Shocked By CCH Holders Yesterday

[LemmyCaution]

Boy!

It's a good thing we don't have carry permits in VT. Those might lead to restrictions on where we could carry. Or what we could do while carrying.

For those who believe that there is a strong correlation between lawful possession of firearms and drinking as a causation of violent crime, I challenge you to support that position by analyzing the state of Vermont's violent crime statistics. It should be easy. We're a small state. The numbers aren't very big and should be easy to gather. Wait! Here they are:

We had four homicides last year.
Three using knives.
One using a hammer.

Correlate away, my friends.

As an added bonus, you can throw out the distortion of the 'good guy card' effect of CCW/FOID permits, as we presume that adults are responsible citizens here as a matter of course and constitution and don't require the government's permission to bear arms.

For myself, if I'm in the woods all day working and want to have a beer at the local watering hole after, I'm going to wear my handgun openly on my belt and sit right at the bar. Both the bartenders carry concealed, as well as a good number of the clientele. In all my years drinking there, I've seen a couple of heated arguments, usually between couples who are well known for that sort of thing, but never a physical confrontation.

 

[MinnMooney]

When I did finally get through I was informed there wasn't enough time. I was told to call back another time.

Were you asked what your opinion was prior to being told to hang up and try someother time?

 

[MikeNice]

Minn, I was not asked my opinion before being told to call back. I don't believe that it was a case of the host trying to stack the deck.

 

[Hatterasguy]

Exactly, dumb kids that are breaking the law to begin with. These aren't law abiding folks. They most likely aren't carrying legally. These are kids that have no respect for their own lives or the laws.

If I was leaving a neighboring establishment I would not want to be unarmed during this scene. I could probably avoid it all together. I would still love to be able to avoid becoming collateral damage. You never know what a violent mob of people will do.

Knives are legal, also I'm not sure if the guns were legal or not.

But weapons, male ego's, and alcohol don't always work so well together. Having a weapon around is the difference between having a bar fight where someone gets roughed up a bit for being a loud jackass, or gets a .357 Sig round in the head.

Say your carrying in a bar, what happens if a loud jackass goes after you, what happens if he gets your gun? Your going to shoot dead an unarmed drunk guy? That would look real good in front of a jury.

If you think you need a gun for protection your in the wrong bar.

 

[lwknight]

These same topics/scenarios have been discussed to death on numerous forums.

1. Almost unanimously , no one wants any more gun laws and no one wants the gubment telling free men what not to do or how to do it.

2. Stupid people walk amoung us. Thats a fact! These people have to be controlled for the safety of everyone. Thats a fact!

3. So far no one has ever come up a satisfactory plan that will both keep "Stupid" headed off before it hurts someone, and stays the hell out of reasonable folks business.

 

[JohnBT]

"Say your carrying in a bar, what happens if a loud jackass goes after you, what happens if he gets your gun? Your going to shoot dead an unarmed drunk guy? "

If he has a broken beer bottle in his hand he will probably get shot unless somebody younger than me grabs him. I'm 60. I don't think I'm going to be taking any beatings if I can avoid it somehow. I don't want to end up crippled and I've had one back surgery already. I'll take my chances thank you very much.

What happens when you leave the restaurant (Virginia does not have bars) and get robbed in the parking lot after having a nice alcohol-free lunch or dinner? It's not unheard of in Richmond.

Everybody isn't an alcohol-crazed idiot looking for a fight. Some of them are just thieves. And maybe some of them are all cracked or cranked up.

John

 

[JohnBT]

And about this

" what happens if a loud jackass goes after you, what happens if he gets your gun? Your going to shoot dead an unarmed drunk guy?"

How am I going to shoot him if he's got my gun? I don't understand.

And it's you're, not your.

 

[ForumSurfer]

If you think you need a gun for protection your in the wrong bar.

But it is a slippery slope.

The same law (which is obeyed by law abiding citizens, not the ones we prepare ourselves to defend against) in my state that is there to keep guns out of bars, also prevents me from carrying in pizza hut or anywhere that serves alcohol for consumption.

By the "you should be somewhere else if you are worried" logic, we should just stay home and not worry about the RKBA for protection at all.

No offense, I partially agree with you...I'm just saying that government laws and legislation leads to our rights being infringed upon.

