Husband doesn't like me packing!

Status
Not open for further replies.
He doesn't recognize the gift he has been given.

Your husband is lucky enough to have married a woman who has her head apparently screwed on straight, has a handle on life's priorities and is willing to stand up for herself instead of relying on others all the time.

By the way, anyone who says they have "never been that scared" is either leading a sheltered life or lying through their teeth. It may have been an innocuous situation misread, but we have all had that fear and can remember the tunnel vision and cold in our guts. And he wants you to go into that unprepared? Shame on him.
 
Thank you again, everyone who has replied. As some have pointed out my hubby can be considered "anti".....I'm hoping deep down he is not really against "carrying"

Mneme, it's refreshing to hear from another lady who "packs" :cool:
MNgoldenbear said:
Congrats on going through the steps and not just carrying w/o a permit. Maybe you folks should move north a county or two -- we here in Traverse are supposed to have the highest per capita rate for CCW permits out of MN counties. :evil: Nothing unfriendly about the place, but there can be emergencies in any location (feral animals, meth cookers, assorted criminals, etc.).
Good luck to you both.
Thanks, MNGoldenbear. As the crow flies, we possibly aren't too far away. I agree on the friendliness - I've found this very true in the Big Stone/Traverse area. Thanks for mentioning the feral animals and meth cookers. The meth vermin have been active way too close to our home, and it frightens the livin' daylights out of me. Here's a headline from the local paper, reporting about when someone loaded up on meth rammed into our Sheriff's car after law enforcement had pursued him and attempted to stop the man via roadblock...and this also was very close to my nest :( : http://www.swiftcountymonitor.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=15487&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&S=1
 
Bean, good for you.

I suppose the next time the matter comes up, you can tell him "Honey, don't worry, if I have to, I can protect you and the kids, since you've decided you can't or won't. Our kids deserve someone they can depend on when the chips are down." (Uhhh . . . he may not take this too well. Think twice before using this line.)

You wouldn't happen to have an unattached sister in Texas, would you? :neener:
 
You're not paranoid if they really are after you.

Seriously, the world is full of lower life forms who are beyond reason and logic, and commonly think nothing of killing someone else who gets in the way of their crime. If you can shoot as well as you claim, and you've got the paperwork, then more power to you. If my state had CCW, I'd be packing 24/7 (yes, even in the shower).
 
bean357,

Not much to add. I respect the fact you have chosen to be responsible for yourself, and continue to do so even while being chided.

I too made this decison so many many years ago, I fired family and friends, continue to do so. My responsibility is to me. If do not take care of me, I cannot be there for others when need, nor can I pass forward or anything else that goes with Responsible Firearm Ownership.

I am a believer in "Attraction" over "Promotion" in many things. One does not always know whom is paying attention to them, who is "attracted" to something one does, or exhibits by behavior, or actions.

bean357,
whether you realize it or not - you are leading by example, and you may never know how many people you have attracted to being responsible for themselves.

Regards,

Steve
 
cool beans, Bean!

Carry on!

Once in Oakland a couple was shot in their front yard, in a very nice neighborhood. The husband saw two men approaching with guns and yelled for his wife to call the police & was shot dead a second later.
His wife was followed into the house & shot with the phone in her hand, The 911 tape only caught the sounds of the gun shots.:(
The two men drove away and were never caught & no one ever knew why the nice couple down the block were executed & who did it.

this is from the link that thr member "paulski" submitted

On 09/26/1986, in Harris County, Texas, Shore kidnapped a fifteen year old white female and strangled her to death with a cord. Shored then dumped the victim's body behind a Ninfa's Restaurant.

On 04/16/1992 in Harris County, Texas, Shore kidnapped a twenty-one year old Hispanic female, sexually assaulted her and strangled her to death with a cord. Shore then dumped the victim's body behind a Dairy Queen Restaurant.

On 10/19/1993, Shore entered the home of a fourteen year old female, bound and sexually assaulted her, and strangled her to death. Shore then fled the scene on foot.

