Safer with a gun? A firearm novice's decision on concealed carry...

Status
Not open for further replies.
At least try and look at it from her point of view. Of course this would never happen to any of us because our world view is 100 percent right, but bear with me here. If some event persuaded you to question your views and you decided to become an enviormentalist, don't you think you would take a couple small steps before joining Greenpeace? Maybe talk to your friends about it as you make up your mind? Maybe learn a little bit more?

That's all this woman is doing, and it's a great start. When I said she had a new attitude, I didn't mean she was initiated into the Ninja sisterhood and is now a deadly warrior. I simply meant that her eyes were opened and she now has the best weapon there is, knowledge. Give her a little time to read the news she helps report and she will figure out that a gun is the next step to really be armed.
 
But it wasn't long before he slowed down and was right next to me again.

A rapid lane change or two usually takes a bit of the starch out of that kind of idiot.

I have driven motorcycles and know that for a biker to play games with a car on the highway is suicidal.

The absolute truth.

I watch for bikes, but I have no sympathy for some idiot who invites retaliation and makes all look bad.
 
Saw this in the Dayton Daily news today. Couldn't help but wonder why there was no obvious negative spin on it in that paper! Maybe the fact that this person went throught the training and decided owning a gun was not necessary was negative enough. I hope no one else gets the impression that the license alone will make them any safer.

Of course she could feel a little safer if she learned to be more aware of her surroundings I guess.

I wonder what her father has to say about this, after encouraging her to get the ccw and gun?
 
IMHO there's a lot of subliminal ant-gun stuff in the article.

-I was surprised at how much they looked like the toys my brother and I used to shoot each other with when we were kids.

-How she couldn't hit the moving target.

-how the recoil threw her hand over her head.

-Even the bikers leaving her alone.

All this gives the antis a chance to say "See most people can't hit what they want, can't handle there guns and if kids find them they'll think they are toys!! Besides the bikers never bothered her.
 
Saw this in the Dayton Daily news today. Couldn't help but wonder why there was no obvious negative spin on it in that paper! Maybe the fact that this person went throught the training and decided owning a gun was not necessary was negative enough.
How 'bout "Thou shalt not speak ill of any member of the media."
 
and I learned more. My instructors said there's no point in carrying a .22-caliber because the bullets are so small. They don't always kill. Since the only time you'd be using the gun is to protect a life, you'd better make sure your one shot is deadly. That was a chilling thought.

I find it difficult to believe that a instructor teaching this type of class would say that.

We don't shoot to kill! We shoot to terminate the action that may harm us. I don't need or want my 1 shot to be deadly. I want my 1 shot to cause the BG to stop what he is doing. If he dies that his problem, but its not my goal.
 
I would say it is an important attitude adjustment she has made. It's sad there are so many people out there who never had anyone to help them reach that point and go further, though. She is not really one iota safer than she was before she went to class and the range, in reality. I hope she makes it to the point she does decide on a carry gun, and establishes the habit of carrying.

The only way to be sure you have a gun if you need one, is to have a gun ALL the time.

lpl/nc
=====

-from John Farnam at
http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2004/31Dec04.html :

31Dec04

The Wisdom of Tom Givens

My friend and colleague, Tom Givens, runs Rangemasters, a wonderful retail gun shop and indoor range in Memphis, TN. Tom's students have been involved in more self-defensive shootings than have those of any other instructor I know, including me! Tom is a top-drawer teacher, among the best in the business.

Memphis bears the dubious title of "Crime Capitol of the South," with a homicide rate higher than many towns three times its size. The local PD is

politicized, top-heavy, incapable, hopeless. When in Memphis, you are truly "on your own."

Tom recently wrote an essay about the importance of carrying concealed consistently. His wisdom merits emphasis. He describes two of his student s who were recent homicide victims in two separate and otherwise unrelated incidents. Both were mercilessly murdered by armed criminals. At the time of their deaths, both were unarmed! All their carefully learned and continuously practiced skills with firearms were of no use to either one. Both held val id CCW permits and owned suitable pistols, ammunition, holsters, etc. They were not armed at the critical moment, because of nonchalance, laziness, carelessness, or a deliberate decision not to be armed. We'll never know. However, in one-sided gunfights, it comes as no surprise that both faired poorly.

