Ranges & Gun Shows: No Loaded Weapons!

[Sam1911]

How do you reduce unsafe handling and ND in public? Adequate mandatory training, education and testing for CC permits is a good start, in my opinion.

Ok, no, we aren't going to do that. They don't prove to reduce any dangers to anyone in the states that require them, as compared to the states that don't. So do you have any other ideas?

Or is this one of those, "well, we have to do SOMETHING, even if it doesn't work, we have to TRY...." sorts of warm fuzzies?

 

[Sam1911]

Are you saying millions CC everyday or speaking in hypothetical? If not, then i'm gona also ask for some data because i seriously doubt a million CCiers carry each day.

Oookay. PA has about 700,000 LCTF holders, some portion of which carry every day. That's one state out of fifty. "Millions" doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

 

[Sam1911]

Why is it too much to ask somebody not to carry at a school to avoid ND's but it is okay at a gun show? People can't get robbed outside a gun show? A mass shooter couldn't attack there?

I don't ask anyone not to carry at a gun show. I DO carry at gun shows.

If they can't keep their loaded firearm holstered, I have no problem with asking them to leave. Same as I would at a school.


...and you are being deliberately obtuse if you pretend you don't understand the difference between "lots of folks handling and manipulating many many weapons in a crowded space" and a concealed carrier walking through (or teaching in, or mopping the floors in, or whatever) a school.

 

[jr_watkins]

it's hypocrisy because when the big box store says you can't bring in your [loaded] gun you cry second amendment rights etc (which I agree with 100%), but when the gun store, range, show does it mums the word.

a private entity (store, gun show promoter, range, etc.) cannot in any way EVER violate my 2nd Amendment rights. The 2nd Amendment speaks only to what the GOVERNMENT and may not do.

Agreed. I should not have used 2nd Amendment rights in my statement as you are correct that we aren't talking about a government infringement.

 

[scaatylobo]

@ Praxidike

I used to announce that I was an LEO ---- then was told to unload,REALLY = NO DISCHARGE PAIL !!.

My dept R & R's left me no room to handle my gun to go into a show,and not even into a mental ward when duty sent us there.

So after a few 'heated' discussions at the door,I kept my yap shut and went with CONCEALED CARRY !.

I am of the strong opinion that any and all AD's or whatever you want to call them = in a public place should be an arrest situation.

If that were the norm,bet there would be NO incidents as any who felt the need to show it ---- would be VERY SURE it was empty,OR they would lose their RIGHT to bear arms.

A few years back I went to a LGS,they had the same rules of telling you that your pistol had to be unloaded.

An elderly man that always went to the shows with his buddy,tried to clear his 1911 in the parking lot while inside his vehicle.

He shot the artery in his leg and was dead in minutes.

Its that kind of incident that I see as very sad,and I avoid handling my firearm unless practicing at a range -- or actually using it for the purpose I carry.

But yes,I do dry fire after being VERY,VERY sure she is unloaded.

 

[Jaxondog]

What makes a proprietor any more trained than the next guy that is legal to carry? Just because someone owns a gun shop does not make him the wizard of Oz.

 

[Sam1911]

What makes a proprietor any more trained than the next guy that is legal to carry? Just because someone owns a gun shop does not make him the wizard of Oz.

Nope, but it does make him the owner, and the owner can do as he pleases -- and can write the rules for his guests while on his premises. After all, it's his insurance that takes the hit if he screws up.

 

[NoVA Shooter]

How do you reduce unsafe handling and ND in public? Adequate mandatory training, education and testing for CC permits is a good start, in my opinion.

Adequate? By whose definition? Who controls the process? Honestly, it wouldn't matter even if there was a way guarantee the process would be fair. That type of control has never worked in the past. Take driving as an example. In order to drive, you must have adequate training, education, and testing, but all of this fails to prevent people from doing stupid things once they get past the mandatory regulations (we still have bad drivers that do the very things they were trained not to do). Knowing and doing are not the same; willful disregard of the rules and a lackadaisical attitude to processes cannot be trained, educated, or tested out of society.

Are you saying millions CC everyday or speaking in hypothetical? If not, then i'm gona also ask for some data because i seriously doubt a million CCiers carry each day.

Admittedly, i don't have actual numbers to back up my claim but i believe i hear significantly more stories about hazardous concealed carry events much more often than NGs at gun shows or shops.