On 08/07/1994, Shore kidnapped and sexually assaulted a nine year old female causing her death. Shore then dumped the victim's body behind an abandoned commercial building.

On 07/06/1995, Shore kidnapped a sixteen year old Hispanic female and sexually assaulted her causing her death. Shore then dumped the victim's body in a field.
 
jpfo.org Raging Against Self Defense

snipped due to space limitations,good read

http://www.jpfo.org/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm

Raging Against Self Defense:
A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality
By Sarah Thompson, M.D.
[email protected]


"You don't need to have a gun; the police will protect you."

"If people carry guns, there will be murders over parking spaces and neighborhood basketball games."

"I'm a pacifist. Enlightened, spiritually aware people shouldn't own guns."

"I'd rather be raped than have some redneck militia type try to rescue me."
How often have you heard these statements from misguided advocates of victim disarmament, or even woefully uninformed relatives and neighbors? Why do people cling so tightly to these beliefs, in the face of incontrovertible evidence that they are wrong? Why do they get so furiously angry when gun owners point out that their arguments are factually and logically incorrect?

How can you communicate with these people who seem to be out of touch with reality and rational thought?

One approach to help you deal with anti-gun people is to understand their psychological processes. Once you understand why these people behave so irrationally, you can communicate more effectively with them.


Defense Mechanisms
Projection

About a year ago I received an e-mail from a member of a local Jewish organization. The author, who chose to remain anonymous, insisted that people have no right to carry firearms because he didn't want to be murdered if one of his neighbors had a "bad day". (I don't know that this person is a "he", but I'm assuming so for the sake of simplicity.) I responded by asking him why he thought his neighbors wanted to murder him, and, of course, got no response. The truth is that he's statistically more likely to be murdered by a neighbor who doesn't legally carry a firearm1 and more likely to be shot accidentally by a law enforcement officer.1

How does my correspondent "know" that his neighbors would murder him if they had guns? He doesn't. What he was really saying was that if he had a gun, he might murder his neighbors if he had a bad day, or if they took his parking space, or played their stereos too loud. This is an example of what mental health professionals call projection – unconsciously projecting one's own unacceptable feelings onto other people, so that one doesn't have to own them.3 In some cases, the intolerable feelings are projected not onto a person, but onto an inanimate object, such as a gun,4 so that the projector believes the gun itself will murder him.

Projection is a defense mechanism. Defense mechanisms are unconscious psychological mechanisms that protect us from feelings that we cannot consciously accept.5 They operate without our awareness, so that we don't have to deal consciously with "forbidden" feelings and impulses. Thus, if you asked my e-mail correspondent if he really wanted to murder his neighbors, he would vehemently deny it, and insist that other people want to kill him.

Projection is a particularly insidious defense mechanism, because it not only prevents a person from dealing with his own feelings, it also creates a world where he perceives everyone else as directing his own hostile feelings back at him.6

All people have violent, and even homicidal, impulses. For example, it's common to hear people say "I'd like to kill my boss", or "If you do that one more time I'm going to kill you." They don't actually mean that they're going to, or even would, kill anyone; they're simply acknowledging anger and frustration. All of us suffer from fear and feelings of helplessness and vulnerability. Most people can acknowledge feelings of rage, fear, frustration, jealousy, etc. without having to act on them in inappropriate and destructive ways.

Some people, however, are unable consciously to admit that they have such "unacceptable" emotions. They may have higher than average levels of rage, frustration, or fear. Perhaps they fear that if they acknowledge the hostile feelings, they will lose control and really will hurt someone. They may believe that "good people" never have such feelings, when in fact all people have them.

This is especially true now that education "experts" commonly prohibit children from expressing negative emotions or aggression. Instead of learning that such emotions are normal, but that destructive behavior needs to be controlled, children now learn that feelings of anger are evil, dangerous and subject to severe punishment.7To protect themselves from "being bad", they are forced to use defense mechanisms to avoid owning their own normal emotions. Unfortunately, using such defense mechanisms inappropriately can endanger their mental health; children need to learn how to deal appropriately with reality, not how to avoid it.8

(This discussion of psychological mechanisms applies to the average person who is uninformed, or misinformed, about firearms and self-defense. It does not apply to the anti- gun ideologue. Fanatics like Charles Schumer know the facts about firearms, and advocate victim disarmament consciously and willfully in order to gain political power. This psychological analysis does not apply to them.)

