Why do you carry?

[idleprocess]

Why do so many carry handguns? What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?

I don't carry a gun. I simply don't feel the need. This is not to say that I think Dallas is an inherently safe place to live (I seem to recall that 2004 or 2005 placed Dallas at the bottom of major-city crime rankings), just that in over 15 years of living around it, have yet to think that it's necessary. The handful of tense situations I've been in have gotten nowhere near actual violence, nevermind deadly violence. Posessing a weapon in my workplace is grounds for immediate termination (I wonder about the day that someone takes exception to the ~3" Kershaw Vapor II folder I carry daily). Texas's concealed-carry laws are a bit screwy and far too many businesses (and of course government) outright prohibit citizens from carrying on their premises.

Don't take the above to mean that I think concealed carry is nuts, or that I disapprove of handguns - I was just explaining why I don't carry... and those reasons aren't set in stone either.

[Topper]

I do not carry a gun due to my temper. I have several guns, long and short; pumps semi auto's revolvers but I do not carry them nor even keep one in the car/truck/boat whatever as I think it would be a bad thing to have one handy when I am mad (if I am awake good chance I am mad* :lol). I always have lights and always at least one knife but guns? nope I do not carry as EDC. If hunting or target shooting yep I got them with me. A few times helping to collect rent from a non nice person or evict a person yep I got one, but that is a rare thing these days; not really into that but my wife is a Landlady (makes me a landlord by default) so if she has a problem I step in and "fix it" I hate it because I have to be extra nice to folks that made my wife cry and you guys know if the wife aint happy nobody in 15 miles is happy.* I have not ever had to pull it out and only one time things got "out of hand" and I dealt with it very well, as in nice. money owed was paid. Deadbeat moved out I even moved most of his stuff out by myself.The policeman was nice but not willing to help him move had the nerve to ask me if I was willing to take "full responsibility'* (is it just me or do* all cops look 16 years old ) for the stuff I drug out of the house and placed by the curb. I just told him Nope not my stuff. The ex- tenant paid up in front of the young officer and we agreed the broken front window would not be considerd his fault.
I think after the folks next door called the cops and clearly saw me backing off and being nice helped a lot, I was glad they called the police. I was more glad they liked me more than him. Point is I could have shot him I did not. Front window? yep I tossed him and he happened to hit the window. I was cut twice before tossing him so I do not feel bad I could have shot him dead when he pulled a knife and cut me the first time I did not I* allowed a second cut: controlled this time as I was good to go had a plan.Very light cut he was far less than a pro so I picked him up and tossed him out the window.
I could of shot him I did not. I thought I was nice wife was mad anyway go figure. The couple that live next door to the deadbeat think I am great.

[Bravo 25]

There are 2 very good reasons why I carry. My wife, and my daughter.

The SCOTUS ruled that a LEO department is not there to provide personal protection, and neither can they be held liable for not protecting you in a given situation. Who then does the responsability of protecting yourself, and you family fall upon. You. We have remanded so much of society, and lives over to the criminals by telling the average citizen they have no right to expect protection, and they are not allowed to carry the weapons to protect themselves. We have seen where this has led, and are now swinging back the other way.

If my carrying a firearm keeps one robbery, rape, assault, murder or devastating crime from happening to anyone, it was worth it. How does this happen? When you have a CCW law in place the criminals now have just as much reason to fear the average citizen, as they the average citizen did of them. By not knowing who is armed, and who is not, criminals are less likely to attack people. There is a saying "An armed society is a polite society". There is a lot of truth to this.

I got tired of being told not to go someplace, or do something that I have a legal right to do because of the danger. I should not have to fear anyone, or any place on this earth. The police are constantly telling me different though, and that doesn't set to well with my personality I guess.

We could go into the whole 2nd ammendment disscusion, and how it is our right without the permission of the government, and how I don't much care for surrending any of my rights, but that is a completely different book.

[22-rimfire]

I just applied for my concealed carry permit. I debated internally about the merits versus pit falls of having the permit and decided that I don't want to carry on my person except in very limited scenarios. The primary reason is that I periodically work alone in what would be considered a bad part of town or in potentially higher risk areas. I do want to have a loaded firearm in my vehicle or at least have the option to have one concealed. Yes, I run the risk of having it stolen. In fact, I have already had a gun stolen from my vehicle in the past along with a lot of other stuff. So, I will take the risk and accept the consequences.

[whiskey]

Because I can.

I have carried since I was 21. I was carrying before that for uncle sam, but not concealed :)

I believe, like most of you, that you should go prepared. I have been trained and tested and I am well prepared to to use a weapon in defense of my life or your life if need be. I believe that if everyone was trained to properly use a handgun and if all of these well trained citizen carried guns everywhere they ventured then the world would be a more peaceful place.

People would not be as quick to be an a$$hole to some one if they knew that person was prepared to use deadly force to protect themselves and their families.

In all the years I have carried I have never had a situation that required me to even think of drawing my weapon. However, I have been in several situations that I was greatly comforted byt the fact that I was carrying a weapon.

[Jim101]

I have to agree with Bravo 25, he covered it all....I live in the Dallas area and the amount of car jackings, home invasions(with the people home) and road rage is going up... I hope I never have to use it, but, if I do I will..

Jim

[P97DC]

I fully agree with Bravo 25. I consider my CCW the same as Insurance on my house and my Storm Cellar. I hope I don't need it, but if I do I have it.

[michael t]

Why do you use seat belts ,Why do you have smoke dectors, fire ex. . Why do you have home owners insurance. Spare tire in car. you don't need any of these either.
We weren't allowed to carry at my work place either. Man walked in a couple min later 2 dead 2 wounded and several lives changed for ever. Oh! we had a unarmed Security guard on duty. Lot of help he was,
I was the target of a arm robbery in mid 80 . Late at night I was in parking gagage where I worked . He had a knife I drew a pistol (25 auto Beretta) No need to fire road runner couldn't have caught him.
Home invasion a pistol on you when door explodes open might stop rest when first run runs in to a bullet. I carry from time I get up till I go to bed.

Or check out the times 911 has been called and no one shows up.

In 70's I was working for a PD out west. Woman called said boy friend was trying to get in house said he would kill her. Sho had a P.O. on him. We were 3 min. form time of call to our arrival. Front door kicked open found her in bedroom dead, baby in crib dead, X boy friend /father of baby dead from self inflicted gunshot. If she would have had a pistol and will to use her and baby might have lived .
I carry for SD and to protect my family. Police can't and won't be their when you need them. They just take reports and help load the body. You are responsable for you and your family safety. Not me, not man next door, not Police, or your Gov. Best do all you can to be perpaired.You may not get a 2nd chance.

[LifeNRA]

* * I carry for SD and to protect my family. Police can't and won't be their when you need them. They just take reports and help load the body. You are responsable for you and your family safety. Not me, not man next door, not Police, or your Gov. Best do all you can to be perpaired.You may not get a 2nd chance.

Good answer and the way I feel.

[TKC]

I carry a gun to protect myself and my family.

[djsmiles]

i have 5 reasons why i carry. my wife and three sons. and because it is my right. as far as the last reason goes, a lot of people may think i'm some sort of nut. well, they are entitled to their opinion. but hey, the second amendment, and the state of massachusetts say i can. so i do.

[Handyman]

I carry for the same reasons I have other EDC items , a BOB and emergency/disaster supplies

[fubar]

I carry a licensed concealed handgun to shoot bad things. I have never done it before , and never intend to do it either, But that doesn't mean I am not prepared.

I put together a good solid bug-out bag , I never intend to see a tidal wave or force 5 hurricane here , but the bag is ready.

There is a fire extinguisher in my kitchen , but I don't plan to set the house on fire.

One time last summer I was walking with wife and child to the ice cream store , happy day , carefree and oblivious. Around the corner comes a smallish woman with a giant-ish bulldog thing , maybe an American Bulldog - a mastiff like creature. The dog was startled or just plain mean 'cause it went nuts when it saw us - dragged the woman to her knees trying to 'get' us but she held on.

As she got the beast under control I realized I was pointing my handgun at it - finger on trigger. I holstered it as she apologised profusely. I don't think she even noticed the gun.

A friend on another site says " Why do I carry a .45 ? Because they don't make a .46 "

[Jim101]

fubar,

Well said, I had a "dog story" like yours as well, and I was ready to shoot also......It's the old "I'd rather have it and not need it than need and not have it"....

Jim

[Lawrence]

I'm a newspaper reporter. As such, I see a lot of very very VERY bad people. Trust me, there are some people out there you don't want to meet. Even in small, rural county such as the one in which I live, there are places where one does not go unarmed.

Tomorrow, I will be writing an article on the latest set of grand jury indictments. In my county of 25K, there are 69 indictments, 44 of which are for violent offenses. Im not talking fistfights either. Home invasions and shootings are the norm in some areas.

Even my very liberal publisher boss keeps a Walther PPK in his desk drawer at work and carries a 16 shot springfield armory XD in a lock box in his car.

[Crocodilo]

Besides all other motivations for carrying a firearm, when you have one you are definetely more aware and carefull. You will think twice before going into that dark alley, you will think twice before grabbing a beer, you will think twice before getting into a stupid argument with someone over a traffic incident. And, if needed, you will have a more responsible confidence in doing what needs to be done.

The big dilemma is acting with a proportional response to a threat. Are three guys with sticks a menace enough to bring it on? How about a junkey facing you with a needle in hand? Is a gun proportional response to these situations? Even when carrying a firearm you will have to be prepared to deploy a less-lethal option, or risk facing legal consequences. Of course being alive to make it to a court is better than not...

IMHO.

[Desertrat1]

Wow, great question, and as you've obviously read reasons vary widely and are still similar. My wife and I both CCW. We live in Kingman AZ which is a wide spot on Interstate 40, there are plently of transients that have no concern for others. Combine that with the arguable fact that it's the meth capitol of Arizona and that should be reason enough.

I carried a weapon in the military in the defense of my country and the police can't be everywhere. Not that I'm looking for something to get into, quite the contrary, but not long ago in Phoenix a gunman went to a Wal-mart parking lot and proceded to shoot two cart attendants for no reason. He even had time to re-load and shoot them a second time as they were trying to crawl under vehicles to protect themselves. One was a 22 year old kid that took a second job so he could get the money to put up the down payment on a house for his fiancee and the other took a second job to get money for his daughters christmas.

The first thing that came to mind was "where was a sane legally carrying citizen?" they wouldn't have stopped the initial shooting but certainly could have prevented him from FINISHING THEM OFF.

But the biggest reason is still my wife and kids.

[chevrofreak]

If you don't carry and have no intentions to then you probably don't understand it.

Whether you believe it or not, in many places 1 in 50 (often more like 1 in 25) of the adults you meet have a concealed weapons permit. Whether they carry or not, you don't know, but the sheer number of people who can be packing heat at any given time keeps criminals wary of who they prey upon. So, whether you pack or not, the others who do are helping keep you safe while out and about.

One of the main things carrying a gun has done for me is to build my confidence. When you are confident, it can be pretty obvious to those around you, especially the ones looking for someone weak to prey upon. Like with many predatory animals, if you show any sign of fear they might see you as an easy target and decide to attack you.

In society there are sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. Which one you chose to be is up to you.

[idleprocess]

chevrofreak:
I wanted to know why people carried and I got a variety of responses. I'm neutral on the issue for myself, but I have no problem with others doing it.

The threat perception simply isn't there in my case. I know it could be too late the moment it happens, but we all take our chances in life.

My problem is that Texas has strange laws about firearms and employers can prohibit licensed concealed-carry. My current employer certainly does.

[Bravo 25]

My problem is that Texas has strange laws about firearms and employers can prohibit licensed concealed-carry. My current employer certainly does.
This can be a valid concern. The way I handle it is that in order for my employer to find out they would have to violate my civil rights. If it is concealed they don't know I have it. If they want to search me I am free to decline, and become suddenly ill, and have to leave. Without proof of theft they cannot detain me. I am free to submit to the search or leave the propertry, but it is still my choice.

[Jim101]

I agree with Bravo, I am in the same boat you are. They need a reason to search you, now, it you tell everyone at work you carry, then you're asking for it, someone will turn you in.....Same with your car on the employers parking lot, as of now (the NRA is working on this one) you cannot have a firearm in your car on their parking lot. But, they need reason and a warrent to search it.....
Not to be wise, but, "Concealed" means no one knows you have it.............

Jim

[Desertrat1]

I agree with Bravo. I currently work for a Canadian owned company in the US. They have very strict rule about weapons. I've made it real clear in a round about way, that I carry.

If they have a problem I will be sick and off site long before corporate heads can invade my space. The funny thing is the local management and floor employees, like that I carry and feel more secure because of it. I can't count the number of times I've been asked to escort people to their cars at night.

[JMV]

* * *I live in commiefornia, here you have to be a public official or an actor or otherwise be famous to get a CCW.* I can only get away with carrying in my car, although that usually means in my BOB.* I have the same problem with my employer saying that they can search my POV anytime it is on company property, and god forbid they find a weapn of ANY kind in a POV or in a company truck.* That's a terminating offence, but I'm willing to take that chance because my job takes me into some really crappy areas.* The company says if I'm assaulted, I have to run, believe it or not the general concensus is that the law says the same thing.

* * I weigh in at damn near 300 pounds.* A twelve year old kid can outrun me.* If I am assaulted, my choices are to comply, and hope I don't get hurt, or to fight like hell for my safety/survival.* Guess which choice I'm going to take.* I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

[Bravo 25]

I have the same problem with my employer saying that they can search my POV anytime it is on company property, and god forbid they find a weapn of ANY kind in a POV or in a company truck.

Many companies are trying this approach. It is called intimidation, and it works. The truth of the matter is it's a lie though. They have the right to "request" a search. They cannot conduct one without your consent. They can leagally request a search, and you can leagally decline, and leave". This is a push pull. You may or may not have a job afterwards, but I don't personally dance well to the "intimidation tune".
Even as director fo security, with signs out at our office towers eluding to the fact "we have the right to search your person, property, or vehicles while on the premissis" I can only request, and without proof of a theft or felony, I cannot detain them if they refuse, and want to leave.

I must add that I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, and none of the above should be construed as legal advice. If you have any really questions outside of your basic civil rights please contact a licensed lawyer in your area.

[Lee1959]

Why do I carry, I pondered this for a long time before getting my CCW. I was on the fence for along time when I saw a tv news report about some Texas woman politician, cannot remember her name. She said she always carried a revolver without a permit, but her parents disapproved. One day she was taking her father and mother to lunch, and her father convinced her to leave her handgun at home, which she did. They went a reteraunt I believe it was a Lubys? Not sure, but anyways a crazed person comes in and starts shooting up the place, killing her father and mother in front of her eyes. She sad she would never forvgive herself for not carrying that day, she might have saved a life or two, perhaps her own parents.

That did it for me, I found that if something where to occur, where I was, and I was not legally carrying a handgun, when I legally can by simply getting a permit and training, I could never forgive myself if a loved one was killed, or even a stranger. Not if there was a chance I could prevent it.

That is why I carry a concealed weapon.

[RoisonDubh]

I don't yet carry. But I live in Texas the "friendly state." The reputation came from the fact that in the 1800's nearly everyone carried. You were polite to others because to be loud and ovnoxious or even dangerous was to invite a possibly permanent "attitude adjustment."

Just a thought for the next time you see people acting like hellions (or worse) in public.

[fubar]

2nd post on this thread :

I also live in Massachusetts , one the least gun friendly states in the Country. But they deemed me okay to get a CCW/LTC permit after a federal background check , safety course , hundred dollar fee , fingerprints , interview - to exercise a Constitutional right.

I'm sorry but that doesn't feel much like a right after all that.

So after all our "gun control" ( a euphamism for " shift the blame to law abiding citizens while we ignore CRIME CONTROL) , I am watching Boston have a record year for homicide.

I carry because in every state and country where gun control restrictions are enacted crime goes up. I carry because my government is making things less safe for me by trying to make me safe. I might not bother if I lived in Fla. or Texas - you know - in America, rather than the Peoples Republic.

New Hampshire bound as soon as my kid graduates ...

[erh]

Why do so many carry handguns? What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?

I don't carry a gun. I simply don't feel the need. This is not to say that I think Dallas is an inherently safe place to live (I seem to recall that 2004 or 2005 placed Dallas at the bottom of major-city crime rankings), just that in over 15 years of living around it, have yet to think that it's necessary. The handful of tense situations I've been in have gotten nowhere near actual violence, nevermind deadly violence. Posessing a weapon in my workplace is grounds for immediate termination (I wonder about the day that someone takes exception to the ~3" Kershaw Vapor II folder I carry daily). Texas's concealed-carry laws are a bit screwy and far too many businesses (and of course government) outright prohibit citizens from carrying on their premises.

Don't take the above to mean that I think concealed carry is nuts, or that I disapprove of handguns - I was just explaining why I don't carry... and those reasons aren't set in stone either.


idleprocess
- I do, because I have since I was 17 years old (of coarse I started out carrying a rifle for you..!) But now, & additionally; I have the knowledge and understanding of the responsibility(S) involved. Some places seem safe, but this is known as being complacent; most everywhere in this "Great Nation" and especially abroad, "The world unfortunately is not an inherantly safe place."
I've been in unprovoked brawls (Stupid "Crack Head wanna be mugger's.." - you'd think they'd avoid the 235 Lb Tattoo'd guys..?!) here in my lovely city. This while having a concealed pistol on my person; it stayed concealed as it should have... It would only ever become "un-concealed" if the circumstance really warranted it, and lastly I have a wife, Grandkids, (I'm only 42..!) & friends that I treasure deaply, and want to keep around me for the rest of my days...
Thanks for asking the question, it's a good one that many people should evaluate. Frankly, it terrifies me in some ways, the people who are legally allowed to carry a concealed weopon, and have no idea of the real attitude & responsibility that this entails..!

Eric Howland
Savannah, GA.

[gearloose]

For the same reason I have fire extenguishers in my house and car. Hope to never use them but when you need one ...

[greenLED]

Frankly, it terrifies me in some ways, the people who are legally allowed to carry a concealed weopon, and have no idea of the real attitude & responsibility that this entails..!Ditto.

[charlie fox]

1. I'm an old Boy Scout and therefore Always Prepared.

2. Bad things sometimes happen to good people.

3. Better to have it and not need it, than....I'm sure you've heard this before.

4. What a better way to show my support for our Country and Constitution!

[nontypical]

Why do so many carry handguns?* What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?

I don't carry a gun.* I simply don't feel the need.* This is not to say that I think Dallas is an inherently safe place to live (I seem to recall that 2004 or 2005 placed Dallas at the bottom of major-city crime rankings), just that in over 15 years of living around it, have yet to think that it's necessary.* The handful of tense situations I've been in have gotten nowhere near actual violence, nevermind deadly violence.* Posessing a weapon in my workplace is grounds for immediate termination (I wonder about the day that someone takes exception to the ~3" Kershaw Vapor II folder I carry daily).* Texas's concealed-carry laws are a bit screwy and far too many businesses (and of course government) outright prohibit citizens from carrying on their premises.

Don't take the above to mean that I think concealed carry is nuts, or that I disapprove of handguns - I was just explaining why I don't carry... and those reasons aren't set in stone either.


As another Dallas resident I do see the need. I travel all over Dallas in my business and wouldn't be without one of my sidearms. Store owners, residents as well as people going out to eat at night are being robbed and beaten at gun point. Most of the restraunts and businesses I've been to don't disallow ccw. Their signs disallow "the illegal possession of a firearm on the premises". Hopefully I will never have to pull my firearm to protect myself or family. But I'm not willing to take the chance that everyone I meet will be nice. We don't live in the 1950's anymore. You can't go to bed with your front door unlocked, your car unlocked (my locked truck was broken into while in my driveway 2 weeks ago to the tune of $1100.00 out of pocket). I don't live in a high crime area either. So what I'm saying is in this day and age you just never know. If you are willing to take the chance with your life, then that's your choice and so be it. Personally I don't like the odds with so many people drug addicted, out of work, don't want to work or just plain mean and out for kicks.

[watchman]

1. I'm an old Boy Scout and therefore Always Prepared.

2. Bad things sometimes happen to good people.

3. Better to have it and not need it, than....I'm sure you've heard this before.

4. What a better way to show my support for our Country and Constitution!


You tuck the words right out of my mouth. better to have it an not need it then to NEED it.
An NOT HAVE IT

[webley445]

No offence intended, but it kinda gets me with folks that say I carry a knife but not a gun.
In many ways a knife can be more deadly than a gun.
If you have the self discipline to carry a knife and not use it when angered, what makes you think its any different with a gun?

[VT-aroo]

I do not carry, but here are a few reasons why I might. A bunch of people looked at Charles Manson and said "yeah that makes sense. Lets do that" and now the inocents are dead and Chuck is safe.
I would prefer the people get the help they need but my kids are important to me.

[Southern Sunset]

Why do so many carry handguns?* What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?


Occupational hazards aside, potential dangers, either real or perceived do exist. One only has to read any local newspaper or watch the evening* news for verification. Mans inhumanity to his fellow man is alive and well! To allow myself or a family member to fall prey to a predator, is simply unacceptable. Especially when I have the potential to nullify the attack. We all have a responsibility to ourselves and to our families.

[Jim101]

Southern,

Well said, I couldn't agree more. That's why I carry..

