Where's the Correct Balance?

[MisterMike]

As I read through the Strategies and Tactics forum, I often ask myself where the balance between preparedness and paranoia lies. Some carry a gun nearly every waking moment and never venture outside the house without one strapped on, theorizing that unexpected harm can befall them at any moment. Others only carry when they believe they might find themselves in a somewhat risky situation . . . out at night in an unknown neighborhood, for instance?

Personally, I struggle with this question. Carrying is, frankly, a pain in the neck . . . or the hip. Or, well, you get the idea. Apart from the issue of physical comfort, there are the innumerable possibilities of things going bad. On the other hand, I like the idea of staying alive, and I realize that while one can manage risks, you can never anticipate or avert every bad situation.

So, here's the question: Where do you draw the line? Do you carry all the time? Some of the time? Almost never? And--most importantly--why?

If you don't carry constantly, how do you assess and manage the risks?

 

[Guy de Loimbard]

Preparedness is the acknowledgment that something may happen, paranoia is the expectation that it will.

I carry everywhere that's legally allowed. I don't expect to ever have to use it, but it's there in case I need to.

 

[jad0110]

Preparedness is the acknowledgment that something may happen, paranoia is the expectation that it will.

I carry everywhere that's legally allowed. I don't expect to ever have to use it, but it's there in case I need to.

Could not have said it any better.

Carrying is, frankly, a pain in the neck . . . or the hip.

Just curious, what are you carrying and what kind of gear are you using? I frequently carry IWB either a 5" all steel 1911 or 2" S&W K Frame Model 15 using a Gary Bromeland Max Con V (about $115) and a FIST # 20 (about $65) respectively. Both are carried on a 1 3/4" Bullhide belt from the Beltman (about $75). Good gear aint cheap, but it can make a hefty, beefy gun like a 1911 or K Frame Smith nearly vanish. In fact, both my 1911 and Model 15 carry more comfortably than my airweight J Frame S&W 642 does on a cheap crummy $12 Walmart belt in a no-name $20 IWB holster.

 

[Oyeboten]

Preparedness can be something one enjoys, a kind of Romance even.


No different than lots of things...no 'paranoia' to it, nothing negative to it in any way, rather, an amenible acceptance, a respect, and a poise and desire to be adequate to exigency.


In one's Automobile, one may carry Jumper Cables, a Gasolene Can, a Box of Tools...Fashlight...Lug Wrench and Jack...


This is what care, interest, a practical oulook, self-reliance, good will toward others, and experience with these, tend to occasion.


No different...

 

[MisterMike]

Preparedness is the acknowledgment that something may happen, paranoia is the expectation that it will.

Well, in truth paranoia is a symptom of mental disease, characterized by debilitating anxiety over events that are unlikely to happen. That's critical to my question . . . whether there is a point where irrational fear overtakes appropriate preparedness. Not drawing any conclusions, just posing the question.

What I would ask those of you who carry locked and loaded every single minute is this: can you explain your choice more fully than to say "bad things can happen anywhere at any time"? In other words, is that your honest assessment of life, perhaps born of experience, or is it just that it's easier to live under this blanket assessment, rather than going to the trouble of constantly evaluating your situation?

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Where do you draw the line? Do you carry all the time? Some of the time? Almost never? And--most importantly--why?

I think it's best to carry all the time. It's not that inconvenient, and it's the best way to keep guns safe from the unauthorised, yet still have one ready.

 

[psyprofessor]

Carrying a gun is like having car insurance......do you really want a car insurance that covers you only in "dangerous" intersections....or do you want a car policy that covers you wherever you drive? Likewise, I want to have "anti-crime" insurance (firearm) even in "safe" places. By the way, if you really can tell the difference between a safe place and a dangerous place....you would avoid danger altogether...and never need a gun.....nor car insurance.

 

[psyopspec]

I don't wear a seat belt while riding in a vehicle because I expect to get into an accident. I don't keep a fire extinguisher in my home hoping that I'll get to use it and be a hero... The analogy ought to be valid, unless you consider firearms unique from any other object of preparation.

 

[Clarence]

If you think that carrying is a pain in the neck you must be doing something wrong. I could carry my 642 in a pair of gym shorts.

 

[SgtDinosaur]

It is better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. Fortunately I have never needed a gun, although there have been a few times I wished I were armed.

Since it is virtually impossible to get a permit where I live, and we have a fairly high crime rate, I can only carry hypothetically. So, hypothetically, I have to decide whether of not I'm going to break that law, which further complicates things. The fact that I may or may not have been breaking that law for over 30 years with no adverse consequenses is another consideration, as well as the fact that there may indeed be serious consequences.

