Concealed Carry Logic

[Idontdotrix]

If I were king of this country I would make rifle marksmanship a required course in highschool. just like drivers ed.

hell yeah. I grew up with a houseful of handguns, rifles and shotguns. We were taught respect for firearms right from the start.

I had access on any given day to two dozen guns, and never once misused them. Education & experience made the difference.

 

[Nemo Brinker]

If we adopted this same sort of passionate level of risk consciousness in all areas of life, we'd all be dumping 15% into our retirement accounts, learning CPR, and carrying medical kits in our cars; and probably reaping greater aggregate social benefit because of it than if we all carried firearms.

Hmmm. I actually do all those things. Well, maybe 10% into the retirement account. No car, but I carry a first aid kit in my tank- or tailbag...and I've got the training to use it. Same with the bike itself--I've had, what, five safety and skills classes now. Same with sex--get tested yearly, always use latex.
I got a similar level of training with handguns before applying for my CCW--it's the only way I feel responsible carrying. Plenty of folks do similarly; it isn't always a fantasy.

And yes, I've had a situation where a firearm resolved an unsafe situation...back when I lived in a rural area, my housemates and I got the reputation as "the dykes." Folks would drive onto the land and stare, run around in our orchards hoping for a glimpse, etc. etc. in ways that got more and more intimidating. Fortunately, one of us had a 12. ga shotgun. One evening, we heard nearby gunshots and my roommate ran in white as a sheet...there were people in the orchard, shooting. So close she could see muzzle flash; they were shooting at the house.
I ran up and got the shotgun, ran out onto the porch, yelled "get the hell OUT of here...we're armed!!!" There were a couple more shots, very close--perhaps 100-150 feet away in the nearby orchard. I fired into the air, and there was the sound of scuffling and running; soon after, the sound of a truck peeling out down the gravel road. And word must have gotten around, because nobody f*cked with us after that.

Educated, trained CCW holders aren't going to bring about the totter and fall of western civ...it'll more likely be all the clueless, untrained drivers and the destruction they cause.

 

[mercurial]

I'm glad the shotgun helped solve your problem, although that is not a CCW story; you aren't carrying that shotgun on your person, it remained in your home.

 

[Ant]

I'm not against guns at all. I carry one everywhere I go legally. And no my theory wanst BUNK. I would never go shooting up a mall, school, etc. I am a law abiding citizen. I guess we have different definitions of those words. But I understand where your coming from M.

Post a pic of your CCW permit or your badge

 

[macadamizer]

ha I usually stay clear from gun arguments since I am not anti-gun or pro-gun per se, but I think you echo the thoughts that are often going through the back of my mind.

Guns are indeed a specific type of tool that, with training and practice, has a definite utility in a variety of circumstances. They are also, simply put, fun to talk about and fun to shoot.

That being said, the utility of carrying concealed full-time is, for most people, extremely low; the chance of actually needing that weapon for defense, and that chance that if that weapon were used it would end in a favorable outcome, are so ridiculously low that it would be hard for any reasonable person to make an argument that the tangible benefits outweigh the rather large drawback of having to carry a big piece of lead everywhere in your pocket.

If we adopted this same sort of passionate level of risk consciousness in all areas of life, we'd all be dumping 15% into our retirement accounts, learning CPR, and carrying medical kits in our cars; and probably reaping greater aggregate social benefit because of it than if we all carried firearms.

But we don't do these things, and thats because the argument for ccw on the basis of risk prevention is, for most people at least, only a thinly veiled facade that provides cover for their real feelings, which are much more id-like: to carry because deep down they have this Wyatt Earp fantasy of confronting a bad guy and, as a poster above so eloquently phrased it, "putting two in the chest and one in the head".

No one is going to blame you for your cute little super hero fantasies, we've all watched a lot of movies so its easy to see where that comes from, but to hide that perspective by cloaking it in language like "a polite society is an armed one" is to engage in social debate under mostly fraudulent pretense.