 

[Sam1911]

2. Stupid people walk among us. Thats a fact! These people have to be controlled for the safety of everyone. Thats a fact!

But no one is "controlled," really. A law can't do that proactively. All it can do is assess penalties after someone screws up.

The only way to "control" someone for the safety of everyone is to put them behind bars. So, are you suggesting we write a law to put behind bars everyone who carries a gun in a restaurant/bar? Or everyone who has a drink or two while in possession of their defensive sidearm?

Leaving that dead horse behind ... at least for a minute ...

And so say I'm visiting some state where I'm not allowed to enter a bar with my carry gun or have a drink while carrying it. I'm all legal, which is a plus.

What protects me from the violent criminal, who does carry a gun into the bar (or the bar's parking lot while I'm on my way to the car) because he doesn't care about the laws? He doesn't care about the (malum in se) laws against assault or murder, why should he care about a technical (malum prohibidum) law against being armed in a bar? I can be really righteous and lawful while I bleed out on the sidewalk.

I guess it's my fault for being in the wrong place, though. If I want to go have a drink (or two, or three) with dinner I should accept the fact that part of the price is an increased chance of being killed. Seems fair ... right?

 

[MikeNice]

Having a weapon around is the difference between having a bar fight where someone gets roughed up a bit for being a loud jackass, or gets a .357 Sig round in the head.

No it is not. If you follow the proper escelation of force you are not going to shoot somebody over a simple fight. Simple assault is not justification for using lethal force in NC. That means first you attempt to walk away. If the person puts their hands on you you use justifiable force to stop them. If you become afraid there is a imminent threat of serious bodily injury you respond as needed. If he pulls a weapon, or breaks a bottle, then you can use lethal force.

Being in a bar does not change the rules of engagement. It does not mean you should be less aware or that you should not try to avoid the situation. If a loud mouth guy comes up and starts screaming in your face, leave. If some guy grabs your lady friend, leave. Do not escelate the fight it you believe the other guy is too drunk to act rationally.

Hell, here is a good piece of advice, never escelate a fight. If it is at all possible to do so safely, just walk away. The only exception should be your home or place of business.

What would you do if a drunk guy approaches you in the Wal Mart parking lot and starts yelling at you? You would continue to your car and try to leave.

If you think you need a gun for protection your in the wrong bar.

If you think you need a gun in your home, you're in the wrong neighborhood. Move to another neighborhood or another city.

If you think you need a gun for protection you are just paranoid.

Do these arguments seem familiar?

I was just thinking about a bit that Chris Rock did. He was talking about how everybody feels safer in clubs now because they started using metal detectors. He basicly said he doesn't go to those clubs because it just means the criminals can wait outside for easy victims. It was part of a song I believe. If anybody remembers it please post a link.

 

[Sam1911]

Having a weapon around is the difference between having a bar fight where someone gets roughed up a bit for being a loud jackass, or gets a .357 Sig round in the head.

Yeaouch... that's a pretty poor understanding of self-defense from several angles.

1) As Mike said, no bar altercation changes the laws or the best practices for extricating yourself from a violent encounter. You've actually suggested here that a) it is acceptible to assault someone for mouthing off, and that b) an otherwise "normal" person would KILL someone for mouthing off if they just had a gun with them. Maybe you want to rethink that...

2) Contrary to what the movies and TV have trained you so carefully (and WELL) to believe -- there are no "simple," "harmless" fights. Any fight can end very quickly with someone dead. There is no circumstance under which it is "safe" to participate in a violent attack or defense. Bottles, chairs, pool cues, boots, and fists ... KILL. You had better know your state's self-defense laws very clearly, and had better have your awareness and de-escalation skills in top condition. But you CANNOT just "be a man" and take a few punches rather than defend yourself. Every injury/impact reduces your ability to respond to the next attack. Allow yourself to get beaten down and you will be at the mercy of your attacker to stop causing you damage before he kills you. He may not have any mercy at all -- and certainly doesn't have the physiological understanding to know when you're about to suffer a fatal injury.

 

[Boberama]

You want to bring a gun into a bar? Sure.

But no drinking.

 

[Boberama]

It depends on the fighter, I guess.
A 260-lb guy coming at you with a broken bottle is different from that 140-lb guy in the corner tring to kick you and falling on his back.

