Author Topic: Firearms in the home  (Read 454674 times)

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2150 on: February 06, 2017, 07:54:05 PM »
That is not what I asked. I asked whether carry is conceal or open.
I am aware of this.

So... I mean, follow your bliss, but what was the point of your answering a question I didn't ask? Just to take up space?
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2151 on: February 06, 2017, 08:01:34 PM »
That is not what I asked. I asked whether carry is conceal or open.
I am aware of this.

So... I mean, follow your bliss, but what was the point of your answering a question I didn't ask? Just to take up space?
No.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2152 on: February 06, 2017, 08:07:38 PM »
That is not what I asked. I asked whether carry is conceal or open.
I am aware of this.

So... I mean, follow your bliss, but what was the point of your answering a question I didn't ask? Just to take up space?
No.

Okay. I just don't get it. But enjoy.

So, as to my actual question... anyone care to respond?
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

jamesvt

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2153 on: February 06, 2017, 08:51:09 PM »
Would you support waiting periods for people who already own guns? Or just for the first purchase? Seems silly to me to wait if I already own six guns, for example.
Yes, because I'd much prefer a few days waiting period for everyone over a registry of who does own guns.

NH waives the waiting period if you have a CCW permit. It's not a registry of who owns what, but if you have a CCW it's a pretty safe bet that you're already a gun owner.

I'm curious how many of you live in states with actual concealed carry permits. I ask because i hear that term used all the time, including in my state of MN, but actually in our state it is a carry permit, not a concealed carry permit. In other words, the permit to carry means I can open carry if I like, no problem. (Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

I know I could google this, but for purposes of ths discussion it's more interesting to ask you folks: is the carry permit in your state a carry permit, or a concealed carry permit?
My state (MA) requires a license to carry open or concealed. While open carry is legal you are not going to see people doing it especially in eastern MA. Most of the country doesn't require a permit to open carry.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2154 on: February 07, 2017, 07:09:26 AM »
Would you support waiting periods for people who already own guns? Or just for the first purchase? Seems silly to me to wait if I already own six guns, for example.
Yes, because I'd much prefer a few days waiting period for everyone over a registry of who does own guns.

NH waives the waiting period if you have a CCW permit. It's not a registry of who owns what, but if you have a CCW it's a pretty safe bet that you're already a gun owner.

I'm curious how many of you live in states with actual concealed carry permits. I ask because i hear that term used all the time, including in my state of MN, but actually in our state it is a carry permit, not a concealed carry permit. In other words, the permit to carry means I can open carry if I like, no problem. (Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

I know I could google this, but for purposes of ths discussion it's more interesting to ask you folks: is the carry permit in your state a carry permit, or a concealed carry permit?
My state (MA) requires a license to carry open or concealed. While open carry is legal you are not going to see people doing it especially in eastern MA. Most of the country doesn't require a permit to open carry.


That'/ very useful information. I'm shocked about Florida and South Carolina.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2155 on: February 07, 2017, 08:05:21 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin. 
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2156 on: February 07, 2017, 08:12:21 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

Oh, I can definitely see why you'd do it in a situation where you're hunting and you can. Hadn't thought of that, and it totally makes sense.

I'm saying, though, that if you are carrying for means of protection/defense from human beings, it is stupid.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2157 on: February 07, 2017, 08:21:34 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

Oh, I can definitely see why you'd do it in a situation where you're hunting and you can. Hadn't thought of that, and it totally makes sense.

I'm saying, though, that if you are carrying for means of protection/defense from human beings, it is stupid.


Understand, and agree that open carrying for personal protection (from humans) is stupid.  But what happens is that people in cities never think about other circumstances, and then lobby for laws that affect everyone, people in the country included.  Which is what causes friction between city people and country people, or red states/blue states. 
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2158 on: February 07, 2017, 08:25:02 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

Oh, I can definitely see why you'd do it in a situation where you're hunting and you can. Hadn't thought of that, and it totally makes sense.

I'm saying, though, that if you are carrying for means of protection/defense from human beings, it is stupid.


Understand, and agree that open carrying for personal protection (from humans) is stupid.  But what happens is that people in cities never think about other circumstances, and then lobby for laws that affect everyone, people in the country included.  Which is what causes friction between city people and country people, or red states/blue states.

Point taken on this one. Thanks for bringing up something I hadn't thought of (and that none of the gun instructors in the classes I've taken have brought up, either).
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3981
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2159 on: February 07, 2017, 08:43:02 AM »
Would you support waiting periods for people who already own guns? Or just for the first purchase? Seems silly to me to wait if I already own six guns, for example.
Yes, because I'd much prefer a few days waiting period for everyone over a registry of who does own guns.

NH waives the waiting period if you have a CCW permit. It's not a registry of who owns what, but if you have a CCW it's a pretty safe bet that you're already a gun owner.