+1. Couldn't agree more. Except for the pro/anti-gun thingie at the top (I am very pro-gun ) this could be something I might have written.

I am an avid shooter, both pistols and rifles; I reload my own ammo, and I shoot as much as I can (unfortunately, this amount is far less than the amount I would like to shoot ). That said, some of the self-defense/concealed-carry arguments, especially on the gun-related boards, oftentimes veer off into extreme paranoia and fantasy land. When you see threads talking about how many guns and where you have them stashed around your house, bug-out bags with armored vests and a thousand rounds of ammo, anything using the acronym SHTF or TEOTWAWKI, arguing over what weapons would be best if you had to walk to Utah after a collapse of government, these are the people that certainly appear to be less worried about self-defense, and are more planning (and hoping) that "Red Dawn" becomes true.

I am not really worried if a law-abiding gun owner wants to get a permit and carry a concealed weapon -- have at it. But I agree with you -- the chances of ever actually needing a weapon are so slight that the inconvenience outweighs the utility, at least for me. Reasonable minds may disagree. I don't keep a loaded gun at home either -- I keep all of my guns safely locked up. Yeah, if a home invasion robbery occurs, I might be out of luck -- but give all of the facts of my own situation -- nice neighborhood, big dogs in the house, friends with kids over often -- it just make no sense to me to keep a loaded firearm ready to go, the risks simply outweigh the vanishingly small chance that I will ever need it.

And I have "bug out bags" in my cars as well -- but none of them contain guns or ammo, just food, water, and some survival/first aid equipment.

Given the risks of an accident, the high level of legal liability (even if it is a "righteous" shoot), the hassle of carrying concealed, versus the very low probability of anyone actually needing to draw their weapon, I definitely come down on the side of not wanting to carry a gun.

But again, I fully support the right to carry if you want; if CC permits were available, I am sure I would sign up, although I doubt I would ever carry.

 

[illmatic]

^^^ better to have it and NOT need it, then to NOT have it and need it. And red, no I'm not going to post a pic of my CCW. You are absofuckinglutly NOBODY to prove shit to but a little pissant. Go tie your shoes and make a post about it.

Also, you only need to have it one time. I would rather have a lifetime of "inconvienance" of carrying it than a minute of convientantly not carrying it and need it, only to get killed or someone in my family get killed by some psycho.

 

[soybean]

^^^ better to have it and NOT need it, then to NOT have it and need it. And red, no I'm not going to post a pic of my CCW. You are absofuckinglutly NOBODY to prove shit to but a little pissant. Go tir your shoes and make a post about it.
Better to have it and NOT need it than to need

The last guy we need having a CCW right here folks.

 

[elbacalao]

The last guy we need having a CCW right here folks.

+ 1 !!

 

[macadamizer]

^^^ better to have it and NOT need it, then to NOT have it and need it. And red, no I'm not going to post a pic of my CCW. You are absofuckinglutly NOBODY to prove shit to but a little pissant. Go tir your shoes and make a post about it.
Better to have it and NOT need it than to need

I understand that logic -- but apply it consistently, and you will need to be wearing a toolbelt all the time. I've needed a hammer or channel lock pliers on several occasions. I've never needed a gun. I don't carry a gun, or a hammer, or pliers.

I do carry a bottle opener.

 

[Ant]

^^^ better to have it and NOT need it, then to NOT have it and need it. And red, no I'm not going to post a pic of my CCW. You are absofuckinglutly NOBODY to prove shit to but a little pissant. Go tie your shoes and make a post about it.

Also, you only need to have it one time. I would rather have a lifetime of "inconvienance" of carrying it than a minute of convientantly not carrying it and need it, only to get killed or someone in my family get killed by some psycho.

You don't have one.

 

[Ant]

The last guy we need having a CCW right here folks.

It's just internet posing, no agency would issue one to him.

