Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Eric F, Apr 7, 2008.
What's next... gun locks with a tube to blow into?
Guns are either locked up or under the direct control (either in-holster-on-body or in-hand) of their owner - as they should be.
That's exactly the kind of attitude that drives some of us nuts on these threads. Did you NOT read the posts where some of us describe not getting drunk and not handling guns when drinking? C'mon, there's a huge difference between having a glass of something with dinner while a handgun remains holstered on one's hip, vs. getting trashed and playing with the thing.
NOBODY IS ADVOCATING PLAYING WITH GUNS WHILE DRUNK.
SIMPLE HOLSTERED POSSESSION WHILE IMBIBING A SERVING OF ALCOHOL WITH A MEAL DOES NOT EQUAL PLAYING WITH GUNS WHILE DRUNK.
Umm... that's not even remotely accurate...
Everyone is responsible for the choices they make. I am just saying that personally if I am carrying I am not drinking. I do not want anything in my body which might keep me from reacting to 100% of my ability if I have to protect myself or loved ones. I also wish to avoid the entire issue of alcohol consumption if in fact I do have to use or threaten to use my firearm. All I am saying is I think it is a bad decision to drink while armed. However I have to admit that drinking while armed has actually helped me, you see I got my first job because a deputy decided that drinking and playing with his gun was OK and he got stupid, which resulted in an immediate opening at the department. He truly believed he was not drunk and was in total control of himself and his situation.
To me, this topic is very similar to the question of wearing helmets while riding a morotcycle.
In Texas it is legal to ride a motocycle without a helmet. But, I'd be willing to bet that anyone who has actually been in a collision with no helmet (and managed to survive) took up wearing them thereafter.
In Texas it is also legal to consume alcohol while carrying a concealed handgun. But, if you have the misfortune to have to defend your life with your handgun you can bet the first question asked in court will be, " Did you consume ANY alcohol before you shot Mr. Smith? The trial will suddenly be all about you instead of what the BG did.
I'm likewise willing to bet that no one who has lived through this will think it's OK to have a few while carrying ever again.
I've been in scooter wrecks without a helmet and I still don't wear one. What the hell - gotta die of somethin'.
I've been in terminal-type situations and survived the civil suits. Yes, I'd had some brews. Don't matter to me. No problem at all with the jury.
I'll continue to live my life the way I wish.
Sounds like he's got other issues. A few drinks, or even being blotto, isn't going to make someone point a loaded 1911 at their chest and magically get the safety off.
There are very different "booze cultures" around this country. In some circles, esp. in the inner city or impoverished rural areas (esp the Res) "a drink" literally means getting totally thrashed and maybe blacking out. I've seen it many many times. In a different culture, "a drink" means just that--some nice quality drink you have with a meal. So when a person used to culture A hears a person from culture B saying "I don't see a problem having a drink while armed" there's a culture clash.
I've had the same issues come up here in Alaska. A lot of folks around here have been brought up to drink incredibly nasty beer and booze until drunk (or even aftershave). That's the point of alcohol to them. And once you start abusing the beverage and yourself that way on a regular basis, addiction is sure to follow. I feel for these folks, but I do get a little annoyed when they come back fresh from detox with the assumption everyone who imbibes the demon rum does it just like they did.
Just understand different people from different backgrounds have a VERY VERY different approach to alcohol. I was drinking beer with dinner since I was 12, but I've only been drunk a handful of times. I won't drink inferior liquor at all. If it doesn't taste good, there's no point to it.
Like Biker, I also ride without a helmet. I don't believe in the law, or any law that abridges freedom just so some nanny sleeps better at night.
But BTW, I am thinking of buying a helmet since I don't own one. I like to ride, Wisconsin has really variable weather, and rain and cold are a factor. I also distrust cagers so much that a skid-lid might be good for long highway trips where turn signals all seem to be defective.
And I'm not even saying that guns and alcohol ought to be brought under the watchful eye of Big Brother.
However, when you screw up on one of those "I can handle it" binges and shoot my dog, don't expect any mercy. You want to squat with the big chickens, then pay the price of the seed.
A reasonable amount with food has never been shown to make people a danger to themselves or others. PERIOD
Note that for that courtroom situation to occur, the defendant would have to be above room temperature. The whole point of being in court at that point is that the decedant intended the defendant to be at room temperature instead. That the decedant's metabolic status is what it is demonstrates that despite imbibing, the defendant was competent enough to do what needed to be done or the defendant would be dead. Seems the question "did you consume ANY alcohol Mr. Smith?" is by far the least of one's worries in the totality of the situation. A competent defense lawyer should be eliminate the question with ease, as the answer to the question is irrelevant to whether the situation warranted pulling a trigger. If the shooting was justified, it was justified - end of story.
The state deliberately allows one to hurtle a multi-ton vehicle down the freeway at 65MPH with up to a 0.8 BAC ... so what's the problem with merely having the keys thereto in one's pocket? Likewise CCW.
You're making the case for being a teetotaler: since one should carry always, one should never imbibe. Are you advocating never consuming alcohol? The tool is irrelevant, as the indicated situation warrants terminal results by any means necessary. Even if not carrying, one should be able to "make do" with whatever is at hand, with equivalent results - ergo, the question is whether one becomes terminally dangerous upon consuming any amount of C2H5OH, and thus consumption thereof should be outlawed entirely. Back to Prohibition, everyone! repeal the 21st Amendment! someone might get poked in the eye with a spoon!
Simplified: the argument is whether consuming any amount of alcohol causes one to forfeit one's right to self-defense.
