Do you believe you are more safe (in public) when others are carrying?

[Outlaw Man]

Being in a place where someone could be carrying makes me feel a little safer than in a place where no one can carry.

That said, I've felt more in danger in certain places in Little Rock and Memphis (in public, non-prohibited locations, with a firearm) than I did in the area of Chicago I was in a few years ago (where all I had was pepper spray and a flashlight). Maybe it's just because I knew those places better than Chicago, and I'm sure there are places in Chicago equally as dangerous, but they'd probably be equally "scary."

 

[Antrome]

I think a bystander joining the fight could lead to confusion in an already tough situation. In the heat of the moment, could you be absolutely certain to distinguish the good guy/guys from the bad guy/guys? Also I have mixed feelings about someone of unknown judgement/ ability, entering the fight.

Unless me or mine were in harms way. As much as it would trouble my conscience, I would have to seriously question coming to the aide of a fellow citizen involved in a gunfight.

 

[taliv]

I think our opponents would like to paint a picture of ccw holders as sheepdog wannabe cops itching to shoot somebody.

Personally I think studies have shown even most soldiers in battle are unlikely to fire their guns at the enemy (at least not in an effective manner). Also most conservative ccw holders are not going to intervene in a situation Because of liability and despite appearances it can be impossible to tell who the bad guy is sometime.

So... IMHO of all people present at an incident the number of ccw holders is statistically tiny, and the ones actually carrying are a small fraction of that. And the ones that would intervene are a small fraction of that. And the ones who would shoot are a small fraction of that. And the ones who have practiced enough to hit something are a tiny fraction of that.

But still I think we're all safer for it.

More importantly we are certainly not LESS safe

 

[243winxb]

The average shooter i see at the range is more likely to hit an innocent bystander. I don't think it makes a significant difference either way.

 

[Bob2222]

I'm a resident of an essentially no-issue state, where the only civilians who carry are mostly convicted and unconvicted felons -- and retired LEOs, who are outnumbered by convicted felons...

Arithmetically, and on average I think I'd be safer in a state where more of the people who carry have been able to pass a background check than in a state where more of the people who carry are felons.

As it is, I try to stay away from places where there might be a high concentration of felons with guns so maybe it all evens out.

 

[skoro]

Under these circumstances, yes:

the other carriers are not intent on criminal activity

the other carriers are licensed for concealed carry

 

[we are not amused]

Despite certain peoples claim that "more guns, doesn't mean less crime", I remained convinced that it does.

Despite claims by a certain individual that there is no link, the Florida crime statistics are there.

While certain people may not believe them, they haven't given any research which refutes John Lott et al.

Given their unsupported word versus that of John Lott, I am going with John Lott.

Recently on this site was a posting about how a concealed carry holder stopped a robbery in a Restaurant.(Family of armed robber killed by CCP holder calls for more gun control) There have been many more over the years. I remember a grocery store robbery, where a thief was holding a shotgun and threatening the store clerk and customers, when a CCH pulled his gun, bided his time till he had a clear shot, and ended the thief's career. Another when a CCH person interrupted a robbery attempt and drove off the armed attackers without firing a shot.

So, yes, I feel safer when in an environment where other people are allowed to be armed, whether I am or not. After all, if you disarm law abiding people, only the criminals will be armed, and they will be armed!

 

[AfghanVetOrcutt]

I don't trust most people because I don't know what kind of training the normal person has. If I'm around another veteran who carries I feel instantly more safe knowing there would be more than one gun on my side in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing with it. I do kinda wish it was a bit harder to get permits from a training standpoint. In Idaho, you don't even have to show any sort of proficiency with your firearm before you get a permit. Kinda makes me wonder what kind of people are carrying. You have to admit, people (in general) are pretty stupid...

 

[we are not amused]

I don't trust most people because I don't know what kind of training the normal person has. If I'm around another veteran who carries I feel instantly more safe knowing there would be more than one gun on my side in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing with it. I do kinda wish it was a bit harder to get permits from a training standpoint. In Idaho, you don't even have to show any sort of proficiency with your firearm before you get a permit. Kinda makes me wonder what kind of people are carrying. You have to admit, people (in general) are pretty stupid...