 

[macadamizer]

Also, you only need to have it one time. I would rather have a lifetime of "inconvienance" of carrying it than a minute of convientantly not carrying it and need it, only to get killed or someone in my family get killed by some psycho.

Again, do you apply this logic consistently? When an airplane crashes, it's usually pretty bad for the people on board -- do you still fly? A motorcycle crash can be pretty bad for the rider, too -- I assume since you are on this board, you ride, correct? The point is, we make these sorts of risk calculations all of the time, and decide what mode of transport to take, or what foods to eat, or what inconveniences we are willing to suffer, based on comparing the value to the inconvenience or whatever.

Unless you are a cop, a soldier, or otherwise expose yourself to much greater danger of shootings/muggings/kidnappings/robberies/etc., (and this is not counting the fact that most of the time, even in these situations, giving them a wallet will make them go away anyway, with nobody having to get shot) than the average person, if you honestly weighed the utility of concealed carry versus the downsides -- the hassle of getting (and maintaining) a license, discomfort of actually carrying a weapon everyday, the very high level of legal liability should you ever make a mistake in its use (and the high level of legal liability that potentially exists even with a righteous use), combined with the low likelihood of ever needing it -- you would probably find that, for most people, it just isn't worth it.

But, like Holeshot alluded to, I would doubt that more than a very few people who carry concealed (or who keep loaded guns around their house) actually do make an honest assessment of risk and rewards.

 

[illmatic]

Soy/red, take the dicks out of your asses and stfu. All the both of you do is talk shit on things you don't know

 

[illmatic]

About, and make bullshit posts. Red I can seriously tell your a flamer, who has no life. Do YOU ride? Do YOU carry? Do YOU do ANYTHING? God I hate fags

 

[nazgulnarsil]

Unless you are a cop, a soldier, or otherwise expose yourself to much greater danger of shootings/muggings/kidnappings/robberies/etc., (and this is not counting the fact that most of the time, even in these situations, giving them a wallet will make them go away anyway, with nobody having to get shot) than the average person, if you honestly weighed the utility of concealed carry versus the downsides -- the hassle of getting (and maintaining) a license, discomfort of actually carrying a weapon everyday, the very high level of legal liability should you ever make a mistake in its use (and the high level of legal liability that potentially exists even with a righteous use), combined with the low likelihood of ever needing it -- you would probably find that, for most people, it just isn't worth it.

If you consider that there have been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theater of operations during the last 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000. The rate in Washington D.C. (among others) is 80.6 per 100,000. That means that you are about 25% more likely to be shot and killed in our Nation's Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, than you are in Iraq.

Conclusion: We should immediately pull out of Washington D.C.

Most people believe that human beings are rational and humane, that society is stable and unchanging, that the government will protect you and your family. Unfortunately scientific research and historical trends show that none of these are true.

The argument here seems to have shifted to:
Is it irrational to be prepared for statistically unlikely events?

the answer depends entirely on how much being prepared costs. Will I wear a helmet outside everyday to protect myself from falling items? No, it is not worth the cost of social ostracization and decreased income potential (who would hire the wacko with a helmet?). Will I carry a spare tire in my car? it costs nothing except a slightly decreased gas mileage seeing as the car came with it. So sure, even though a flat tire is statistically unlikely I'll carry a spare tire.

Should you own a firearm?
each person has to look at the costs and decide for themselves. I think that the costs of not having firearms is unacceptable.

It should end there, each individual making choices. Unfortunately we have people inundated with communist propaganda that believe that they should have some say over my private property because the externalities of said private property are interfering with their happiness.
They generally back up their claims with fudged or straight up fabricated statistics.

for example, from this thread:
"a vast majority of people who buy guns for home protection end up shooting a family member instead of a intruder."

firstly, this is a fallacious claim, but even if it were true what business do you have telling me what risks are acceptable to me and my family?

maybe I'm just not as enlightened as progressives, but I don't understand how you can have a peaceful society without private property rights and freedom of choice. tell people what to do and take away their possessions long enough and bad things happen.