Jim

[traveler]

I don't carry on concealed firearm on an everyday basis, but I am not above the idea of doing such. I live in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia, and as I've stated before and as JMV points out, CCW permits are only issued to judges, politicans, actors, and celebrites. You know, the most easily preyed upon group that resides in the most downtroden parts of this great state. In 1992, there was a wake-up call entitled the Rodney King/ L.A. Riots. I carried a .357 in a cross-draw rig for three days after all that blew up,and that left an indelable imprint on my mind. I did'nt have to pull it, did'nt even come close, but it was there, like any other emergency lifesaving tool. Remember folks, while the people that are in charge of protecting you may be doing their best, and I personally salute them for their toil, they are not legaly responsible for your health and well being! Cops can't always be there when you are assaulted,firefighters and paramedics can't always be there if there is a fire or when you are injured, the National Guard can't always be there during a natural disaster or terrorist event. At some point during any of these situations, you might be the only one to help you, even if it is for a short period of time. These are just some things to consider, and remember, a gun is a tool like any other.

[Goldtanker]

When I grew up back in the '40's and '50's, all the other kids I knew had guns leaning in the corner of their rooms. They knew if they touched them without the permission of their father, it would be the end of the world. There was no such thing as a 'school shooting'. You could buy a handgun in any hardware store and put it in the same bag with a hammer. On the way home it would never cross your mind to shoot someone. Knives were tools - we all carried them in grade school. You never hit girls - ever. There was what I refer to as the 'Universal Father'. You couldn't get away with anything at Eddie's house that you couldn't do at your own. I remember riding on the school bus while someone brought a gun to school for 'show and tell'. Before my mother died, she was at a nursing home that had a sign in the window that said,"No guns allowed on the property". (Minnesota has a CCW law). I asked the lady at the desk if they had a lot of gunfights at this place. She didn't get it. Why not put a sign at the border, "Welcome to Minnesota, no criminal activity allowed". That should do it.

I retired after 27 years in law enforcement and didn't apply for a permit because carrying a gun is a nuisance. Then one day I saw some hate America group out at the state fair collecting signatures to prevent the passage of the CCW law. That was it for me. I got the permit because it is Ammendment #2, not #47. If you give that away, #4 is not far behind and they will be coming into your home looking for peanut butter that has a lot of unsaturated fat. I'm tired of being portrayed as the bad guy. I'm a retired federal agent, a combat veteran and an American!

If you give this country away you will never get it back.

Sorry for the rant.

[traveler]

That was'nt a rant, and you should not be sorry for speaking your mind and the truth. When I was in elementary school in the 1970's, me and many other boys carried pocket knives. They were not to be brandished or used, be we all knew and respected that,and nobody was stabbed or slashed. It just did'nt happen. I can't even imagen what would happen if a kid brought a pair of nail clippers to the classroom.

[rgoff23]

Why do I carry?

I consider it to be my civic duty!



Visit www.usconcealedcarry.com

Read the words of Tim Schmidt, founder of USCCA! If you are unsure of a reason to carry, listen to what he has to say, and make up your own mind. It ain't for everybody, and I believe that is a good thing. Some people do not posess the character traits needed in a person who carries. But, for those of us that do, join the ranks brothers and sisters.

The Second Ammendment is the only gun law we need. Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.

Sorry, but I cant stop waiving the flag.

[dairycreek]

I'm now 69 years old and have carried fro about 45 years now. Why? A long, long time ago I figured that the police just could not be everywhere at the same time. The responsibility for protecting my family was (and is) always mine no matter where we might be at any particular time. So, 45 years ago I started carrying and still do to this day. The laws have changed; customs have changed; attitudes have changed; but my basic responsibility for protecting me and mine has NEVER changed - that's why I carry.

[jmateer]

employers can prohibit licensed concealed-carry.* My current employer certainly does.


So does my employer, but guess what's in my backpack at my feet? My personal safety is more important that my job. As already stated, YOU are responsible for your safety.

"What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?"

Are you serious? Right now there's a serial killer running rampant maybe a mile south of me. Believe me, there are plenty of real threats in the world. Idle, God forbid you're ever in a situation that you need a gun, and all you have is your Leatherman.

[USARSHOE]

I personally feel that if you have gone throught the process of getting a CCW then it is your responsibilty to carry whenever legal able. After working for 20+ in public safety I fully realize that the police are not the public's personal body guards. The majority of the time the PD responds after an incident occurs and their role is to investigate and arrest those responsible. I would have a hard time living with myself if I was in a position to prevent something as simple as a dog attack where a child is either mauled or killed and was unable due to being unarmed. I am by no means paranoid (I rarely lock my doors) but the public has a responsibilty to look out for one another. I feel that I am one of those rare individuals who is not afraid to intervene when another is at risk of being harmed or has been injured and as such I must always have the tools to do whatever is required.

My two cents.

[bigfoot]

...Knives were tools - we all carried them in grade school...


I remember carrying a pocket knife to elementary school one day, which had been given to me by an uncle. When the teacher found out what I had there was a serious call home and a long reprimand.

This was many years ago; I can't even imagine what they would do now. Probably an immediate suspension and freak-out fest. :idiot2:

I agree -- we all have the responsibility to take care of ourselves and our loved ones.

[0dBm]

Cuz I can't sing. :P

[greenLED]

I remember carrying a pocket knife to elementary school one day, which had been given to me by an uncle. When the teacher found out what I had there was a serious call home and a long reprimand.

This was many years ago; I can't even imagine what they would do now.
My son forgot to take his knife out of his pocket one day. Fortunately, he realized that as he was getting off the bus. So, he ran straight to the Principal's Office and turned it in. No reprimand or anything, just an honest mistake. They actually commended him for being honest and straight-forward about this. He's a pretty good kid, so I'm not sure what the response would've been if a "problem" individual would've done something similar.

In any case, I had to pick up the knife myself later on - they wouldn't return it to him (which I can see the reason for).

/highjack

[idleprocess]

I carried a small folding knife every day in high school. I didn't make a big deal of it since it was far more tool than weapon. It was low-profile and stayed in my pocket every day. Maybe it wasn't a big deal because I was never confronted about it ... but that was also going on 15 years ago.

Playing devil's advocate on the "why carry a knife but not a gun" question: because it takes much more effort to kill someone with a knife, and a gun has range greater than your reach. So not only is it more deadly, but given a brief moment of exceptionally poor impulse control there's greater potential for something reprehensible to occur.

Note the qualifier.

[traveler]

I appreciate you playing devil's advocate, idleprocess. Here's my two cents on the subject.Yes, it does take more effort to kill someone with a knife, but if your assailent just got out of prison, for instance,he will know how to do just that: kill you. Now you are in the fight for your life against a seasoned professional with a contact weapon. The gun does have greater range than your knife, and thats the point: simply branishing the weapon can stop most encounters, and if the attacker still poses a threat, keeps advancing, for instance, he will be met with deadly force.As for the impuse control question, the average law-abiding gun owner,IMHO, has enough common sense to know when to draw a gun.I, for one would only point a loaded gun at another human being if my life, or the life of another innocent individual was in grave danger. Unfortunately, there are those that will shoot others for even the most trivial of reasons, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

[raiderrescuer]

I have a CHL...in Oregon there are a lot of times the License trumps local ordinances and allows carry.
Like avoiding the hassle of carrying ammo and gun seperate and locked on the way to the range.
Or in the case of a jacket over a Hunting Handgun.

[TimB]

Hi everyone,

This is my first post other than a brief introduction.

I carry to protect myself, my loved ones, and the innocent.* I also carry because I truly believe that we alone are responsible for our own security, and as an American I believe this is the way the Founding Fathers indended it to be.

I regret the fact that my State (California) ignores this Right and is not "shall issue" with regard to CCW.* Furthermore, I am deeply ashamed that the voters in this State have allowed this to happen.* I think the world would be a better place if "Vermont carry" were the rule.

It pains me to see bad people do unkind things to others simply because they feel they can.* (I'm a law enforcement officer and I see lots of this.)* I wish more folks would take responsibility for their own safety, and I'd like to see the criminal element acquire a healthy fear of the general public.

-Tim

Edit:* Forgot to specify that my State is California.

[Badgerboy]

Besides the reasons given above, all valid and true; I would like to include one of the best written articales about concealed carry (or any kind of carry for that matter).* This was printed in the July/Aug issue of American Handgunner and was written by columnist John Conner - who has lived in many dark places.* It goes like :

“Why do you carry a gun?”



If I had a nickel for every time I’ve been asked that question, I’d have, uh … as many guns as his firearm-festooned Editorial Immenseness, Roy-Boy.* It’s been asked of me by all flavors of folks in all slices of society, with attitudes and expressions ranging from angry-arrogant to curtly-contemptuous, to brainless an’ befuddled.* My answers to it have sorta formed three phases in my professional gun-carrying life.* During that first and longest phase, I answered all of ’em sincerely and articulately, often following up with stacks of historic and legal documents.* After many years, I concluded only a semi-significant sliver of people even heard what I was sayin’.* The rest had already made up their muddled minds.

Finally, I just got sick of it, and moved on to Phase 2.* If those asking seemed to have teensy open spaces in their minds, I gave ’em S & A: “Sincere & Articulate.”* The more harshly-bleating sheep, however, often got exchanges like this:

“So,” queried Snidely Snotworth III, lookin’ down his un-busted but needed-bustin’ nose, “Why do you think you have to carry a gun?”

“Well,” bellowed the Brutish Neanderthal (that would be me): “Because you’re not QUALIFIED to carry one. You haven’t got the skills, the judgment, the sense of responsibility, or the courage for it.”

This answer often popped out after I’d just returned from some Heart-Of-Darkness where every living soul knew that the difference between slaves and free people is having the means and determination to defend their lives, property and liberties. That meant having guns and guts and God-given rights.* Most of those people would quite literally die fighting for the freedoms so many Americans casually give away, and proudly bear social responsibilities those ******** won’t even recognize.

********: Sheep-like people, many of whom deny the existence of wolves, and vote to pull the teeth of the sheepdogs who protect the flock.

The Voices

Then I matriculated to Phase 3, where I started having some fun with the Snidely Snotworth types.* When they asked the Big Question, I’d go all hunchy-shouldered an’ secretive, then lean in close and mutter, “Because of the voices, ya know?”*

“The VOICES?” sniveled the Snidelies, suddenly scaredy-cattish.

“Oh, yeah, the voices … They told me to be, you know, prepared for when the killer clowns come … ” I’d furtively goggle around. “The voices say the killer clowns are comin’ … They’re cannibals, some of ’em, and … ”

About that time the Snidelies would be skitterin’ away like mice on polished marble.

Yeah, I know, the “killer clowns” answer might not have been “helpful,” but it did just as much good as giving S&A answers to the *******, and it was a lot more fun for me.* I know you already know why we carry these cannons.* But sometimes, just sometimes, we all need a little reminder.* That includes me, and I’ve got one to share with you.* One that got me where I live.

The Connor Clan has been nomadic, and we’ve lived in a number of places.* In one of ’em, we shared a side yard and friendship with a young woman we’ll call Miss Maine, and her knee-high daughter, Little Lizzie.* Miss Maine quickly bonded with the Memsaab Helena.* Clearly, Helena’s Amazon-warrior spirit and skill with arms impressed Miss Maine mightily, and much of their time and talk revolved around that fierce self-confidence — and guns.

As for Little Lizzie, the munchkin almost duct-taped herself to the Mem’s leg.* She followed Helena everywhere, but always, always, kept glancing back to check on her momma, as though she were the worried parent.

There was something guarded, something hurt and defensive about both of them, and that fearfulness extended to me for a while.* They got over it, thank God.* Then I sorta became a moving bunker for ’em, representing cover and protection.* Finally, we learned the story.

Miss Maine had been attacked — brutally and viciously.* You don’t wanta know the details.* As with so many such crimes, it wasn’t really about sex.* It was about hate and domination, cowardice and cruelty.* And an even younger Little Lizzie had witnessed it.* I like to think the Memsaab and I helped them to recover emotionally.

Then one day Lizzie came and snuggled into my shadow, visibly disturbed.* That morning her kindergarten had put on “Frighten The Munchkins Day.”* Some schools do a pretty good job of alerting children to predators — don’t go with strangers and that kinda thing — but others do more harm than good.* All they do is terrify the tots and give ’em no operating options.* Lizzie already had twin tears glistening, ready to fall when she grabbed a tiny fistful of my trouser-leg and asked, “Connor-Sir, will you a’ways be here?* Wouldja be here … When the bad mens come?”

My knees cracked on the sidewalk as she slammed into my shoulder, shaking with sobs as the hot tears came, splashing my neck and searing into my soul. “ ’Cause I’m a-scared!” she choked, and clutched me tighter.

Oh, GOD! Who would not — who could not — fight without fear, suffer without sense of sacrifice, and kill or die deliberately, using the most effective means available — to protect life, liberty and a Little Lizzie?* For God’s sake, who?

Those who would not are no better than the predators.

Maybe in Phase 4, when somebody pops The Big Question I’ll just smile and say, “For life, liberty and Little Lizzie.”* You guys can fill in the details.

Enjoy, Cliff

Permission to re-print this article appeared in the September / October 2005 issue of American Handgunner, Speak Out column.
The link to where I found the article : http://www.handgunrepairshop.com/Why_do_you_carry_a_gun.html

[greenLED]

BadgerBoy, if that piece was published, it may fall under copyright restrictions by quoting it in its entirity. If you could please just provide a link to the original source, or quote and excerpt, that be most appreciated.
Thank you,
:gl:


Oh, and, it's a great piece of writing - can't agree more.

[Badgerboy]

Added reprint permission statement and link to where I originally found the atricle from a websearch.

Cliff

[greenLED]

Thank you, Badgerboy.

[Loonatick]

It has probably already been said here but here goes, I carry for preservation of self and family.
It is better to have and not need than need and not have. I find that situational awareness goes a looooong way in keeping me and loved ones safe.

[rb25_sil80]

I don't yet carry.* But I live in Texas the "friendly state."* The reputation came from the fact that in the 1800's nearly everyone carried.* You were polite to others because to be loud and ovnoxious or even dangerous was to invite a possibly permanent "attitude adjustment."

Just a thought for the next time you see people acting like hellions (or worse) in public.



Happy to say ive never even seen a gun in lil old Australia. Let alone the need to actually own one. If you get into a fight here, someone gets a black eye, get into a fight in the states and someone dies.

So I dont carry because theres no need.

edited for content

[Gadget Guy]

:)


GG

[scríbhneoir]

Happy to say ive never even seen a gun in lil old Australia. Let alone the need to actually own one. If you get into a fight here, someone gets a black eye, get into a fight in the states and someone dies.

So I dont carry because theres no need.


While one may disagree with others' points of view, name calling is unnecessary, unwarranted, and unacceptable.* Keep it civil, please.

Karen
:pp:

[Lunal_Tic]

Anyone interested in researching more the concealed carry verses more crime aspect might want to check out this book and the accompanying data. More Guns, Less Crime by John R. Lott, Jr. (http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html)

-LT

[tvodrd]

I can't legally carry in CA without jumping thru too many hoops, and so don't. I am able to keep two 1911s within reach in my home. :) (Socked-away a bunch of "Black Talon" befpre Winchester pulled it off the market thanks to Schumer. :)

Larry

[0dBm]

Happy to say ive never even seen a gun in lil old Australia. Let alone the need to actually own one. If you get into a fight here, someone gets a black eye, get into a fight in the states and someone dies.

So I dont carry because theres no need.

edited for content


You are apparently fortunate enough that you can confidently say that about where you reside. As a husband and a father to a young girl while living in one of the most populous areas of the continental United States, I truly envy you. I don't live in a particularly crime-ridden area and few, if any, reasons compel me to own a firearm other than the knowledge that just 20 minutes up the road can be a bit "rough."

I must admit that the media and the pop culture have painted a jaundiced picture of the rough areas that I speak. Such fastidious portraiture of the sort sell many magazines, newspapers, and movie tickets. From these few snapshots, the rest of the world has, long ago, obviously formed a tainted image of what can be a very violent American society.

I didn't have an agenda when I decided to post this. It wasn't meant to be a direct reply to your post, although I did quote you. I didn't see the entirety of the original post and I don't know if there were parts of it that were edited. I don't entirely see it in its present content as "name calling."

Now that you have foretold us of your Shangri-La, please tell us more. I see that it is your first post and no one has welcomed you. Allow me to be the first.

Tell us about your EDC. Pics, as always, are highly encouraged.

[0dBm]

Yes, I missed that part. It must have been a very strong emotion that was being expressed; especially in the form of a first post.

[Gadget Guy]

<BAITING COMMENTS...removed.>

[Lunal_Tic]

0dBm and GG,

The name calling part has been edited so let's just go from there.

-LT
:gz:

[Deaths Head]

.

[GPE427]

Besides all the above posted statements, ...protecting one's self and family and friends ...excersising constitutional rights (I believe WE ARE THE WELL REGULATED MILITIA) ...and preventing crime.

I carry for two other reasons.

The possibility of injuring an animal with a vehicle.

As a signalling device (Three rapid shots equals a SOS)

I really don't believe anybody NEEDS a gun, I certainly don't need an AK, and I certainly don't NEED a bayonet lug on it, or 30 round magazines, but they sell them to almost anybody, so I have 'em.

Nobody NEEDS a gun, but when you do, you need one REAL BAD!

[Goldtanker]

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l63/Goldtanker/billrite.jpg

[LowWorm]

:lolhammer: Goldtanker!

[scríbhneoir]

rb25_sil80,

Check your PMs, re: EDC Forums' Code of Conduct.

Karen :pp:

[VinnyP]

......

[Lee1959]

Vinny, I think most people who carry a firearm, generally consider it a part of an overall defensive system, plan, whatever you wish to call it. Quite naturally, there are times when it is not possible, nor advisable to draw a firearm, during those times, one must have other options, and have trained in other options. I carry, train, and use multiple options, including hand to hand, a walking stick, and various other options. The biggest and baddest option of all, is the will to survive couple with the human brain, always.

A firearm, like any tool is not a magic wand, and does not solve every situation. But, if used correctly, in the right circumstance, can save my, or someone elses life, which is the reason I carry and train with one.

[Lunal_Tic]

...does carrying a firearm for self defence make matters better or worse?


Vinny, I posted this link above but thought you might find it interesting, at least regarding your last question. More Guns, Less Crime by John R. Lott, Jr. (http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html)


-LT

[VinnyP]

I.....

[Lunal_Tic]

Hi Vinny,

If you have the opportunity to read the entire book you might find it interesting. Excerpts and promotional interviews seldom give a complete picture. It's been a while since I read the book but IIRC the author is an economist by trade, a number cruncher and the book is ostensively the distillation of the data that he could acquire on the subject. The appendix was quite thorough as well allowing for additional research into his conclusion, something I have found missing in other projects.

-LT

[0dBm]

Are you really sure that your chances of needing it are really more than the chances of being in a situation where it could make matteres worse?


Vinny,

This is the VERY first decision that anyone absolutely needs to make about a defensive firearm. When I lived in a state where I was licensed to carry a firearm, I always carried it concealed with the thought that it is the VERY LAST method that I would deploy in a self-preservation circumstance. Having said that, I have never deployed a firearm or any other method or implement for self-defense.

My answer to your question above is an unequivocal YES!

[Lee1959]

Using statisitics is a very dicey proposition at best. They always have a built in error factor, and they can be swayed to one point of view or another by selecting target population, or asking specific questions. Sometimes the questions not asked are just as important, but not shown in statistics.

In statistics such as mentioned above, they are collected from crimes, usually violent crimes. They do not reflect crimes not committed, or better yet prevented, nor do they reflect the group that carries firearms, as part of their overall lifestyle. A lifestyle which also includes their being more situationally aware, and not getting into situations where a crime may be commited, call this crime avoidance perhaps.

Take someone like myself, I carry a pistol and in so doing, I am not allowed legally to carry it into any place that serves alcohol, therefore I seldom, if ever go to places that serve alcohol, and never carry there. Therefore, I do not put myself into the situation where I meet Joe Jerk who is drunk and mad at the world, or at the mercies of those predators who hang out in bars waiting for a likely victim out in the dark parking lot. Or simply traveling in certain areas later at night after bars close when predators are out.

Also, as far as crime statistics are concerned, the collection is heavily biased by sheer numbers, which is what statistics are. Unfortunately certain racial groups (sorry not trying to put a racial spin on anything), income groups, education level groups, and urban communities heavily outweight others by sheer numbers, thus effecting the outcome of those statistics towards what is occuring in those areas. To put the results of said statistics on any other group is simply invalid science, or mathmatics however you wish to look at it.

Some might be able to make a claim that statiscally, the average citizen may be more stable, and able to make pressure descions, than some police officers. If their major source of information was statistics concerning alcohol use, divorce rates, suicide rates, and other thigns caused by stressors and used as a sole determining factor. That would of course be ludicrous, but perhaps as valid as putting statistics on other groups not collected on those groups.

[traveler]

Quote by VinnyP:
* you need at least 10 yards of seperation from an opponent without a drawn firearm and need to be out of effective range of someone who has got one already drawn.

First off, hello VinnyP and welcome to EDCF.

I was curious about this phrase. Is this doctrine taught to police in England? I mean to say that* distance is crucial in this type of situation,naturaly, but there are plenty of instances where a gun is drawn in closer proximity than 30 feet and the person defending still wins the altercation.

[Handyman]

I missed this thread and asked this question elsewhere. I respect your right to carry but are your sure it reduces the risk not increases it? I am from the UK and in law enforcement and at work frequently carry a handgun. This is unusual over here. Law enforcement is different I am obliged to go the assistance of others and to intervene with someone who may be armed this is not self defence. I know the law is different but if I was allowed to carry one as a civilian no matter what the crime level or level of firearms usage I just think a handgun is a very poor self defence weapon, if I was seriously considering a self defence firearm it would be a wrist mounted derringer affair a-la Travis Bikle and we all know what happened to him.

