How many of you conceal carry on a regular basis?

StoryTime wrote:

It was at a Federal Courthouse. Should narrow it down, and also give away my identity to some out there.

Not to split hairs, but you wouldn't have been able to carry in that situation even with CCW.

Our opinions aren't so far apart, I don't think. Very interesting hypothetical about arming women. That's basically what I meant when I quoted Heinlein about an armed society being a polite society. Rapists and their ilk would think twice if they knew that their targets were armed and dangerous.

Felons can't own guns. Maybe the obese shouldn't be allowed into Burger King! :) They have proven that they can't handle the responsibility.

Dick Doobey wrote:

I can't blame McDonald's for making me fat. I can't blame my car for making me speed. I can't blame Budweiser for making me drunk. I have to take personal responsibilities for my actions and if I commit a crime with a gun it isn't the gun's fault or the gun maker's fault.

^This.

I just love being told I'm a helpless sheep because I don't have wet dreams about being Dirty Harry. I would think people that don't feel safe unless they have a gun would move to remote island or something because that must be a shitty way to feel all the time.

There's a really great video on Youtube giving a dozen or so exmples of drills to practice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEn8srkG7OY

Most people don't have access to a course with moving targets and all, but the idea of being able to draw and shoot while in motion is great.

And this guy is really, really good. Watch really closely, his gun doesn't have a round in the chamber when he draws. He pulls up his shirt, draws, loads, and fires in one smooth motion. This is the kind of competence that takes hours and hours of practice to refine.

Dick Doobey wrote:

I can't blame McDonald's for making me fat. I can't blame my car for making me speed. I can't blame Budweiser for making me drunk. I have to take personal responsibilities for my actions and if I commit a crime with a gun it isn't the gun's fault or the gun maker's fault.

neanderthal dream wrote:

^This.

If you ate carrots and salad, it would be a lot harder to get fat than if you ate McDs

If you drank de-alcoholized beer, you could still get drunk. It would just take 4-5 cases to do what a bottle of Jack can do.

We assume all violence is entirely intentional. It is not. most of it is an over-reaction. If you have a gun, it is much easier for your over-reaction to result in people dying.

Lyndon LaRouche wrote:

If you ate carrots and salad, it would be a lot harder to get fat than if you ate McDs

If you drank de-alcoholized beer, you could still get drunk. It would just take 4-5 cases to do what a bottle of Jack can do.

We assume all violence is entirely intentional. It is not. most of it is an over-reaction. If you have a gun, it is much easier for your over-reaction to result in people dying.

Did you miss the earlier post that showed how seldom that actually happens? Let me give you a recap. A well-intentioned anti-gun nut posted this link:

Which gives detailed documentation of every homicide committed by CCW carriers since 2007. The site states there have been 499 in that time period.

I took the liberty of calculating the homicide rate of CCW carriers. It is 25% of the US rate.

Lyndon LaRouche wrote:

We assume all violence is entirely intentional. It is not. most of it is an over-reaction. If you have a gun, it is much easier for your over-reaction to result in people dying.

My real problem with this type of thinking is this: You presume to know what's best for people that you don't know, who are in situations that you know nothing about. If a man/woman decides that it's in their best interest or their family's best interest to have a gun around, who are you to tell them differently?

Do you think you're protecting them from themselves? Well, I think it's best for fat people to stop eating fast food. But the thing is, I don't get to make that choice for them, even though I can make a really good argument about how it's in the best interest of society to put a weight limit on people who are eating fast food.

You walk a fine line when you start taking away that freedom of choice.

move along. nothing to see here.

You crazy Americans and your guns!

You have fun down there. Just make sure nobody gets Hurt!

For those interested, some of us do carry while we run. I've found a simple clip-on holster tucked into the front of the shorts works best. Keep it lightweight and a thin profile. Get one of thsoe subcompact or snubnose revolvers that are under 15 oz. Don't go any smaller in caliber than 9mm or 32NAA for subcompacts, and nothing smaller than 327 federal for a snubnose (although the lightest snubnoses only come in 38/357 at this time).

neanderthal dream wrote:

You walk a fine line when you start taking away that freedom of choice.

Or what? The US will become Canada/UK/Australia?

If my neighbors have a HANDgun, there is a far greater chance that they will kill someone. That is what a handgun is designed to do - kill people. The owners of a handgun, by virtue of owning one and training with it, have prepared themselves for the possibility of killing somebody. that is perverse.

Plenty of people in Canada have long guns. In fact they want to abolish the long gun registry in Canada. But what you can't do is carry a handgun, unless you have a VERY good reason. The results are pretty obvious - a lot less gun crime, even though Canada sits right next to handgun heaven.

Running on Empathy wrote:

For those interested, some of us do carry while we run. I've found a simple clip-on holster tucked into the front of the shorts works best. Keep it lightweight and a thin profile. Get one of thsoe subcompact or snubnose revolvers that are under 15 oz. Don't go any smaller in caliber than 9mm or 32NAA for subcompacts, and nothing smaller than 327 federal for a snubnose (although the lightest snubnoses only come in 38/357 at this time).

.....why?

neanderthal dream wrote:

You walk a fine line when you start taking away that freedom of choice.

Lyndon LaRouche wrote:

Or what? The US will become Canada/UK/Australia?

Sort of. If it's what the people of those countries want, that's up to them.

As a generality, taking away the freedom to choose gets people riled up in this country. Gay marriage, pot legalization, etc., etc. are all hot topics because people want choice and the freedom to choose..

And I think you're presenting an inverted morality. You say it's perverse for a law-abiding citizen to own a handgun for purposes of self-defense. The real perversion is the robber/rapist/murderer/etc. There is nothing immoral about protecting yourself or your loved ones.

neanderthal dream wrote:

Sort of. If it's what the people of those countries want, that's up to them.

As a generality, taking away the freedom to choose gets people riled up in this country. Gay marriage, pot legalization, etc., etc. are all hot topics because people want choice and the freedom to choose..

Gay marriage? Pot? You have more freedom around these things in the Netherlands than you do in the US.

You are not free. Governments dictate most aspects of all of our lives. And that being said, I prefer things this way - it is much safer. Having the, "right" to own a handgun just introduces MORE risk into your life, it does not reduce it. That is the experience of the rest of the world.

I would think people that always feel safe because they naively think the govt will always protect them would move to some faux-utopia like Canada......

Oh wait..

(sigh)

You and I are going around in circles. I see what you're saying, but I don't think you're hearing me at all.

I have provided data that show many of your fears about CCW holders are false, or jaded at the very least. I have listed responsibilities gun owners should take upon themselves to eliminate the risks associated with gun ownership. Others have provided examples that show "the rest of the world" is divided on gun laws and the resultant crime rates.

And your response is "you are not free." I am free within the bounds of the law, to which I comply. I see it as an immoral and condescending encroachment on my rights to suggest I would be better off any other way.

but Canada's idea of a street gang is a couple of whitebread nerds taking a kid's lunch money on the playground.

Compare to the bloods, crips, etc. Bro'

Let us export our thugs to Toronto & your other gay french villages and see how long it is before you start bitching about being gunned down in your front yard, bitch.

Oh wait. Since you prohibit handguns, I guess the thugs would have to resort to using slingshots. Never mind.

so I'm buying my 13 yr old son his first gun for Christmas. I'm thinking Mossberg 12 Gauge pump. Your thoughts?