I'm curious how many of you live in states with actual concealed carry permits. I ask because i hear that term used all the time, including in my state of MN, but actually in our state it is a carry permit, not a concealed carry permit. In other words, the permit to carry means I can open carry if I like, no problem. (Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

I know I could google this, but for purposes of ths discussion it's more interesting to ask you folks: is the carry permit in your state a carry permit, or a concealed carry permit?

NH allows open carry with no permit - the permit is required to carry a loaded concealed firearm. You can carry an unloaded concealed firearm without a permit.   I'm in NJ now, which basically doesn't issue permits at all.

hoosier

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2160 on: February 07, 2017, 09:05:24 AM »
Indiana issues a LTCH (License to Carry Handgun).  It doesn't specify how one must be carried (open or concealed).  You must have one to legally carry on your person or in your vehicle (loaded and/or accessible) off your property.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4397
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2161 on: February 07, 2017, 10:50:30 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.
Wow, something on here from the "other side" that I agree with.  I personally think Chris makes sense here.  In a rural area, you may need a gun and running into town should not be a reason to have to put your gun in a place you are not in control of it. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk


Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2162 on: February 08, 2017, 01:47:27 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.
These are exactly the types of situations that gun control activists don't think of when proposing federal gun laws. I mean police officers open carry all the time, can't be stupid in all situations. Open carry has its advantages in some situations, without any societal downsides.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2017, 01:07:21 AM by Metric Mouse »
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9315
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2163 on: February 08, 2017, 11:05:31 AM »
You don't think there are any societal downsides to having police carrying firearms all the time?

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2164 on: February 08, 2017, 11:35:11 AM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

Oh, I can definitely see why you'd do it in a situation where you're hunting and you can. Hadn't thought of that, and it totally makes sense.

I'm saying, though, that if you are carrying for means of protection/defense from human beings, it is stupid.


Understand, and agree that open carrying for personal protection (from humans) is stupid.  But what happens is that people in cities never think about other circumstances, and then lobby for laws that affect everyone, people in the country included.  Which is what causes friction between city people and country people, or red states/blue states.

As a female that has shot someone trying to rape and or kill me I'm going to disagree with this one.  I had been carrying concealed on the street, guy didn't know I was armed when he grabbed me and dragged me into the alley whilst ripping off my shirt.  I have no doubt the .45 in my purse saved me from extreme bodily harm that day.

I openly carry now when I am out and about whether it be in a bad part of town or hiking back woods, and the oddest thing has happened.  No more verbal sexual harassment, no more unwanted groping, no more sketchy men trying to invade my personal bubble, all of which was a fairly common occurrence prior to this incident, and it was something people always told me I "just had to deal with". 

It's nice.  Sad that the world is that way, but nice to not have to deal with it.  I still carry concealed in places I am less likely to encounter said harassment or potential violence or where there are small children present in abundance.  I do this just to give piece of mind to those around me, and I'll never be the ass that carries an assault rifle around with me in the open walking down the street "just cause I can" (even though I own quite a few of them and I do carry them in open when appropriate, like sighting in at the farm)

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2165 on: February 08, 2017, 12:09:05 PM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

Oh, I can definitely see why you'd do it in a situation where you're hunting and you can. Hadn't thought of that, and it totally makes sense.

I'm saying, though, that if you are carrying for means of protection/defense from human beings, it is stupid.


Understand, and agree that open carrying for personal protection (from humans) is stupid.  But what happens is that people in cities never think about other circumstances, and then lobby for laws that affect everyone, people in the country included.  Which is what causes friction between city people and country people, or red states/blue states.

As a female that has shot someone trying to rape and or kill me I'm going to disagree with this one.  I had been carrying concealed on the street, guy didn't know I was armed when he grabbed me and dragged me into the alley whilst ripping off my shirt.  I have no doubt the .45 in my purse saved me from extreme bodily harm that day.

I openly carry now when I am out and about whether it be in a bad part of town or hiking back woods, and the oddest thing has happened.  No more verbal sexual harassment, no more unwanted groping, no more sketchy men trying to invade my personal bubble, all of which was a fairly common occurrence prior to this incident, and it was something people always told me I "just had to deal with". 

It's nice.  Sad that the world is that way, but nice to not have to deal with it.  I still carry concealed in places I am less likely to encounter said harassment or potential violence or where there are small children present in abundance.  I do this just to give piece of mind to those around me, and I'll never be the ass that carries an assault rifle around with me in the open walking down the street "just cause I can" (even though I own quite a few of them and I do carry them in open when appropriate, like sighting in at the farm)

I can definitely see that it would stop men from harassing you. And I will amend this to say that you are right, open carry is probably a good option to keep women especially from being violated by men who assume they are easy targets for rape or other crime. So, I stand corrected.

It's really a question of what kind of crime you anticipate having to defend yourself from, isn't it? Because if what you're envisioning is defending yourself from an armed attacker who doesn't care whom he hurts, open carry is basically putting a target on yourself as the first person to shoot/remove from the situation.