Yes it's great as an offensive weapon and as a retailiatory weapon but when faced by a threat if your weapon is holstered (which it usually is) if you are very good and don't panic in the heat of the moment, you need at least 10 yards of seperation from an opponent without a drawn firearm and need to be out of effective range of someone who has got one already drawn. In those cases nearly always the best self defence is the 100yd dash screaming wildly.

We see time and time again well equiped and highly trained individuals coming up second because real "self defence" nearly always only kicks in once an attack has begun and, except in the movies, the first blow, stab wound or shot is completely unexpected and does connect with sufficient ferocity that it's rare that anything will help. All our self defence training now is based on surving/recovering from being hit by surprise. If confronted by a mugger armed with a knife or gun in order to draw a weapon you have to create enough time and space to do that, in attempting to make that time the risk of being shot or stabbed is much more than just handing over the wallett car etc. In circumstances like this carrying a weapon just means you are more likely to provoke the mugger into attacking you or even adding to his arsenal.

I really don't want to upset people and am not crusading to try and change peoples views. I certainly don't think gun control has much impact on the criminal use of firearms but does carrying a firearm for self defence make matters better or worse?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * :lolhammer:* * * Are you really a UK LEO or just someone playing a joke ?* If you are real then I 'd say the PTB in the UK* have done a good job of brainwashing you .* *I'm not sure where or how to begin to respond to the absolutely rediculous statements you made . *I'll just ask one question . You say the best defence would be the 100 yd. dash . What about people like me who can't do the 100 yd dash [ I have bad knees ] ?

[scríbhneoir]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * :lolhammer:* * * Are you really a UK LEO or just someone playing a joke ?* If you are real then I 'd say the PTB in the UK* have done a good job of brainwashing you .* *I'm not sure where or how to begin to respond to the absolutely rediculous statements you made . *I'll just ask one question . You say the best defence would be the 100 yd. dash . What about people like me who can't do the 100 yd dash [ I have bad knees ] ?


Handyman,

EDCForum guidelines (http://edcforums.com/index.php?topic=2169.0).

Let's keep it civil, please.

Thanks,
Karen

:pp:

[VinnyP]

.....

[VinnyP]

Here if you shoot someone it's a last resort, and you have to show it was the only available option. If we assume for a minute that the law allowed concealed weapons for protection then, if I was acting in self defence, I'd have to show 2 things. Firstly that it was necessary for me to defend myself, secondly that it was necessary to shoot them. If I can run away then it wasn't necessary to defend myself. I'm sorry to hear about your knees, I did say NEARLY allways, but of course in your case running may not be an option you need to consider. I still maintain avoiding a fight and that includes running away is a viable self defence option

[Malcontent]

I am not convinced as you can see but I don't have the experience of the members of this site. I read a lot of people who are willing to take responsibility for the protection of themselves and their families and I admire that, but aside from the (hopefully extreme) example of the nut in the restaurant, I haven't seen any examples of where having a concealed weapon in the street helps. Also no arguments against my fear that having one on more occasions would make matters worse. That's what I was hoping to illicit or even better real incidents where it helped and nothing else would have done the job.


I would recommend you join the NRA. Their monthly publication has a section called the Armed Citizen where they list documented cases where a firearm was successfully used in self defense.

Some text from the NRA Publications website.
"Studies indicate that firearms are used more than 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances. Shooting usually can be justified only where crime constitutes an immediate, imminent threat to life, limb, or, in some cases, property. Anyone is free to quote or reproduce these accounts, which are condensed from individual newspaper clippings" Source (http://www.nrapublications.org/armed%20citizen/Index.asp)

The 100 yard defense is certainly an option for some people in some situations, but it isn't always available to everyone in every situation. Regarding your 10 yards of seperation, there is an exercise that is taught where someone stands 7 yards away with a trainer knife, and at the sound, you have to draw and fire your dummy weapon before the trainer knife touchs your person. This is very difficult to do, as it takes only about 1.5 seconds for the average person to travel the 7 yards. Add in the stress factor of the situation (adrenaline rush, tunnel vision, etc), without training, most likely it isn't going to happen. However, if someone is coming at me with a knife, I am not going to stand still.

A firearm is simply a tool, nothing more. It isn't the holy grail of self defense. That title goes to the mindset of the individual.

[VinnyP]

Thanks for the post and it looks like some bad people are off the streets as the result of the actions of others which is to be applauded, But of the examples there is only one which concerned a concealed handgun in the street all the others were where the gun was in a building. The one where it was a help was more helped by the terminally stupid criminals who let the victim keep a .40 in his pocket throughout. I see the figures and 2 million is a lot I just wonder how many involved the defender carrying a concealed firearm, if a ofll them needed a firearm, and if something less lethal would have helped just as well.

For example even amongst the examples there; the guy who shot the crow bar weilding attacker might have been as well served with pepper spray as might the guy who shot the burglar with a rifle (or even better locks). No tears shed here for any of those shot (except the victim who confronted the bogus gas employees) and there is no way the shooters could have known what they were up against at the time so definitely no critism either.

[VinnyP]

Posted in error

[Malcontent]

It is easy to armchair quarterback Sunday's game on Monday. The link provided only shows a few examples. The publication shows many on a monthly basis.
The decision to carry, or not, is up should be up to the individual.

[Lee1959]

For example even amongst the examples there; the guy who shot the crow bar weilding attacker might have been as well served with pepper spray as might the guy who shot the burglar with a rifle (or even better locks). No tears shed here for any of those shot (except the victim who confronted the bogus gas employees) and there is no way the shooters could have known what they were up against at the time so definitely no critism either.

It would seem that instead of your open mind you have alluded to, no matter what example or arguement that is given to you, you will argue against. In your opinion they would still be as well off with pepper spray, which is your opinion just as others may have different. That is the good thing about the U.S. everyone is entitled to speak their opinion. It is rather obvious that you are simply arguing against arguements under the guise of wanting to hear the other side. Perhaps it would be better to say that you are against it, period, as is obviously the case, and we all agree to disagree, rather than keep up the facade.

After all, we do not ask everyone to believe as we do, and I hope you would do the same :).

[VinnyP]

I am not arguing against anyone unless you disagree that they could probably have managed with pepper spray in those 2 examples, in the others I do agree a firearm was by far the best option so I hope I am being even handed.

From the outset I asked for some evidence or examples that would support the fact that EDCing a firearm away from the home or car would have benefits that outweigh the problems. I look to everything I carry to do that, balancing weight, against the amount of use and benefits against disadvanatages. A hangun of any use would be heavier than anything else I EDC. A handgun as well as in many circumstances presenting a potential threat to me, would cause real problems in gyms, bars, airports swimming baths etc etc and no one here who vocally supports the carrying of them has mentioned so far ever having to use one in anger. I was pointed to a number of examples and just pointed out that only one of them involved EDC handguns.Even in that one if they had meant him harm from the outset it would have done him no good.

I am sorry you think I don't have an open mind. I certainly agree you are entitled to your opinion and even more so as regards the carrying of firearms in the US since clearly your experiences make it more relevant than anything I say sitting in front of a keyboard.

I am not trying to convince anyone. It is your right to do anything your laws allow. I do try to have an open mind but so far have been given 2 very rare situations where an EDC firearm has been of use to anyone, I know of many where it would be a positive liability and have given examples of the same which no one has disagreed with (I of course don't take silence as agreement). If I was convinced by such a limited argument I don't think that would be consistent of having an open mind.

[Malcontent]

In response to your mention of pepper spray, a search on Google turns up numerous reports, some by police departments, where pepper spray was found to be ineffective. While it might deter the happenstance opportunist, I don’t believe it effective against an experienced and/or determined criminal.

It appears that you are looking for empirical data where the use of a firearm, carried concealed, prevented that person from losing their life. I really don’t think you can get data, that granular, on a forum. Most likely, this would come from researching individual cases and interviewing the person in question. That is IF they were willing to discuss it, and I am guessing that most would not.

[VinnyP]

In response to your mention of pepper spray, a search on Google turns up numerous reports, some by police departments, where pepper spray was found to be ineffective. While it might deter the happenstance opportunist, I don’t believe it effective against an experienced and/or determined criminal.


As an aside pepper spray is technically 100% effective if it is used correctly, no matter how experienced or determined anyone is, however that's a misleading figure used by the manufacturers since to use it correctly involves hitting the eyes. Miss and it's much less effective and that's where your far more realistic assesment comes in. I take your point about data and individual accounts and have no wish to monopolise this thread or cause anyone offence so I'll happily move on.

[Lunal_Tic]

As an aside pepper spray is technically 100% effective if it is used correctly, no matter how experienced or determined anyone is, however that's a misleading figure used by the manufacturers since to use it correctly involves hitting the eyes. Miss and it's much less effective and that's where your far more realistic assesment comes in. I take your point about data and individual accounts and have no wish to monopolise this thread or cause anyone offence so I'll happily move on.


It's been a while since I've read the articles about the effectiveness on drugged, intoxicated, or mentally deranged attackers but a quick search on Google for "pepper spray intoxicated drug ineffective" turned up several pieces about the less than 100% effectiveness of Pepper Spray.* IIRC there are also videos online showing test subjects "fighting through" the effects of the spray.* These items would seem to lend some credibility to the lower effectiveness of the spray. A detailed search may turn up more useful information for you.

Also it would seem to be considerably less effective against more than one attacker particularly as a deterrent to the others if you managed to hit one effectively since you would lose the surprise element allowing them to block the spray.

As far as moving along, there isn't really any need.* Good discussions cause people to think and thinking gives an edge that stacks the deck in your favor.* Sometimes discussions like these are hard to have without a lot of excess baggage attached but when they move along well, a lot of useful information can be gleaned from them.

I trust you will find other parts of the forums of interest and look to see you posting there as well.

Cheers,
-LT

[Lawrence]

Thanks for the post and it looks like some bad people are off the streets as the result of the actions of others which is to be applauded, But of the examples there is only one which concerned a concealed handgun in the street all the others were where the gun was in a building. The one where it was a help was more helped by the terminally stupid criminals who let the victim keep a .40 in his pocket throughout. I see the figures and 2 million is a lot I just wonder how many involved the defender carrying a concealed firearm, if a ofll them needed a firearm, and if something less lethal would have helped just as well.

For example even amongst the examples there; the guy who shot the crow bar weilding attacker might have been as well served with pepper spray as might the guy who shot the burglar with a rifle (or even better locks). No tears shed here for any of those shot (except the victim who confronted the bogus gas employees) and there is no way the shooters could have known what they were up against at the time so definitely no critism either.



Vinny

There are quite a few cases where pepper spray doesn't always work. As a newspaper reporter, I see these incidents fairly often.


If gun control is such a good idea, then why do all law enforcement officers I know always carry a handgun even when off duty and not required to do so?

[Co_Outdoorsman]

Simple...

I live in a county with 6 deputies (3 days, 3 nights) and the response time is a tad to long...

Great folks Protect and Serve this county but they cannot be everywhere at all times...

[dyyys1]

I take your point about data and individual accounts and have no wish to monopolise this thread or cause anyone offence so I'll happily move on.


Actually, I think your posts may have been some of the most valuable in this thread so far. O0 The best way to stimulate useful discussion on this sort of topic is by putting together two parties who can peacefully disagree. I am glad you are here. Some people resort to emotional, generalized, misinformed, superficial, or malicious statements when confronted with someone who doesn't agree with them, as has happened many times in this thread. However, please do not let these people keep you away from this discussion. No one has any right to be offended by what you have said. If anyone has a right to be offended it's you.

Back on topic: I am 18 so I can't get a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but I am thinking about applying for one when I can. This thread is very interesting to me. Really, i think the best answer to these questions would be reliable statistics, and that is something I've never found. Most statistics seem to be skewed to favor the view of whoever is citing them. I agree that the possession of a handgun can worsen (or cause) bad situations, but most of the time this can be prevented by only drawing a handgun when it will help, keeping it hidden otherwise. Part of being responsible with a handgun (or any other tool) is knowing when to keep it out of the situation. The only exception to this is some kind of surprise attack leaving you lying on the ground and leaving the attacker with a gun that he found concealed on your person. This situation is much less common than others where a firearm is helpful to have around. However, it is a reasonable concern when considering carrying a handgun. Concerning the usefulness of a handgun over some other weapon for self defense, it seems that your main problems with a handgun are the time it takes to draw it, its ineffectiveness in countering a surprise attack, and the risk of injury or death from escalating a situation by presenting a weapon of your own. The first two concerns apply equally to any self defense tool you don't already have in your hand when the attack occurs. Sometimes you have to resort to fists and feet even if you have a gun on your belt. The only reliable way to combat a surprise attack or a situation that is too close to draw a weapon is to avoid the situation. Situational awareness, peaceful resolutions, and avoiding places where bad situations occur all come into play here. Of course, running is always the best solution if you can get away with it, but this is not a viable option for every person or in every situation. The third problem also applies to most self defense weapons and goes back to the issue of when to draw your weapon. In a nutshell, only draw as a last resort and only draw when it will help your situation more than it will hurt it. Escalation is a dangerous thing, but sometimes escalation is necessary. The victim isn't always the one who escalates, either. If there is a situation where I must use a weapon, I want the most effective weapon available, and it seems to me that a handgun fits the bill. Most other weapons are either impractical or have limited success in a self defense situation. In contrast, a well placed shot from a handgun is more effective than any other edc-able self defense weapon. In addition, one of the most useful things about a handgun is the intimidation factor. If a victim presents a handgun, only the most determined, confident, or intoxicated attacker will continue to attack; most will high-tail it the moment they lose control of the situation.

[fubar]

Vinnie is speaking of the Tueller Drill , I believe. Where it is shown that a man can sprint 21 feet and hack a cop faster than he can unholster and fire. It's true. It's also wrong - here's what I mean : I tested it for myself. If I treat it like a race - me unholstering and trying to fire with a weaver stance I lose. If I treat it like a fight[i] and [i]move while being charged I can consistantly get 2 head shots off from contact range , without getting cut. Hand gun fight trainers are all aware of these force on force drills. And how to teach the shooter to win. Vinnie was exposed to the "Scary warning about overconfidance" part of the speech , but someone forgot to show him how to go on and overcome the situation.

As for crime and statistics ... useless argument. Every country uncluding the UK and Aus. have proven that restricting the firearms of law abiding citizens INcreases violent crime. And here in the States we have also proven it over and over with no exceptions - fewer gun laws equals less crime.

All the rest is political posturing.

[powernoodle]

I carry all of the time, everywhere its legal. Its just a matter of being prepared. Same reason we carry SAKs and prybars and tweezers. I never want to be in the position of wish I was able to defend myself and my family, and not being able to. For me, there is no downside to carrying a gun and never needing it, just as there is no downside to carrying a SAK and never needing it.

peace

[VinnyP]

....

[Lunal_Tic]

Gun laws only affect the law abiding.* I remember a bumper sticker from my youth that said "When guns are outlawed only Outlaws will have guns."* It would likely be very difficult to argue that persons intent on committing crimes would be overly concerned with the legality of gun ownership.

As for the figures regarding gun carry and declines in violent crimes check the book from my post above.

-LT

[VinnyP]

Gun laws only affect the law abiding.*

I completely agree it will always be possible for even a slightly determined criminal to get hold of a whole array of weapons, you can't unring the bell. If they changed the constitution in the US then, I imagine, a good number of the lawfully owned weapons would not simply dissappear and the cost of compensating all the owners would be crippling for any adminisitration that went that way. It was expensive enough over here.

However the other side is lawfully owned weapons in the hands of people who had never been convicted before worldwide still end up either falling into criminal hands or being used in crime by their owners. But the same could be argued for bread knives. There is a distinction handguns were designed to kill people and they are very good at it. Breadknives whilst good at killing were desgned for more mundane thingswhich is why over here you couldn't carry one in the steet without a good reason.

As crime figures include illegal possession of firearms. If it's legal you'd expect crime figures to be much lower in countries which allow it but the fact they are actually much higher is interesting.

[Lunal_Tic]

I found the following article (http://www.washingtonpolicy.org/GovtRegulations/OP_EDgunownershipmay2006.htm) from John Barnes of the Washington Policy Center to be interesting.* Here are some exerpts:


* In 1997 Britain banned handguns, and between 1998 and 2003 gun crimes doubled.
* According the British Home Office, between 1997 and 2001 homicides increased by 19 percent and violent crime increased by 26 percent; meanwhile, in the United States, those same crimes fell by 12 percent.
* Between 2000 and 2001, robbery increased by 28 percent in Britain but only 4 percent in the United States. Domestic burglary increased by 7 percent in Britain, but only 3 percent in the United States.
* In 1996 Australia enacted sweeping gun control laws. In the six years following, violent crime rates rose by 32 percent.
* Canada isn't faring well under its stringent gun control laws. Today Canada's violent crime rate is more than double the rate in the United States.

The fact that during this time right-to-carry laws were expanding in the U.S. makes these statistics all the more telling. Now 40 states allow citizens to carry guns. Violent crime rates are steadily declining in the U.S.

-LT

[VinnyP]

One of the reasons crime increases is if you make something illegal that was legal. So of course gun crime and crime increased it wasn't illegal before. The classification rules for robberies changed in crime counting in the UK and are completely different to the US now. In the UK if one schoolkid takes the mobile of another that is now robbery, as is a bag snatch. They never used to be hence the alarming increase. I am sure there has been an increase but not on that scale. That is also why crime will fall in states which legalise carying firearms. Illegal posssession of a handgun or weapon and robbery are "violent crimes". So an increse in these will show as an increase in violent crime. Have no doubt it is increasing but the incidents are not up to the same degree. The figures that matter are "crimes against the person" for people who actually got attacked, but using them wouldn't support the authors argument. If we legalise drugs, fireams, prostitution and weapons our crime figures would plummett but that wouldn't necessarily mean we had a safer society just what was illegal is legal. I am not sure about those figures either. Domestic burglary has significantly fallen in the UK and Canada has a lower level of violent crime than the US.

From the same article

There is another side to stories about guns. In 1990 a group of gang members pulled a Seattle man from his bicycle and beat him. He used his legally-registered handgun to shoot one of the assailants and stop the attack. In 2002 a West Seattle woman shot an intruder who had broken into her home and was beating her roommate. In 2003 an elderly Tacoma man confined to his bed shot an intruder who had kicked in his door and attacked him. In 2004 a Spokane woman awoke one morning to discover an intruder in her house, whom she held at gunpoint until the police arrived. In all of these cases, if it were not for the legal use of guns in self-defense, the victims would likely be dead.

Again some good examples covering a 14 year period and again only one example where concealed carrying was justified and that from 16 years ago. The others were all people armed at home. Incidentally if the burglar in Spokane had tried to escape what could the woman have done?

All along I keep saying I think banning firearms in the US would be almost impossible but even if it's legal is EDC of a handgun worth it?

[Lunal_Tic]

. . . is EDC of a handgun worth it?

Just an observation, part of the effectiveness of the concealed carry laws against violent crime isn't that everyone is packing but that the BGs don't know who's packing and are more inclined to move on to easier targets.* So in this case, most definitely it's worth having the option to carry even to those who don't since both those that carry and those that don't benefit from the lower crime rates.

-LT

[plblark]

Again some good examples covering a 14 year period and again only one example where concealed carrying was justified and that from 16 years ago. The others were all people armed at home. Incidentally if the burglar in Spokane had tried to escape what could the woman have done?

All along I keep saying I think banning firearms in the US would be almost impossible but even if it's legal is EDC of a handgun worth it?


There are several sites tha collect Self defense cases. A couple recent ones I can remember off the top of my head:

1) Seattle... Random crazy guy beats random person.. Tuens out victim has CCW and shoots attacker.
2) Saint Paul, MN... Just yesterday. Man attempts to rob convenience store. Clerk hears click in man's pocket where robber says he ahs a gun. Clerk draws and fires... Clerk is still alive.

Additionally, Most Defensive Gun Uses don't involve shots fired. Sometimes the presence of a gun is enough. My isttructor has drawn 3 times and not fired a shot.
1) gang of robbers in his home. One came into the bedroom.. Loud bellow of "I have a Gun!" Robbers RAN
2) Stalker in home. Stalker held at gunpoint for police
3) Attempted robbery of Gun store ... Store Owner and Instructor drew. Robbers fled.

In MN, we're at ?49 Homicides on the year. Burglaries near the UofM are up 367%. There have been a rash of severe beatings and muggins near there as well.


is EDC worth it? each must answer for themself. I have a wife and 2 kids. Retreat is not an option. I can't run and leave them and they're not terribly mobilre , ya know... So, I avoid trouble, I'm vigilant (as in aware), and I'm prepared. I pray NEVER to use it but would not hesitate if My life or the lives of my family were in danger.

[kwg020]

I'm a School Resorce Officer. Only one person in the building should be armed and that person is me. kwg

[Malcontent]

I'm a School Resorce Officer.* Only one person in the building should be armed and that person is me.* kwg


Please don't take this question the wrong way, but I am curious as to why you think you should be the only one armed?

[plblark]

I'm a School Resorce Officer. Only one person in the building should be armed and that person is me. kwg


What about those schools that don't have ANY armed presence (officially)

[CanDo]

i have 5 reasons why i carry. my wife and three sons. and because it is my right. as far as the last reason goes, a lot of people may think i'm some sort of nut. well, they are entitled to their opinion. but hey, the second amendment, and the state of massachusetts say i can. so i do.


