Deanimator
Member
No, tell him he has to BRING a gun!Sounds like he likes you, just has that irrational hatred and mistrust of an object. If you want to retaliate, simply state that he can come over, but he has to leave his car at home.
No, tell him he has to BRING a gun!Sounds like he likes you, just has that irrational hatred and mistrust of an object. If you want to retaliate, simply state that he can come over, but he has to leave his car at home.
It would irritate me, however, if somebody put a sticky note on my back that said, "Ask me about my concealed handgun!"
sacp81170a said:You pretty much already did that yourself. Don't get me wrong, I'm a CHL instructor and I advertise. I'm also an LEO (part time) and I'm known as one of the "gun guys" where I work. I willingly take that on, knowing that I'm going to meet opposition and chances to change attitudes and minds if I display responsible behavior myself. Do I let people know whether or not I'm carrying at any particular time? I just paraphrase the tried and true answer we gave about nuclear weapons in SAC: "I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of nuclear weapons/that I am carrying a firearm."
tinygnat219 said:If you want to retaliate, simply state that he can come over, but he has to leave his car at home.
Not much of a "friend" if you ask me --Tall Pine
Kentucky Kernel said:The comment from her that stunned me into absolute silence was that she'd "rather be stabbed by a bad guy than protected by someone with a gun".
Henry Bowman
I do not disagree with the info you present. And I am not saying we should give up our freedoms. Although I do not currently have a CCL I have been thinking a lot lately of getting one. I do believe in the right to own firearms and also in fact carry firearms.
I also think that some of the posters on this thread...if they present their message in the public arena the same as they present it here is part of the problem.
Here is an example of what I am talking about.
"The individual has insecurities tied to his sexuality/masculinity and sees you (with or without a gun, in fact) as a threat."
This type of comment is destructive to anything we should be trying to accomplish. How does someone make a statement like this? Does the person know the individual the poster is speaking of? The person who made this post is the type I would not allow to carry in my home. It is not constructive at all...just destructive. I want someone who can think straight and be levelheaded in a heat situation and this type of comment to me is just the opposite.
This is not the only response that is unproductive but it is just the first one I grabbed. I am sure I will get blasted...quickly... by those who have made these type of responses and if they get this upset that quickly do you want them carrying a gun around your wife? Children? etc...not me...I will pass.
Also as far as carrying a gun in someone elses home...Never without their knowledge and approval. Would I take this personally? No. Why? Because I choose to make the same decision about anyone coming into my home. Do I care what their reasons are? No. Would I want to talk to them about it? Not unless they are open to it. Would it prevent me from going into their homes? Not unless they live in a very bad area.
If we draw the line in the sand this way do we win? I think not. Only through constructive diologue can we overcome ignorance. That and showing people we do not reacte like Rambo can we overcome their prejudices.
DeerHunter, my friend, I wouldn't "blast" you, but there's a good bit of the BE PERFECT OR DON'T BE mentality in what you wrote.
We don't get to be perfect people, we're just people. If the man saw the difficulty in terms of a Psycho-Sexuality, then that's just his perspective, and "Arrogant Bastard" is asking for open discussion.
I agree that we should perfect a message, but nobody carries a message with perfect people. It's a lot easier to accept people as they are, rather than insist that they come packaged is a specific ethical form.
/
/
You'll notice that among the reasons so far listed, self defense is not there. I think that because so few have been in a situation where deadly force would be a reasonable response, they cannot conceive of it as a valid reason. For example, if you use that reason then you must be paranoid, and if paranoid, then you are mentally ill, and if mentally ill, should you be trusted to carry a firearm? If you choose to carry a firearm into my home, where there is absolutely no threat to you, does this not give further proof of your paranoia? --member Wulfbyte
He agrees in principle with the second amendment, though he thinks it's for sporting, hunting and self-defense against criminals. He agrees a person should have the right to arm themselves if they feel the need, though it makes him vaguely uncomfortable when that person doesn't have to carry a gun as part of their job.
In my case, I suspect he thinks i'm slightly paranoid.
That person is either:He said, "It's not you. I trust you. But people with guns make me uncomfortable."
Werewolf said:1. a lying, cowardly POS - he really doesn't trust you but doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to say so and instead justifies his lack of trust by blaming the gun.
I have to disagree. The guy obviously has no knowledge of firearms so how can he fairly and creditably judge another's level of knowledge or responsible use of firearms. He really can't. He might think he can based on preconceived notions of what is responsible but he'd probably be wrong as judgements based on false knowledge, opinion, preconceptions etc are almost by definition - wrong.Arrogant Bastard said:I suspect his position is similar to what other have mentioned here -- one said he doesn't trust ANYBODY with a gun until he's had time to gauge their level of knowledge and responsibility. That's a fair attitude
Now that gets more to the point but again - your friend has no way to creditably judge your skill or observance of the safety rules (which he probably doesn't know or maybe he does - I'd be surprised though if he did).Arrogant Bastard said:-- just because somebody has a gun, or even because they have their CHL, does NOT mean they properly observe the safety rules. It doesn't mean I'd trust somebody with a gun to be a good enough shot to hit a threat beside me, and not accidentally hit me, instead.
It means that he is one of the Illuminati, aware of the secret power of suggestion hidden deep in the metallurgical structure of every firearm. This dark power overcomes reason on the part of those carrying said firearms, changing normally trustworthy people into mindless killing machines.A B said:But here is my question: What does it mean, "I trust you, but people with guns make me uncomfortable?"
Snakes are OK. But change that to spiders and that's me. Difference is, I don't "live and let live." I kill every spider that I see. I guess it doesn't help that I was bitten by a particularly nasty one, but I never liked them.I don't like snakes. I've tried to be logical, but drop a snake near me and my blood runs cold.