So, then it comes down to statistical likelihoods of who might hurt you, and how, and why. And when we get to that point, I think it's likely that the statistical likelihoods are not what's driving conceal or open carry decision, in many cases.

Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2166 on: February 08, 2017, 01:29:43 PM »
Personally, I think there is a time and place for everything.  And just because you COULD carry an AR or PS90 around in the open, doesn't mean you should, it's called being a decent person and not scaring those less familiar with firearms because lets face it...they are the ones that get their panties in a bunch and try to regulate away firearms, so we shoot ourselves in the foot. 

Open carry has it's place, concealed has it's place.  It's all about developing a sense of when it may be appropriate, and when (even though it's legal) you're just being a dick. 

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3981
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2167 on: February 08, 2017, 02:53:42 PM »
(Though deciding to open carry is freaking stupid in my opinion.)

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it's way more nuanced and situational than your blanket statement suggests.  I open carry more than I concealed carry.  But I open carry in places where it sorta makes sense to do so, and absolutely no one raises their eyebrows at it (unless, I guess, there are out of towners).  I've referred before to spending a lot of time in Northern WI, which is a huge hotbed of outdoors activities like hunting, ATVing, fishing, boating, etc.  There is lots of woods there, and they frequently have bears.  So lots of times we're out in the woods building deer stands, maintaining the land, etc etc, and we're open carrying large caliber handguns in case of a bear wandering through.  And then halfway through the day we decide to go into town and grab a hot dog or go to the hardware store or whatever, and I'd rather keep my weapon on my hip than leave it in a car, or more frequently, we're on ATVs and I have no way to secure it.  So open carry it is.  PLENTY of other folks do the same. 

I agree, if open carry means wandering around downtown Chicago with a pistol on my hip, or being one of those assholes in CA with an AR-15 strung over my back in Starbucks, it's stupid.  But this is a big country, and going around saying stuff like "open carry is freaking stupid" and not accounting for regional norms and differences is what hacks people off, because what makes sense in Chicago or Minneapolis doesn't necessarily make sense in Eagle River, Wisconsin.

These are exactly the types of situations that gun control activists don't think of when proposing federal gun laws. I mean police officers open carry all the time, can't be stupid in all situations. Open carry has its advantages in some situations, without any societal downsides.
Police officers also typically have heavy-duty triple retention holsters, where most people open-carrying have holsters that aren't specifically designed for simultaneous fast access and weapon retention. It's not quite analogous to compare.

robartsd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2168 on: February 09, 2017, 09:26:35 AM »
So, then it comes down to statistical likelihoods of who might hurt you, and how, and why. And when we get to that point, I think it's likely that the statistical likelihoods are not what's driving conceal or open carry decision, in many cases.
I'm pretty sure that rape is much more common than crazy guy with a gun. Crazy guy with a gun always gets national attention for months; rape is barely a local news story (nationwide average is one rape every 2 minutes). There still is the argument for concealed carry in that the more common concealed carry it is the greater the risk of attacking someone who is not openly carrying the weapon. One of the biggest reasons I support gun rights isn't because I personally want to use firearms, it's because I want those who want to harm others to not know if they are risking their personal safety.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2169 on: February 09, 2017, 09:30:21 AM »
So, then it comes down to statistical likelihoods of who might hurt you, and how, and why. And when we get to that point, I think it's likely that the statistical likelihoods are not what's driving conceal or open carry decision, in many cases.
I'm pretty sure that rape is much more common than crazy guy with a gun. Crazy guy with a gun always gets national attention for months; rape is barely a local news story (nationwide average is one rape every 2 minutes). There still is the argument for concealed carry in that the more common concealed carry it is the greater the risk of attacking someone who is not openly carrying the weapon. One of the biggest reasons I support gun rights isn't because I personally want to use firearms, it's because I want those who want to harm others to not know if they are risking their personal safety.

True, but I think date rape/acquaintance rape is the majority of that statistic, and I think in either of those circumstances it is unlikely a firearm will be a factor; thinking of the 'classic' "guy took a previously consensual hook up too far" thing, doubtful a firearm will come into play in this situation but I suppose it is possible.


100% agree on the "make the bad guys wonder if they good guys are armed" though.
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2170 on: February 09, 2017, 11:57:57 AM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

robartsd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1044
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2171 on: February 09, 2017, 12:25:54 PM »
So, then it comes down to statistical likelihoods of who might hurt you, and how, and why. And when we get to that point, I think it's likely that the statistical likelihoods are not what's driving conceal or open carry decision, in many cases.
I'm pretty sure that rape is much more common than crazy guy with a gun. Crazy guy with a gun always gets national attention for months; rape is barely a local news story (nationwide average is one rape every 2 minutes). There still is the argument for concealed carry in that the more common concealed carry it is the greater the risk of attacking someone who is not openly carrying the weapon. One of the biggest reasons I support gun rights isn't because I personally want to use firearms, it's because I want those who want to harm others to not know if they are risking their personal safety.