Very good reasons :)
If you happen to still check this site, how was getting a carry permit in MA. As that I live here, it interests me very much, but I've heard that you need to have 'very good' (life in danger) reasons for the state to approve you...

[dyyys1]

I'll leave the final decision to the moderators, but I would like this thread to get back on topic. I am interested in discussing gun laws, but I am also interested in discussing reasons to carry. Perhaps this thread should be split and the posts about carry laws should be moved to another thread. Thanks, Mods.

[fubar]

Very good reasons :)
If you happen to still check this site, how was getting a carry permit in MA. As that I live here, it interests me very much, but I've heard that you need to have 'very good' (life in danger) reasons for the state to approve you...


It's not the State here in MA.( I'm on the North Shore). it's the local/town Chief of Police. Marblehead gives them to Anyone , Salem gives them to No one , Boston is corrupt. Unfair system. Ask your local police.

[dinoadventures]

1) Seattle... Random crazy guy beats random person..

That one happened to my brother a few weeks ago. He was accosted by some random dudes. Soon as I get out of this rediculous state of NJ I'll look into getting one of those nice 1911 variants to keep such people where they belong.

[idleprocess]

I haven't checked in here for several months and I'm surprised to see that this thread is still going. I'm somewhat disappointed that this has become a gun rights vs gun control debate, but it's been civil and informative.

I recently exercised my second amendment rights and obtained a Glock 17 (http://idleprocess.net/img/glock01.jpg). I may persue a concealed carry license someday, but quite likely not carrying that particular gun.

I expect that in the event I need to use a gun in self-defense, it will be within my home. Property crime is so much more likely than violent crime against my person. Given the particulars of my home, I should have enough warning of any forced break-in to retrieve and ready my weapon.

I also expect that I will use the gun almost exclusively for putting down the ongoing paper-target insurrection overwhelming gun ranges everywhere ;D

[PX]

Because it's a habit..
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_5833.jpg

I've got approximately 40 years seniority now at cc and I don't want to lose it!

Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[TKC]

I carry a gun because I believe in protecting myself & my family. The Police can not be everywhere. I carry a gun, because it is my right.

[RGNY]

i carry because criminals have guns, and as a law abiding citizen i should be allowed to be as well armed as the predators.

[longwatch]

I carry because it is my right to provide for my own defense, I can't carry a cop and I can't throw rocks at 1300 feet per second.

[jtice]

I am just days away from getting my CCW, just waiting on the paper work.

This is something I have wanted to do for a long time, I never really had to think about IF I wanted to carry a gun, I always have.
Its just one of those things, some ppl understand it, some think its just completely retarded to carry a gun.

Most ppl dont think anything real bad will ever happen to them, and they may be right.
So, they dont see a reason to protect themselves with a gun.

its not really that I am paranoid, and think something bad is gonna happen, but you never know.
Thats one thing that bothers me, the ppl that dont understand it always have that mentality of, "you will never need that, thats just silly to want to carry a deadly weapon, do you WANT to kill someone?"

Why would I WANT to kill someone?
hell, even if I am in the right, and killed a guy before he killed me or a loved one, the way the laws are nowadays, his mother might sue me!
When it comes down to it, even I think I will never have to use the gun.
I will probably carry a gun every day of my life until i die, and never use it.
.... and I will not regret it in the least.

I would rather carry a gun my entire life, and never need it, than to not carry a gun, and need it.
Its like bringing an umbrella to work, you dont take it to stay out of the rain, you take it so it wont rain in the first place.

I have EDCed a knife since I was very young, mostly cuz they are very useful tools.
But I also liked having it as a self defense option.
Well, why half *** protect yourself? It is my RIGHT to own and carry a gun, why would I not want to use that option?

As others have said here, ALOT more ppl have carry permits than you think.
Those ppl are keeping YOU safe also,
Look up any state that has tried to mess with gun owning and carry laws.
Take away gun carry permits, and crime increases, its that simple.

~John

[Mark G]

While the Constitution of the Unites States says I can the great and all knowing state of California and it's Democratic comrads seem to think I cannot and should not carry (so I don't). I most definately would if allowed. Luckily I have never been in a situation where I needed one - yet..... My home is another mattter however :)

Mark

[ront]

I am just days away from getting my CCW, just waiting on the paper work.

This is something I have wanted to do for a long time, I never really had to think about IF I wanted to carry a gun, I always have.
Its just one of those things, some ppl understand it, some think its just completely retarded to carry a gun.

Most ppl dont think anything real bad will ever happen to them, and they may be right.
So, they dont see a reason to protect themselves with a gun.

its not really that I am paranoid, and think something bad is gonna happen, but you never know.
Thats one thing that bothers me, the ppl that dont understand it always have that mentality of, "you will never need that, thats just silly to want to carry a deadly weapon, do you WANT to kill someone?"

Why would I WANT to kill someone?
hell, even if I am in the right, and killed a guy before he killed me or a loved one, the way the laws are nowadays, his mother might sue me!
When it comes down to it, even I think I will never have to use the gun.
I will probably carry a gun every day of my life until i die, and never use it.
.... and I will not regret it in the least.

I would rather carry a gun my entire life, and never need it, than to not carry a gun, and need it.
Its like bringing an umbrella to work, you dont take it to stay out of the rain, you take it so it wont rain in the first place.

I have EDCed a knife since I was very young, mostly cuz they are very useful tools.
But I also liked having it as a self defense option.
Well, why half a** protect yourself? It is my RIGHT to own and carry a gun, why would I not want to use that option?

As others have said here, ALOT more ppl have carry permits than you think.
Those ppl are keeping YOU safe also,
Look up any state that has tried to mess with gun owning and carry laws.
Take away gun carry permits, and crime increases, its that simple.

~John


I pretty much agree with all of what John has said here. I think his reasoning is dead on accurate!!

Ron

[raider502]

When my license comes back from the state i will be carrying. My reasons for carrying are as follows:
1. No need to buy handgun permits from the state once I have my permit.
2. it is my insurance policy. it is the little bit of insurance I have to protect myself and my loved ones from the things that go bumb in the night (and the day).
3. The powers that be have felt the need to allow its citizens to carry firearms and not taking advantage of it might show a disinterest in it and cause the revocation of that privelage.
4. Because I like things that go bang!

[Vic303]

...........

[el_diabl0]

Because I can !

[dan20703]

Because I can't count on anyone else but me to protect me and my family in a situation with a BG. Police will always arrive later when everything is over.

[Gadget Guy]

That is so true! Don't count on the police when your life is on the line.

[MinorCuts]

See my signature.

[JonSidneyB]

On the worrying about getting sued. I think that it depends on where you are at. In my case I got in no trouble but it did have consequences. I was asked to be a witness to the prosecution. I was working fulltime and going to school fulltime, this caused school to fall apart and I missed alot of work the month following the shooting. All four of the criminals went to jail, one for 20 years, two for 10 years, and one for 7 years. I have to admit it changed me but others things have changed me more.

One where something like this can happen. It was not in a city, it was at a friends mom and pop store in a semi-rural area. It can happen anywhere. I can tell you that shooting people is not a fun glamours thing. It can make you feel sick but it was the right thing to do in this situation.

[lcranston]

I carry a firearm because I have seen too many people that needed one and did not have one. They are not worrying about being sued as the dead have no worries.

[jamesko]

Because I can.

I have to agree with a lot of what has been said about cc. It isn't the Police Officers job to protect us. There aren't enough Officers to have around us all the time to protect us. We have to take upon us some responsibility to protect ourselves and our families.

jamesko

[onlyonespyderco]

3) Attempted robbery of Gun store ... Store Owner and Instructor drew. Robbers fled.

:lolhammer: Who could have guessed that they'd be armed?

[Mark123]

I have no problems with concealed carry, especially in regard to defense of life and family, as long as the carriers are mature and responsible, trained and licensed adults. For every story about a concealed weapon being used to safeguard life or property, there's usually another story about unprovoked shootings because the person felt threatened with little or no provocation, or stories of people having their own weapon used against them.

This is not just anecdotal either-one such incident happened when I was stationed at Ft. Benning, and a Dateline show I watched a few weeks ago talked about a similar type unprovoked shooting in a state park.

There's an entire concealed carry, edc, survivalist subculture in America (and I'm a proud member), but we'd be naive to discount that our way of thinking also doesn't attract the paranoid, mentally unstable, dangerously immature, less than honorable, and other "black helicoptor" types.

[jmateer]

Why do so many carry handguns?

Because beating people to death is alot of work.

[knightrider]

No carrying here in Wisconsin... yet. :luck:

[MinorCuts]

See my signature.

[pipedreams]

I only carry when I am working on special assignment with Delta Force or the Israeli Mossad. A suppressed .22 is my first choice for wet work. I tend to go for larger caliber stuff when ******* are involved.

todd

[plblark]

I only carry when I am working on special assignment with Delta Force or the Israeli Mossad. A suppressed .22 is my first choice for wet work. I tend to go for larger caliber stuff when ******* are involved.

todd


wow, I'm impressed. You don't perchance also do contract security work for Malls and Train in Ninjitsu do you?

:-)

[plblark]

No carrying here in Wisconsin... yet. :luck:


Illinois carry may work. the laws say cased and unloaded but nothing about the proximity of ammunition or magazines. ... Seems a fanny pack and an auto loader you're familiar with may beat a pointy stick. ZIP, Magstuff, Rack, Bang...

[pipedreams]

wow, I'm impressed. You don't perchance also do contract security work for Malls and Train in Ninjitsu do you?

:-)
My roll in mall work is generally as a sniper/counter sniper. It's not my usual work, but I'll chopper in and fast-rope insert on a case by case basis. Of course this requires much different equipment and doesn't really fit into EDC discussion. My martial arts training is so top secret that I am not at liberty to discuss it.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j271/pipedreams308/ninja1.jpg

todd

[dyyys1]

Unfortunately, I have two more years (as of a little over a week ago) before I can buy a handgun. However, I fully intend to get a permit the moment I come of age. Why? As many of you know, 32 people were killed this morning on Virginia Tech campus by a lone gunman. In one classroom there were about 25 people before the killer walked in. Only four students walked out. Most of the rest were killed; a few were injured.

I have resolved that, as far as it is in my power, I will never allow myself, or anyone I love, to experience the horror of watching classmates and friends lined up against a wall and executed, knowing that I might be next, and not having anything I can do about it. That is why I'll carry.

[Emanuel]

Unfortunately, I have two more years (as of a little over a week ago) before I can buy a handgun. However, I fully intend to get a permit the moment I come of age. Why? As many of you know, 32 people were killed this morning on Virginia Tech campus by a lone gunman. In one classroom there were about 25 people before the killer walked in. Only four students walked out. Most of the rest were killed; a few were injured.

I have resolved that, as far as it is in my power, I will never allow myself, or anyone I love, to experience the horror of watching classmates and friends lined up against a wall and executed, knowing that I might be next, and not having anything I can do about it. That is why I'll carry.


As you should.

Gun control advocates have blood on their hands today.

Here are the two links to the stories so as not to infringe on copyright laws:



http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/04/va_tech_official_praised_defea.php
VA Tech official praised defeat of student self-defense proposal in 2006
Jeff Johnson
OneNewsNow.com
April 16, 2007


A Virginia Tech official in 2006 praised the defeat of a proposal to allow students with state-issued concealed handgun permits to carry their handguns on college campuses in Virginia. At least 20 unarmed students were killed on the VA Tech campus Monday morning by a single gunman.


Virginia House Bill 1572 was proposed in 2005 by Shenandoah County, Va., Republican Del. Todd Gilbert after a VA Tech student with a state-issued concealed handgun permit was arrested and charged only with "unlawfully" carrying a handgun on campus. The bill would have prohibited state universities in Virginia from enacting "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit ... from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun."

After the proposal died in the state's House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety, The Roanoke Times quoted VA Tech spokesman Larry Hincker as celebrating the defeat of the bill.

"I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions," Hincker said on Jan. 31, 2006, "because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

Following Monday's multiple-victim shooting at VA Tech, Erich Pratt with Virginia-based Gun Owners of America called that philosophy "idiocy."

"I think gun control advocates will say, 'See, we need more gun control,' even though this is exactly the product of gun control," Pratt said.

Currently, only Utah has a statute specifically authorizing law-abiding individuals with concealed handgun permits to possess their firearms on state university property. Most other states have explicit or implied prohibitions.

"Every school campus [other than those in Utah] in this nation is a 'gun free zone,' supposedly," Pratt bemoaned. "But, isn't it amazing that criminals, bad guys never obey those laws."

Regarding Utah, Pratt adds, "Isn't it interesting that that's the one state where we haven't heard of any school shootings."

At least two school shootings have been stopped by armed civilians before police arrived:

· January 9, 2002, Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, Va. - 43 year old Peter Odighizuwa, who had flunked out of the small law school earlier in the week killed three people and wounded three others. Two law students - Tracy Bridges and Ted Besen - retreived a handgun from Bridges' vehicle and held Odighizuwa at gun point for several minutes before police arrived. (Bridges was a reserve deputy sheriff, but was not on duty at the time of the incident.)

· October 1, 1997, Pearl High School, Pearl, Ms. - 16 year old Luke Woodham carried a rifle onto the school campus, killed his ex-girlfriend and one of her friends and wounded seven other people. Assisstant Principal Joel Myrick retreived a handgun from his truck and held Woodham for police. It was later learned that the teeneager had beaten and stabbed his own mother to death before the attack at the school.

Pratt is not optimistic, however, that lawmakers will allow public university students and faculty members to protect themselves from mass murderers like the one who struck VA Tech Monday.

"The only schools and universities where these tragedies have been stopped abruptly were the places where law-abiding citizens had a gun that was accessible to them and they were able to stop the shooter," Pratt noted. "The schools and universities that had to wait for the police to arrive, those are the ones that find these high death tolls.

"It's just a real shame," he concluded, "that these guys never get it."


All Original Content Copyright 2006-2007 American Family News Network - All Rights Reserved

================================================== ======

More brilliance from Mr. Hincker in 2005:

"I think it's fair to say that we believe guns don't belong in the classroom," Hincker said. "In an academic environment, we believe you should be free from fear."

******

Hincker acknowledged that the concealed guns issue had "never been tested" and that the university could be opening itself up to legal action.

"But we stand by the policy unequivocally," Hincker said.

Go ahead and stand by your tragic policy, Mr. Hincker. I can't wait to see the lawsuits against Virginia Tech. Their policy ensured that today's shooter encountered no resistance. Fish in a barrel.

Here's the whole article, dated 13 April, 2005:

http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/xp-21770
Virginia Tech's ban on guns may draw legal fire
Some people question whether the university has the authority to ban the carrying of firearms. How about you?
By Kevin Miller
381-1676

BLACKSBURG - Virginia Tech's recent action against a student caught carrying a gun to class could draw unwanted attention from groups already angry about firearms restrictions on public college campuses.

University officials confirmed that, earlier this semester, campus police approached a student found to be carrying a concealed handgun to class. The unnamed student was not charged with any crimes because he holds a state-issued permit allowing him to carry a concealed gun. But the student could face disciplinary action from the university for violating its policy prohibiting "unauthorized possession, storage or control" of firearms on campus.

Tech spokesman Larry Hincker declined to release the student's name or specifics of the incident, citing rules protecting student confidentiality. But Hincker said Tech's ban on guns dates back several decades.

Students who violate the school policy could be called before the university's internal judicial affairs system, which has wide discretion in handing down penalties ranging from a reprimand to expulsion.

"I think it's fair to say that we believe guns don't belong in the classroom," Hincker said. "In an academic environment, we believe you should be free from fear."

Most public colleges in Virginia ban or restrict guns on campus. But the root of that authority is murky, according to some observers.

Virginia law already prohibits students or visitors from carrying guns onto the grounds of public and private K-12 schools. The state also prohibits concealed weapons in courthouses, places of worship during a service, jails and on any private property where the owner has posted a "no guns" notice. State employees are barred from possessing guns while at work unless needed for their job.

But Virginia code is silent on guns and public colleges. And two bills seeking to give college governing boards the authority to regulate firearms on campus died in committee during this year's General Assembly session.

David Briggman, a resident of Keezletown in Rockingham County, has made it his personal mission to challenge state colleges' authority to enact tougher gun restrictions than the state.

Briggman, who is a former police officer, said he forced Blue Ridge Community College to allow him to carry a gun onto campus while a student. And he sued James Madison University over its ban on concealed weapons even among permit holders. While JMU's policy still stands, Briggman said he has been told by campus police officials that they will not arrest visitors who carry a gun legally.

"It's extremely easy to challenge university policy by looking at ... whether they are given the statutory authority to regulate firearms on campus, and of course, they're not," Briggman said Tuesday.

Hincker, meanwhile, said it is not unusual for colleges to have more restrictive policies than the state. As an example, Hincker said certain chemicals and explosives that are legal on the outside are prohibited in the classroom or in dormitories for safety reasons.

"We think we have the right to adhere to and enforce that policy because, in the end, we think it's a common-sense policy for the protection of students, staff and faculty as well as guests and visitors," Hincker said.

Virginia Tech also has the backing of the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police. In a policy position paper dated April 1, association executive director Dana Schrad wrote that the presence of guns on college campuses "adds a dangerous element to an environment in which alcohol is a compounding factor." Students should not have to be concerned about guns on campus, Schrad wrote.

"The excellent reputation of Virginia's colleges and universities depends in part on the public's belief that they are sending their college-age children to safe environments," the policy paper reads.

At least one attorney who represents college students would like to see the concealed-carry permit issue clarified.

John Robertson, the Student Legal Services attorney at Tech, said he's heard differing interpretations of the policy at Tech. Robertson, whose position is funded through the Student Government Association's budget, does not represent students in disputes with the university but offers free legal advice and services to students on civil and criminal matters.

Robertson said he would like to see either a court or the state Attorney General's Office resolve the matter. As for a university's refusal to honor a concealed-carry permit, Robertson added: "I am dubious that one particular arm of the state can do so without a particular statute."

Hincker acknowledged that the concealed guns issue had "never been tested" and that the university could be opening itself up to legal action.

"But we stand by the policy unequivocally," Hincker said.

==============================================

BTW, here is contact info for the VT spokesman, Larry Hincker, who refused to support legislation that would have protected these students. Instead, Hincker stated that it's better that the students "feel safe" rather than be safe:

Contact Larry Hincker at hincker@vt.edu or (540) 231-5396

[dyyys1]

Very well stated. :iagree:

For those interested in seeing the above article in its original form, click here (http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/04/va_tech_official_praised_defea.php).

[Emanuel]

Thanks mate, I'm going to modify my post and put in the links to the stories as I was contacted by someone at edc forums telling me I need to do so so as not to infringe on any copyright laws. Thanks.

[tvodrd]

And add the first few paragraphs of the article(s), I pray! :)

Larry - off to the sack.

[LoneWolfUSMC]

1. Why own a fire extiguisher?........I have never had a fire at my house.
2. Why have car insurance?............. Many people drive for decades without a major accident.

Simple answers.
1. Fires DO happen.
2. Accidents DO happen.

People DO get robbed, battered, raped and murdered.

I refuse to be one. I refuse to allow my family to come to harm in my presence. I refuse to wait until it happens to see the need for protection.

I carried before I became a LEO. Obviously since I now have peeved off a large number of bad people I still carry.

Even if we eliminated all firearms from society we would still have those that choose to prey on the weak.

Emanual - Thanks for the article. Obviously if just one of those students was armed then the assault would have been slowed or stopped.

The question that keeps me awake at night is what are we teaching our children that would allow them to be slaughtered like sheep rather than attacking with tooth and claw?

[plblark]

1. Why own a fire extiguisher?........I have never had a fire at my house.
2. Why have car insurance?............. Many people drive for decades without a major accident.


A great quote from a young man at Purdue that dared to go to the Dean and ask about Carry on campus... he was denied but the meeting went well and he presented himself and carry in general very well.

"I just think that would be the wrong time to buy an insurance policy... Putting your seatbelt on right after a wreck, installing a fire extinguisher in a burned down house, or starting to wear your motorcycle helmet as you're skipping across the pavement would be along the same lines as me starting to carry a firearm because something horrible and life threatening had already happened to me, or worse had JUST happened to me."

[Dirty Bob]

Like others have said, it's like wearing a seat belt. You don't expect to get into an accident, but they happen.

Crime happens. It happens in places that people thought were "safe," like gated communities, security buildings, small towns, etc. I've had the experience of sitting in the dark with a .38 and a telephone (talking to the cops), while some people tried to kick in my front door. They gave up before the door did. The police arrived 30 minutes later. Shortly after we moved to San Antonio, two guys tried to mug my wife and I in broad daylight on the Riverwalk, on a Saturday afternoon! A pocket knife (in my hand in the pocket, but never drawn) and an attitude convinced them to back off.

I live in a very good neighborhood, with wonderful neighbors, but I still carry.

Regards,
Dirty Bob

[peacefuljeffrey]

Why do so many carry handguns? What potential danger or occupational hazard requires a firearm on your person whenever you're out in the world?

All it takes for me is to imagine for a moment that I am in a "Luby's Cafeteria" situation with my dad.
Could that happen? Yes, it can happen anywhere.
Will I get to choose when that happens, and avoid the place on that day? No, I'll have no idea it's coming, just like anyone else it's ever happened to.
Will I want to be armed then? Absolutely, so I can fight back rather than cower and hope I get overlooked by the psychopath. But in order to protect myself on the one-in-a-million day I need a gun desperately, I have to have it with me as a regular habit.