I guess it's my fault for being in the wrong place, though. If I want to go have a drink (or two, or three) with dinner I should accept the fact that part of the price is an increased chance of being killed. Seems fair ... right?

Become a tee-totaller. Or go to the bar and drink a soda.
If you allow people to drink and carry, there will be drunken people carrying. Can't drink and drive, can't carry and drink.

Try shooting with these on and tell me how you do:

 

[KBintheSLC]

Generally I'm against special laws for stuff that is already illegal. Murder is illegal, therefore this "issue" is moot.

I know that there are people who believe that there is a magical number of laws that need to be written in order for people to behave; I don't understand those people, but I know they exist.

This sums it up for me. Killing someone in a drunken fit of rage is already illegal pretty much everywhere.

 

[Hatterasguy]

1) As Mike said, no bar altercation changes the laws or the best practices for extricating yourself from a violent encounter. You've actually suggested here that a) it is acceptible to assault someone for mouthing off, and that b) an otherwise "normal" person would KILL someone for mouthing off if they just had a gun with them. Maybe you want to rethink that...

My point is a perfectly rational person who does start to consume alcohol loses their ability to properly judge and react to a situation. Throw a weapon in and a situation can quickly get out of hand. Also most bars and clubs are frequented by a younger crowed, and with age comes judgment which they lack. This is why 18-21 year old clubs at least around here never work, they kids just fight, stab, and sometimes shoot at each other.

I would have no problems with guns in bars if the people carrying were not drinking. Just like motor vehicles firearms and alcohol don't mix.

But having been on this world for awhile, and been to my fair share of bars and seen my fair share of stupid people; I don't trust people not to drink and carry anymore than I trust them not to drink and drive.

I'm also all for supporting freedoms but your rights stop when they can affect other people. Its not your right to get drunk and plow your truck into my car; its also not your right to get drunk next to me while carrying a gun.

This is one thing I like about my states CC permit, if you are caught carrying in a bar you lose it for good, that's it, can't buy or transport pistols legally anymore. It certainly doesn't stop the criminal element, but it does help keep honest people honest.

 

[Hatterasguy]

If you think you need a gun in your home, you're in the wrong neighborhood. Move to another neighborhood or another city.

If you think you need a gun for protection you are just paranoid.

Do these arguments seem familiar?

I was just thinking about a bit that Chris Rock did. He was talking about how everybody feels safer in clubs now because they started using metal detectors. He basicly said he doesn't go to those clubs because it just means the criminals can wait outside for easy victims. It was part of a song I believe. If anybody remembers it please post a link.

You can take any argument to the extreme, but let me spell it out. Don't go into seedy biker/gang banger bars. The kind of places where you sit with your back to the wall, every city has at least a couple seedy bars.

Somehow I don't think I'm going to need my 1911 to fend off the accountant or attorney next to me as a sip my drink at a nice bar. Contrary to popular belief violent criminals are not hiding in every shadow waiting to attack. We live in a very safe country if you practice a bit of common sense.

 

[wishn4more]

Mutually independent

Being in a bar, and being inebriated/altered/drunk are not the same thing.

I am a teetotaller, so being IN a bar/tavern/restaurant absolutely does not mean I would be altered. From what I hear about Virginia, most of the Chili's, Outbacks and the like are considered bars. Being in one does not mean you would be altered -- under the current law, it does mean you must be unarmed. Why should I not be armed when out to dinner with my family?

I don't think drunk people should carry. That makes sense. Same goes for high (whether illegal or prescriptive). If you're gonna get altered, lock up your carry piece and give up the car keys.

An earlier post said that the alcohol limit for CCH was 0.0, so there's no reason for a ban in a place that sells alcohol. If you're drinking and carrying, you're breaking the law anyway (regardless of where you are)...

 

[unloved]

If you're drinking and carrying, you're breaking the law anyway (regardless of where you are)...

Huh? Absolutely incorrect.

 

[skipbadger]

I like to separate my thinking about carrying in bars/restaurants that serve alcohol and whether or not one should drink and carry into two arguments depending on the situation:

1. What the law really should be - Carrying shouldn't be limited in any way, shape, or form. I have been drunk many times and never been involved in any encounter whatsoever. If I won't throw a punch and will always act with a sense of decency and decorum, why would I ever pull a gun unless deadly force was needed to protect myself? There are plenty of laws around "behaving badly", why add laws that cover "MIGHT POSSIBLY behave badly"?