True, but I think date rape/acquaintance rape is the majority of that statistic, and I think in either of those circumstances it is unlikely a firearm will be a factor; thinking of the 'classic' "guy took a previously consensual hook up too far" thing, doubtful a firearm will come into play in this situation but I suppose it is possible.


100% agree on the "make the bad guys wonder if they good guys are armed" though.
Yes, most rape is by an acquaintance; but 28% are stranger rape, so stranger rape occurs about 8.4 times per hour in the US. So it is still much more common than "crazy guy with a gun" scenarios.

So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?
It certainly is appropriate to hold gun owners responsible for their own actions or negligence. I could even see passing reasonable laws that would have charged the moviegoer in the linked article with a misdemeanor. Conviction of a weapon related misdemeanor might be reason to suspend a firearms license and/or extra scrutiny when applying for a firearms license. Conviction of a weapon related felony (which should be charged in a case where negligence causes a toddler to shoot themselves) would be reason for revoking or denying a firearms license.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2172 on: February 09, 2017, 12:56:59 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it. 
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2173 on: February 09, 2017, 01:05:16 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

The gun fell out, CCW holder picked it up? 

No optimal, but guns generally don't go off from being dropped.

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2174 on: February 09, 2017, 01:23:35 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

I'm interested-what are the repercussions for doing stupid stuff with a weapon like dropping it in public or leaving it out so a kids gets hold of it?  I guess i was under the impression that most people aren't charged with a felony if their kid shoots another kid because they've "suffered enough" or whatever. Are there cases where people go to jail in that circumstance?  I don't think the guy who dropped the weapon had anything happen to him.  Prosecutorial discretion?



Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2175 on: February 09, 2017, 01:27:57 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

I'm interested-what are the repercussions for doing stupid stuff with a weapon like dropping it in public or leaving it out so a kids gets hold of it?  I guess i was under the impression that most people aren't charged with a felony if their kid shoots another kid because they've "suffered enough" or whatever. Are there cases where people go to jail in that circumstance?  I don't think the guy who dropped the weapon had anything happen to him.  Prosecutorial discretion?

All sorts of things.  If you leave your weapon unsecured you can be charged with negligent homicide if it's used to kill or maim someone.  If you are careless with keeping your weapon concealed you can be charged with brandishing.  It sounds like the guy in the theater wasn't charged because he wasn't arrested; I don't know what happened beyond what was in that article, but like I said, if the cop determined that his weapon literally fell out of the holster when he sat down, the cop probably gave him a stern talking to and sent him on his way.  Given how many times my cell phone has fallen out of my pocket I'm inclined to give the guy some leeway; not the exact same thing, but again, shit happens. 
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9315
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2176 on: February 09, 2017, 01:34:20 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

I'm interested-what are the repercussions for doing stupid stuff with a weapon like dropping it in public or leaving it out so a kids gets hold of it?  I guess i was under the impression that most people aren't charged with a felony if their kid shoots another kid because they've "suffered enough" or whatever. Are there cases where people go to jail in that circumstance?  I don't think the guy who dropped the weapon had anything happen to him.  Prosecutorial discretion?

All sorts of things.  If you leave your weapon unsecured you can be charged with negligent homicide if it's used to kill or maim someone.  If you are careless with keeping your weapon concealed you can be charged with brandishing.  It sounds like the guy in the theater wasn't charged because he wasn't arrested; I don't know what happened beyond what was in that article, but like I said, if the cop determined that his weapon literally fell out of the holster when he sat down, the cop probably gave him a stern talking to and sent him on his way.  Given how many times my cell phone has fallen out of my pocket I'm inclined to give the guy some leeway; not the exact same thing, but again, shit happens.

So to confirm here . . . there are only theoretical repercussions for stupidity involving guns and you are against the idea of having anything more concrete than that?

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3981
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2177 on: February 09, 2017, 01:39:20 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

I'm interested-what are the repercussions for doing stupid stuff with a weapon like dropping it in public or leaving it out so a kids gets hold of it?  I guess i was under the impression that most people aren't charged with a felony if their kid shoots another kid because they've "suffered enough" or whatever. Are there cases where people go to jail in that circumstance?  I don't think the guy who dropped the weapon had anything happen to him.  Prosecutorial discretion?

All sorts of things.  If you leave your weapon unsecured you can be charged with negligent homicide if it's used to kill or maim someone.  If you are careless with keeping your weapon concealed you can be charged with brandishing.  It sounds like the guy in the theater wasn't charged because he wasn't arrested; I don't know what happened beyond what was in that article, but like I said, if the cop determined that his weapon literally fell out of the holster when he sat down, the cop probably gave him a stern talking to and sent him on his way.  Given how many times my cell phone has fallen out of my pocket I'm inclined to give the guy some leeway; not the exact same thing, but again, shit happens.