Don't take the above to mean that I think concealed carry is nuts, or that I disapprove of handguns - I was just explaining why I don't carry... and those reasons aren't set in stone either.


I appreciate that you and everyone else has the right to decide for himself. (Unfortunately, many who decide that guns are not for them seek to extend the law so that it is not even an option for anyone else who is not like-minded. :mad: )

However, I think that many people -- you might be included -- determine that carrying a gun is not for them because they have yet to make the realization that violent crime victimization could very well happen to them, and if so, the most effective practical defense is indeed a handgun.

It's only because your experience ("I've never needed one") has taught you that it's possible to get by without a gun that you feel it's not necessary. I too have never had to use my defensive handgun. That's a blessing. But I have been in enough "close calls" to know that if I ever come to need it, it's going to be a lifesaver. For that, I am unwilling to be without it.

-PJ

[peacefuljeffrey]

A friend on another site says " Why do I carry a .45 ? Because they don't make a .46 "


I like that, but it doesn't work for my gun:

"Why do I carry a .40 S&W? Because they don't make a .41 . . . uh, wait a minute . . ." :P


-PJ

[peacefuljeffrey]

One of the main things carrying a gun has done for me is to build my confidence. When you are confident, it can be pretty obvious to those around you, especially the ones looking for someone weak to prey upon. Like with many predatory animals, if you show any sign of fear they might see you as an easy target and decide to attack you.

One of the favorite attacks that anti-gunners (usually leftists) make is, "Oh, your gun gives you power, huh? Makes you a big man, huh?"

It's a bogus, irrelevant argument, but they still make it. Well, I ask, if a gun can give confidence to a 115 lb. woman against a 170 lb. man, or a 170 lb. man against a 235 lb. bigger stronger scarier man, what's actually wrong with that? The confidence grows from knowing that you can handle what might be brought your way. Would they make the same condemnation and disparaging comments against someone who was confident because he had taken the time and effort to become an expert in a martial art like karate?? What's the difference?

[peacefuljeffrey]

chevrofreak:
I wanted to know why people carried and I got a variety of responses. I'm neutral on the issue for myself, but I have no problem with others doing it.

The threat perception simply isn't there in my case. I know it could be too late the moment it happens, but we all take our chances in life.

Well, isn't it possible that you're projecting the idea that you've never been attacked to an extent that is not really valid, i.e. that not having been attacked is evidence you won't ever be?

Applying real logic brings us to the realization that just because something has not happened, that's not a reason to decline to prepare for it possibly happening in the future.

[ironraven]

Why not?

In Vermont, if you can buy it, you can carry it anyplace but hospitals, schools and state and federal buildings. No need for a permit or any other silliness. We average about a murder a month in the entire state, and probably half of that is drug related with at least one of the parties is what some of us politely call a "flat lander".

In New Hampshire, the visitors liscence is fairly inexpensive, and if you aren't nuts, a druggie or a convicted criminal, it's easy to get.

If I had to give an answer, it is becuase there is a thing called the principle of due care. It's a bit of legalese that means simply "don't be a jerk to others". It also means that you can't walk past a drowning man without taking action to make your best attempt to save him, either by going in or by calling for help. It means that if a house is on fire, you call you the fire department; when someone is choking, grab and hug; if someone goes down clutching thier chest and is nonresponsive, get EMS rolling and start pumping and blowing.

If something endangers the life of someone is in the same room or building as me, I fail to see how not taking the best possible action to prevent the the innocent person from coming to harm does not fall under due care. If I have the option of using a sidearm it's better than NOT having the option, even if I'd rather use a different option.

Edited for content
--Lugsalot :mm:

[tvodrd]

ironraven, Vermont, must be a whole lot better place to live than the people's republik of Ca! I have to last 5 more years before retirement elsewhere! :thumbsup:

Larry

[Lugsalot]

I share your sentiments, Larry! I often dream of moving to Vermont, especially when I read the paper and see our benevolent politician friends prescribing more useless laws to deter all the criminals! :(

What's the weather like in Vermont? Is it miserable-cold in the winter? How about the other seasons?

And is it true that some larger cities and counties have no-carry legislation in place? I think I remember reading that somewhere. Whatever the case, it's GOT to be better than the miserable PRK! :rant:

[ironraven]

What's the weather like in Vermont? Is it miserable-cold in the winter? How about the other seasons?

Define miserable cold. I wear the same jacket a 50 that I do at -30. Although, then I'm wearing it under a heavier jacket. :)

If you like consistant, predicatable weather, its not for you. With windchill factored in, 60 degree temperature changes aren't uncommon in 48 hours- 20 degrees with no wind and 20mph steady at -20 two noons apart happen every winter. The nights get bad sometimes, -30 hits at least once a year. When it's that cold, you bring your battery inside or plan on walking the next morning, becuase all the jumping in the world won't save it. That assumes you don't shred your alternator and your starter isn't a block of ice when you try to start the car.

Mud season (the spot between winter and spring) is fortunately constant, don't bother getting an alignment done on your car until the back roads harden up. Spring and fall are just unpredictable. Three weeks ago, it was hitting 80, two nights ago we had a frost warning, and we've had better than 2" of rain today. In the fall, I've seen it go from being 60 to snowing in 24 hours.

And the summer can go from bone dry to dripping humidity in a just a day or three, and from the 50s to the hundreds just as fast. Some summers you see no sun and the farmers think about skipping corn and putting in rice paddies next year. Others we've had almost as much rain as Oklahoma.

If you are coming for the weather, you're crazy. If you are coming for the job market, forget it, there isn't one. If you like a state that is both one of the most liberal and most conservative in the country, come on over and enjoy the insanity. Any place that both FoxNews and CNN thinks is messed up can't be all that bad. :P

[TKC]

I have a MA, CT, and NH permits. I love the fact that VT. is the only state that follows the Constitution! I wish more states were like VT. I can dream can't I.

[Lugsalot]

Wow. Just...WOW. :shocked:

I can see why you don't work for the Vermont Department of Tourism, ironraven! :laugh:

Man, if only I could take the awesome State Constitution of Vermont, copy it and paste it over the mess we Californians have to deal with, I think I might have a near-perfect combination of pleasant weather and natural rights. As near to perfect as I can see, anyway.

"Mud Season?" For serious? Jeez, what a price to pay for laws that make sense...and I'm not even going to comment on the temperature extremes!

You sure there isn't some tiny spot of VT that's got some relatively sane weather? :shrug:

[dbhn]

To protect myself, and even more so, my family....
Self sufficiency...
To be able to fend for myself...

[KeeperSD]

i carry because criminals have guns, and as a law abiding citizen i should be allowed to be as well armed as the predators.




Coming from Australia, this makes very interesting reading.

I often wonder when I read these threads if it is a case of which came first the egg or the chicken. Are the reasons that people believe that they need to carry firearms coming about because of the laws that allow such a large number of firearms, and worse concealable firearms to be in the general population and thus into the hands of criminals? I understand the thinking that you carry to protect your families etc, however when do you draw the line? Someone who is attempting to assault you without a weapon, I wouldn’t think the laws in your country would condone someone being shot in this instance? (I know ours certainly don’t).

As a Police officer in Queensland obviously when I am on duty I am armed, with a Glock 22, I can tell you that it would make me extremely nervous/anxious thinking that any person I deal with on the street could be armed as well or better than me. At this stage the main things we have to worry about in this state are knives, and since they are a proximity weapon, they can countered somewhat. Obviously there are some firearms in the state, and I am not naïve enough to think that there are not concealable firearms here as well, but the numbers are minimal and not in frequent enough numbers that require us to wear body armour under our shirts as is the case in most states in the US as I understand it and I do hope it stays that way. All that being said I will always carry whilst I have my uniform on.

As a new member I certainly am not trying to insult or upset anyone, just putting an outsider’s perspective forward.

[tvodrd]

Welcome to EDCF. KeeperSD!!
It's fair to discuss the different attitudes for responding to being confronted with potential violence in different jurisdictions around the world! It's controversial. and tends to heat people up!

I don't pretend to have an answer, but the option to be armed in my home or on my desert property, given the number of "bad guys" on the loose warms me a little!

Again, welcome to EDCF, KeeperSD!

Larry

[JonSidneyB]

KeeperSD,

I can't speak for everyone but I feel safer when I do know others are carrying. If I happen to not have a firearm but I know that there are dozens around me that are carrying legally. I feel that a criminal will not be in a good position to act out. It is when I am in the parts of the country where people are not armed that I am more concerned.

The USA has laws by state and this nation is different in alto of ways as you travel around it. We do have some very dangerous areas but it also does seem that most stranger on stranger crime involves the criminal seeking out the easiest targets and generally avoiding the places where they are more likely to face resistance.

I was in an incident where if I had not been armed and the criminals had not been armed I would have lost. I was not in a position to win a four on one hand to hand fight. The fact that all of us was armed I actually had a chance with some luck.

I was with some friends from the UK and we went to a place where the armed citizens can be counted in the thousands. We had not talked about firearms at all and one of the guys from the UK said this out of the blue "I suppose we are in one of the safest places we can be. A criminal would have to be pretty stupid to try anything here. I had not ever thought of it this way".

When you asked about unequal force. In the state where I am at they go by what they call the reasonable many rule. If a reasonable person would feel there is the risk of bodily injury or death by the unprovoked aggressive actions of another lethal force can be used. If in anyway the gun carrying citizen provoked the fight there would be sever trouble for the legal gun carrier. He he is under attack by even an unarmed person that was unprovoked if the courts rule that a reasonable person would feel there was real risk if severe injury or death it would be a justifiable shooting. The laws here again do vary from state to state.

[JonSidneyB]

KeeperSD,

The various opinions are welcome here. As long as the discussion stays civil it is a perfectly vailid topic so do not worry that you might have insulted or upset anyone as you presented your case in a very civil manner and your was very civil.

We only get concerned when people quit talking and start fighting by issuing insults, baiting, and using profanity.

Again your prespective on this is welcome.

[Mark123]

It's refreshing to be able to talk about this with people who have different points of viiew, yet remain reasonable during the discussion.

I think there is no correct answer, and it depends on the individual and their circumstances, and in the end it's a personal a choice. But here are my few thoughts:

1. I completely support concealed carry, as long as the persons are trained, licensed, and without a history of mental illness. Of course I'm stating the obvious, but I like it when there are no grey areas regarding this, whether in Hawaii (Zero Tolerance) or in South Carolina, which has a very liberal gun carry policy.

2. Some will disagree with me on this-I strongly support the no guns on school grounds policy, with the exception of security. Unless we want to turn school campuses into armed fortresses, Virginia Tech was largely unavoidable, unless gun buy laws are changed. The argument that if concealed carry was allowed on campus would have prevented it is a strawman argument. (That means at least 5,000 students would have to be armed for the chance of even one of them to be armed in one of those classrooms. And the gunman had large capacity quickload magazines.)

3. Last, (and yes I may be a hypocrite, b/c I carry) I may be the last idealist, b/c I actually would like my nieces to be able to attend college in the future, where there are no fireamrs on campus. I visited Nigeria where the police walk around everywhere with military assault rifles. I'd like to think in America we can do better than that.

Just my 2 cents.

[JonSidneyB]

Mark>

I do think it is fine to disagree and glad you feel the same way. O0 If this were a specialized forum sometimes it is hard to talk about these issues in the same way. In a firearms forum and this comes up there might be some attacks.

Many have misunderstood this forum. We are not a tactical forum, a survivalist forum, backpacking forum, or anything highly sectored. I want this to be a place for anyone that carries gear so we can discuss how to carry it but before we can figure out how to carry it we have to have gear to talk about.

Since I want different kinds of people that carry for all types of reasons (as long as it is legal) no matter what beliefs they may hold it means we have to work harder I think at keeping things civil. If you have 99 percent like minded people the 1 percent is outside the norm for the group. I don't think we have as many norms as some other groups might have.

Since we want such a diverse group in here we realized that civil discussion is important but we have to be vigilant to keep it civil or we could become a finger pointing name calling ugly place full of fighting and insults. I will grant there are times when someone needs to be exposed for what they are and there are somethings that we do not allow at all in here.

Firearms are a hot topic that stirs the pot quite easily. I am definately pro-right to carry but I do want those that feel differently to always feel welcome here.

I think we do have a really good group in here as we have had very few flareups for a long time ;D

I guess I am posting this partly for those that think they are not allowed to have opinions in here. You can have opinions as long as it stays civil.

[KeeperSD]

i completely understand that in an environment such as the US with firearms being in abudance i can understand ones desire to carry, however i am not sure i would feel all that confident that someone else near me has a firearm and may in fact use it. I have seen trained police officers shoot, add a little stress into situations makes all the difference. I guess growing up in an environment that it is common might change my thinking and comfort in people carrying them. I would be interested to hear from some Police officers from the US on this topic.

[JonSidneyB]

We are a nation of 300 million plus people. Out of that large of a group bad things are going to happen once in awhile. When we talk about stranger on stranger crime I think that counting gun crime vs other is not that instructive but I could be wrong. If you have a socioty that is actually gun free do you know have stabbings and improvised bombs? I kind of think all the violent crime needs to be lumped together.

I will admit I am probably affected by the way I grew up. I slightly older I think than most here online, and was from a rural area. Our entertainment was less violent. We used to take guns go school on our bicycles and never had a problem. It seems that guns were always visable and almost every pickup truck had a shotgun visable in the rear window. I got my first guns when I was in 1st or 2nd grade. I have always had them.

I might think differently if I grew up someplace else. It is hard for me to say.

[KeeperSD]

I am certainly not disagreeing, and i also have no doubt that by being armed it might make some bad guys think twice before trying it on a "helpless" victim. Whilst our society is typically gun free, there are bashings and stabbings (no bombing though) and i agree that they are just as bad as violence with a firearm, although many of our courts don't think so. Out of curiosity how many times would a civilian self defence shooting occur in the US?

I guess i am more curious to know if the culture of it being a right to bare arms, is possibly the reason there are so many firearms in the hands of the wrong people....... hence chicken before the egg analogy. Compared to a culture where there is no right to bare arms, thus their presence and any movement of them is very obvious, down to a Plain clothes officer walking into a shopping mall and a complaint being made as they had a holstered firearm on their belt that was visible to passers by; The complaint going along the lines that it was difficult to know that the officer was a Police officer, even though she was wearing a badge next to the holster on the belt. Plain clothes officers can no longer wear a holster that is not covered by clothing. Different cultures and upbringings i guess.

I guess i am also looking at it from a PO point of view and i would not like to have to wear body armour to work each day or think that each day i would encounter someone with a concealable firearm. Although like you siad though there is 300 million people in the US, there really isn't anyway to successfully change that now.

[JonSidneyB]

We have some people in law enforcment in here. I am sure they will eventually find this thread. The list of criminals that are arrested due to civilian action is quite large. 4 went to prison on my incident. The statistic that we do not have is how many flee at the sight of a gun from a citizen.

Like I said our laws vary all over the place. The no carry states tend to have more stranger on stranger crime and some of these states complain that people come from carry states to commit crimes as it is less risky. I suppose we may have moved some of the violent crime due to our patchwork of laws.

[depusm12]

Right now I'm not but I'm getting a CCW. As for police officers and CCW as a Police Officer I support CCW by civilians. Because the truth is myself and my fellow officers can't allways be there to protect you. I personally think that more criminals are afraid of encountering a armed civilian more than a police officer.

[el_diabl0]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is a great reason to carry...


Edited link out for content.

:pp:

[plblark]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is a great reason to carry...

Ok, I'm going with a couple things:
1) it's staged.
2) What was the guy thinking? why turn down that road? why not go to a populous area? What about a Cell phone?
3) while the "sweet revenge" feeling may be a strong motive / feeling, it's totally inappropriate here and illegal.
4) the CCW holder crossed the line from defending his life to assault with a deadly weapon.

[Lou3]

As others have said, you're ultimately the last line of defense for you and your loved ones.

[Rob72]

Interesting thread. My decisions are as much nature and temperment, as experience. Let me give a construct,before answering fully:

If one is walking about the parking lot, apartment stairwell, or a city street, with the MP3in one ear, the cell phone on the other, and looking at the Crackberry calendar, one is disconnected from reality. And reality is frequently unforgiving. In fact, an individual so preoccupied has been described as a "bipedal cheese burger", and to any fan of Nature, the similarity becomes evident. The truth is, there are bad people, and they view the world through a predatoristic screen. Avoidence and situational awareness will carry you through most of your life (statistically) without major conflict. But....

What if you are one of the (I'm plucking this out of the air) 3% who have no risk factors- you don't live with domestic violence or have a child who deals dope, you live and travel in well-patrolled sections of town- who is randomly selected and/or, you happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time? I plan to stack the odds in my favor.

Why the need for lethal force? Experience has shown that death is the most efficaceous means of ending hostility with immediacy. And frankly, there is no loss to society as a whole, or even to the predaceous individual, with the loss of their life. How/why do I say such a thing? I've worked well over 100 shootings in the EMS/ED setting, and will confidently say, life (yours or mine) has absolutely no relevance to the average offender. While some may argue, I would also posit that the "grief" expressed by family and friends of dead offenders has more to do with someone taking something from them, than anything to do with the loss of a socially-functional relationship.

In summation, I would say that my own "screen" is a bit different. I view the world in questions of, "If that building collapsed, what injuries would I have to treat?", "What would cause that to happen?", "How would someone make that happen?", or, "That individual is completely unaware, what do they have that someone might want to take.....how?" I know that a significant segment of the human population will do what brings pleasure or benefit to them, regardless of the consequence to others, and to some degree, themselves. I have dealt with these types of people professionally, and personally(generally by a fast tongue and faster feet, but I'm not averse to a Maglight upside the head.). I would rather be prepared than not.

Having worked with them, I know my community, police, fire and EMS cannot arrive expeditiously enogh to save my life, or the lives of those I love, ever. An independant nature demands that I assume responsibility for myself. ;)

Lastly, violence is nature (not only human). The Glasgow Kiss is now followed a lil' swipe from a machete. British yobs are favoring the steel bar and the ballpeen. Fewer handgun deaths, far more traumatic brain injuries/traumatic amputations and permanent disability. Personally, I would rather be shot than beaten. The odds of survival with minimal deficit are better. :)

[Rob72]

I guess i am more curious to know if the culture of it being a right to bare arms, is possibly the reason there are so many firearms in the hands of the wrong people....... hence chicken before the egg analogy.
False analogy. Starting with the "Rehabilitation" movement of the 1960s, we in the States are doing the following to increase the virulence of our offender population:

1) We allow congregation in gangs, as it would be "racist" to gang-bust.
2) We have made prison into a body-builder fight-training club. Inmates have (except in a few states that have passed legislation) access to mail-order dietary supplements and not infrequently, roids. Exercise is mandatory. Executions (save Texas) are sloooooowwww-moooottttion, allowing some Big Names to continue running their criminal enterprises from within.
3) There is no universal immunity from prosecution for the average citizen using lethal force against violent assault. It may be shocking to some, but no society is "better" because the BGs are "brought in alive".
4) It is known and recognized universally that "Rehabilitation" is an invalid Correctional theory- yet we refuse to do away with it.

In conjunction with the above, we have increased the survival rates of the violent and stupid through improved trauma care. 30-40 years ago, the violent and stupid died in greater numbers before the age of 20, and their impact on society was therefore reduced by 60%. Personal responsibility would indicate that if one wishes to be violent and stupid, one should be prepared to bleed-out for one's failings in judgement. Since we have alleviated that responsibility, we are apparently willing to live with mothers, daughters, wives and sisters being raped, families killed by home invaders, man-hours lost due to injuries from muggings/carjackings and assault, and the revolving door of DV.

Firearms have been present in comparatively mass-quantity in the States since 1740, and only the last 40-odd years of our history have shown significantly deviant (statistically) violence. This would indicate a societal change-of-norm, rather than the relationally increasing presence of a commodity (firearms).

[PX]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_6811_01.jpg

I've been cc (with permit) since 1966... I think partial paranoia coupled with the fact that bad things indeed do happen to good people (I'm considering myself the "good people" in this senario) plays a large part in my interest in cc.

My personal threat level now is extremely low.. I'm a retired senior citizen, living in a rural area on 5 acres of woodland, surrounded by a chain link fence, and I have a 70 lb. Australian Shepherd who thinks he owns the whole place..

When I leave my personal comfort area I try to be situationally aware, I don't do drugs so have no need to visit the "other" parts of town at midnight, and it gives me great comfort to know that I am armed should the need arise to protect myself or my family. When traveling away from home I prefer to carry my Walther P99c/AS with me as it's been extremely accurate, 100% reliable and hides relatively easily in a FIST Kydex IWB holster..

In the summer here in S.E. Georgia the heat and humidity and resulting wardrobe simply will not allow for the easy concealment of most firearms, therefore I fall back on the Seecamp LWS32, which basically can be carried anyplace, anytime.

I think the most important thing in self defense is to be armed..

With the drug problem in our country, and the associated crime because of it NO ONE is immune from being in the "wrong place at the wrong time".. Be it the local "stop and rob" convenience store, or just walking to and from your vehicle when shopping, being prepared for the worse is imminently better than not being prepared.

The 2nd Amendment gives me the right to bear arms, the State of Georgia has seen fit to give me a concealed carry permit, and I feel better armed than unarmed.. That's why I carry..

Just my old fart opinion.. Dissenting opinions welcomed.

Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy

[Rob72]

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a73/Laserlips/100_6811_01.jpg
If you're going to EDC, it may as well be stylish and elite, durable and reliable, right, PX? ;D

(Love mine too!)