Denial

Another defense mechanism commonly utilized by supporters of gun control is denial. Denial is simply refusing to accept the reality of a given situation.9 For example, consider a woman whose husband starts coming home late, has strange perfume on his clothes, and starts charging flowers and jewelry on his credit card. She may get extremely angry at a well-meaning friend who suggests that her husband is having an affair. The reality is obvious, but the wronged wife is so threatened by her husband's infidelity that she is unable to accept it, and so denies its existence.

Anti-gun people do the same thing. It's obvious that we live in a dangerous society, where criminals attack innocent people. Just about everyone has been, or knows someone who has been, victimized. It's equally obvious that law enforcement can't protect everyone everywhere 24 hours a day. Extensive scholarly research demonstrates that the police have no legal duty to protect you10 and that firearm ownership is the most effective way to protect yourself and your family.11 There is irrefutable evidence that victim disarmament nearly always precedes genocide.12 Nonetheless, the anti-gun folks insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that "the police will protect you", "this is a safe neighborhood" and "it can't happen here", where "it" is everything from mugging to mass murder.

Anti-gun people who refuse to accept the reality of the proven and very serious dangers of civilian disarmament are using denial to protect themselves from the anxiety of feeling helpless and vulnerable. Likewise, gun owners who insist that "the government will never confiscate my guns" are also using denial to protect themselves from the anxiety of contemplating being forcibly disarmed and rendered helpless and vulnerable.

Reaction Formation

Reaction formation is yet another defense mechanism common among the anti-gun folks. Reaction formation occurs when a person's mind turns an unacceptable feeling or desire into its complete opposite.13 For example, a child who is jealous of a sibling may exhibit excessive love and devotion for the hated brother or sister.

Likewise, a person who harbors murderous rage toward his fellow humans may claim to be a devoted pacifist and refuse to eat meat or even kill a cockroach.14 Often such people take refuge in various spiritual disciplines and believe that they are "superior" to "less civilized" folks who engage in "violent behavior" such as hunting, or even target shooting. They may devote themselves to "animal welfare" organizations that proclaim that the rights of animals take precedence over the rights of people.15 This not only allows the angry person to avoid dealing with his rage, it allows him actually to harm the people he hates without having to know he hates them.

This is not meant to disparage the many wonderful people who are pacifists, spiritually inclined, vegetarian, or who support animal welfare. The key issue is not the belief itself, but rather the way in which the person experiences and lives his beliefs. Sincere practitioners seek to improve themselves, or to be helpful in a gentle, respectful fashion. They work to persuade others peacefully by setting an example of what they believe to be correct behavior. Sincere pacifists generally exhibit good will towards others, even towards persons with whom they might disagree on various issues.

Contrast the sincere pacifist or animal lover with the strident, angry person who wants to ban meat and who believes murdering hunters is justified in order to "save the animals" – or the person who wants to outlaw self- defense and believes innocent people have the obligation to be raped and murdered for the good of society. For example, noted feminist Betty Friedan said "that lethal violence even in self defense only engenders more violence."16 The truly spiritual, pacifist person refrains from forcing others to do what he believes, and is generally driven by positive emotions, while the angry person finds "socially acceptable" ways to harm, abuse, or even kill, his fellow man.

In the case of anti-gun people, reaction formation keeps any knowledge of their hatred for their fellow humans out of consciousness, while allowing them to feel superior to "violent gun owners". At the same time, it also allows them to cause serious harm, and even loss of life, to others by denying them the tools necessary to defend themselves. This makes reaction formation very attractive from a psychological point of view, and therefore very difficult to counteract.


Defense Mechanisms Are Not Mental Illnesses
Defense mechanisms are normal. All of us use them to some extent, and their use does not imply mental illness. Advocates of victim disarmament may be misguided or uninformed, they may be stupid, or they may be consciously intent on evil, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are "mentally ill".

