Fear of firearms

[Morrey]

I was raised around guns and had a rimfire from the age of 10. My grandpa and dad taught me respect and proper use of firearms.

My wife, on the other hand, had limited exposure to firearms. While dating, she resisted shooting with me and always was fearful of firearms. In most cases, people fear what they are not familiar with.

I encouraged my wife to take a firearms concealed weapons course which she did very well with. She now has her own revolver and practices with me at the range. Many gun owners are encouraged to keep guns locked away in safes or inaccessible in case of an emergency. As empty nesters, my wife now encourages me to have a pistol close at hand in case of an emergency such as home invasion.

With our personal safety at an all time high risk, I hope that more families will take gun safety courses and become familiar with the use of firearms. Lose the fear of guns and learn to respect them.

 

[FAS1]

Many gun owners are encouraged to keep guns locked away in safes or inaccessible in case of an emergency. As empty nesters, my wife now encourages me to have a pistol close at hand in case of an emergency such as home invasion.

We have been empty nesters for a dozen years or so since both kids went away for college and so far have not had to move back home.

I pocket carry around the home, but still keep my primary HD gun in a quick access handgun safe bolted to my bed frame at all times. If you haven't looked at one there are many choices today that can be accessed in just a couple seconds.

For us we think that way it doesn't matter who comes to our home our gun is not accessible to them. That could be friends, friends and family with kids, or just someone here on a service call like cable, housekeeping, plumber, etc.

 

[kcofohio]

Morrey, that is about the same with my wife. I got her out to shoot a couple of times, but she was leery about guns in general.

Then, with the prompting of our adult son, she took the 12 hr. NRA course for Ohio's CCW. It taught her that she could handle a gun safely. And that, handled properly, the gun wasn't going to fire on its' own. It took her from a fear of guns, to a respect for guns.

I believe all need some type of safety training. Whether dads, uncles, etc. Or by a professional course.

 

[MechAg94]

Sometimes it is how they are introduced to guns as well. A new shooter who is handed a large caliber pistol instead of starting with a 22 might get a bad first impression.

 

[MEHavey]

That 12-hr Ohio reqm't got my attention, so I looked it up.
I found:
>
> This is a twelve hour class as required by the State of Ohio, taught by
> an National Rifle Association instructor. The class meets on Saturday
> at 9AM and runs to noon. We will break from noon to 1PM for lunch,
> the class then resumes and ends at 6PM. Sunday class starts at 2PM
> and ends at 6PM. You will need to supply 100 rounds for the second
> day shooting.
>
> No revolvers nor .22 calibre pistols allowed in this course.
>
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/12-hour-ohio-nra-concealed-carry-course-tickets-10662286185

No Revolvers ? As I could find not requirement under Ohio Code O.R.C. Section 2923.125 (B) (3) etc, etc to this effect... why no revolvers?

 

[ATLDave]

I think the single most important thing people can do to help protect gun rights is to take a non-shooter to the range. Ideally, someone who is somewhat anti-gun or sympathetic to gun control. It's far, far, far more effective than haranguing them with slogans about the second amendment or how heavy cops are or how Hitler disarmed the populace or whatever. Lots of anti-gun people have a visceral fear of guns and cannot even imagine how they might be used safely and for non-violent purposes.

 

[PJSprog]

My first wife was like that. She was deathly afraid of guns. I finally got her to go to the range with me one day back in the late '80s. She shot my .22 semi, then shot .38s and .357s from my revolver. She liked them all, but thought my 6" barrel 686 was too front heavy. Next gun show that came around, she went with me and bought her own 4" 686. She turned out to be a very good shooter. We even used to compete against each other for chores.

Second wife is a completely different story. She grew up with guns. To her, they were farm tools just like anything else. She didn't really get into the pleasurable aspect of recreational shooting until after we started dating. Now, we shoot frequently, and her handgun collection is starting to approach mine.

"Sorry - she has no sister."

 

[Morrey]

Thanks for all the supportive feedback. Gun education is far greater than donning a bumper sticker that states the right to bear arms. It is familiarity, respect, training and application. My wife is a living example of exposing her to guns in a non-threatening way. On her own terms, she is now a concealed weapons permit holder and a gun owner.

 

[Sunray]

A limited exposure to firearms is pretty typical, including cop and military recruits. Most city people will never see a real firearm in their entire life. Nothing new about it either. The idea of the U.S. being a nation of riflemen is a myth.
"...With our personal safety at an all time high risk..." How so?