[TKC]

I love my Seecamp too!! They are EXCELLENT guns!!

[mrichelo]

Can anyone point me in the direction of any statistics or studies on crime and places where CCW is allowed? I'm sure someone did the research or crunched the numbers. I know there are stats on the most dangerous cities etc.

Off the top of my head I know that Washington DC has been at the top of of thel list many times for violent crimes, and IIRC it is pretty difficult to get CCW there for the average citizen.

I'm just curious, because it seems that there may be some corelation there.

Thanks,

Mark

[ironraven]

Can anyone point me in the direction of any statistics or studies on crime and places where CCW is allowed?

Lots of places, on both sides, have a list of those states that have relatively reasonable CC laws. Then go to those state's AG's office website, and check the stats. I think you'll find the relationships interesting, particularly when a state relaxes it's laws to allow the more widespread legal practice of what the courts have defined recently defined as a civil right.

Keep in mind, that statistics only show the crimes that happened. They don't show the ones that didn't happen. Historically, the second best security you can have is large, loud, hungry dog. Even better is a cranky person with a sword/spear/crossbow/firearm (depending on your era and location). Criminals are in it for profit. A hard target is outside of what most consider an acceptable profit-loss ratio. That is why they mug the old, the alone, the people who look like they are out of it, rather than a SWAT team on the job.

[adorable_harree]

I choose to carry a handgun (and knives) everyday because the world is an uncertain one. Maybe thats why we pack all of these flashlights and various other survival "stuff" because we want to be ready. Guns and knives aren't actually weapons in my mindset. They are my rescue tools...just like my flashlight, there to serve a particular purpose when the need arises. To rescue myself or a family member or an innocent citizen from a situation that warrants a particular response.

[JN01]

The question of "why do you carry" is often less a matter of practical considerations than it is a mind set or philosophy.

On the practical side, it has been pointed out that most people will never be involved in a deadly force situation. True. It has been pointed out that there are other options to using a gun. Also true in most instances, a gun is one part of a continuum of force. I agree with the majority or posters who consider the gun as an "insurance policy" as anyone can be a victim at any given time.

Regardless of real or perceived "risk", or lack thereof, many of us still choose to carry a gun. Why? Because in the end, all the statistics and anecdotes for or against concealed carry are irrelevant. The bottom line is self preservation is the most fundamental of rights and responsibilities.

The government has no legal responsibility to protect any individual. Even if they did, it is physically impossible to do so. This being the case, it is each individuals obligation to do for themselves (or make their own arrangements for someone to do it for them).

It is immoral for this same government which cannot/will not protect its citizens to then prevent those citizens from possessing the means to exercise their most basic right under the most extreme circumstance- being confronted with a threat of death or serious harm.

Telling them to just submit to whatever depredations the criminal wishes to bestow upon them is no less immoral. Every situation has many variables, and in some cases, submission may be the best or only option. However, as members of a society, we have an obligation to resist those who have no regard for society's basic rules respecting others. Requiring passive submission in every instance not only encourages more criminal behavior, it elevates the selfish wants and well being of the criminal above the victims rights and well being.

What level of resistance is appropriate is dependent on the specific situation and the potential victims physical condition, skills, and available tools. Resistance can be as simple as situational awareness/avoidance, running to get help for another, to using non- or less lethal tools

But when someone is trying to kill you, the most effective option in most cases is the gun. It does not require great physical strength, requires less training to become reasonably proficient than other methods, and allows you to stay outside your attackers reach. If you are constantly aware of your surroundings (which you should be anyway), you can often see potential problems coming and either (a) avoid them, or (b) if unavoidable, prepare to physically deal with it- not being able to access a weapon due to being "surprised" shouldn't normally be a problem.

The suggestion that you are better off being unarmed when someone is trying to kill you (what, you might get hurt?) is so ludicrous I don't know how to respond.

To those police officers that don't like the idea of concealed carry licenses due to officer safety issues, I would submit that you would be in less danger from a legally armed citizen than the citizen (or you for that matter) is in danger from criminal attack. Secondly, your desire to "feel" safer or not be as nervous should not trump the citizens right to self-defense. Lastly, to restate the obvious, if a criminal wants to shoot you, he will be able to get a gun illegally.

[SBloke]

I choose to carry a handgun (and knives) everyday because the world is an uncertain one. Maybe thats why we pack all of these flashlights and various other survival "stuff" because we want to be ready. Guns and knives aren't actually weapons in my mindset. They are my rescue tools...just like my flashlight, there to serve a particular purpose when the need arises. To rescue myself or a family member or an innocent citizen from a situation that warrants a particular response.




Let me start with stating that I'm from the Netherlands, guns, pepperspray, teasers, even knives bigger than about 3,5" are all illegal here.

On the one hand I tend to agree with you. But on the other, aren't some people here going a bit overboard with being prepared? In my every day living and according to people in my neighburhood even carrying a knife is considered "overpreparation".. "it's not like you need to stab anyone". Granted, a knife can be used as a weapon, but that's not all it's good for. A gun however is a weapon, only a weapon, and a very deadly one at that. If I ever get attacked I would even hesitate to draw my knife in fear of getting it turned against me. Imagine losing your gun to the other.

I keep my edc to a minimum and trust on my stamina to run away if things go wrong and am always aware of escape routes.

Can just about anyone in the States carry? I shudder to think that would be the case here. My father-in-law for instance has a terrible temper and at times can get physical. The idea alone of him having a gun. Come to think of it, there are allot of unstable people out there that might get a bit triggerhappy when put under pressure. On the news a few days ago. Some kids threw an egg against a car, the driver (an elderly man) got out and yelled at the kids. He got stabbed and died. Would that warrent drawing a gun and shoot kids? Do you want a criminal dead? ..that would be to easy a way out for scum.... Although I must admit there are some people over here that I would gladly see "extinct". (16 year old kids who think you need to respect them, without showing respect first)

Sorry guys and girls, but I really see no point in carrying a gun. Because of the weapon laws over here there are hardly any guns on the streets. And in crowded areas LEOs are always present. A good lock on my door keeps people out at night and if they do get in they get a maglite to the base of their skull and LEO's would be over here in perhaps 10 minutes. (I live in an urban area) If a burglar would carry, I would need to and the outcome of a nightly visit could get very messy.

Murder rates are low here, gun-related crimes aren't a daily thing. If someone gets executed on the streets (organised crime) it's in the national papers.

I wonder, what would the USA be like with the same gunlaws as the Netherlands. :shrug:

Please don't feel offended by my post, I'm just putting my thoughts to paper.

[Lifesaver]

Why do I carry? All you have to do is look at 9/11 for an answer. Who are the bad guys targeting? Cops? The military? Not hardly. They are targeting civilians. In most cases, that is you and me. I carry in an effort to even the "playing field". They do not know I carry, nor will they until it is too late. I do not advertise it. I make sure when I carry that I do not "print". Even people that know me well (to include my wife) are not sure whether I am carrying or not. Criminals prefer unarmed victims. Ask them. The FBI did; and, that is what they were told...repeatedly. But why do you need a gun when the police already have guns, you ask. Well, let's see. When do the police show up? After something has happened. I would much prefer they are taking my statement as to why said bad guy is bleeding out on the pavement than have them visiting me in an E.R. somewhere because I was the one bleeding out on the pavement. These are the reasons I carry. YMMV

[SBloke]

Why do I carry? All you have to do is look at 9/11 for an answer. Who are the bad guys targeting? Cops? The military? Not hardly. They are targeting civilians. In most cases, that is you and me. I carry in an effort to even the "playing field". They do not know I carry, nor will they until it is too late. I do not advertise it. I make sure when I carry that I do not "print". Even people that know me well (to include my wife) are not sure whether I am carrying or not. Criminals prefer unarmed victims. Ask them. The FBI did; and, that is what they were told...repeatedly. But why do you need a gun when the police already have guns, you ask. Well, let's see. When do the police show up? After something has happened. I would much prefer they are taking my statement as to why said bad guy is bleeding out on the pavement than have them visiting me in an E.R. somewhere because I was the one bleeding out on the pavement. These are the reasons I carry. YMMV


9/11: planes being hijacked by bad guys. Is it allowed to carry a gun in a plane? If so, nobody on any of the planes had a gun and the skill to use it? And I doubt any of the victims in the WTC would have any use for a gun against these bad guys.
Don't get me wrong, 9/11 was a terrible event. But in my view it doesn't give a reason to carry.

Who do bad guys target. Unarmed people, so very true. But they do not know if you are CCing or unarmed. You still get targeted. Police show up afterwards... well that certainly is true.
In my oppinion the chance of actually needing a gun could be (made this figure up... is someone has real statistical data I would really like to see it) something in the order of one in a million per day. You would go years and years without using your gun. (and perhaps even firing it) Isn't that overpreparation?

I'm just trying to see the other side of my views (I'm against carrying as you might have guessed) .. trying to see good reasons to carry.

[Jim101]

I can't agree with Lifesaver more and SBloke less.....Here in Texas, Gov. Perry has been talking about a Bill that would allow people with a CHL carry EVERYWHERE, no restrictions.....He brought that up after the Va. "horror". Someone with a gun could have stopped that guy sooner and saved some lives....
I have a CHL (Concealed Handgun Lic.) and train at a local gun club every month..


Jim

[JN01]

SBloke said:

If I ever get attacked I would even hesitate to draw my knife in fear of getting it turned against me. Imagine losing your gun to the other.

If someone is trying to kill you (the only justification for drawing a deadly weapon) how are you "safer" by being totally helpless?


I keep my edc to a minimum and trust on my stamina to run away if things go wrong and am always aware of escape routes.

Not everyone has the physical capability to outrun an attacker. Running is not an option if you are cornered.


On the news a few days ago. Some kids threw an egg against a car, the driver (an elderly man) got out and yelled at the kids. He got stabbed and died. Would that warrent drawing a gun and shoot kids? Do you want a criminal dead?

Yes, I prefer a dead criminal to a dead victim.


I wonder, what would the USA be like with the same gunlaws as the Netherlands. :shrug:

The US has many areas with strict gun control laws (such as Washington DC, Chicago, etc), they generally have the worst crime rates.

[JN01]

For a more thorough study of the impact of firearms ownership on murder and suicide rates, a paper was released this spring in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, which can be found at the link below.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

[TKC]

The Police can't be every where! I like to be able to defend myself and my family, if the need should arrive. It is my right to keep and bear arms, and I SHALL do so!!
I also ALWAYS carry a knife, but I wouldn't pull it in a self-defense situation either, as I have not been trained to do so. I have some extensive training with a handgun. There are a lot of bad guns out there!!
Yes, I AM prepared to kill someone if I feel MY life is being gravely threatened.
And YES, if there were people on any of those 9/11 planes, that were carrying guns; I assure that the outcome would have been MUCH different!!
I am grateful that I live in a place where I CAN carry my gun!! God Bless America!!

[Jim101]

In Texas (and maybe other places) if someone attacks you with a knife, you can legally shoot them at 21' away. Thought being, they can move from 21' to you in a matter of seconds..

Jim

[Lifesaver]

9/11: planes being hijacked by bad guys. Is it allowed to carry a gun in a plane? If so, nobody on any of the planes had a gun and the skill to use it? And I doubt any of the victims in the WTC would have any use for a gun against these bad guys.
Don't get me wrong, 9/11 was a terrible event. But in my view it doesn't give a reason to carry.

Who do bad guys target. Unarmed people, so very true. But they do not know if you are CCing or unarmed. You still get targeted. Police show up afterwards... well that certainly is true.
In my oppinion the chance of actually needing a gun could be (made this figure up... is someone has real statistical data I would really like to see it) something in the order of one in a million per day. You would go years and years without using your gun. (and perhaps even firing it) Isn't that overpreparation?

I'm just trying to see the other side of my views (I'm against carrying as you might have guessed) .. trying to see good reasons to carry.


There is an old saying that can be applied to many things. It goes "I'd rather have a (insert item here) and not need it, than need a (insert item) and not have it." Many of us carry "tactical" flashlights as EDC. How many days do they just ride around in a pocket or on a belt unused? Yet, we still carry them everyday. My pistol rides silently, hidden on my hip. Have I ever drawn it? Yes. Have I ever had to fire it outside of a range? Thankfully, no. So far, its mere presence has precluded the necessity of firing it. Would situations have played out differently if I had not had it? I'm sure they would have. Fortunately, I did not have to find out.

You are against carrying. That is your decision. One I do not agree with; but, one I will defend. Not everyone should carry. I do not know if you fall into that category, or not. I'm sure you have your reasons for not carrying just as I have mine for carrying. I hope for your sake that you never encounter one of my reasons unarmed. For you,I hope you have the safety you seek as you traverse this path we call life.

I cannot help but recall another famous quote though "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I plan on surrendering neither any time soon.

[Lifesaver]

I can't agree with Lifesaver more and SBloke less.....Here in Texas, Gov. Perry has been talking about a Bill that would allow people with a CHL carry EVERYWHERE, no restrictions.....He brought that up after the Va. "horror". Someone with a gun could have stopped that guy sooner and saved some lives....
I have a CHL (Concealed Handgun Lic.) and train at a local gun club every month..


Jim


You mention the Virginia Tech shooting. Do you know why there have been no "Columbines" or "Virginia Techs" in Israel?? All the teachers are required to carry a weapon and qualify with it yearly. Would you want to enter a school as a shooter knowing that at any moment a door could pop open with an armed teacher coming after you? I certainly wouldn't. That will never happen here though because the liberal establishment that is teachers would not willingly (or otherwise) become armed and trained. Personally, I think the Israelis have the right idea about protecting their children. It's too bad the same sentiment has been forgotten here.

[Jim101]

LS,

+1, I'm with you.

Jim

[Roadkill Bill]

I carry because our town is up to 93 murders this year. Latest was a drive by that killed a 50+ yer old man just standing around with family and friends.

[dyyys1]

In my opinion the chance of actually needing a gun could be (made this figure up... is someone has real statistical data I would really like to see it) something in the order of one in a million per day. You would go years and years without using your gun. (and perhaps even firing it) Isn't that overpreparation?



Many of the things that I carry stay with me, not because I expect to ever have to use them, but because of how badly I would need them if I ever did. For example, I carry a keychain-sized car window breaker. I've never needed it, nor has anyone that I know. I most likely never will need it. Nevertheless, if I ever did need it I would feel really stupid if I didn't have it with me. Is saving a little space in my pocket worth my life or the life of another person stuck in a car someday? I don't think so, so I keep the window breaker on my keychain. Is that overpreparedness? I don't believe it is. If you do then carrying a handgun is definitely not for you. I hope for your sake and the sake of those around you that you never need any of the things you choose not to carry.

[Jim101]

DYYYS1,

Where did you get the window breaker?

Jim

[0dBm]

.. trying to see good reasons to carry.

When I did carry legally in another state years ago, I did it for the same reasons as having life, automobile, and home insurance policies as well as a separate umbrella policy.

I also carried a spare tire in all my automobiles along with at least two of those compressed liquid flat tire repair cannisters, a raincoat, umbrella, dedicated flashlight, and road flares.

I carry spare change in my pockets, stock large drinking water bottles in my house, and 1 complete change of clothes in my carry-on when I travel.

The list can go on. If you are looking for reasons to carry, look at your domicile.

[SBloke]

Interesting points you all have.


For me personally there are two reasons not to carry
1: It's illegal over here (The Netherlands)
2: Because it is illegal the amount of guns on the streets, the number of crimes involving a gun (and even the number of crimes with a deadly outcome, thought that is not related to the gun-laws here) is very VERY slim over here.

If someone does get shot and killed it's a national headline. In our capital there were 32 murders, most of them liquidations in the criminal underground. I live far far away from the "Randstad" the densly populated west of our country. Gangs, drive-by shootings, shootouts, violent murders.... none of those happen over here (Okay, perhaps one a year in my home town of Nijmegen) and certainly not in my suburb.

I do not have the right to carry, simple as that actually. It's not even a choice for me.

On not drawing a knife in a potentially deadly conflict: I am not trained in knife combat, I would fumble the knife and get it used against me. But being unarmed for me doesn't mean being totally helpless at all.

Getting cornered is the outcome of an event that occurred earlier. Failing to see that someone is trying to corner you is a mistake I hope not to make.

Why do I feel secure? it's a different mindset I guess. A gun might add to it but as it's now allowed here I never even had to choose not to carry. All I can do is try and spot ****, before it comes in the same ballpark as the fan, and so far I am successful at doing so. Street violence is on a totally different level over here I guess.

If you feel secure with a gun, by all means, please DO carry one! If you can save one single life, or even can just prevent someone from getting hurt, just because you carry I applaud you! If it means killing the attacker however, that's a life lost and would be a shame but sometimes it can't be prevented on account of the attacker being a total ***.

I hope none of you ever need to fire your sidearm and I hope you all thought long and hard about your motivations to carry. God bless.

[0dBm]

1: It's illegal over here (The Netherlands)
That is a VERY GOOD reason NOT to carry. I certainly would not advocate unlawful carry.

I currently live in a state in which the legislature has made it VERY difficult, but not impossible to obtain a concealed carry permit for a defensive firearm. I have not yet determined how to obtain a permit for concealed handgun carry outside my property, but eventually I will find a way. The county in which I reside currently has a sheriff that has issued permits to those with a bona-fide need. I just need to establish MY need.



I hope none of you ever need to fire your sidearm

That is one of the reasons that I did carry legally in another state and continue to do so when IN my property. Carrying a firearm for protection places the carrier in a mindset of preparedness and constant alert. These two states, alone, should be able to allow anybody, anybody, whether carrying a concealed defensive firearm or not, to avoid 99.99% of the reasons to carry the firearm. In over 20 years of legal concealed carry of a defensive firearm, I have never had to use it in any scenario, defensive or otherwise: NEVER. I carried it in the event that I DID need to use it that .01%.


...I hope you all thought long and hard about your motivations to carry. God bless.
My motivation for carrying a defensive handgun while IN my property is simple: to protect ME first because if I cannot do so, I cannot protect my family. Merely thinking "long and hard" about it is woefully inadequate without having a plan, practicing executing the plan, testing for its adequacy, and then adjusting it accordingly to be more efficient.


I am ultimately envious that you have found a place in which you feel safe as a result of the laws and circumstances around you. I believe that all of us strive vigorously to find a place in which it fulfills a fundamental need to feel secure, safe, and serene. Many will search their entire lives and not find it. Many more will not have the economic means to actually find residence there once they actually find it. Still others, like myself, have found a suitable compromise in their physical locale, but prefer a self-reliance for personal safety rather than depend on the resources of the local government; however historically adequate and efficient their law enforcement has been. I do this because, however low the crime rate has historically been, it is no measure of what CAN occur 5 minutes from now and that the police will likely respond AFTER the event has occurred; leaving ME to address the circumstance as it unfolds before me in my solitude as the sole sentinel of everything that I dearly love and have toiled my entire miserable existence to achieve.

[JN01]

SBloke said:


Why do I feel secure? it's a different mindset I guess. A gun might add to it but as it's now allowed here I never even had to choose not to carry. All I can do is try and spot crap, before it comes in the same ballpark as the fan, and so far I am successful at doing so. Street violence is on a totally different level over here I guess.

As I stated in an earlier post, I do believe it is a mindset. For your situation, your choices probably make sense on a personal level. Each person has to make those choices based on their own criteria- personal temperament, skills, risk assessment, etc.

My only gripe is that it should be a personal choice. It is immoral for governments to deny that right no matter how low the risk is perceived to be. A bunch of bureaucrats can't possibly know what each persons situation is and will be in the future.

The other point is that feeling secure and being secure are not always the same thing (speaking in general terms, it may not apply to you personally). There are lots of folks who feel secure because they are oblivious to their surroundings or are in denial about the dangers around them because it is unpleasant to think about.


On not drawing a knife in a potentially deadly conflict: I am not trained in knife combat, I would fumble the knife and get it used against me. But being unarmed for me doesn't mean being totally helpless at all.

Sorry, that is one argument that bothers me. It's often used by the gun ban crowd over here. I certainly agree that if you carry a weapon you should be trained in its use, but even if untrained, you won't be any worse off than if you are unarmed (though it ultimately may not help you). I somehow doubt that anyone, as they are being stabbed/shot/beaten to death, says to themselves, "I sure am glad I didn't have a weapon on me, I might have gotten hurt". It is even more ridiculous when applied to someone who is trained in the use of their self defense weapon.

As for you personally, it sounds as though you have the proper attitude as far as awareness, avoidance, etc. Hope it continues to work well for you.

[SBloke]

Sorry, that is one argument that bothers me. It's often used by the gun ban crowd over here. I certainly agree that if you carry a weapon you should be trained in its use, but even if untrained, you won't be any worse off than if you are unarmed (though it ultimately may not help you). I somehow doubt that anyone, as they are being stabbed/shot/beaten to death, says to themselves, "I sure am glad I didn't have a weapon on me, I might have gotten hurt". It is even more ridiculous when applied to someone who is trained in the use of their self defense weapon.



Perhaps as a last resort I will draw my knife. But yes it would have to be in a life or death situation where it's my last option (after smashing my cellphone into "his" teeth, gauging "his" eyes out with my keys and if I end up against someone who can run faster and longer.) Maybe it's a false sense of security, not in touch with how crappy the real world can be, but so far it hasn't let me down. And more training in using the items in my EDC for self defense is as of this moment on my to-do list.



My only gripe is that it should be a personal choice. It is immoral for governments to deny that right no matter how low the risk is perceived to be. A bunch of bureaucrats can't possibly know what each persons situation is and will be in the future.