So to confirm here . . . there are only theoretical repercussions for stupidity involving guns and you are against the idea of having anything more concrete than that?

C'mon GuitarStv, you're better than that.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2881
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2178 on: February 09, 2017, 01:42:48 PM »
So, this is an interesting thread, and I think that I am persuadable on gun rights issues.  Many compelling arguments here.  Here is my sticking point.  I'm ok with giving everyone, within reason (e.g., no toddlers), a first crack at things and letting them demonstrate that they are doing the right thing.  But what about people who have demonstrated that they are too stupid to carry around a deadly weapon?  Like those people who leave guns out and then a toddler shoots himself.  Or this guy:

http://www.coloradofirearmtraining.com/firearm-safety/gun-falls-out-onto-ground-at-tampa-movie-theater

Would you be in favor of any repercussions at all for just out and out stupidity while carrying?

Uh, generally there ARE repercussions, and they are severe.  Do you mean MORE repercussions?  In the theater one, I mean, not sure.  Nothing is foolproof, so I'll give the guy a little leeway, nothing did happen after all.  CCW guys talk about "printing" which is where your weapon is outlined under your clothes, or they worry about a shirt riding up and exposing their weapon.  Again, if you're making a good-faith effort and shit happens, I wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle over it.

I'm interested-what are the repercussions for doing stupid stuff with a weapon like dropping it in public or leaving it out so a kids gets hold of it?  I guess i was under the impression that most people aren't charged with a felony if their kid shoots another kid because they've "suffered enough" or whatever. Are there cases where people go to jail in that circumstance?  I don't think the guy who dropped the weapon had anything happen to him.  Prosecutorial discretion?

All sorts of things.  If you leave your weapon unsecured you can be charged with negligent homicide if it's used to kill or maim someone.  If you are careless with keeping your weapon concealed you can be charged with brandishing.  It sounds like the guy in the theater wasn't charged because he wasn't arrested; I don't know what happened beyond what was in that article, but like I said, if the cop determined that his weapon literally fell out of the holster when he sat down, the cop probably gave him a stern talking to and sent him on his way.  Given how many times my cell phone has fallen out of my pocket I'm inclined to give the guy some leeway; not the exact same thing, but again, shit happens.

So to confirm here . . . there are only theoretical repercussions for stupidity involving guns and you are against the idea of having anything more concrete than that?

No.  Don't put words in my mouth. 

First of all, I object to some of the characterization of "stupidity."  Leaving your loaded handgun on a table where I kid can find it is stupidity, and it's negligence, and it's illegal.  Taking your gun out in public and waving it around, or lifting up your shirt to show it off is stupidity and is brandishing and is illegal.  Having a gun fall out of your holster may be stupidity, or it may be an equipment failure, or a million other things that I'm not going to speculate on.  I'd liken it in this case to speeding; you can go 100mph in a school zone and go to jail for reckless driving, or you can go 75 in a 65 and have the cop let you off with a warning or write you a nominal ticket.  I'm in favor of letting the cop use his judgement and determine if something is an honest mistake, or actual negligence and him using one of the laws on the books to arrest the guy.

Second, plenty of people have been charged for negligence or brandishing or other similar crimes, these are not "theoretical" in any way.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 01:44:53 PM by Chris22 »
"If I could get all the money back I ever spent on cars, I'd spend it on cars." - Nick Mason

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2179 on: February 09, 2017, 04:56:10 PM »
I can't believe I'm going to defend Chris22 on this (sorry, Chris, I realize that probably sounds like an insult, but I really just mean that you and I seem almost always to be on opposite sides of the fence), but:

Gun control advocates, me included, often like to use the gun vs. car comparison regarding licensure, etc., in part because both can be lethal on purpose or through negligence.

I think I'm a good, responsible driver. I never text or use my phone behind the wheel, I'm not given to excessive speeding (though come on, I drive an Audi, I'm not made of stone). I have, on occasion, accidentally done something in my car like drift over the center line, before realizing that I've done so and moving back into my lane. Now, I could have killed someone, theoretically, by doing so, if there was someone else coming in the other direction. But there wasn't, and also, I'll wager that everyone, if they are honest, has done something like this from time to time. We are human, no harm no foul, whew! I don't necessarily think that person should be harshly fined or prosecuted for it.

Chris is right that modern handguns... don't just go off if they are dropped. They are designed not to. So, yeah, dropping it is a boneheaded move, dumb for sure, but not outside the realm of possibility that a responsible person could have it happen. But it's probably not nearly as dangerous as you might think if you weren't very familiar with them.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19781_6-stupid-gun-myths-everyone-believes-thanks-to-movies.html
« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 05:03:13 PM by Kris »
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2180 on: February 11, 2017, 01:15:49 AM »
You don't think there are any societal downsides to having police carrying firearms all the time?
Another strawman?
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2181 on: February 11, 2017, 01:29:48 AM »
I can definitely see that it would stop men from harassing you. And I will amend this to say that you are right, open carry is probably a good option to keep women especially from being violated by men who assume they are easy targets for rape or other crime. So, I stand corrected.