So I am in fact unarmed at certain times. It is a calculated risk that I wish I did not have to take. At least there is pepper spray and blackthorn canes for those times.

 

[loneviking]

What I would ask those of you who carry locked and loaded every single minute is this: can you explain your choice more fully than to say "bad things can happen anywhere at any time"? In other words, is that your honest assessment of life, perhaps born of experience, or is it just that it's easier to live under this blanket assessment, rather than going to the trouble of constantly evaluating your situation?

The problem is the idea of 'contantly evaluating your situation'. That's just a fallacy as any evaluation can fail to identify a threat at ANY time. Threats are not just people, they can also be animals. There have been two dogs and their owners chewed up by other dogs in my town in the last couple of months.

Or it may be wild animals, such as the mountain lions that roam around in my back yard. Or the racoon that went after my dog about three years ago one cold winter night.

Then again, two bad guys robbed the little Mexican carniceria where I shop every week, did it in broad daylight and smashed the cashiers face into the cash register. Or the guy who shot his estranged to wife in broad daylight in the middle of a parking lot outside of my daughters charter high school. And I live in what's considered a 'safe' town with lots of folks carrying firearms!

If you think you can evaluate a situation and decide it's 'safe' and you don't need to carry, you're fooling yourself. If carrying is such a pain, do some research and figure out what you need to do to carry comfortably. Either better equipment, smaller gun, better clothing choices---but don't kid yourself as to your 'safety'.

 

[mljdeckard]

The why is the most important part.

When you start taking or not taking your gun based on whether or not you think a given situation is dangerous, you open yourself to a bad line of questioning. "Do you always carry a gun? Why or why not? Why did you carry tonight? Ok, if you thought this situation was one of the dangerous ones, why did you go at all? If you thought it was going to be dangerous, why take a gun? WHY NOT JUST NOT GO IN THE FIRST PLACE?"

If you use deadly force to defend yourself, you must be able to convince the D.A. and the jury that there was no other option. If you are selective about WHEN you carry, you have opened the possibility that you had an option besides deadly force. You could have just not gone in the first place. Deciding on a particular night that it's dangerous and you need to bring a gun along means that you decided IN ADVANCE that something bad might happen, and it DID. This might make them look at PREMEDITATION.

On the other hand, if you ALWAYS carry, you don't have to make distinctions about WHY you decided to carry THIS particular night. "I had a gun because I always carry a gun everywhere I am legally allowed to. This night wasn't anything special. I DIDN'T DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN I NORMALLY DO."

Of course all of this is theoretical. YOU aren't going to say JACK to anything in EITHER case. You are going to let your LAWYER do the talking.

 

[SgtDinosaur]

The problem is the idea of 'contantly evaluating your situation'. That's just a fallacy as any evaluation can fail to identify a threat at ANY time. Threats are not just people, they can also be animals. There have been two dogs and their owners chewed up by other dogs in my town in the last couple of months.

Or it may be wild animals, such as the mountain lions that roam around in my back yard. Or the racoon that went after my dog about three years ago one cold winter night.

Then again, two bad guys robbed the little Mexican carniceria where I shop every week, did it in broad daylight and smashed the cashiers face into the cash register. Or the guy who shot his estranged to wife in broad daylight in the middle of a parking lot outside of my daughters charter high school. And I live in what's considered a 'safe' town with lots of folks carrying firearms!

If you think you can evaluate a situation and decide it's 'safe' and you don't need to carry, you're fooling yourself. If carrying is such a pain, do some research and figure out what you need to do to carry comfortably. Either better equipment, smaller gun, better clothing choices---but don't kid yourself as to your 'safety'.

Not only that, but I would add that you'll probably never see the worst threats coming. It's Murphy's law, which I have found applies to almost everything. While I do know that certain activities (such as being on the street at night around here) are more dangerous than others, I have absolutely no way to predict when the S will HTF.

 

[conw]

What I would ask those of you who carry locked and loaded every single minute is this: can you explain your choice more fully than to say "bad things can happen anywhere at any time"? In other words, is that your honest assessment of life, perhaps born of experience, or is it just that it's easier to live under this blanket assessment, rather than going to the trouble of constantly evaluating your situation?

Basically, my choice is DUE to my acknowledgment that "bad things can happen anywhere at any time," but I can explain it more in-depth:

It's the result of a simple cost/benefit assessment.

You spend X dollars on a gun and whatever equipment if you determine it is worth having a gun at all.