Some defense mechanisms, however, are healthier than others. A safe general rule is that a defense is healthy if it helps you to function better in your personal and professional life, and unhealthy if it interferes with your life, your relationships, or the well-being of others. Young children utilize projection and denial much more commonly than do healthy adults. On the other hand, "if projection is used as a defense mechanism to a very great extent in adult life, the user's perception of external reality will be seriously distorted."17

Defense mechanisms are also frequently combined, so that an anti-gun person may use several defense mechanisms simultaneously. For example, my unfortunate correspondent uses projection to create a world in which all his neighbors want to murder him. As a result, he becomes more angry and fearful, and needs to employ even more defense mechanisms to cope. So he uses projection to attribute his own rage to others, he uses denial that there is any danger to protect himself from a world where he believes he is helpless and everyone wants to murder him, and he uses reaction formation to try to control everyone else's life because his own is so horribly out of control.

Also, it's important to remember that not all anti-gun beliefs are the result of defense mechanisms. Some people suffer from gun phobia18, an excessive and completely irrational fear of firearms, usually caused by the anti-gun conditioning they've been subjected to by the media, politicians, so-called "educators," and others. In some cases, gun phobia is caused by an authentic bad experience associated with a firearm. But with all due respect to Col. Jeff Cooper, who coined the term "hoplophobia" to describe anti-gun people, most anti-gun people do not have true phobias. Interestingly, a person with a true phobia of guns realizes his fear is excessive or unreasonable,19 something most anti-gun folks will never admit.

Defense mechanisms distort reality

Because defense mechanisms distort reality in order to avoid unpleasant emotions, the person who uses them has an impaired ability to recognize and accept reality. This explains why my e-mail correspondent and many other anti-gun people persist in believing that their neighbors and co- workers will become mass murderers if allowed to own firearms.

People who legally carry concealed firearms are actually less violent and less prone to criminal activity of all kinds than is the general population.20 A person who has a clean record, has passed an FBI background check, undergone firearms training, and spent several hundred dollars to get a permit and a firearm, is highly unlikely to choose to murder a neighbor. Doing so would result in his facing a police manhunt, a trial, prison, possibly capital punishment, and the destruction of his family, job, and reputation. Obviously it would make no sense for such a person to shoot a neighbor - except in self-defense. Equally obviously, the anti-gun person who believes that malicious shootings by ordinary gun owners are likely to occur is not in touch with reality.21


The Common Thread: Rage
In my experience, the common thread in anti-gun people is rage. Either anti-gun people harbor more rage than others, or they're less able to cope with it appropriately. Because they can't handle their own feelings of rage, they are forced to use defense mechanisms in an unhealthy manner. Because they wrongly perceive others as seeking to harm them, they advocate the disarmament of ordinary people who have no desire to harm anyone. So why do anti-gun people have so much rage and why are they unable to deal with it in appropriate ways? Consider for a moment that the largest and most hysterical anti-gun groups include disproportionately large numbers of women, African- Americans and Jews. And virtually all of the organizations that claim to speak for these "oppressed people" are stridently anti-gun. Not coincidentally, among Jews, Blacks and women there are many "professional victims" who have little sense of identity outside of their victimhood.

Identity as Victim

If I were to summarize this article in three sentences, they would be:


(1) People who identify themselves as "victims" harbor excessive amounts of rage at other people, whom they perceive as "not victims."
(2) In order psychologically to deal with this rage, these "victims" utilize defense mechanisms that enable them to harm others in socially acceptable ways, without accepting responsibility or suffering guilt, and without having to give up their status as "victims."

(3) Gun owners are frequently the targets of professional victims because gun owners are willing and able to prevent their own victimization.

Thus the concept of "identity as victim" is essential. How and why do members of some groups choose to identify themselves as victims and teach their children to do the same? While it's true that women, Jews, and African- Americans have historically been victimized, they now participate in American society on an equal basis. And other groups, most notably Asian-Americans, have been equally victimized, and yet have transcended the "eternal victim" mentality.