This is one of those arguments I'm not going to start. Should you have the right to bear arms. My government thinks it's not a good thing. So be it. You can put this debate right up there with "it the death penalty a good thing" Again, my government doesn't think so. So be it.
There are alot of people in this country I would rather not see having a gun. How are people screened in the USA for a lisence? (in particular the psychological aspect)



The other point is that feeling secure and being secure are not always the same thing (speaking in general terms, it may not apply to you personally). There are lots of folks who feel secure because they are oblivious to their surroundings or are in denial about the dangers around them because it is unpleasant to think about

Denying the truth because the truth is unpleasant. Goes for so many things and is often true.



As for you personally, it sounds as though you have the proper attitude as far as awareness, avoidance, etc. Hope it continues to work well for you.

I certainly hope so, in the mean time I'll keep training my internal martial arts (keeps me focused under pressure) and update my EDC a bit for better defencive options :rolleyes: :rolleyes:. Maybe a better knife, one I can't fumble (Emerson La Griffe) and a kubotan.


Keep sharp people, keep sharp :)

[dyyys1]

DYYYS1,

Where did you get the window breaker?

Jim


It's a res-q-me tool, found here (http://res-q-me.com/). Very small and very effective. Looks like they updated the site. :)

[Jim101]

Thanks, gotta get one.....

Jim

[0dBm]

An now for some much-needed levity. :idiot2: :P ;D

That full-size model of the res-q-me tool was tested in a recent episode of the television series Mythbusters. Those two goofy main characters on that show submerged an automobile door in a large tub and tried several implements to smash the window. None of them worked until they used that big orange Life Hammer. All it took was one blow.

If this keychain model works equally well, I'll purchase one for each of my vehicles. I don't anticipate ever having to break my windows or windshields and swim out of my vehicle and out of a large body of water in which it has plunged, but if the door ever happens to jam and the electrical system will not allow the windows to be opened, I can see a real use for it.

I anyone does purchase it, please start another thread since posting in this one will be OT.

________________________
Back OT.

There have been some very fine points exacerbated in this thread. I happen to be very much an advocate of taking responsibility for my own safety. I can go on for another 10,000 or more words on the topic, but there have been enough hints by fellow members that the topic has been sufficiently waxed at his time. :P

Let's back off from any more posts in this thread for a coupla weeks. Wadaya say? ;D

[KeeperSD]

I have already stated my position so won't repeat it. But can i ask people who state things such as drive by's and being mugged as reasons to carry. Not sure how carryong a firearm would stop a drive by, you wouldn't get your hand to your firearm. As for a mugging if you have already been threatened with a knife or gun then it is to late and now the bad guy has a firearm as well as a knife. The only thing you will achieve trying to draw on a bad guy who has the drop on you is getting yourself stabbed or shot. Most bad guys pick the time and place to their advantage. Someone stated that it was legal to shoot someone who is threatening you at 21', tests show that from a standard holster (eg not concealed) it requires a bad guy to be at least 7m (21') away to draw and fire before the bad guy got to you. It appears to me that in most situations that you might draw your weapon it would be too late and would more than likely only escalate the situation.

Just on another note i would also suggest that the Israel teachers being trained as shooters has more to do with terrorism from neighbouring countries rather than the US type of school massacres.

You guys have the legal right to carry and if thats the case then go for it, the above is just my opinion. :)

[Brassnut]

WHY :doh:

This Forum Does not have enough Storage space for me to list all the stories where good people going about there daily lives are no longer with their loved ones :rant:
the Top 5 reason Wife, 3 sons, and a baby girl.

reasons >:(
random shootings, RIP VT STUDENTS and all those who fell before them
Care jacking
Home Invasion
Hate Crimes
Drug related
Robbery

never will I be a SHEEP

[Harald]

A moral debate is always interesting.
I noticed our Dutch friend seemed to have walked right in to a minefield, and our English LEO VinnyP before him…? So maybe I should join them.

Please allow me to suggest an idea for the reason why Europeans may be con’s while Americans may be pro’s, assuming this is in fact the case.

I have learned from reading various posts and threads in here that many seem to also have a certain survivalist view on their EDC. Many feel a need to be prepared for large scale emergencies, thus “BOB’s”, survival-kits, water purification systems etc.
I believe that the American reality may be a place for such incidents, they may be rare or frequent, but they are possible.
In addition, I think I even saw statements expressing a certain level of mistrust in government?

In Denmark I don’t think such incidents are imminent. It’s unlikely we should have earthquakes, tornadoes, grizzly attacks, nuclear power station break downs or similar. At the most we could face heavy rain or snow, car accidents or very short power failures (I can only think of one in recent times). – but, then again, maybe I’m just un-prepared?

I have come to think that the American understanding of government (please correct me if I am wrong – I know you will) is that any government should provide the framework for a society in which it is possible for any citizen to pursue her/his own fortune and happiness. As little regulation as possible because this is likely to cause limitations rather than opportunity?
That is: Any citizen should be able to take care of himself and not have to rely on help from anybody else? (NOT the same as saying that he who is on top should not help he who is not)

In Denmark it is more or less the other way around (please don’t take my statement as the official one):
Government should secure all citizens with whatever necessities required to live a decent life, should they not be able to provide these for themselves. I.e. no citizen should be left to take care of himself if unable, but should always be able to rely on help from others (the State).
Regulation by the State is necessary to protect the weak from potential domination by immoral entrepreneurs, and to keep resources fairly even among its citizens in order to minimize envy (which may eventually lead to civil unrest, thus, it is also in the interest of the rich that the poor are not too poor…).

I am not going to argue which is better, should my analysis be true (or wrong for that matter).

I think these are the corner stones in this debate:
Americans are raised in a reality where everybody is responsible for his own wellbeing and survival.
Danish (Europeans?) are raised in a reality of social responsibility where everybody (can) depend on the next man.

From this, Americans may feel a personal need and responsibility of the ability to protect themselves. Some of you in here have decided that the better way to do this is by means of a handgun.
Danish (Europeans?) rely and depend on the State to uphold security and take action against law breakers.

This is my suggestion for a reason why Europeans may have some difficulty in understanding the urge of some Americans to carry handguns.
And a suggestion for a reason why some Americans may have some difficulty in accepting the European scepticism on this subject.

Despite this, it seems that everybody can agree to the hope that none of us will ever be in need of a firearm, carrying or not, pro or con.

Sorry about this topic diversion.

/Harald

[0dBm]

Americans are raised in a reality where everybody is responsible for his own wellbeing and survival.
Danish (Europeans?) are raised in a reality of social responsibility where everybody (can) depend on the next man.

For the entirety of my life, I have lived in communities where public service was only a phone call away. These services are, admittedly, spectacular, however, the citizen does need to make the phone call and the response time can vary considerably.

What does the citizen DO while WAITING for the government services to arrive? In the example of police service, it is usually an action, such as investigatory, that occurs AFTER the alleged crime has been committed.

Let's paint the scenario. Despite every precaution that you have taken to avoid ANY probability of encountering danger, you suddenly find yourself in a very precarious circumstance as follows:

What would some of you Europeans do in the precious minutes between the time the perpetrator is about to do grave bodily harm to your 75-year old mother holding your 7-month old baby and YOU are the only one there to prevent the heinous act from occurring and when the police arrive?

[0dBm]

But can i ask people who state things such as drive by's and being mugged as reasons to carry. Not sure how carryong a firearm would stop a drive by, you wouldn't get your hand to your firearm. As for a mugging if you have already been threatened with a knife or gun then it is to late and now the bad guy has a firearm as well as a knife. The only thing you will achieve trying to draw on a bad guy who has the drop on you is getting yourself stabbed or shot. Most bad guys pick the time and place to their advantage. Someone stated that it was legal to shoot someone who is threatening you at 21', tests show that from a standard holster (eg not concealed) it requires a bad guy to be at least 7m (21') away to draw and fire before the bad guy got to you. It appears to me that in most situations that you might draw your weapon it would be too late and would more than likely only escalate the situation.

Carrying a loading firearm is just a small portion of the total readiness plan for self-defense. Careful planning and alertness comprises, at least for me and my family, the largest portion of this plan. Of that, avoidance of the areas and people where crime statistically has occurred is paramount. When frequenting those areas where the crime has historically been low, maintaining high alert is ABSOLUTELY necessary because there is NO guarantee in life.

There is an ample amount that can be done to defend against drive-bys and muggings. The most important component is avoiding the area and the people. I did so for over 20 years while legally armed in another state. I did so BEFORE I was legally armed. I do so NOW that I cannot legally carry my firearm outside of my domicile. This plan is more than adequate for most people. Just like I have life, home, auto, and health insurance, I once legally carried my loaded firearm on my person so that when I found myself in that circumstance, I had something to assist me.

__________________
Referring to the quote above about "bad guys pick[ing] the time and place to their advantage." Pick your time and place that is CONTRARY to theirs!

[0dBm]

Some of you in here have decided that the better way to do this is by means of a handgun.

:laugh:
This is oversimplifying it considerably. While true that, as an American, I have chosen that a handgun is a way to help me protect myself and my family, it is not THE sole means nor is it a better way. It is merely one method amongst many and in conjunction with many more in a much more comprehensive total plan.

While the State can and shall provide a level of protection that can address the needs of the many most of the time, it cannot, by far, address the needs of every single individual all the time. While the individual can likely rely on the help of others most of the time, that individual should be prepared for when the help from others is not available.

____________________
I have waxed philosophic on this topic. It has been fun, but now it has become, for me, burdensome. This is my last post in this thread.

[gtie]

A handgun is simply a tool. I am a Lifetime NRA Benefactor member, have held concealed carry permits in GA, FL and now NC and have completed several training courses including Lethal Force Institutes' LFI-I. I consider it irresponsible for a head of household to choose not to protect their family in and out of their home. Before someone decides to harm your family, you must decide what will I do if this occurs? A gun is one tool to assist you in this task. Much more important are strategic decisions in where your family lives and tactical decisions on when are where you and your family travel. A handgun is not Excalibur, it is much more akin to a fire extinguisher in your kitchen. Just because you have a fire extinguisher, do you intentionally start fires while cooking? A gun is the same, you don't go looking for trouble when you carry, it is just a tool that you have with you in case you need it.

I highly recommend the writings of Massad Ayoob, he does a great job of stressing why you should carry and why you never want to have to use deadly force to defend yourself or family unless it is absolutely necessary!

[Lugsalot]

Great first post, TimB, and a belated "Welcome!" to EDCF! :highfive:

As a resident of the Golden State, I also lament the lack of common sense exhibited by the general population when it comes to the right of self-defense.

Some people don't mind giving up freedom for security, and there are plenty of others willing to capitalize on this, from street thugs on up to politicians.

The "peace" these well-meaning pacifists seek is an illusion; it's simply the quiet pause between attacks. Live long enough, and you will experience an attack at some point. If you don't do what you can to discourage and prevent the attack, you encourage further attacks against others.

Someone needs to teach these people about feedback loops!

[PMarc]

I am new to the forum, and reviving an old thread, but thought worthy to jump in.



. I was recently working in Sao Paulo and police there are understandably jumpy, but, despite being armed to the teeth on and off duty, action beats reaction every time and some good people have been killed their being armed didn't help one of them.


For those not in know, during may 2006 a major BG faction did attack specifically LEOs, Corrections agents, public buildings. So, after that, the guys on the beat took a very agreesive stance towards their own persoanl safety.
So, this may be the reason why those guys were so "jumpy".



Thank god such situations like this of any kind in civilised countries (and I am definitely NOT saying Brazil is uncivilsed) are very rare, even in the "high crime areas" but I'd have thought it's a lot more common to meet a drunk unarmed idiot or a mugger at close quarters with a knife than the lunatic with a gun in the restaurant described earlier in the thread.


I, being brazilian, can say that this is NOT a civilized country. And quickly becoming a People's republic. The gun law here is nation-wide, and, from what I see, closely resembles Kalifornia.

Currently I only carry a folder in my pocket, and I am actively into FMA and other hand-to-hand SD techniques.
I am flirting with the idea of acquiring a gun, but, with all the paper work that has to be done I am almost discouraged. :brickwall:

[giggles]

PMarc, if it's a pistol then it is worth all the paperwork in the world. Get a quality one, it pays off in the long run. If you can carry a shoulder holster whenever you need to carry the gun, then get a fullsize like a USP expert in .40 S&W or 9mm, and if not then get a USP compact in 357 SIG or .40 S&W. Unless ofcourse you can get CIP ammunition down there, then you would want 9mm in that compact and maybe in the fullsize too. But ask the dealer to have a spurred hammer installed on that USP compact.

Oh yeah, and if you can't have 18 or 15 round mags (9mm) or minimum 13 round mags or higher in .40 S&W then don't bother getting the fullsize, because the compact will be all you need then, and way more versatile. And I do believe you can still use the M2 UTL weaponlight on the compact as well as all the other sizes of USP.

Then all you need is some Mill-Comm TW-25B grease and KleenBore Formula 3 oil, a couple of rags/cloths for cleaning patches and the front two pieces of the cleaning rod for KleenBore 9mm cleaning kit (comes in a black plastic box). in order to maintain it perfectly, wherever in the world you are. Remember to use the grease on all metal that moves on other metal, even under the barrel, and including the selector plate, but not so much that the gun cycles the grease onto the front of the hammer while cycling the slide. Also wipe dry the chamber and barrel on the inside, then chamber a round (and put another one in the magazine) and put the safety on and you're ready to go, will never have anything hindering you from chambering a round ever, in that way.

Well, good luck with your choice :roof:

[Spectre]

"why do you carry? . . . . Because some one may decide to kill me or a member of my family. How would I feel if I couldnt stop that?

[PMarc]

PMarc, if it's a pistol then it is worth all the paperwork in the world. Get a quality one, it pays off in the long run. If you can carry a shoulder holster whenever you need to carry the gun, then get a fullsize like a USP expert in .40 S&W or 9mm, and if not then get a USP compact in 357 SIG or .40 S&W. Unless ofcourse you can get CIP ammunition down there, then you would want 9mm in that compact and maybe in the fullsize too. But ask the dealer to have a spurred hammer installed on that USP compact.

Oh yeah, and if you can't have 18 or 15 round mags (9mm) or minimum 13 round mags or higher in .40 S&W then don't bother getting the fullsize, because the compact will be all you need then, and way more versatile. And I do believe you can still use the M2 UTL weaponlight on the compact as well as all the other sizes of USP.

Well, good luck with your choice :roof:


Unfortunately, all I can have due to legal restrictions, is .380. Then, I guess I must stay with that, and maybe go +P or +P+ and expansive. Then I am also not aware of mag cap restrictions, so Maybe I should get as much as possible. However, my workplace has _serious_ gun regulation, I mean, no guns allowed on premisses. I must check how far they can go with that, as CC permits are issued by our federal LE agency, though only valid in the state where applied for. Freak, isn't it?

So, all the bullets in the world will not be enough if can't consistently hit a target out to 15 meters, maybe 20. Also, the law does not allow one to buy more than 50 rounds per year, per gun. And those registered shooters are not being permited to buy reloading equipment and supplies, althought the law does permit. Also, buying reloaded ammo is a crime.

So, seems we are all screwed up. :rant:

[jnathan]

I posted this a while back for some of the guys on cpf and I thought everyone participating in this post really ought to take the time to listen to this Alex Jason (http://www.alexanderjason.com) interview (http://cerberus.sourcefire.com/~jeff/cpf) in its entirety.

If you carry a concealed weapon, even if you're a former or current law enforcement officer, you may not be aware of all the information presented during the interview.

[0dBm]

I have abstained from responding again in this thread, but made an exception because of jnathan's post about the noted authority Alexander Jason.

I am familiar with Mr. Jason's work and have listened to the original as well as the subsequent airing of that broadcast. While pertinent and germain to the information and responses presented in this thread, Mr. Jason's opinions on firearm usage during a perceived self-defense scenario extends well above and beyond the single dimensional scope of this thread and forum altogether. This is about carrying firearms for personal protection.

The body of his work shall be enlightening to many and frightening to some. It has remained an invaluable resource for myself; drawing from it a perspective that a clear demonstration of the responsibility with the ownership, carry, and use of a firearm should somehow be incorporated on a grander scale in conjunction with a CCW issuance.

I may be speaking ultimately too soon, but I am pleased to see few responses so far about opinions regarding usage.

[giggles]

Unfortunately, all I can have due to legal restrictions, is .380. Then, I guess I must stay with that, and maybe go +P or +P+ and expansive. Then I am also not aware of mag cap restrictions, so Maybe I should get as much as possible. However, my workplace has _serious_ gun regulation, I mean, no guns allowed on premisses. I must check how far they can go with that, as CC permits are issued by our federal LE agency, though only valid in the state where applied for. Freak, isn't it?

So, all the bullets in the world will not be enough if can't consistently hit a target out to 15 meters, maybe 20. Also, the law does not allow one to buy more than 50 rounds per year, per gun. And those registered shooters are not being permited to buy reloading equipment and supplies, althought the law does permit. Also, buying reloaded ammo is a crime.

So, seems we are all screwed up. :rant:

PMarc, where exactly do you live? Those are some cruel and unusual rules >:(


You should have bought the gun right before new years, then you'd have 100 bullets right now... but a gun with no training is close to no good... Can't you even go to a range and buy ammunition there and train with that on the range, and so not have to spend your valuable ammunition on training?

But anyway, you are limited to .380 diameter bullets? Then 9mmx19 and .357 SIG are two VERY good choices... If you can get +P or CIP ammunition then go for the 9mm, if not then get the .357 SIG.

If you are limited to magazine capacity, then take the 357 SIG because you'll fit ten of those into a mag that takes ten 9mm too. Also carry one in the chamber.
.357 SIG is also slightly more powerful than CIP standard or SAAMI +P 9mmx19, and I would take all the advantage I could get. (the 357 SIG is actually .380 diameter.)

You should check if there are any capacity limitations though.



I feel almost privileged, but I know my countrys gun laws are not very good, we can't get everything we need or want here either, but at least I just ordered myself up five 33-round Glock mags, and glock SMG stock + AAC bungee sling for my Glock 19, and have thousands of rounds at home and equipment+supplies to reload tens of thousands of rounds.



In what way do you want to carry? Is it a hot country, or cold?
With only 50 bullets, I would put as many as possible into the gun, by having maximum magazine capacity if there are no restrictions. Size of the gun must also be taken into consideration, but the length of the magazine does more to hurt the concealability than the length of the slide/barrel. Also you will want to have as long a barrel as you can conceal, to gain the most power from your bullets. HK USP comes in an "Expert" version with a 5.19" barrel and an even longer version with a 6" barrel, called "Elite", but I think the Elite is no longer in production and it has been replaced by the Expert. If you can conceal the Expert, I would carry that if I was you, it will give you 18+1 round capacity.
If it is too big, you can always take a standard USP and put the jet funnel on that, but then the magazine becomes exactly as long as on the expert, and may still be too long for you. You could get the standard USP and carry a 15 round magazine in it and have two 18-round magazines as backup, or you can get the Expert and remove the jet funnel on the magazine-well, and use a 15 round magazine in it and two 18-round magazines for backup.

The compact USP can not take 18 round or 15 round magazines.

Only the compact USP comes in .357 SIG. But with an expert, and firing CIP ammunition, you have the same performance as a .357 SIG anyway. Perhaps even slightly more than the .357 SIG fired out of a USP Compact. However, if you can get CIP ammo, then you can also get +P CIP fired from the Expert, and then things start to become really interesting.


If you do the annual changing of all the springs in a Glock, then you can get away with using a Glock 19 or 17, or even 17 Long, and have a 17 or 19 round magazine in the gun and a 33 round magazine as a backup.



But you need to find out about whether there is a magazine capacity limit, because if there is, and if it is ten rounds, then you should get a H&K P3000 or P30, it's the same gun but two different names for some reason. That is the newest and best pistol from H&K, but not best if you can have 15 or 18 round magazines.
I am also assuming that you can not have a silencer for yor guns in your country or location, so the P30/3000 will leave you missing nothing. I would miss the ability to use a silencer, so that combined with the 18-round magazine capacity is why I have a USP and not a P30/3000. (I also have the Glock 19 hehe.) My only regret is that I can not have two HK USP at this time, because I want an Expert, but also want it with an even longer barrel for a suppressor, so that I can switch between the standard and suppressor barrel when I want to. I would also remove the jet funnel and install a lanyard loop.

The Expert is specially hand-adjusted, and the standard USP is not. Also a good reason to buy the Expert, more accurate than the already very accurate standard USP. But use some superglue or something to glue the trigger-stop-screw in place, (the one you see on the back of the trigger) or it is going to move and block the trigger at the worst possible time.

But you will want to get Meprolight tritium sights on the pistol, I am going to see how Meprolight green dots work for rear sight and a HiViz fiberoptic green sight for front sight.



Oh yes, and you will not want to use hollowpoints, or at least you should only use 50% hollowpints and have the other 50% full metal jacket. They have very different and specific uses, there is no such thing as a magic bullet.

[PMarc]

PMarc, where exactly do you live? Those are some cruel and unusual rules >:(


Well, I live in Brazil. Rio de Janeiro to be precise. So, temperatures here fall belo 20C just two weeks per years. Most of the time is above 30s.
So, I am mostly wearing light pants and short sleeved shirts. On weekends, bermudas and tees.

No, the rules aren't cruel. They are senseless. The came from a time in the 1930s when some tirant arose to power by arms, then proceeded to take guns away from the people.