Past that, it is absolutely free (monetarily) to carry 100% of the time. The cost in risk (equipment failure, negligence) is easily minimizable. And I actually spend less time messing with the gun when wearing it 100% than I do putting it on and taking it off multiple times per day, thus spending less time and potentially less risk (due to less gun handling).

Finally, I would say that at least in my case, due to my precautionary habits my ability to judge the likelihood of a threatening situation very far in advance is very low. I avoid areas where I would experience such a situation whenever possible. Yes, I have to go into gas stations sometimes. But everywhere I go is relatively safe. Probably the most dangerous places I go to are parking lots and places I drive through. So since everywhere is fairly safe, and there are no overtly dangerous places on my itinerary, it's just not worth the trouble to judge the minimal difference in risk to figure out where to carry.

Hope that helped!

 

[kyo]

my dad asked me a few weeks ago why I always had the gun out when I was home. I said to him "Am I gonna defend the house with the gun in the safe?"
And he understood.
It is the same concept. I do look around and I am way more aware then I used to be before I started carrying. This is due to the fact that I REALLY don't want to get into a fight, struggle, or dangerous situation in general. But I do take precautions. I look at people, I look at what they are wearing, what they are doing, I look at how they look at me, how long they look at me, I wonder how many friends they have, and what can happen. That is all in about a second of though.
Why? Well, if you wear black all the time, and cut your hair to be emo, your freaking emo. If you look like a gangster and act like a gangster even though you are a gangster wanna be, I will treat you like a gangster, and I will evaluate the threat accordingly. Yes, looks can be deceiving, but facial expressions can't.
You can read people if you look for behaviors. If a guy keeps staring at me for more then lets say...a minute, maybe even 30 seconds I have a problem. I take that mental note. Usually people who don't want trouble don't try to interview you to do something. Morons make it very easy. Does this sound like I am paranoid? I don't think so. I don't present to everyone I think I should keep an eye on.

 

[N3810F]

To me there is definitely a law of diminishing returns. It has nothing to do with guns and has everything to do with lifestyle. How many people here smoke yet carry 24/7? How can some items be forfeited for lifestyle reasons but not others? If i planned my entire life around tactical advantage I'd be a victim before a crime even happened.

 

[dbltp]

"bad things can happen anywhere at any time"? Basically describes why I have a gun with me at all times.

With m carry gun there is honestly no reason not to. It is small and light and I can honestly forget it is there until I shift around or put my hand on it.

I almost look at it from an economic POV... Since there is basically no cost to carrying (after the sunk cost of the gun and holster) and the potential reward (not dying) is so high it is an easy decision.

 

[chieftain]

If you know ahead of time you will be in a fight, take a long Arm, not a handgun.

If you don't think you will be in a fight, use a handgun.

It really is that complicated.

How many folks at Virgina Tech "THOUGHT THEY WERE SAFE" and would not have carried. Those poor Amish School girls should have been safe too. But although in a "safe place" they were not.

The list goes on. The long list of massacres seem to be almost exclusively in "safe" places. How could that be?

By the OP's standard all those "safe" places he would consider voluntarily disarming. That is the point and the issue. If you know where you are SAFE, you are only fooling yourself.

Security or "real" safety, doesn't exist, only a religious belief that it does. There are places where more bad things happen than others places. But bad things can happen anywhere.

Thank about it.

Go figure.

Fred

 

[Fred Fuller]

I carry everywhere it's legal because I have not yet learned how to schedule emergencies. If Mr. Thug would be so kind as to call ahead and make an appointment for my next attempted mugging, I wouldn't have to have a pocketfull of 642 all the time. But since I don't know ahead of time when Mr. Thug or his friends might put in another appearance, I don't see any alternative save having a gun handy whenever possible.

I try not to have to go places I can't carry legally. And I carry all the time everywhere else. I've done that for years.

And having a gun when I needed one has kept trouble at bay a couple of times.

Every person has to do their own risk evaluation and determine how much hassle they're willing to put up with. I've done mine and am comfortable with it.

lpl

 

[snorky18]

Have you ever heard this saying:

"Have you ever noticed that everyone who drives faster than you is an idiot, and everyone who drives slower than you is a moron?"

Paranoia vs. preparation is similar. What's just preparation to you (or me or most other people on this board) would be considered paranoia to the "average" Joe on the street walking by if they knew you (gasp) carried a handgun everywhere you legally could, even walking right past them.

Yet even people on here occasionally see posts and say "Wow, they've really gone overboard".