Why, for example, would a 6'10" NBA player who makes $10 million a year see himself as a "victim"? Why would a successful, respected, wealthy, Jewish physician regard himself as a "victim"? Conversely, why might a wheelchair bound woman who lives on government disability NOT regard herself as a victim?

I would argue it's because the basketball player and the physician believe that their identities are dependent on being victims – not because they have actually been victimized, but because they're members of groups that claim victim status. Conversely, the disabled woman was probably raised to believe that she is responsible for her own success or failure.

In fact, many people who have been victims of actual violent crime, or who have survived war or civil strife, support the right of self-defense. The old saying is often correct: "a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged."

Special Treatment and Misleading Leaders

Two reasons for these groups to insist on "victim" status seem likely. First, by claiming victim status, members of these groups can demand (and get) special treatment through quotas, affirmative action, reparations, and other preferential treatment programs.

Second, these people have been indoctrinated to believe that there is no alternative to remaining a victim forever. Their leaders remind them constantly that they are mistreated in every imaginable way (most of them imaginary!), attribute every one of life's misfortunes to "racism" or "sexism" or "hate crimes", and dream up ever more complex schemes for special treatment and favors.22 These leaders are the ones who preach that the entire Black experience is slavery and racism, or that Jewish history before and after the Holocaust is irrelevant,23 or that happily married women are really victims of sexual slavery.24

Likewise, the NAACP is suing firearms manufacturers to put them out of business,25 and is especially opposed to the inexpensive pistols that enable the poor to defend themselves in gang-ridden inner cities. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) proposed evicting anyone who dares to keep a tool of self-defense in any of its crime-infested housing projects. Jewish leaders, especially those in the politically correct "Reform" branch, preach that gun control is "a solemn religious obligation",26 contrary to the teachings of their sacred scriptures and their own history.27 Law enforcement agencies falsely teach women that they are safest if they don't resist rapists and robbers,28 while women's organizations advocate gun control, thus rendering women and their children defenseless.

Victimhood is good business for organizations that foster victim status. As victims, the members depend upon the organization to protect them, and the organization in turn relies on members for funding and political power. In the interest of self-preservation, these organizations work hard at preserving hatred and bigotry and at keeping their members defenseless – and therefore dependent.

Anti-gun groups love victims!
 
It's a personal decision.....

you've made yours. Congratulations. My guess is that if you continue quietly carrying, he'll get used to the idea. Stay safe.
 
Just Takin' Responsibility for Yourself, IMO

Do you also wear a seatbelt? The same category, IMO.

IMO, women ought to:
1. Be able to support themselves, even if married. Husbands have been known to die.
2. Be able to protect themselves. Hubby can't be there all the time & just who looks after & protects the young'uns when daddy isn't home?

BTW, we have to GSPs. What wonderful dogs!
 
Sounds like a bit of a strange situation - maybe there is some ego factor at work here.

I think he'll come around eventually, though. At first, my wife wasn't comfortable with me carrying and asked many of the same questions. I just kept carrying, though, and now she's used to it (if not endorsing it).
 
Come Back

Say something to him like, 'Well gee Honey, maybe we also won't need any smoke detectors in the house, a fire extinguisher, any fire insurance or a spare tire in the car'.

Of course, the reason we have all those things (just like your firearm) is "in case I need it". The above reasoning is how I answer those kinds of discussions about 'not needing it'.

As another poster said, "It's about Being Prepared".
 
Bean357,

All it will take is both of you being in one shady situation.

The guy I am dating now, has a firearm habit, but had so far been too lazy to get a permit. We were walking down the river trails in the evening when we were approached by an agressive homeless man (turned out to be nothing). He asked me if I had my gun, I replied that I did. He was on the phone arranging class that week.

Sometimes we suburbanites need a quick reminder about the existance of the rest of the world.
 
Bean I have the same little J frame. It is a great gun for concealing.

I hope you guys can work it out. I think Joel lets individuals takes his courses again if they want to. Why don't you see if you can sign you husband up for a class and then go with him. A lot of times a little more knowledge goes a long ways to easing ones fears.
 
