Armed citizen risks

Okay. No dispute there. But what does law enforcement do if it comes upon the scene while the action is In progress? Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? I’m afraid that standard police procedures assume only bad guys are armed. LEOs are already nervous as hell about encountering armed civilians. And they tend to err on the side of caution which means a lot of innocent folks are getting shot by the law. They don’t have to actually be armed. They just have to have something in their hand. How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

rpenmanparker said:

Okay. No dispute there. But what does law enforcement do if it comes upon the scene while the action is In progress? Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? I’m afraid that standard police procedures assume only bad guys are armed. LEOs are already nervous as hell about encountering armed civilians. And they tend to err on the side of caution which means a lot of innocent folks are getting shot by the law. They don’t have to actually be armed. They just have to have something in their hand. How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

Click to expand...

Armed citizens and legal carry isn't new.

rpenmanparker said:

Okay. No dispute there. But what does law enforcement do if it comes upon the scene while the action is In progress? Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? I’m afraid that standard police procedures assume only bad guys are armed. LEOs are already nervous as hell about encountering armed civilians. And they tend to err on the side of caution which means a lot of innocent folks are getting shot by the law. They don’t have to actually be armed. They just have to have something in their hand. How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

Click to expand...

Its worked before. Legalized carry is a right imo...and our Forefathers.

rpenmanparker said:

Okay. No dispute there. But what does law enforcement do if it comes upon the scene while the action is In progress? Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? I’m afraid that standard police procedures assume only bad guys are armed. LEOs are already nervous as hell about encountering armed civilians. And they tend to err on the side of caution which means a lot of innocent folks are getting shot by the law. They don’t have to actually be armed. They just have to have something in their hand. How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

Click to expand...

Side note, I disagree. I believe the properly trained armed citizen knows how to react when an officer arrives on the scene. If he/she doesn't, then their training wasn't sufficient, which is rare considering ccw classes teach you what to plan for when an officer shows to the scene.

When our office was left unlocked one night, and the police called, on my entrance into the building (hands clearly empty) the first words of the LEO, when he first saw me, were effective:

“I’m more afraid of you than you are of me.”

No one, hearing that, is going to make a sudden move.

Mn Fats said:

Its worked before. Legalized carry is a right imo...and our Forefathers.

Click to expand...

And actually it also hasn’t worked before. The famous lawmen of the post-Civil War West were paid to do one thing, disarm the populace of the frontier towns and the cattle drive cowboys who passed through. I’m not saying they were Constitutionally justified in doing that. I’m saying that the hallmark of a civilized society throughout US history has been the absence of both open and concealed carry. The way a frontier city demonstrated it had come of age was to remove handguns from the daily experience of the population. Like it or not, that is how it was.

I just don’t believe we are justified in being so smug. As handguns make their return to our cities, the issues of dealing with them will also resurface. And the insecurity that policemen feel on duty will make for a very volatile situation. So if you support either open or concealed carry, be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Work to develop ways that innocent gun-carrying citizens can be protected against “shoot first and ask questions later” tendencies of the local constabulary. Doesn’t matter what color you are. This is going to be a problem.

rpenmanparker said:

Work to develop ways that innocent gun-carrying citizens can be protected against “shoot first and ask questions later” tendencies of the local constabulary.

Click to expand...

Where is it that LEO's have these tendencies? I have not seen it.

Fine Figure of a Man said:

Where is it that LEO's have these tendencies? I have not seen it.

Click to expand...

You don’t think the many shootings of unarmed citizens over the last few years displays this tendency? In Florida? In Missouri? In New York? On and on. Or does it not count if the victim is black?

rpenmanparker said:

You don’t think the many shootings of unarmed citizens over the last few years displays this tendency? In Florida? In Missouri? In New York? On and on. Or does it not count if the victim is black?

Click to expand...

Define "many" and explain what race has to do with the topic of this thread.

rpenmanparker writes:

You don’t think the many shootings of unarmed citizens over the last few years displays this tendency? In Florida? In Missouri? In New York? On and on. Or does it not count if the victim is black?

Click to expand...

The "many shootings"? Relative to when? To how many?

There have always been LE shootings of unarmed citizens (or, at least, citizens not armed with firearms, all of which are considered by the media to be "unarmed citizens.") There just hasn't always been the media hype over them.