 

[PJSprog]

That 12-hr Ohio reqm't got my attention, so I looked it up.

In Illinois, it's a 16 hour class.

No restrictions on qualification firearms that I know of, though. Several people in my class used .22s. In fact, those who had no firearm, or had trouble with their own, were encouraged by the instructor to use his S&W M41.

No revolvers in Ohio is crazy, though.

 

[bearcreek]

No Revolvers ? As I could find not requirement under Ohio Code O.R.C. Section 2923.125 (B) (3) etc, etc to this effect... why no revolvers?

That's not a state requirement. It's just that particular trainer. (BTW, training time requirements have now been reduced to 8 hrs instead of 12). We've considered limiting or prohibiting revolvers in the class that I teach because we consider them to be an antiquated, sub par choice for a carry gun. Haven't done it yet because some people still like them for whatever reason and they're better than nothing.

 

[Theohazard]

With our personal safety at an all time high risk

Actually, the risk to our personal safety hasn't been this low in 60 years.

Violent crime in the US has been plummeting for decades. We're currently at 1960s crime levels in this country. Don't get me wrong, I carry concealed virtually everywhere I go. But it doesn't help to perpetuate the myth that the danger is worse than it has ever been.

 

[kcofohio]

That 12-hr Ohio reqm't got my attention, so I looked it up.
I found:
>
> This is a twelve hour class as required by the State of Ohio, taught by
> an National Rifle Association instructor. The class meets on Saturday
> at 9AM and runs to noon. We will break from noon to 1PM for lunch,
> the class then resumes and ends at 6PM. Sunday class starts at 2PM
> and ends at 6PM. You will need to supply 100 rounds for the second
> day shooting.
>
> No revolvers nor .22 calibre pistols allowed in this course.
>
http://www.eventbrite.com/e/12-hour-ohio-nra-concealed-carry-course-tickets-10662286185

No Revolvers ? As I could find not requirement under Ohio Code O.R.C. Section 2923.125 (B) (3) etc, etc to this effect... why no revolvers?

As bearcreek said, the 22 cal. and revolver restriction was that instructors preference. Some courses, when they were 12 hrs., split them into 2 days, some would do it in one day.

 

[yugorpk]

That's not a state requirement. It's just that particular trainer. (BTW, training time requirements have now been reduced to 8 hrs instead of 12). We've considered limiting or prohibiting revolvers in the class that I teach because we consider them to be an antiquated, sub par choice for a carry gun. Haven't done it yet because some people still like them for whatever reason and they're better than nothing.

Given that most gun fights are over in a shot or two why would you consider that? Your'e hurting my little 5 shot .357 Smiths feelings. That little guy goes everywhere with me and I sure wouldnt want to be on the business end of that sucker with a chamber full of the nasty ammo.

Glad I'm moving back to Washington where the "training" requirements for a CPL are sending $60 in to the sheriffs office with a filled out form every 5 years ( OK renewals are $30 ).

 

[bearcreek]

Given that most gun fights are over in a shot or two why would you consider that? Your'e hurting my little 5 shot .357 Smiths feelings. That little guy goes everywhere with me and I sure wouldnt want to be on the business end of that sucker with a chamber full of the nasty ammo.

I probably shouldn't have said that cause it's not what this thread is about. Couldn't resist though. That always gets a rise out of people. I'll just answer briefly. A semi auto can be the same basic size and weight as a five shot revolver but it holds more ammo, it's easier and far faster to reload, it's flatter and so easier to conceal in many cases and a reload is more convenient to carry in a flat magazine than a round speed loader.

 

[oneounceload]

We've considered limiting or prohibiting revolvers in the class that I teach because we consider them to be an antiquated, sub par choice for a carry gun

Incorrect assumption

I probably shouldn't have said that cause it's not what this thread is about. Couldn't resist though. That always gets a rise out of people. I'll just answer briefly. A semi auto can be the same basic size and weight as a five shot revolver but it holds more ammo, it's easier and far faster to reload, it's flatter and so easier to conceal in many cases and a reload is more convenient to carry in a flat magazine than a round speed loader.

My revolver has no flat or sharp edges, just like the human torso and conceals in a pocket better than any semi.