Most people are not going to be running toward the sound of guns, if they were, I would be worried about their level of training too! Most people who use a gun in self defense, do so only because they can't flee, or people they want to protect can't. (family, friends that kind of stuff)

Therefore they are on the scene and have a pretty good idea of what is going on, unlike say a responding police officer. That is why so few self defense shootings, especially in public, target the wrong person.

I do not fear a relatively untrained permit holder, in most situations, especially the ones I am likely to encounter.

 

[Warp]

I don't trust most people because I don't know what kind of training the normal person has. If I'm around another veteran who carries I feel instantly more safe knowing there would be more than one gun on my side in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing with it. I do kinda wish it was a bit harder to get permits from a training standpoint. In Idaho, you don't even have to show any sort of proficiency with your firearm before you get a permit. Kinda makes me wonder what kind of people are carrying. You have to admit, people (in general) are pretty stupid...

Please do not support gun control.

Gun control is not cool.

Moreover, it is not American.

That's the kind of stuff that belongs on the Democratic Underground. Not a (pro)gun board like THR.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Post #53; situations, On Killing.....

RE; post #53, author & retired US Army officer; Dave Grossman(0-5, LTC) explains military research on deaths/combat & how soldiers/service members really act.
Grossman explained that as time progressed, soldiers in real combat became better conditioned & prepared for facing violent encounters(contact with the enemy). Grossman's On Killing & On Combat are worth reading.
The books aren't like The Art of War but do offer insight into killing/acts of violence.

I, for one, would not get involved in any lethal force event unless I was 100% sure it was a violent crime(forcible felony).
There was a recent event in my metro area where 2 armed, uniformed security guards in a dispute pulled guns on each other. One angry security officer re-holstered his pistol only to have his counter-part, point his weapon & fire.

What would a CCW license holder do then? Would drawing a gun be prudent?
These situations are easy to deal with & can be extremely stressful.

 

[we are not amused]

RE; post #53, author & retired US Army officer; Dave Grossman(0-5, LTC) explains military research on deaths/combat & how soldiers/service members really act.
Grossman explained that as time progressed, soldiers in real combat became better conditioned & prepared for facing violent encounters(contact with the enemy). Grossman's On Killing & On Combat are worth reading.
The books aren't like The Art of War but do offer insight into killing/acts of violence.

I, for one, would not get involved in any lethal force event unless I was 100% sure it was a violent crime(forcible felony).
There was a recent event in my metro area where 2 armed, uniformed security guards in a dispute pulled guns on each other. One angry security officer re-holstered his pistol only to have his counter-part, point his weapon & fire.

What would a CCW license holder do then? Would drawing a gun be prudent?
These situations are easy to deal with & can be extremely stressful.

Since you have just witnessed a murder, and assuming the murderer is not looking like trying to eliminate all witnesses, I would run like hell, and be the best witness I could! If he looks like he is going to keep killing, I would definitely consider pulling my weapon, depending on the tactical situation.

After all, I am not the police, it is not my job to arrest him.

 

[Warp]

RE; post #53, author & retired US Army officer; Dave Grossman(0-5, LTC) explains military research on deaths/combat & how soldiers/service members really act.
Grossman explained that as time progressed, soldiers in real combat became better conditioned & prepared for facing violent encounters(contact with the enemy). Grossman's On Killing & On Combat are worth reading.
The books aren't like The Art of War but do offer insight into killing/acts of violence.

I, for one, would not get involved in any lethal force event unless I was 100% sure it was a violent crime(forcible felony).
There was a recent event in my metro area where 2 armed, uniformed security guards in a dispute pulled guns on each other. One angry security officer re-holstered his pistol only to have his counter-part, point his weapon & fire.

What would a CCW license holder do then? Would drawing a gun be prudent?
These situations are easy to deal with & can be extremely stressful.

Well, would a "CCW" license holder* reasonably believe that lethal force was necessary to prevent serious bodily harm/death/forcible felony**?


*I've never had a CCW personally, I've had a pistol license, a license to carry a handgun, and a weapons carry license

**Or whatever that specific jurisdiction's laws say

 

[ACP]

WeAreNotAmused:

Here's two:

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-scott-gellatly-arraignment-0509-20140508,0,4134370.story

http://www.courant.com/community/ha...d-murder-charge-0425-20140424,0,7378877.story

 

[ACP]

Warp,

that commentor is correct -- we do need MUCH STRONGER BACKGROUND CHECKS AND MANDATORY, MINIMUM HANDGUN TRAINING in every state in America.