I've never had a flat tire...

...on the side of the road when I had to get somewhere.
I have a spare tire in my car, and the tools required to change it if necessary.

Does your husband have a spare tire in his car? Having never had a flat, should I consider him, "that scared" of a flat?

I've never needed the floatation device under my seat in the aircraft.
I've never been at the wheel during an accident requiring my seatbelt or my airbag.
I've never wrecked a motorcycle in a way that would make my hlemet necessary.
I've never used the emergency exits in a movie theater.
I've never lost power long enough to destroy the meat in my freezer.
I've never had a fire at home that set off the smoke alarm and woke me up.
I've never been shot in the goggles during a paintball game.
I've never been hit with a baseball in the nuts while umpiring.
I've never had to use my concealed weapon.
And on and on and on...
 
Thanks again for the input, I do hope he does "get used to it" and accept it. We went on an ice fishing escapade Friday, and he definitely saw my gun when I was changing in/out of the carhartt coveralls....and nothing was mentioned, no looks like "whatcha doin' with THAT" or anything!:)

jfruser-good to hear from you. BTW: GSP's, that is great you have two!! Show some pics! I believe my 11 yr old male has seen his final pheasant season. It greatly saddens me, but he has been a wonderful dog and we have given him the best quality life we know how.

Cats:)neener: are you talking feral cats?:evil: ) and Sturm-I agree it would just take that one situation, and I wish he would take the course, he just has no desire to "carry"....if he can accept me carrying, maybe we can move forward from there?

Steve, the "I've never..." list-that's great, thx!
I hope you never have any of the situations.
 
Good for you, Bean!

But, hubby may feel less needed if his little lady can defend herself just fine without him. Cook him a nice meal, tell him how great he is, how much you need him, etc., and he will come around before long.

We, men, are simple creatures. :)
 
Am I the only person upset that he felt her up for a weapon after she declined to answer?

either I'm misreading the post, or married couples must be much stranger than I imagined... if any of my siblings tried that, they'd be nursing a bruised wrist for the next 20 minutes... much less NON-siblings.
 
The-Fly said:
sounds like he has an ego problem cause you no longer "need" him to protect you. Hell with him, pack away girl.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it is an ego problem, but I do agree with one thing: Pack away. It's your right, your choice. Kudos for "stickin' to your guns" (pun definitely intended). :D

My g/f wants to carry and I have no problem with it. I've met her ex and know how she grew up. We both agree that, while you don't choose to be the victim, you do choose to be defenseless. Carry on, sweetheart, literally.
 
Krenn said:
Am I the only person upset that he felt her up for a weapon after she declined to answer?

either I'm misreading the post, or married couples must be much stranger than I imagined... if any of my siblings tried that, they'd be nursing a bruised wrist for the next 20 minutes... much less NON-siblings.
Married couples are strange, that's a fact. As for feeling her up... I think I would enjoy it if my g/f checked me... ;)
 
bean357 said:
BTW: GSP's, that is great you have two!! Show some pics! I believe my 11 yr old male has seen his final pheasant season. It greatly saddens me, but he has been a wonderful dog and we have given him the best quality life we know how.

We have an 8 year old, male GSP and we've had him since he was 10 weeks old. The first three years, were, ahh, interesting. :) He's a great dog and a great member of the family, and his name is Mauser as he is a German gun dog, so I thought that would be appropriate. We took him to the Broadmoor in Colorado Springs with us for a weekend getaway. It happened to be right after the Westminster Dog Show in which a GSP won best in show. He was often mistaken for that dog as the real winner is local from Castle Rock.

I beg my wife almost daily to get a CCW and carry her S&W 642. She has taken two handgun courses with me and did very well. I am going to convince her soon. I worry about her, especially when she works late. :(
 
Just tell him "its your body and your choice". :neener:

Good for you, Paranoia is much different than being prepared. CCW is not different that a seatbelt. You don't plan on needing it, but you are better off you if have it when you do need it.
 
I say, ole Bean-tis easier for him to get you out of jail than it is to get you out of the morgue!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top