It's really a question of what kind of crime you anticipate having to defend yourself from, isn't it? Because if what you're envisioning is defending yourself from an armed attacker who doesn't care whom he hurts, open carry is basically putting a target on yourself as the first person to shoot/remove from the situation.

So, then it comes down to statistical likelihoods of who might hurt you, and how, and why. And when we get to that point, I think it's likely that the statistical likelihoods are not what's driving conceal or open carry decision, in many cases.
But does it matter if statistical likelihood is driving the carrying? Can't carrying a gun provide protection against being robbed, assaulted, raped, murdered in their home, attacked by wild animals or killed in a mass-casualty shooting? Some of these are more likely to occur than others, but isn't a firearm just as effective at protecting against one as another? Does it matter that one carries because they might be shot by a terrorist while visiting planned parenthood, when they're actually more likely to be assaulted by muggers? So while open carry may not be best for all situations, neither is concealed carry.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2182 on: February 17, 2017, 06:55:46 PM »
I found an interesting article here:  http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/boston-the-second-amendment-right-to-be-afraid-the-night-i-came-face-to-face-with-my-gun-toting-neighbour

An elderly Canadian woman has been working on a farm in Florida.  It sounds like a big place, and access is gated using some sort of electronic system where you enter a code.   She followed a truck through the gate before it closed and continued on towards her house.   Shortly after, she encountered another truck which blocked the road.   The driver, a large man, got out with an assault rifle and confronted her.    Apparently she had tailgated his daughter, who reported it to her parents.   Her parents freaked out and went off to find the intruder before he killed or assaulted someone.  Everything ended without injury, although the author seemed a bit traumatized by the experience.

I'm not sure what to make out of this story.    Is crime so bad in Florida that the locals have to actively patrol like this?   It seems very foreign to me.

Or was the girl's father over-reacting?

Abe

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 806
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2183 on: February 17, 2017, 09:07:40 PM »
Maybe the father is a drug dealer and thought she was trying to kidnap the daughter.

In all seriousness I think there's an inverse relationship between real and perceived risk of danger in this country. Also an inverse relationship between real and perceived manliness. I'm not saying that most people who have self-esteem issues bury them with gun-toting, but there are some undercurrents of that where I grew up. We all knew the annoying neighborhood gadfly always talking about needing a gun for never-realized threats. The moron is lucky he didn't get shot up, illegally blocking the road and assaulting someone like that. The neighborhood road is not private property and he's not a policeman.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2184 on: February 17, 2017, 09:17:25 PM »
Maybe the father is a drug dealer and thought she was trying to kidnap the daughter.

In all seriousness I think there's an inverse relationship between real and perceived risk of danger in this country. Also an inverse relationship between real and perceived manliness. I'm not saying that most people who have self-esteem issues bury them with gun-toting, but there are some undercurrents of that where I grew up. We all knew the annoying neighborhood gadfly always talking about needing a gun for never-realized threats. The moron is lucky he didn't get shot up, illegally blocking the road and assaulting someone like that. The neighborhood road is not private property and he's not a policeman.
Would you care to compare these people with Mishmash, who posted just one page ago about deciding to open carrying a gun after an assault, and how they feel they have been treated more respectfully since deciding to carry a weapon in a way everyone can see?

Also; if the neighborhood is gated as such in the story, it is likely it was private property and thus it is not illegal for a homeowner to block the road. This may not be the case, but is quite likely.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

calimom

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
  • Location: Northern California
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2185 on: February 17, 2017, 10:43:09 PM »
I found an interesting article here:  http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/boston-the-second-amendment-right-to-be-afraid-the-night-i-came-face-to-face-with-my-gun-toting-neighbour

An elderly Canadian woman has been working on a farm in Florida.  It sounds like a big place, and access is gated using some sort of electronic system where you enter a code.   She followed a truck through the gate before it closed and continued on towards her house.   Shortly after, she encountered another truck which blocked the road.   The driver, a large man, got out with an assault rifle and confronted her.    Apparently she had tailgated his daughter, who reported it to her parents.   Her parents freaked out and went off to find the intruder before he killed or assaulted someone.  Everything ended without injury, although the author seemed a bit traumatized by the experience.

I'm not sure what to make out of this story.    Is crime so bad in Florida that the locals have to actively patrol like this?   It seems very foreign to me.

Or was the girl's father over-reacting?