Some of the requirements to purchase and carry a handgun in some U.S. states are downright frightening.

I want good guys -- not criminals, mentally ill and psychopaths -- to have access to firearms. And I want them to exhibit GOOD JUDGEMENT and REASONABLE ACCURACY if I, my wife and children are ever going to be in the vicinity when they draw and fire their 2nd Amendment right.

It's "cool" and "American" to want and expect that too.

 

[jrdolall]

that commentor is correct -- we do need MUCH STRONGER BACKGROUND CHECKS AND MANDATORY, MINIMUM HANDGUN TRAINING in every state in America.

Couldn't agree LESS. This is completely asinine. Please explain to me exactly how we are going to go about this "mandatory, minimum handgun training". Maybe the Feds can be in charge? Maybe we can have everyone that applies for a CCW fly out to California for training?
Again, it's idiotic.

 

[Sam1911]

that commentor is correct -- we do need MUCH STRONGER BACKGROUND CHECKS AND MANDATORY, MINIMUM HANDGUN TRAINING in every state in America.

Irony? Or a "...they walk among us..." type of comment?

I know we've never discussed here before how more laws and mandatory training are NOT solutions to any of our nation's problems -- maybe we should have a thread on that!

 

[Warp]

PLEASE STOP SUPPORTING GUN CONTROL IN HERE.

If you want to start a discussion where we explain why gun control is bad, please start a new thread on the topic. If you link it in here I (and others I am sure) would be happy to reply to it.

 

[jrdolall]

Irony? Or a "...they walk among us..." type of comment?

I'm thinking TROLL.

 

[Walkalong]

Never consider it.

 

[Agsalaska]

There are two parts to that question. At the end of the day I think you are safer in a state where CC is legal. I would much rather be in a place where it is legal than where it is not.

That being said, I do not think it makes you any safer in an actual situation, such as a store robbery. In fact I am pretty confident it makes you less safe.

 

[ACP]

jrdolall

A 'troll' with over 800 posts? Please be serious. Your attempted insult is meaningless and silly.

And NO, your hated federal government doesn't have to be in charge of any mandatory training. The NRA and its instructors could come up with qualifications, or private club instructors could do so, an they could administer the test.

But I want live fire, and an accuracy minimum, and a knowledge of self defense laws and castle doctrine in your home state. I want personal interviews, references, fingerprints, background checks, firearms seized from men who have protective orders issued against them.

And, BTW, this is The High Road, which is pro 2nd Amendment, but not brain dead. Debates about who should carry and what they have to do to qualify are allowed.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Interesting thread. Given the discussion and correction above about "feeling" safer versus actually being safer or not, I don't doubt a lot of people may feel safer. A lot of folks also believe that "more guns = less crime" and that CCW causes crime rates or violent crime rates to decline despite there being no substantiable justification for such claims.

Beliefs and feelings are a lot of what contribute to our quality of life, like folks who live in quiet small towns and don't lock their doors at night because they feel safe, only to have said feeling totally destroyed because of even a minor burglary.

 

[Hullraiser]

Not really. It depends if that someone is off duty or retired LE , active military , idpa top competitor or with extensive training & practice. Or someone that took a CCW one day course 2 years ago and is the last time they fired a gun.

 

[Sam1911]

And NO, your hated federal government doesn't have to be in charge of any mandatory training. The NRA and its instructors could come up with qualifications, or private club instructors could do so, an they could administer the test.

Oh, so let me get this right... the federal government is going to mandate that training standards be set and instructional courses established, but then is going to give over all administration of those standards and instruction to the training and competition wing of the largest gun-rights lobbying organization in the world? Yeah...that could happen.

Why don't they just ask the NRA to step in and write the gun laws too, while they're at it?

But I want live fire, and an accuracy minimum, and a knowledge of self defense laws and castle doctrine in your home state. I want personal interviews, references, fingerprints, background checks, firearms seized from men who have protective orders issued against them.

I always prefer to have high barriers to entry on the exercise of any right.

This is truly awful, saddening stuff to read here. A veritable litany of anti-gun old saws. And most so easily demolished as promoting any TRUE public good as to invite, unacceptable here levels of derision.