That's part of the point. If we define a carry event as one person carrying a gun for one hour, and we define a gun show event as one person attending a gun show for one hour, the number of carry events is vastly larger than the number of gun show events on any given day, week, year, etc. It's perfectly logical to expect that the number of NDs associated to carry events will be higher than to the number associated gun show events simply because of the discrepancy in how much more carrying is done. That does not mean a ND is more likely to happen during a carry event. A true comparison will be the rate of NDs for each event type.

It would be like saying it's safer to swim in the winter than the summer simply because so many more drownings happen in the summer.

 

[astra600]

In North Las Vegas, NV (the armpit of Clark county) the city rule on CC is it has to be on your person at all times, unless you have a secured gun safe of some sort in your vehicle. Car break ins are a daily thing there and the police don't want more stolen guns than they already have.

If I am looking for an accessory at a gun show I will OC or bring a gun case, and of course show the police/security at the door so the can check it's serial number and run a plastic rib through it. If a gun show is so dangerous I need to CC, I don't need to be there. Since you can't really check a holsters fit with the slide back a bit I will ask for a couple of more plastic strips so I can put one back on after taking the first one off to try the holster.

 

[JustinJ]

Really? Ok. So they ask to zip-tie any weapons you show them, at the door. That's all they do. They aren't stopping anyone from entering with a concealed sidearm.

Proactive? Reactive? Maybe that's one of the nuances you were talking about.

I imagine charges would ensue if one lied to the on duty cop about carrying a concealed weapon. No, no nuance, that's pretty blatantly PRO-active.

Oookay. PA has about 700,000 LCTF holders, some portion of which carry every day. That's one state out of fifty. "Millions" doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

One state that is hardly representative of the others. 10% daily is generous and that would put as at 70K. Yeah, millions, especially with an "S" on the end is a pretty big stretch. I love in a very pro-gun state, know countless permit holders and very, very few of those carry daily on their person, if ever.

So the rate of risk of injury of loaded weapons is sufficient to prohibit loaded weapons at gun shows, does that mean the risk of such from concealed carry is just not adequate to make restrictions acceptable? Its a matter of degrees, then? Because that seems awfully counter to the normal ideological rhetoric i hear.

Ok, no, we aren't going to do that. They don't prove to reduce any dangers to anyone in the states that require them, as compared to the states that don't. So do you have any other ideas?

I think you missed the word adequate. If you can cite a study which shows that real training (one six hour course and a few rounds doesn't count), please do cite it. Or does it not concern you that a person with zero gun knowledge, experience or training can buy a gun, get a permit(or not in some states) and carry it having no idea how to use it or about gun safety?

An IQ test would be nice too but i'm not getting overzealous.

I don't ask anyone not to carry at a gun show. I DO carry at gun shows.

Okay, didn't know we were talking about what you do specifically.

..and you are being deliberately obtuse if you pretend you don't understand the difference between "lots of folks handling and manipulating many many weapons in a crowded space" and a concealed carrier walking through (or teaching in, or mopping the floors in, or whatever) a school.

Really, gona straw man, now? Where exactly did i say or imply they were the same or had equal levels of risk? I'm just asking where the level or risk of ND becomes high enough to prohibit carrying loaded guns, and not just of you.

 

[JustinJ]

Adequate? By whose definition? Who controls the process? Honestly, it wouldn't matter even if there was a way guarantee the process would be fair. That type of control has never worked in the past. Take driving as an example. In order to drive, you must have adequate training, education, and testing, but all of this fails to prevent people from doing stupid things once they get past the mandatory regulations (we still have bad drivers that do the very things they were trained not to do). Knowing and doing are not the same; willful disregard of the rules and a lackadaisical attitude to processes cannot be trained, educated, or tested out of society.

I see, so get rid of all requirements for drivers education? Because it doesn't prevent all accidents it has no value? Heck, meds are rarely 100% effecitve, guess we shouldnt take them? Seat belts aren't either...no point, then? All or nothing arguments are not realistic.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Hypocritical? No. Annoying? Yes.

But this is because I know I'm not one of those slack-jawed, booger-eating morons who doesn't know how to safely carry and handle my personal firearms in crowded market places.

I mean, everybody else here knows that about me, right?

 

[tuna]

Yes - I find it hypocritical. I also find it irritating that the fairgrounds that usually has the gun show has a "no weapons" policy for other events it holds.

Of course, this is all rumor. I don't read signs too well. Concealed is concealed.

One thing of note - when the off duty LEO (read that as over paid mall cop) asks if you have ammo, it doesn't go over well to ask "Why, did they take your one bullet away Barney?"

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

A little expounding on my last comment.