Who knows. Canadians (and otherwise sane people) must be constantly shaking their heads over the craziness of gun toting Second Amendment Americans. Did you hear the one about the Idaho woman who was so terrified by the idea of shopping at a big box store in broad daylight that she was shot to death by her own toddler?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/12/31/the-inside-story-of-how-an-idaho-toddler-shot-his-mom-at-wal-mart/

Abe

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 806
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2186 on: February 18, 2017, 06:35:58 AM »
Maybe the father is a drug dealer and thought she was trying to kidnap the daughter.

In all seriousness I think there's an inverse relationship between real and perceived risk of danger in this country. Also an inverse relationship between real and perceived manliness. I'm not saying that most people who have self-esteem issues bury them with gun-toting, but there are some undercurrents of that where I grew up. We all knew the annoying neighborhood gadfly always talking about needing a gun for never-realized threats. The moron is lucky he didn't get shot up, illegally blocking the road and assaulting someone like that. The neighborhood road is not private property and he's not a policeman.
Would you care to compare these people with Mishmash, who posted just one page ago about deciding to open carrying a gun after an assault, and how they feel they have been treated more respectfully since deciding to carry a weapon in a way everyone can see?

Also; if the neighborhood is gated as such in the story, it is likely it was private property and thus it is not illegal for a homeowner to block the road. This may not be the case, but is quite likely.

I'd say if one was a victim of assault or not, and carries a gun for protection it's make sense to let others know you have one. That's why I think open carry laws are fine. I'd say that is even a more responsible use of a gun since it deters violence against the gun owner.  That is an entirely different scenario than pulling a gun on someone and threatening to shoot them for apparently no real reason other than your paranoia if they don't comply with your demands. This is ostensibly why police forces were invented - to have neutral parties with training settle disputes between people while minimizing violence.

Regarding private property - unless the person owns the entire farm and pays for that road maintenance, the road is probably not his property but that of either the town or the HOA. In either case the writer would have exactly as much right to use the road and the right not to be accosted by a random person barricading it. Again, not his legal property and thus not legal for him to barricade the road and threaten someone on it. If he does own the property in its entirety then he has a plausible defense for his actions and the writer shouldn't be surprised a gun was pulled on her for trespassing.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2017, 06:45:14 AM by Abe »

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2187 on: February 18, 2017, 06:42:16 AM »
re: open carry -- some people say that open carry is like wearing a sign that says -- shoot me first.   This would be true in some situations.
If the goal is to defend, then an element of surprise may be desirable.

re: vulnerability, I don't go out much and don't see a need to carry, but if I were to rate the risk of places I go, I would estimate my highest risk is running errands at Walmart and Target.   

But overall my lifestyle is very low risk and I don't feel a need to carry at this time.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2188 on: February 18, 2017, 04:12:38 PM »
Quote
Who knows. Canadians (and otherwise sane people) must be constantly shaking their heads over the craziness of gun toting Second Amendment Americans. Did you hear the one about the Idaho woman who was so terrified by the idea of shopping at a big box store in broad daylight that she was shot to death by her own toddler?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/12/31/the-inside-story-of-how-an-idaho-toddler-shot-his-mom-at-wal-mart/
Sad. On a positive note, it is a good thing the Canadian lady didn't drive past this... http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/12/us/arizona-good-samaritan-kills-man-beating-trooper/index.html
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2189 on: February 18, 2017, 06:00:27 PM »
You know, that's the first example I've seen of a citizen using a pistol to do something directly useful.   It's an impressive story.   It would be challenging to remain calm in the situation that motorist encountered.    I hope he gets the same sort of support an officer would after the shooting.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2190 on: February 18, 2017, 07:51:14 PM »
http://www.wibw.com/content/news/Topeka-Police-respond-to-stabbing-at-East-Topeka-Walmart-413500003.html

Well here is another one. Ccw holder stopped a stabbing- no one was shot.

The point is that for every "shot by a toddler" story, there is at least one "good" use of a weapon for defense. Anecdotes do not equal data, and throwing out horror stories as if they are the norm is not helpful, nor particularly useful to the conversation.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

calimom

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 464
  • Location: Northern California
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2191 on: February 18, 2017, 09:59:49 PM »
re: open carry -- some people say that open carry is like wearing a sign that says -- shoot me first.   This would be true in some situations.
If the goal is to defend, then an element of surprise may be desirable.

re: vulnerability, I don't go out much and don't see a need to carry, but if I were to rate the risk of places I go, I would estimate my highest risk is running errands at Walmart and Target.   

But overall my lifestyle is very low risk and I don't feel a need to carry at this time.

KBecks, when you enter Target, do you just brandish your pistol and just start firing? Or wait for all the "danger" to start happening and then shoot? You must live in a very dangerous neighborhood! ((hugs))

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2192 on: February 19, 2017, 05:53:18 AM »
Try reading that again, because I stated very clearly that I don't carry.   
« Last Edit: February 19, 2017, 06:07:11 AM by KBecks »

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2193 on: February 19, 2017, 06:08:27 AM »
And yet this statement
Quote
The point is that for every "shot by a toddler" story, there is at least one "good" use of a weapon for defense.
is itself an anecdote.   