To each his own. To me the balance point between paranoia and preparation can fall anywhere in a large range. It's an opinion basically. Although there are some things that would cause most people to think you had crossed the line into paranoia. Lots of talk of TEOTWAWKI, and zombies or instance

 

[MisterMike]

Some very thoughtful replies. Just to set the record straight, in posting my original question(s), I wasn't advocating one approach over any other. However, I am interested in what motivates people to adopt different strategies.

Some of what I read on THR seems to be only a recitation of catch phrases, with little apparent thought by the proponent. I have to say, though, that the thoughts shared thus far in this thread strike me as thoughtful and well-reasoned.

What got me thinking about this topic was the thread asking people if they always packed heat while hanging around their home. Quite a few responded in the affirmative.

Honestly, I don't always carry. I recognize the logic in what many of you have written regarding the unpredictability of life, but there are times when I simply can't (due to where I'm going) or choose not to (because I've determined--correctly or not--that I am quite unlikely to find myself in a dicey situation). I recognize the perils in this sort of approach, but I also believe that there are few situations that would occur during these disarmed periods that I could not effectively address, through retreat, the use of improvised weapons, etc.

On the other hand, whenever I venture out for gas, groceries, a cup of joe, or a walk with the dog . . . .

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[conw]

Some of what I read on THR seems to be only a recitation of catch phrases, with little apparent thought by the proponent.

Amen. The memes or catchy quotes are kind of useful; I particularly like John Farnam's, of whose there is a list available on THR library. But I hate when people post one-liners we've all seen as their reply to threads like this.

So, frankly though, I think you have one foot in the water and one out. In other words, I think your defensive mindset is (falsely) predicated on the idea that you're "unlikely" to have an encounter you can't handle unarmed. That's always true if you are cautious, but the extra cost of carrying a gun is basically nothing unless you feel apologetic in some way, as if you don't deserve to be able to do so. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think at the very least the best reason to carry 24/7 if you're going to at all is because, while you may be able to generally make risk predictions accurately, if you get in the habit of doing so it will breed complacency. You will become more and more relaxed about being unarmed. I would liken it to gun safety rules. Sure...you can break them one time (putting your finger on the trigger and pointing it at a friend without checking if it's loaded) but when you cross the boundary and make it a habit, what then? It's a slippery slope.

 

[psyopspec]

Honestly, I don't always carry. I recognize the logic in what many of you have written regarding the unpredictability of life, but there are times when I simply can't (due to where I'm going) or choose not to (because I've determined--correctly or not--that I am quite unlikely to find myself in a dicey situation). I recognize the perils in this sort of approach, but I also believe that there are few situations that would occur during these disarmed periods that I could not effectively address, through retreat, the use of improvised weapons, etc.

And that's the bottom line; you and I get to make our own choices. Hopefully we make ones we can live with. As long as personal decisions in realm of preparation bring no harm to others, I say no big deal either way.

As for cliches, I was the one that posted the seat belt and fire extinguisher analogies above. I know they've been said before, but in the context of this thread, I do have a genuine interest in hearing, if you believe them to be different.

 

[MisterMike]

As for cliches, I was the one that posted the seat belt and fire extinguisher analogies above. I know they've been said before, but in the context of this thread, I do have a genuine interest in hearing, if you believe them to be different.

They do strike me as a little different, but I understand your point. In my mind the greatest difference lies in the fact that all--seat belts, fire extinguishers, and weapons--can save me from my own folly or others' misdeeds, but only the weapon has the ability to affirmatively cause harm if I misuse it.

Which brings me to the one set of circumstances that will cause me to go unarmed every time: those occasions when I'm not feeling "with it." I don't know that I can effectively describe a set of symptoms or performance deficits, but this is a practice I adopted years ago as a motorcyclist. Sometimes, whether as a result of illness, fatigue, or distraction, I would get the feeling that I could not operate my bike to the full extent of my abilities. I decided pretty quickly that those were good days to stay home, watch the tube, putter around the garden, or find some other diversion. I've done the same with carrying. Not because I fear harming myself, but because for me (under rare circumstances), I calculate that the perhaps almost imperceptibly greater chance of making a mistake that could harm another isn't worth it.

So, I find your analogies useful, but not exactly 100% on point. However, I do not feel they're "cliches."

 

[MisterMike]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think at the very least the best reason to carry 24/7 if you're going to at all is because, while you may be able to generally make risk predictions accurately, if you get in the habit of doing so it will breed complacency. You will become more and more relaxed about being unarmed.

Good points . . . worth mulling over.