Now, with all this PC craze, and drug traffickers in Rio, people scream in fear just at mere sight of a gun.
However, just to annoy people, I have a photo over my desk that was taken during a shooting afternoon, with a G25.
I have yet to shoot military rifles, and then, a photo shall go to my desk, to really peeve people off.



You should have bought the gun right before new years, then you'd have 100 bullets right now... but a gun with no training is close to no good... Can't you even go to a range and buy ammunition there and train with that on the range, and so not have to spend your valuable ammunition on training?

There's at least a 3 month period between the date of purchase and the issue of the gun. Yep, you pay the gun, the fees (almost half of the gun price), and wait. It is very rare to see a used gun on sale.

I am not sure about the range. Have to find out some range near home or office and see if I can buy ammo for practice there.
[/quote]



But anyway, you are limited to .380 diameter bullets? Then 9mmx19 and .357 SIG are two VERY good choices... If you can get +P or CIP ammunition then go for the 9mm, if not then get the .357 SIG.


No, not limited to .380/.38, but those are maximum caliber allowed for handguns. (9mm, .357, .40, .44Mag, .45 - only if you are a Federal Policeman or Armed Forces Officer, which I am none)



Oh yes, and you will not want to use hollowpoints, or at least you should only use 50% hollowpints and have the other 50% full metal jacket. They have very different and specific uses, there is no such thing as a magic bullet.


I am most concerned with armed individual wanting to harm myself or close persons. Mostly the are on foot or motorcycles. Quite seldom in vehicles, and then, it would probably be mine.

[giggles]

Hello again PMarc :D

Hmm, i see :) I thought it might be somewhere in south america, plus I accidentally watched this strange movie on TV yesterday, about two guys walking around in south america and being philosophical, while all the time having to shoot attackers with only one gun and, 50 bullets ;) by shooting just one into every person.

Turned out the movie was not my kind of movie, but up until they became a little too friendly, it was cool. Hehe :laugh:


hmmm, so 9mm. and 357 SIG are limited to military and police only? Hmmm...

Luckily, as someone in this forum pointed out and I agree to, it's not the size (weight) of the bullet, it's the shape... after all, a 38 special is just a 9mm at 50 meters away. So you increase the speed of the bullet to get the same performance. So if you get like a 38 Super, that will kick just as much butt as the 357SIG and the 9mmx19, if you use the same shape bullets as NATO 9mm, and bullet weight of 123 - 130 grains :highfive: (38 super: 9mmx23, velocity for 130 grain bullet: 1305 fps., 124 Grain: 1346 ft/s)

The 38 super is apparently the caliber of choice in Mexico and south america, among civilians.



Then there is also the 380 ACP or 38 auto as it is called too, which is 9mmx17, and Glock makes a Glock 25 for this, the exact size as a Glock 19, and seems to be the best gun in this caliber on the market today. You can put the 120-125 grain bulets in the casings, and increase the powder charge on that, and get it too up to 9mmx19 power.

[greenLED]

The 38 super is apparently the caliber of choice in Mexico and south america, among civilians.
Depending on where you are, that's partly due to historical reasons, no so much by personal choice. Back in the 70's (?) that caliber was the latest rave and quite a few countries adapted it as their "official" caliber (for police, for example). Of course ammunition technology has moved beyond and other options are now available.

The BG's of course don't care about the law and use whatever they want or can get their hands on. Unfortunately, the pace of the law does not progress as fast as technology, and police and legally licensed firearms owners are stuck with having to use "sub-par" ammunition (relatively speaking).

AFAIK, Brazil is one of the most restrictive countries when it comes to private gun ownership, but in many other countries people are burdened with high taxes for firearms, complex and lengthy registration processes, limits on ammo purchases, registering firearms for specific uses (so if you shoot a BG with a rifle registered for hunting you're in deep doo-doo), etc. It's a little weird to think you can easily put 1000 rounds down range in a weekend of training, when I know in some countries people are only allowed a fraction of that in an entire year!

[giggles]

Yeah, they aren't allowed to have 9mmx19 because the military and police use that, and so they have to settle for 9x17 or 9x23.

[hso]

I carry a firearm because the criminal that decides to start shooting everyone while robbing the MiniMart won't bother to notify me before I come in to buy a soda.

Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

[dyyys1]

Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.



O0 I really like that! Well put!

[Obey]

This is why:

http://agunblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/100-crimes-in-1-month.html

[marcangel]

People have tried to rob and shoot at me. I'd like the option to shoot back. Simple enough.

[icqcq]

Interesting question, and lots of intriguing answers.

The logic that finally caught up to me was: if all the ***holes are packing, then I should be able to defend myself, to meet force with force. I've had a couple of run-ins where things nearly got to the point that I was going to have to defend myself physically; fortunately I'm kind of cowardly and can talk pretty good when I think I'm about to take a beating, and I talked my way out of those situations. But there will be situations where there either won't be any talking, or it won't do any good.

I remember when I first started carrying; I was too young to have thought it through, and wherever I went I was apprehensive, looking for the troublemaker. I realized it was a problem, so I quit carrying for a few years, then started again when I had enough life experience under my belt to understand 'how' to carry, the proper mindset.

I agree with those who carry on passively-restricted property (work). The 'passive restriction' of firearms ("No firearms allowed") is a mistake: a law-abiding citizen will follow that rule, and someone with evil intent will ignore it and there will be victims. If there are going to be restrictions, then they have to be active (screeners & machines). At this point, it's too late in this country to try to restrict handguns: there are just too many out there. The better response is to - if not encourage - at least not discourage good folk from carrying. If the bad guys knew that there was a very good chance that someone in the immediate vicinity was willing & able to stop them, they would be a lot more hesitant to do those things.

[dyyys1]

...fortunately I'm kind of cowardly and can talk pretty good when I think I'm about to take a beating, and I talked my way out of those situations.

There's nothing cowardly about talking your way out of a situation like that!

O0 for avoiding violent situations.

[58sniper]

I carry because carrying a whole SWAT team would be hard on my back and knees.

[Hank0331]

It's probably been stated more than once here, but I carry for two reasons. First: Because I can. Second: I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

Just imagine the abject uselessness and downright horror you'd feel if you found yourself in need of a firearm and reached back to find... nothing. I would think it reasonable that even the most devout anti-gun lobbyist (not saying that is anyone here) would rather have a gun than a phone with a police dispatcher on the other end when someone with less than polite intentions is making an incursion into their lives. Also, I would call into question any workplace that would disallow legal carry as putting their bottom line before the safety of the people they profess to support. All they're doing is creating sheep primed for the jaws of a Wolf. They, therefore, can kiss my ***. Granted, I carry guns for a living so I feel pretty naked when I can't. Even so, it boggles my mind that they can restrict people from carrying a knife with a blade more than 2 3/4" long (these rules vary from place to place), let alone a pistol. As though a CRKT M16-13 can kill you faster than a Boker Subcom. Regardless, the bottom line is I'd rather be with than without when *****, as it has a tendency to do when you're nice and comfortable with your "station" in life.

[58sniper]

Even so, it boggles my mind that they can restrict people from carrying a knife with a blade more than 2 3/4" long (these rules vary from place to place), let alone a pistol. As though a CRKT M16-13 can kill you faster than a Boker Subcom.

Curious as to what state you're in?

[Hank0331]

Curious as to what state you're in?


Depends on when you ask. I grew up in Utah, spend most of my time, unfortunately, in California, and am currently in Okinawa.

[gadgetjack]

I carry because I can. I grew up in a very rural area where any law enforcement was 20-30 minutes away. I've had poachers on our family's land before and had to run them off (got a nice Remington 870 one time). Recently my dad has had to run off kids trying to set up a meth lab in the back 40. Every carries on the farm and there are many long guns in the outbuildings. My wife, kids and I now live in Vegas and I am getting my CCW and the family and I are taking training classes together so we all on the same page. In addition to self defense, I have used my carry gun to signal for help and to hunt in a couple of survival situations. Firearms are not for everyone and neither is concealed carry. It is for me and my family. It has saved lives and defended our property.

[rwdflynavy]

I have two responses I use if folks ask why I carry a pistol:

Cause a Cop is too heavy

or

In case I need to shoot someone.

[rawdog1]

Read this about A year ago(.http://www.americanhandgunner.com/CGC705.html)
Eight nieces and nephews that are my world this is why I carry every day
Heck the old lady carries A 70s colt combat commander(was mine)
!But if some one comes at my family and all I have is A toothpick thats what I will use!!!
These days some people would not defend their own grandmother.SAD WORLD WE LIVE IN.
Well this is my 2 cents ;)

[Corporal Punishment]

Short answer is, I often travel and hike alone, often away from assistance. I also happen to be nocturnal, so I often do my traveling at night. My travels take me to some areas where I'm uncertain of the law level. So, as someone said, "I'd rather have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it", or, "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6".


A weapon is a tool just like anything else I supply myself with to be prepared. As a military veteran and a former MP I have been trained in their use. As a civilian I took the firearm certification classes and got a permit. I take the responsibility seriously and maintain proficiency by practice, and upgrade equipment as technology advances. I don't hunt with firearms and I am not a member of any club, organization, or involved in "gun culture". I'm just a private citizen now, quiet and law-abiding (with not even an overdue library book on my record) who just wants to be left alone.

Interestingly, being quiet and law abiding (not drawing attention to myself in any way), I have never been lawfully pulled over in my vehicle or been subject to a search when I was carrying my weapon. I've been pulled over twice, both times, wrong car/for nothing that I did. The times that I have been searched were always when I expected to be searched (concerts, airlines, White House, etc). So, really, I am not legally concerned. I don't show off or brandish. None of my family or friends even know I own a weapon.

As a side issue, I have spent a significant amount of time in the great state of Alaska. I love it there (in all seasons) and I plan to retire there. There are parts of the state where you are REQUIRED to carry a firearm and aren't supposed to go out without one. This is because humans are still on the food chain there (and not necessarily at the apex, if you know what I mean).

I mentioned elsewhere, that I have now lived through 3 events that made me grateful that I owned a defensive weapon.
The first was the big Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989. I immediately went out to help in the rescue and relief efforts, but there was clearly a time in the first few days afterward, when the authorities were overwhelmed and society had broken down to smaller, simpler elements (neighbourhood groups). Nothing bad, for the most part, happened, but for a time, if you called 911 (if you could find a phone that even worked) you would not have gotten a police responder. It was every man for himself and everyone was on the honor system. This was the time that I worked a 30 hour shift, and afterwards, it brought up for me the issue of the "haves" (those that took the time and money to prepare) vs. the "have nots" (those that didn't even have rudimentary food/water or a friggin' flashlight!). I had all my stuff, and, sure, I was willing to share with my family and neighbours, but if things turned ugly, yes, I would defend myself and what is legally mine. My loaded and ready weapon brought me much comfort through those dark nights.
The second was the rioting in the aftermath of the Rodney King verdict in 1992. It really surprised me how quickly the authorities in our city lost control. It didn't matter what I thought of the verdict, the fact was, there were several thousand people outside smashing windows, turning over cars (police cars too!), burning tires and setting fires to newspaper stands, and :( (joyously) looting. People were shooting at each other, beating people, burning homes and businesses, and the police were completely powerless to stop them. I can tell you some alarming anecdotes of police brutality/over-reaction, but I understand, there was much confusion and the police were scared also. So once again, I loaded up my magazines, put on my "doomsday" gear, and waited for civilization and civil order to return. And I was grateful once again that I had a weapon and was not a totally defenseless schlub at the mercy of the mob outside.
The third and most recent occasion was the great "Y2K" scare. We look back and laugh at it now, but back then, no one really knew what would happen for sure. We were ready for power grids and communications to fail, international banking to go haywire, airplanes to fall out of the sky, and pretty much (at least temporarily) a mass disruption of our technology infrastructure. None of it happened of course, but those of us who lived through it could not just dismiss it as silliness offhand. I'd rather err on the side of caution, so I did prepare (again). I had my food, water, and supplies, and I did arm myself once again for a breakdown in society (as I had already witnessed twice).

So that's it. When people argue "I don't need a gun", "why do we need private guns?" or "guns should be banned", I just smile quietly and step away from the conversation. These are probably the same naive type of people that don't even have a single jug of water, a case of canned beans, rudimentary FAK or batteries for their radio... and are going to wait for the "gub'ment" to help them out. It's no use trying to convince these people.
All I know is that I legally and responsibly have mine and know it's proper use. I plan to survive.

[Dirty Bob]

Corporal Punishment:
Good post! You make a great case for the 2nd Amendment and concealed carry.

Re: The Bay Area: I was in Berkeley for the Loma Prieta quake and scampered north across the last open bridge (Richmond/San Rafael) to my parents' place in Sonoma County. The aftermath wasn't nearly as bad as many other disasters, but it was prudent to be able to look after yourself at that time.

BTW, I called 9-1-1 in Oakland a couple of times during grad school and didn't get through. Some places don't even need a disaster for you to feel like you're on your own!

Regards,
Dirty Bob

[Crocodilo]

Fantastic post, Corporal Punishment. Lots of wise words, there. Thank you.

I relate personally to the fact of being a law-abiding "greyman" never having been searched or scrutinized by the authorities. The self-discipline to fulfill your duties as a citizen, in order to earn your rights, is the right way to go.

Having a gun, instead of giving me a vague feeling of security or power, brings to me a greater responsibility to keep out of trouble, as if carrying in the hip a constant reminder. My proficiency and carry methods might not be enough to respond adequately to all kinds of surprise close-range threats, but I have that knowledge to keep away from potential situations, by the use of increased awareness. So far it has worked.

[Rémy]

Why?
Simple Answer:
for duty reasons.

I wouldnt go to a grocery in my spare time with a gun...
I don't even need that one for home defense...
It's just a duty weapon.

But that all depends on where you live. Which country, which city and which part of the city.
In my case, there's no need to carry a gun in any part of my city (which is Vienna, Austria).

I love Alaska too and fully agree with Corporal... I went there without any gun (foreign tourist...) and sometime wished I had one... (huge bears, wolves... lonelyness...)

[Stelth]

Why? Because I'm American.

[dovk0802]

To offer something different: Good Practice. I've travelled & carried, through some less desirable neighborhoods; the Middle East & HOA. In these areas, the margin for error is small. I like to try new clothing, holster, technique, etc in a more benign (although not perfect) environment, before having to use it for real.

Not really a reason, but benefit is a slightly different take on the confidence & helping the neighbor arguments: On a couple of occasions, I've stopped to offer help in a situation like a stranded motorist. Sometimes, I'll help whether I'm carrying or not; severe injury, apparently safe situation (a senior citezen, during the day, at the botanical gardens or whatever). Sometimes, I won't stop if I have three buddies who are also well equipped. However, there are some situations in the middle, where, being well equipped pushed the danger-o-meter that little bit over to the side of the person who needed the help. Again not advocating reckless abandonment of reason, just a little help being a good neighbor.

As for the abilities of most people to carry: I agree that most people are not sufficiently trained, to include most LE & Mil, where there's a good chance they might cause more harm than good. I think the same could be said for: driving, first aid, handling money, voting, raising kids (all of which could have equally grave or even greater circumstances)... While I'd like to see all such activities highly regulated, it's the bagage that comes with the whole free society thing. And overall things have worked out rather well for the US (not to say we all couldn't use some improvement, nor to imply that the availability/restriction of guns has anything to do with it). Of course, I like to think that I'm an exception to the rule (I understandably, made a small accidental incursion into the other lane. Every other driver who cut me off is an %$$&*!@. :shrug:

One last thought related to several previous posts; I worked in a gun shop when the shall issue permits were first allowed. A great deal of the customers confided that they were glad the law had been changed as they would not be criminals now &/or they could now carry on a regular basis. :shocked:

[watchman]

Why do I carry. Well the punks dopers an just bad guys carry. I will not put my family or myself at a disadvantage. am I prepared to use it YES have I used it the answer is still Yes. Would I use it again the answer is still Yes. Does it bother me NO Do I have bad dreams NO.
If some degenerate tyres to stick me up he made his choice.
When I get up every morning. After I put on my pants I put a .380 PPK in my right front pocket. Then when I am fully dressed I put a .45 colt in my waistband at the small of my back. And a Godfather in my waistband on the left side. This is every day 7 days a week


PS Just for the crybaby liberals the only time I had to use it was not in the USA. But that could change at any time.

[glocker21]

Springfield Armory PW9701W High Capacity Steel Frame 1911 (13+1)
I have customized it with the following...

Kings long trigger
Tru Glo TFO night sights (AWESOME SIGHTS!)
Flat chackered mainspring housing with recessed lanyard attachment point
Polished feed ramp
Wilson high grip beavertail safety
39,000+ rounds down range

[KenpoTex]

hey y'all, this is my first post other than my intro. but the topic caught my eye...

Why do I carry?


Because I want to be as prepared as possible for a situation where the threat of death or serious injury to myself of another innocent person is present. I truly hope that I live my entire life without needing to utilize my training and tools. However, I never want to find myself in a situation where I need that training or those tools and don't have them because I made the conscious decision to not be prepared.
Violence can happen to anyone...you are not immune to it because you live in the "good part of town," or because "that kind of stuff just doesn't happen here." To those that say "it's just not something I really see happening," consider this: all of the people who have ever been murdered, raped, robbed, or kidnapped could have said the same thing and they would have been right...until it happened to them.
Because I don't like the idea of depending on others for my safety. As the saying goes, "when seconds count, police are only minutes away." This is not a "slam" on LE, the simple fact of the matter is that when you're confronted by an armed thug at 1 a.m. outside the gas-station the police are going to be irrelevant. You're going to win or lose on your own...I prefer to maximize my chances of winning.
Effectiveness: Until someone comes out with a light-saber or personal force field, the handgun is the most efficient and effective weapon that we can carry discretely on a daily basis. I'm a firm believer in Col. Fairbairns philosophy that "empty-hand techniques are only for the times when you have been foolish enough to find yourself without a weapon." Bad guys are often armed and often travel in packs...I'd rather have more than a knife and some empty-hand training when confronted by such people.


just my $0.02...I'll shut up now.

[arizona-hermit]

Why do I carry?

In town, when disaster strikes, the police are just minutes away.
At home, should disaster strike, the police are just an hour (or so) away.

A bad guy will not wait even a few minutes to accomplish his dirty work.

You are your only protection.

[dl52163]

Because I can.

[e206]

Every anti-gun American should read this thread.

[fuzzypockets]

HELLO

In my humble opinion there are three type of people in this world. One the sheep, the person who believes that all things are good all the time and that there is good in all people all the time and that it will not happen to them. Two the wolf, that is the person that the sheep does not believe is out there, however the wolf has teeth and claws and likes to prey on the sheep. Three there is the sheepdog, this is a critter that looks like a wolf, smells like a wolf, and even acts like a wolf, however the big different is that we help the sheep no matter what even when the sheep does not want us too.

I can not take credit for the saying I got it for Col. David Grossman. Husband, Father and Soldier and all around good Man. And yes he is a Sheepdog too


FP

[bigkahuna]

[quote=fubar ]
I carry a licensed concealed handgun to shoot bad things. I have never done it before , and never intend to do it either, But that doesn't mean I am not prepared.

I put together a good solid bug-out bag , I never intend to see a tidal wave or force 5 hurricane here , but the bag is ready.

There is a fire extinguisher in my kitchen , but I don't plan to set the house on fire.

One time last summer I was walking with wife and child to the ice cream store , happy day , carefree and oblivious. Around the corner comes a smallish woman with a giant-ish bulldog thing , maybe an American Bulldog - a mastiff like creature. The dog was startled or just plain mean 'cause it went nuts when it saw us - dragged the woman to her knees trying to 'get' us but she held on.

As she got the beast under control I realized I was pointing my handgun at it - finger on trigger. I holstered it as she apologised profusely. I don't think she even noticed the gun.

A friend on another site says " Why do I carry a .45 ? Because they don't make a .46 "


[/quote"] Because they don't make a .46" I love that!!! ROFL !!!!

[beagle]

1) Because bad things happen to good people all the time.

2) Because it is my responsibility to defend, to the best of my capabilities, my wife and daughter.

3) Because "Fortune favors the prepared".


v/r,
B.

[protaganis]

Perfectly said.

Sadly, I've worked with many cop wannabe's who've said: "When I get my license to carry, nobody will mess with me." That has been a trend among the LE students that I've had the displeasure to deal with.
The carrying of a firearm shouldn't change your behavior in ANY way shape or form. If you avoided a section of town before, you should continue to avoid it after. Any change in those habits will lead to your needing to make a life or death decision based on only a moments notice, something that WILL haunt you for years to come, if you're lucky.
As said in the prior post, that is the best summary of a reason to carry I've ever seen. Hope you never need it, but never count on luck and hope.

[Tex8746]

Has anyone seen the new Ruger LCP .38? It looks like a great SD Handgun a .38 should be enough to take care of most problems and it is in an incredible small package, I have only seen the reviews and thus far they seem to be good.

[KenpoTex]

Has anyone seen the new Ruger LCP .38? It looks like a great SD Handgun a .38 should be enough to take care of most problems and it is in an incredible small package, I have only seen the reviews and thus far they seem to be good.


I tend to adhere to the adage that "guns that are easy to carry suck to fight with." In this case, the .380 is not the greatest round. To consistently get adequate penetration, you pretty much have to avoid JHPs and go with FMJ (which means you get no expansion). I personally wouldn't go any smaller than 9mm in an auto or .38 special in a revolver unless I absolutely had to carry a tiny gun (i.e. I was somewhere were having a weapon was a no-no)