 

[nazgulnarsil]

About, and make bullshit posts. Red I can seriously tell your a flamer, who has no life. Do YOU ride? Do YOU carry? Do YOU do ANYTHING? God I hate fags

there's one of you in every thread on a controversial subject. someone who just serves the opposing side by being an example of a "____ nut"

 

[nazgulnarsil]

a little aside about police:

the war on drugs has done irreparable harm to the US and not just monetarily. When you force the police to enforce arbitrary laws you turn them against their own people. In turn the people become bitter and resentful of law enforcement. Arbitrary laws undermine your own authority. Each time a person disregards the law your authority is undermined. When a population becomes used to breaking all the arbitrary laws it is a much shorter step to breaking the real ones.

 

[macadamizer]

Should you own a firearm?
each person has to look at the costs and decide for themselves. I think that the costs of not having firearms is unacceptable.

I wasn't talking about having firearms in general -- I was talking about concealed carry every day. I have a safe full of guns myself; I support concealed carry (shall issue); I think personal defense is a legitimate use of a firearm; I think anyone that qualifies for a concealed carry permit, and wants to carry, should carry.

That said, I stand by my earlier premise -- that most anyone who takes an honest look at the risk-hassle-reward curve, without ego involved, will find that in most situations, there just isn't a reason to carry a gun in everyday life. I think that some people who carry have made an honest assessment, and feel that, in their circumstances, carrying a gun makes sense. I also believe, based on my interactions with other gun owners, that many -- maybe most -- have not made an honest assessment, and just want to carry a gun, for whatever reason. I'm fine with that -- if you are legal, and want to carry a gun, go for it -- but I don't think you should support your right to carry with rhetoric such as "better to have and not need" or "an armed society is a polite society" or "two in the chest one in the head."

There is a lot of macho posturing and preparing for the zombie wars and SHTF and rising up against the JBT's amongst the pro-gun folks, and I think that is what drives a lot of the desire to carry -- not rational reflection.

If you want to, fine. Go for it. Like I said, I would probably sign up for a permit myself, although I doubt I would ever actually carry. Maybe because I am a lawyer, I am more sensitive to the considerable legal implications of carrying and using a firearm -- I don't know.

It should end there, each individual making choices. Unfortunately we have people inundated with communist propaganda that believe that they should have some say over my private property because the externalities of said private property are interfering with their happiness.
They generally back up their claims with fudged or straight up fabricated statistics.

Even hardcore libertarians understand that, in some cases, the fact that a risk or harm or nuisance can't be completely (or reasonably) internalized to an individual means that an individual know longer has the unfettered right to the activity. Where the line is drawn is subject to debate, but even libertarians recognize that there are limits to individual freedoms.

 

[macadamizer]

a little aside about police:

the war on drugs has done irreparable harm to the US and not just monetarily. When you force the police to enforce arbitrary laws you turn them against their own people. In turn the people become bitter and resentful of law enforcement. Arbitrary laws undermine your own authority. Each time a person disregards the law your authority is undermined. When a population becomes used to breaking all the arbitrary laws it is a much shorter step to breaking the real ones.

Can't disagree with you there.

 

[Ratters]

a little aside about police:

the war on drugs has done irreparable harm to the US and not just monetarily. When you force the police to enforce arbitrary laws you turn them against their own people. In turn the people become bitter and resentful of law enforcement. Arbitrary laws undermine your own authority. Each time a person disregards the law your authority is undermined. When a population becomes used to breaking all the arbitrary laws it is a much shorter step to breaking the real ones.

If I was able to rep you twice, I woulda repped this one as well.

One other problem with the drug laws is that police departments use them to pad their accounts with all the seizure laws and rico statutes, which are just utter bullshit. What it leads to is this: www.fear.org/scott.html