2. What I would compromise on - Give me a choice and let it be mine and mine alone. I live in North Carolina and can't carry in a place where alcohol is both sold and consumed. In NC, I would be fine with the ability to carry and not be able to drink. Not because that is what I truly believe, but at this point in time, that law would be the easiest to get passed. Once that law was passed, I would get behind being able to drink and carry. I would be OK with BAC limits as well, because that would make the law more likely to pass.

Legal baby steps in the right direction work for me if it means progress. Just like in sports, it doesn't always make sense to go for the touchdown or homerun. Just get in a better position to score points and win.

 

[MikeNice]

Somehow I don't think I'm going to need my 1911 to fend off the accountant or attorney next to me as a sip my drink at a nice bar.

When I'm inside my favorite blues bar I don't think I'll run in to any proplems. However, walking down the dim alley to get to my car makes me nervous.

When I am at my second favorite blues/jazz bar I feel safe inside. However, it backs up to a low income neighborhood that is known to be dangerous. A family member was actually robbed while replacing windows in a church about six blocks away.

Inside I feel completely safe. Outside I think there is an elevated risk to my safety. Should I have to chose between enjoying a good night of music and being safe? It is illegal to carry and drink. So, I will not be drinking anything stronger than Pepsi. Somehow I should still be unarmed? It makes no sense to me.

If we look at the stats from across the country less than 1% of CCH permit holders have their permit revoked. When you get down to people having it revoked for breaking the law the percentage falls even more. So, with the evidence being what it is, why are people afraid to let CCH holders carry? If the law says you can not drink and carry 99% of permit holders will not drink.

I just can not see the loigic in a law saying a CCH holder can not enter an establishment that sells alcohol for consumption on the premises.

Also most bars and clubs are frequented by a younger crowed, and with age comes judgment which they lack. This is why 18-21 year old clubs at least around here never work, they kids just fight, stab, and sometimes shoot at each other.

At what age does maturity magically appear? So because young criminals go to bars law abiding citizens shouldn't be allowed to protect their self from them? I know that isn't exactly what you are saying, but that is how it sounds.

Also don't forget these laws also apply to the places you like to eat dinner with your family. It also affects restraunts that sell for consumption.

Could a happy medium be we exempt restaraunts that just happen to sell alcohol to go with food?

 

[Varob]

I think Virginia got it right. If you want to carry concealed in restaurants that serve, you can. If you want to have a drink/beer with you dinner, and carry, you can do so but you have to open carry.

 

[azyogi]

I only ever have one drink, wine mostly dark beer sometimes. The notion that this somehow renders me incapable of driving or carrying a gun is 0 tolerance nonsense. Drunks don't belong behind the wheel or a trigger, one drink doesn't make a drunk. To ban guns and drinking is to buy into the idealogy that anyone that has anything to drink is a drunk. Lowering the BAC standard from 0.12 to 0.08 wasn't done because of a rash of wrecks with BAC's of 0.09 it was done to placate 0 tolerance a vocal special interest group. Some folks can't have just one drink, to fix their problem by transfering it to everyone was tried, it was called the 18th amendment.

 

[Sam1911]

If you allow people to drink and carry, there will be drunken people carrying.

Really? Where are they? We "allow" that in my state and -- as I've said before several (hundred) times, no social outcry has arisen...even after several decades of a "trial period."

Can't drink and drive, can't carry and drink.

Can in my state. So far, so good. Maybe we're just about to see a rash of trouble from it. You know, at that critical 20-something year horizon.

 

[Sam1911]

but your rights stop when they can affect other people.

Bull crap.

Your rights stop when they DO affect other people. Not when they "can" or "could" or "might" or ...

 

[Sam1911]

Its not your right to get drunk and plow your truck into my car; its also not your right to get drunk next to me while carrying a gun.

Wow. So vehicular homicide is the same thing as SITTING NEXT TO SOMEONE with an object and drinking a beverage?

It certainly doesn't stop the criminal element, but it does help keep honest people honest.

Ahhh, good. Another seriously needed law to keep the honest folks in line.

Sheesh.