When I go to a gun show, my carry weapon is my carry weapon. That never changes. It's not a show-and-tell piece, it's not a for sale piece, it's not for trade. And it NEVER comes out of its holster unless there is a NEED for it. (Zip-tying not withstanding.)

If I am going to a gun show with the intent to sell or trade something myself, then I'll carry that separately. It will NOT be my carry weapon at any point, period.

If somebody notices I'm carrying and comments something along the lines of "Nice gun!", my respons will likely be along the lines of "Thank you! How do you like the grips?" because that's ALL they're going to see of it.


Along with my own personal philosophy of firearms handling with respect to having to have my gun zip-tied, I AM THE ONE WHO CONTROLS THE WEAPON. I don't know how my gun would be handled in the process of unloading/verifying in preparation for sip-tying at any given event. If I'm required to hand over my gun for unloading/verification, I will refuse to do so if it's loaded. That's my control philosophy. They will get an already unloaded gun from me because handing someone else a loaded gun outside of hunting or a shooting range just ain't gonna happen.

Which means that I will already have my carry weapon unloaded (done in a "safe" place of my own choosing) and ready for their inspection. My loaded magazines will be in my pocket or magazine holders.

And as a side note...being zip-tied does not change my philosophy on my carry weapon. It stays in my holster unless there is a NEED to draw it.

 

[DT Guy]

I see, so get rid of all requirements for drivers education? Because it doesn't prevent all accidents it has no value? Heck, meds are rarely 100% effecitve, guess we shouldnt take them? Seat belts aren't either...no point, then? All or nothing arguments are not realistic.

What's 'enough'? I have something in the thousands of hours..do you? If not, I find your training insufficient.

See how that works?


Larry

 

[Sam1911]

and of course show the police/security at the door so the can check it's serial number and run a plastic rib through it.

Wait, WTH? The police check the serial numbers on any gun you enter with? Egad. So just by entering you consent to a "search" of sorts. That's ... great.

If a gun show is so dangerous I need to CC, I don't need to be there.

If ANY place is so dangerous I need to CC, I don't need to be there. And yet, sometimes places are dangerous whether I expected them to be or not. And even if the show isn't dangerous, the exterior of the venue, the walk to my car, etc. may certainly be.

If I could predict WHERE and WHEN I'd need my gun, I'd just stay home that day...

 

[Sam1911]

I imagine charges would ensue if one lied to the on duty cop about carrying a concealed weapon. No, no nuance, that's pretty blatantly PRO-active.

Really? Ok then. Guess they'll have to start up those x-ray machines and metal detectors.

 

[Sam1911]

One state that is hardly representative of the others. 10% daily is generous and that would put as at 70K. Yeah, millions, especially with an "S" on the end is a pretty big stretch. I love in a very pro-gun state, know countless permit holders and very, very few of those carry daily on their person, if ever.

Oy vey. Million. Million(s). MILLIONS. Whatever. A dumb thing to sit and argue over. Clearly FAAAAR more man-hours of carrying are executed by average folks every day than in a year's worth of folks carrying on the occasional Saturday or Sunday gun show. So your point is vapid.

So the rate of risk of injury of loaded weapons is sufficient to prohibit loaded weapons at gun shows, does that mean the risk of such from concealed carry is just not adequate to make restrictions acceptable?

Again, if they aren't doing SEARCHES, then they aren't prohibiting anything, except by name. And at any rate the answer to your question is yes.

Because that seems awfully counter to the normal ideological rhetoric i hear.

You need to listen to better rhetoric. And stop ignoring the crux of the matter (handling firearms vs. non-handling concealed carry).

 

[Sam1911]

I think you missed the word adequate. If you can cite a study which shows that real training (one six hour course and a few rounds doesn't count), please do cite it.

Ok, so you're saying that none of the various required carry classes that our more onerous states require are adequate? Well, on the one hand that kind of makes my point. We already have some pretty intrusive, expensive, bothersome class requirements in some states -- to exercise a basic human right -- and you STILL don't think they're "enough." But that's what so many who believe like you do say: Just a little more restriction and control and then we'll be "safe." Just a liiiitle more. That would be reasonable...it's for the children!

Or does it not concern you that a person with zero gun knowledge, experience or training can buy a gun, get a permit(or not in some states) and carry it having no idea how to use it or about gun safety?

Freedom is not safe. It carries with it certain risks. So to answer your question, NO. It does not bother me at all.