So simplified, the answer seems rediculously obvious, as any other answer turns into an "anti"-like "but you might ... so we'll punish you even though you didn't actually cause/threaten harm". I'm smart enough to pace myself, to stop at the onset of certain effects, and to not draw anything when doing so; I'm responsible for my actions, and act accordingly; now get off my (and others') case and let us do what hasn't been a problem. So long as it stays holstered, leave me the heck alone, m'kay?
Yes They Dont!
You never know you've gone too far until you get there.
If you're serious about your own self-defense, you won't get blotto.
Will I have a beer or two, or a glass of wine with dinner? Yes, and the law lets me. 2 beers or a glass of wine will not put me over .04, our limit while carrying.
Will I get sloshed? No. I take my safety and wife's safety far too seriously to relinquish that amount of control ever again.
Seems the NRA is okay with a nip or two . . .
That's the most accurate post in this whole thread.
Only thing I have to add on the subject is that ccw in resteraunts and full-on bars is perfectly legal here in OR, and there is no specific law that deals with firearms use, carry, or posession with alcohol in your system, and I have yet to hear of a legal ccw permit holder having a ND or shooting someone in a bar (excluding legit self defense obviously, but I havent even ever heard of THAT happening), and we all seem to do just fine and are able to control our guns, ourselves, and our drinking while out. And having observed enough people in this state, I certainly cabnt say it's because the population here is any smarter or has bettre self control than anywhere else.It's just that those responsible enought to legally ccw, also seem to magically be responsible enough to know how to handle themselves in the presence of guns and alcohol.For some, maybe that means no drinking at all.Fine by me.For others, maybe it means being responsible, and knowing when to say when when carrying, or when to not carry in the first place knowing you plan on having more than you feel is responsible to carry under.Also fine. It's all about being a responsible adult, and exercising common sense and self control.
If one is not responsible enough, and has enough self control to know how to deal with guns and alcohol safely, I'm willing to bet that even without a gun, they would drink and drive while over the limit, which is stupid and dangerous, or would manage to shoot themselves or someone else even while sober. Irresponsible with lack of self control is irresponsible with lack of self control. it isnt just limited to alcohol, or guns.Those who are like that will be that way about EVERYTHING in thier lives.some will wise up and/or grow up, others will not. Some will get lucky and never harm themselves or anyone else by thier irresponsibility and lack of self control, other will in some way, and dont need a gun, alcohol, or a car to do it.
It about the person, not the thing, just like we always tell the anti's about guns and criminals.
i think you need to know and be realistic about who you hang with. i was a drunk quart a day of hard liquor for last 10 years. i would appear relatively sober when i was far from it. worked 3 days in a blackout once and no one i worked with noticed. my solution was i quit drinking 15 years ago. i learned the hard way about drunks and guns and chose not to carry when i drank. so i never carried. thats was MY problem and solution. i know many folks who can have a drink or 2 and who i'm not the least bit bothered if they carry. i know a few who shouldn't carry while drinking pepsi. no one size fits all answer. you have to remove yourself from the fools. i failed to once got to watch my first dog bleed out on the floor after my best friend got stupid while drinking. he gave up shooting that nite. we were lucky was only a dog . coulda been one of us nearly became him
"The state deliberately allows one to hurtle a multi-ton vehicle down the freeway at 65MPH with up to a 0.8 BAC ... so what's the problem with merely having the keys thereto in one's pocket? Likewise CCW."
bad analogy in va having the keys in your pocket if you have access to the car while drinking will get you busted
What? mind explaining this one please?
if you are legally drunk in va outside your home you better not have keys in your control and acess to the car.
know and old man doing 10 years for sleeping in his car behind the bar he was drinking in. wanna sleep it off in your car? hide the keys away from car. if cops come find you in car and keys on you you get to ride in the back of the cop car
That is what the drunk SOB said right after he plowed into one of my friends and her 3 year old child in texas. For your information he said "I ONLY HAD TWO BEERS". I guess two is enough to take the lives of a mother and child.
What give you the right to to endanger mine and my childrens lives by driving after you have been drinking?
I can not to this day understand why people do this.
Why couldn't you stopped at a store on the why home and picked up a 6 or 12 pack then got home and drank away some of your brain cells? Then your not on the road trying to kill people.
drunks and a lot of things don't mix.
Human physiology as it relates to the comsumpton of alcohol is still a great mystery to me. After arresting several hundred people during my career for DWI, the BAC's were of all various levels. In the majority of the cases the defendant "only had two beers", never could figure that out. I don't think anyone is saying you cannot make your own decision about drinking while you carry. I believe lots of folks have put their opinion forward, most based on some life experience to support their position. If I decide not to drink while I carry that is my decision if you decide to drink while you carry that is your decision.
Most of you are addressing this issue from an extremely sensible angle of how much alcohol you can realistically handle while remaining a responsible, safe person.
I wouldn't argue with that for a second and agree with every word so far as common sense is concerned.
My point earlier in this thread is that if you should have to defend your life with deadly force, then the fact that you have consumed ANY alcohol will definitely be an issue for you.
Don't even try to tell me this isn't so. We have dozens of threads here on THR telling the sad story of people who have spent a lot of money defending themselves in court after defending their very lives against BGs who clearly were out to harm them. The people in your jury will not all be members of THR or Polite Society! Adding a drink to that can not possibly be a 'no impact' item.
BTW, I am not a tea totaler. But, I try not to drink when I carry (everywhere I legally can). If I'm really in the mood for a drink I go for it, but it always makes me a tad uneasy to do so.
OK, I'm outa here!
Separate names with a comma.