My 5 shots of 38+P is more than adequate for the 99.99% of the time (which in and of itself is a mere 99.99% of the time I will be out and about)
Why do you assume the need for a reload or that most folks carry one?

You are doing a disservice to those who prefer a gun not subject to limp wristing, FTE, FTF, etc.

 

[J-Bar]

I simply agree with them:

"You are right to be afraid of guns. I don't want to be around any one who isn't afraid of guns. Firearms can provide protection and recreation if they are handled safely, but they can cause harm if not handled safely. So I don't think you are afraid of guns as much as you are afraid of unsafe gun handling..."

Then we can start talking about how movies and TV do not show guns being handled in a safe manner. Sometimes that leads to a range trip, sometimes not. But it gets them thinking about the person handling the gun as the safety issue, not the gun itself.

 

[stonecutter2]

I probably shouldn't have said that cause it's not what this thread is about. Couldn't resist though. That always gets a rise out of people. I'll just answer briefly. A semi auto can be the same basic size and weight as a five shot revolver but it holds more ammo, it's easier and far faster to reload, it's flatter and so easier to conceal in many cases and a reload is more convenient to carry in a flat magazine than a round speed loader.

How many self defense situations require a reload and more than 5 shots.

 

[bearcreek]

How many self defense situations require a reload and more than 5 shots.

Guys, this thread isn't about revolvers vs. semi autos. I opened a can of worms bringing it up. Looks like that was a mistake. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread or comment on one of the many threads already started on that subject. I've made the same statements in other threads. Look them up if you like.

 

[buck460XVR]

We've considered limiting or prohibiting revolvers in the class that I teach because we consider them to be an antiquated, sub par choice for a carry gun. Haven't done it yet because some people still like them for whatever reason and they're better than nothing.

Ever heard the phrase “Those who can, do, and those who can't, teach”?


This is a prime example.

 

[chipcom]

That's not a state requirement. It's just that particular trainer. (BTW, training time requirements have now been reduced to 8 hrs instead of 12). We've considered limiting or prohibiting revolvers in the class that I teach because we consider them to be an antiquated, sub par choice for a carry gun. Haven't done it yet because some people still like them for whatever reason and they're better than nothing.

My old man woulda loved schooling you with his old Security Six just like he did with me and my brothers when we'd start popping off about the alleged obsolescence of revolvers. Additionally, my wife's arthritis prevents her from racking the slide on autoloaders even with really wimpy springs...but she handles a revolver just fine...so yes, that revolver is definitely better than nothing for her.

Back to the subject...while I do ensure my operational firearms are locked up when the grand kids come to visit, I keep an old, inoperable revolver in pretty much plain view all the time, just like I did with my kids. It has provided many a teachable moment for not only my kids and grand kids, but also their friends and other visitors to my home. Why send people to a class when you can give them some lessons in firearm safety on-the-spot? ;-)

 

[bearcreek]

Ever heard the phrase “Those who can, do, and those who can't, teach”?


This is a prime example.

Can't imagine how you could possibly know that since we've never met, much less trained together.

 

[yokel]

The first order of business is to remind friends and family that the Second Amendment is still in the Constitution of the United States, contrary to what some elites would like us to believe.

And the Second Amendment was not put into the Constitution by the Founders merely to allow us to intimidate burglars. The right to keep and bear arms derives from our duty to retain the basic means necessary to defend our country, our liberty, and to resist tyranny, if necessary--something that is very difficult to do if the government has all the weapons.

This is not to say that defending against personal dangers was not an anticipated use for arms, particularly on the frontier. But these things are not the fundamental purpose of the Amendment.

Certainly it is true that the actual defense of our national borders is normally delegated to the professional military. But we, the people, are ultimately responsible for the defense of country and liberty, and the Second Amendment is crucial to our performance of that duty.

 

[gbran]

We hear lots of stories where people who are attacked in their home, fight back and overcome bad guys because they had a gun and it was accessible.

 

[buck460XVR]

Can't imagine how you could possibly know that since we've never met, much less trained together.

No, but you've expressed severely biased opinions about a tried and true SD/HD tool that is as effective today in those scenarios as ever. This shortsightedness would be reflected in your instruction and your reluctance to accept proven methods shows your are not that well informed to start with, i.e sub-par choice for a SD instructor. But, I guess, if you were the last firearm instructor in the world, you'd be better than nuttin'.......