My fellow citizens of the Commonwealth of PA seem to have figured this out and get along mighty fine without taking any coursework or proving proficiency. And there is no higher rate of "ADs" or arrests for assault, or any other unpleasantness among OUR concealed carriers than there are among the Nevadans or Floridians or any others in states where extensive class time and/or range time is required to qualify for permission to carry a gun.

Absent of evidence to the contrary, you have NO argument at all.

If there WAS evidence to prove a public benefit, it would still be an unacceptable infringement on a right to require such, but at least then you'd have something to point to. As it is ... nada.

An IQ test would be nice too but i'm not getting overzealous.

Go for all the marbles. Better make it a literacy test, law test, loyalty test, mental health check, proof of income and good credit? Maybe just cut right to the chase and say (pick your favorite underclass) can't carry guns.

Okay, didn't know we were talking about what you do specifically.

The word "you" seemed to get tossed around a lot. I don't necessarily agree with the status quo nor perceive "prohibitions" to be exactly what they're advertised to be.

 

[Sam1911]

Where exactly did i say or imply they were the same or had equal levels of risk? I'm just asking where the level or risk of ND becomes high enough to prohibit carrying loaded guns, and not just of you.

You did put them into the same sentence, seeming to imply that if one was acceptable then the other must be equivalently so. Perhaps you misrepresented your position.

Where does it become "high enough?" When folks are packed into a space where there are lots of guns out and being handled, that would be "high enough."

Of course, I don't say prohibit, because these places ARE NOT PROHIBITING ANYTHING. (No search, no enforcement until after the fact.) They just set the groundwork for immediate corrective action if someone proves insufficiently careful.

 

[texasgun]

as said before: at gun shows/ in gun stores people "fiddle around" with guns and pull the trigger.

same holds true for gun ranges so the only time a weapon is loaded there is when it points downrange...

 

[Pit4Brains]

As far as ranges go, the public (daily membership req.) range that I shoot at has very strict rules on handling firearms. They can only be handled while the line is hot. That goes for cased firearms as well as uncased. Cased firearms will be uncased / cased on the bench with the business end down range. The only holstering is done while range is hot and you are drawing on target. During a cease fire, that firearm is on the bench with the action open. The only people walking around with holstered loaded firearms are the RSO's. Being a public range there are hundreds of shooters there everyday with all levels of experience. Heck I had a guy walk down range one morning while I was getting ready to squeeze off a round. It was just me and him, we had the flag out but he thought I was done firing. There are idiots out there.
Law enforcement officers do not bring firearms into my wife's hospital either, even while escorting cons. Too many loonies in close quarters. If I owned a gun shop, I would not like to have another person with a loaded firearm in my shop. I'd reserve that benefit for myself. I'd actually ask that all guns for sell, trade, appraisal or smithing be cased.Not to much to ask in IMHO.

 

[NoVA Shooter]

I see, so get rid of all requirements for drivers education? Because it doesn't prevent all accidents it has no value?

Funny, I see that strawman argument used by antis all the time...

The point of the comparison was to demonstrate that your concerns regarding cc will not be alleviated by training, education, or testing. You seem to think there's a slew of NDs because people don't know how to use a gun instead of realizing that most NDs occur because of carelessness.

Let's also not forget that driving is a privileged, not a right.
Nobody ever suggests that we need adequate training, education, and testing to exercise our first amendment rights. Before you make the typical counter argument that freedom of speech isn't a deadly weapon, just remember that words have been used to incite suicide, murder, rebellion, terrorism, war, and tyranny.

Heck, meds are rarely 100% effecitve, guess we shouldnt take them? Seat belts aren't either...no point, then? All or nothing arguments are not realistic.

Neither are "if it just saves one life..." arguments.

 

[NoVA Shooter]

If I owned a gun shop, I would not like to have another person with a loaded firearm in my shop.

Yet you'd sell that same person a gun. This is where I think a bit of hypocrisy comes in when gun stores ban CC.

As I've said before, if you're bringing in a gun that you intend to handle, keep it unloaded. I have no problem with a store enforcing that policy. But a carry gun that you have no intention of handling? Unless there are legal/insurance issues at play, I just don't get it.

 

[Pit4Brains]

True. Buy a firearm at sportsman's warehouse or bass pro shop. It goes in the box, and a sales associate walks you to the door. i'm not sure about their policies about bringing one in as far as checking with customer service, etc., but they will be unloaded. I cannot say for sure about their ccw policies though. This is AZ and we are very liberal about carrying firearms outside of Target and coffee shops.
I think the "gun stores" just don't need armed people of any intent that close to their merchandise.