidents..maybe it makes some people feel safe but it's just a slippery slope towards more governent control. Remember government is not our friend.:neener:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top