Tom correctly points out that you will never get to decide which times are the dangerous ones. Someone else will decide that for you, and you'll probably become aware only at the last moment! Since we therefore cannot know when personal readiness and valor are going to be critical to our continued good health, we must be "ready" all the time. In Memphis (and probably where you live too), that means being well trained, audacious, and constantly armed.

We cannot live victoriously when we are continuously unprepared. Tom is right! Be prepared, or go back to eating grass.

Happy New Year to all!

/John

created by [email protected]
Copyright © 2004 by DTI, Inc. All rights reserved.
created on Friday December 31, 2004 23:59:0 MST
 
Yeah, I read this same article here today in the Az Republic. I can perhaps agree with others who've seen subtle anti-gun bias here, but I'm willing to give this reporter the benefit of the doubt. Overall, I think it is a pro-gun article, so I won't try to read too much into it.

The last couple of paragraphs are troubling as they make us believe she's committed enough to get her CHL, but not (yet?) committed enough to actually own a gun. Here again, I'm going to give her a pass. Maybe its simply financial: Scraping up $400-700 for a decent set-up may be a strain for her now. She said she took the course with borrowed/rented guns. A firearm (and holster) decision is an intensely personal one, and if she doesn't own yet because she's still exploring which weapon/holster combination she's most comfortable with, then I'd applaud her measured approach. As it says in the article, she's clearly not ready for a .45. To buy a gun that she can't handle is irresponsible.
 
Although not a typical anti article, I disagree it was a pro-gun article as it ends with a "guns are not for me" slant.

Me-thinks the anti's have decided that a change of tactics is in order and this is a flanking maneuver.

It's more of that "reasonable people don't need guns" undercurrent that's in the media today. And often yields the "gee what do you need a gun for?" questions from well meaning but sheep like friends and relatives who perceive guns to be for the police and criminals only (as the media properly continues to portray here.)

And it certainly has less than a 0.0000000001% chance of changing anything in the PRNJ.

Think about it . . . . .
 
Hmmmm...

I just got home from work and my wife told me: 'There was a great pro-gun article in the paper, and it was a whole page about how to get your carry permit!'

After reading it, I consider it neutral at the very least. I keep coming back to these two thoughts:

My instructors said there's no point in carrying a .22-caliber because the bullets are so small. They don't always kill. Since the only time you'd be using the gun is to protect a life, you'd better make sure your one shot is deadly. That was a chilling thought.

It makes me kind of mad that ANY firearms instructor would say this. If you want to express an opinion of other calibers being more effective, fine! But, unless you are willing to stand up in front of the clas and take a .22 to the torso to PROVE how ineffective it is, you shouldn't be telling people it's useless to carry one.

It's one of the reasons I think starting begging shooters out with something OTHER than a .22 is not a bad idea. 'It's JUST a .22 syndrome' can be deadly.

The other line was this:

If I didn't bobble the gun and shoot my foot, there is still no guarentee that the bad guy wouldn't just snath the gun out of my hand and use it on me.

Typical 'No one needs a gun' drivel. I liked most of the article, but I let several audible groans while reading the last quarter.

greg
 
My impression when I read this is that she is perhaps one mentor away from owning a gun .

Her knowledge on the whole subject is not yet mature and I think that explains the little fallbacks to statements regarding recoil , etc. where she comes off a bit flakey .

If you live near her why not invite her to the range ! Let her shoot some handguns with low recoil and share your knowledge.
 
if you aren't comfortable with a gun, you shouldn't have one.

Agreed 110%. Now, her next step is to KEEP GOING TO THE RANGE and keep shooting untill she gets comfortable! And do so with all haste! That's what I did. Firing a gun (esp a pistol indoors, especially by myself) the first time was scary and traumatic for me too.

Know what? I now don't mind the recoil of big rifles, and regularily dump a mag just to get 'warmed up' too!
 
To a reporter checking the laws, the statement is correct.

Yep, NJ is may issue, just like MD is. In practice, no dice. Same in CA (urban counties), MA, NY, and other "blue states" who might have "may issue laws". On second thought that might be it for "no issue may issue". Hey how come "blue states" like WA, MI, VT, CT, and such have "shall issue" .:)

Interesting fact for those who might not know: Alabama, Heart of gun friendly Dixie, is also "may issue".

The % of those who get permits here, however, means its actually shall issue.
(I don't know for sure, though, they have a six month residency requirement in Jefferson County).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top