It's also possible that, once upon a time, people, meaning street thugs, didn't feel empowered to charge cops as much as they do today. Charge a cop, and you stand a real good chance of getting shot. Ditto for waving fake guns at them (people shot while waving fake guns are considered by the media to have been unarmed as well.)

Armed or not... fight with a cop, you might ( will ) get shot.

Fine Figure of a Man said:

Define "many" and explain what race has to do with the topic of this thread.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding? Have you no awareness of the police on innocent citizen shootings all across the country? Are you pretending not to know that the vast majority of the victims have been black.

You folks are amazing. You have your own facts. “Charge a cop”? “Fight with a cop?” “Waving fake guns?” How about be found standing in a back yard with a telephone in your hand. Bang, you’re dead! Fact is the police are scared out of their wits and are overreacting to imagined guns. Wait until they see the real thing. Don’t expect them to check out your carry permit before shooting.

rpenmanparker writes:

The famous lawmen of the post-Civil War West were paid to do one thing, disarm the populace of the frontier towns and the cattle drive cowboys who passed through. I’m not saying they were Constitutionally justified in doing that. I’m saying that the hallmark of a civilized society throughout US history has been the absence of both open and concealed carry. The way a frontier city demonstrated it had come of age was to remove handguns from the daily experience of the population. Like it or not, that is how it was.

Click to expand...

But were those "frontier towns" truly civilized, meaning peaceful and relatively crime-free, once their citizens were so disarmed? Was simply having laws against carrying handguns "the hallmark of a civilized society"? Does that hold true today?

There are far more "unarmed people" getting shot by cops while charging cops, or waving fake guns, in the streets than there are getting shot while standing in their own backyards holding a cellphone. All are lumped by the mainstream media into the category of "unarmed citizens" gunned down by police.

EDIT: I'm guilty myself of losing track of the actual thread subject, and had to scroll back up to review the title. It appears to be well off-topic now, so I'll step back.

MedWheeler said:

But were those "frontier towns" truly civilized, meaning peaceful and relatively crime-free, once their citizens were so disarmed? Was simply having laws against carrying handguns "the hallmark of a civilized society"? Does that hold true today?

Click to expand...

I don’t know the answers to your questions. I’m just saying that in the place where slinging guns became legendary, getting rid of them was considered a stepping stone to normalization. I’m not talking about right or wrong, just what was.

rpenmanparker said:

Are you kidding? Have you no awareness of the police on innocent citizen shootings all across the country? Are you pretending not to know that the vast majority of the victims have been black.

Click to expand...

No I'm not kidding.

rpenmanparker said:

You folks are amazing. You have your own facts. “Charge a cop”? “Fight with a cop?” “Waving fake guns?” How about be found standing in a back yard with a telephone in your hand. Bang, you’re dead! Fact is the police are scared out of their wits and are overreacting to imagined guns. Wait until they see the real thing. Don’t expect them to check out your carry permit before shooting.

Click to expand...

Who has their own facts?

rpenmanparker said:

I don’t know the answers to your questions.

Click to expand...

Something we agree on.

rpenmanparker said:

How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

Click to expand...

Arizona has had unregulated open carry for over 100 years and Constitutional Carry for 8 years.

rpenmanparker said:

And actually it also hasn’t worked before.

Click to expand...

See above.

{entire section removed as not to bait the troll}

rpenmanparker said:

I’m just saying that in the place where slinging guns became legendary, getting rid of them was considered a stepping stone to normalization. I’m not talking about right or wrong, just what was.

Click to expand...

And you are wrong. I live in a place where it has been normal for longer than you and I put together have been alive. Even in Tombstone, where the Earp era law was grandfathered in at statehood, the law was eventually repealed making it "normalized" with the rest of the state. You can legally carry openly or concealed, any number of legal firearms as long as you are not a prohibited possessor and obey the signage, and you may do this without permit or license, waiting period or registration. BTW, Phoenix, AZ had just over half the population of Chicago, but less than 20% of the murder/non negligent manslaughter - can you explain that?
So global statement refuted and debunked. Please deposit another $.25 to play again.

MedWheeler said:

I'm guilty myself of losing track of the actual thread subject, and had to scroll back up to review the title. It appears to be well off-topic now, so I'll step back.

Click to expand...

May I borrow this? Sorry, me too. The FBI data is very interesting, especially when the media and idiot celebrities claim no armed citizens ever stop crime.

rpenmanparker said:

Okay. No dispute there. But what does law enforcement do if it comes upon the scene while the action is In progress? Who is the good guy? Who is the bad guy? I’m afraid that standard police procedures assume only bad guys are armed. LEOs are already nervous as hell about encountering armed civilians. And they tend to err on the side of caution which means a lot of innocent folks are getting shot by the law. They don’t have to actually be armed. They just have to have something in their hand. How are the cops going to cope with legalized carry. Just wondering how it is going to work.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Cops have been coping with legalized carry in all of the states where it is legal, which is almost all of them. Cops have been coping with the potential of encountering plainclothes or off-duty officers who are armed in every state since forever. Concealed carry is not a new thing. The possibility that an officer might encounter an armed innocent bystander of one sort or another is not a foreign thing to police.

'Standard police procedures' assume everyone might be armed until proven otherwise.

armoredman said:

Arizona has had unregulated open carry for over 100 years and Constitutional Carry for 8 years.

See above.

{entire section removed as not to bait the troll}


And you are wrong. I live in a place where it has been normal for longer than you and I put together have been alive. Even in Tombstone, where the Earp era law was grandfathered in at statehood, the law was eventually repealed making it "normalized" with the rest of the state. You can legally carry openly or concealed, any number of legal firearms as long as you are not a prohibited possessor and obey the signage, and you may do this without permit or license, waiting period or registration. BTW, Phoenix, AZ had just over half the population of Chicago, but less than 20% of the murder/non negligent manslaughter - can you explain that?
So global statement refuted and debunked. Please deposit another $.25 to play again.

May I borrow this? Sorry, me too. The FBI data is very interesting, especially when the media and idiot celebrities claim no armed citizens ever stop crime.

Click to expand...

Nothing is refuted or debunked. You confirmed what I said, that the good conservative citizens of some western cities desired to be gun free on their streets. There was no right or wrong being preached, but that fact. That such laws were eventually repealed or modified doesn’t change that they existed.

ONE law existed due to a few men who decided, against the wishes of the townsfolk, to enact the law You are incorrect yet again, sir. And to state that a law existed is prof it was good - so you agree with Dredd Scott?

"The famous lawmen of the post-Civil War West were paid to do one thing, disarm the populace of the frontier towns and the cattle drive cowboys who passed through."

The Earp brothers and allies issued (1) No carrying your guns in town, (2) Store your guns in safe a place, and (3) You can get them back and wear then out of town (where you'll need them). Why? Because they were paid to primarily provide armed security to the town folk, not to take their guns away like D.C. or Chicago. (A cynical read of Tombstone history is the Earps and their allies were a gang, like the Clantons and the Cowboys were a gang, and the Earps wanted the rival gang disarmed.) Second, in that part of Arizona in that time, "cowboy" meant cattle rustler not ranch hand. The Clanton "Cowboys" stole cattle in Mexico and sold them in the US. The Earps handled saloons, gambling and prostitution. The Earps were charged with murder and tried for the shootout at near the OK Corral.

It is wrong and historical revision to claim "The famous lawmen of the post-Civil War West were paid to do one thing, disarm the populace of the frontier towns and the cattle drive cowboys who passed through." They did many important things, but (temporarily) disarming the populance and cattle drivers was probably the least in towns with no gang problems. Tombstone Arizona is legendary because it was exceptional.

rpenmanparker said:

Are you kidding? Have you no awareness of the police on innocent citizen shootings all across the country? Are you pretending not to know that the vast majority of the victims have been black.

Click to expand...

This source shows that far more whites are killed by police than blacks.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

Mn Fats said:

Side note, I disagree. I believe the properly trained armed citizen knows how to react when an officer arrives on the scene. If he/she doesn't, then their training wasn't sufficient, which is rare considering ccw classes teach you what to plan for when an officer shows to the scene.

Click to expand...

Not all concealed carry training is equal. I observed the two days of training my wife was required to do for an Illinois carry permit, and the instructor covered none of that. The training was terrible but it was required. I would not assume people are properly trained, nor that after an emotional event they would remember and comply with whatever training they might have gotten.