Anyway I don't think I've been throwing out horror stories.   I started the thread because I want to understand the right to bear arms culture in the states beyond the typical 'Muricans love their guns, they're all nuts' meme that you encounter outside of the US.

KBecks

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2194 on: February 19, 2017, 06:21:34 AM »
You know, that's the first example I've seen of a citizen using a pistol to do something directly useful.   It's an impressive story.   It would be challenging to remain calm in the situation that motorist encountered.    I hope he gets the same sort of support an officer would after the shooting.

Do you want to see some other examples? 

Here's a gunfight video from Brazil
http://ferfal.blogspot.com/2016/12/gunfight-video-10-lessons-learned.html

A 63 year old man in Florida shoots armed robbers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CJp9BPHMOo

Generally I don't like watching these kinds of videos, I don't like seeing people getting shot, even people who are going to hurt and steal.  But I respect that people can and do successfully defend themselves with firearms. 


Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2195 on: February 19, 2017, 10:13:58 AM »
re: open carry -- some people say that open carry is like wearing a sign that says -- shoot me first.   This would be true in some situations.
If the goal is to defend, then an element of surprise may be desirable.

re: vulnerability, I don't go out much and don't see a need to carry, but if I were to rate the risk of places I go, I would estimate my highest risk is running errands at Walmart and Target.   

But overall my lifestyle is very low risk and I don't feel a need to carry at this time.

KBecks, when you enter Target, do you just brandish your pistol and just start firing? Or wait for all the "danger" to start happening and then shoot? You must live in a very dangerous neighborhood! ((hugs))
Please don't troll.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2196 on: February 19, 2017, 10:42:56 AM »
And yet this statement
Quote
The point is that for every "shot by a toddler" story, there is at least one "good" use of a weapon for defense.
is itself an anecdote.   

Anyway I don't think I've been throwing out horror stories.   I started the thread because I want to understand the right to bear arms culture in the states beyond the typical 'Muricans love their guns, they're all nuts' meme that you encounter outside of the US.
Exactly right, just another anecdote. The point being that anecdotes don't prove anything, and you now have examples of guns being used for defense.  I was not implying that you were throwing out horror stories, only that you were looking for the other side of the equation as well. The trolls in tbis thread will try to sidetrack things, but mostly the debate has been open, and as evidenced by the last few pages some people have even come to different opinions than they previously held.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1256
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2197 on: February 19, 2017, 10:53:18 AM »
Exactly right, just another anecdote. The point being that anecdotes don't prove anything, and you now have examples of guns being used for defense.  I was not implying that you were throwing out horror stories, only that you were looking for the other side of the equation as well. The trolls in tbis thread will try to sidetrack things, but mostly the debate has been open, and as evidenced by the last few pages some people have even come to different opinions than they previously held.

Didn't really read the last couple pages but since it seems we have some new folks to the discussion, thought I would chime back in as someone who changed his mind on guns (years before this thread existed). I used to be militantly pro gun control, but now I am pretty indifferent to it. I'm not about to join the NRA, which remains a shady and hypocritical entity as far as I'm concerned, but I do think most of the gun laws out there are unnecessarily burdensome, and do not need to be made even stricter given the likely low ROI on goals like reducing gun deaths. The thing is, you don't even have to believe that guns are necessary for self defense (I don't, for many/most Americans anyway) to still think gun control is a bad idea.

First, the biggest danger privately held guns pose is to the owners themselves, and personally I fall on the Darwin's Law side of that equation. You add in the logistical nightmare outlawing guns in a country with so many guns out there already, combine that with the number of gun deaths related to things like suicide or the drug trade, and it becomes clear that reducing gun deaths can be accomplished much more quickly and efficaciously through actions other than stricter gun control laws which also, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, disproportionately affect poor and minority communities.

Constitutionality doesn't need to come into it, nor does how effective guns are for personal defense. The fact remains in the U.S. specifically, crusading for gun control is not an effective use of time or resources. I wish we could be like Japan or the UK when it comes to guns, but that ship sailed long ago, and here we are.

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2198 on: February 19, 2017, 02:38:29 PM »
Yep, I tend to be pretty indifferent to gun control.   Gun control largely works in Canada and I don't think we should change.   I see no way to implement gun control in the US either, so not much point in trying to change that either.

My impression is that a large part of the US has a bit of a libertarian culture, and owning a firearm to defend yourself is just part of being able to look after yourself.    I can understand the folks on this forum who have their own weapons, and practice with them and store them safely.    I'm a big believer in self-sufficiency.   One of the things Robert Heinlein wrote that I actually agree with is:

Quote
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

I don't understand why society would tolerate someone with a handgun who does not behave in a safe manner.   This person is a danger to themselves and everyone around them.

This story here http://www.wibw.com/content/news/Topeka-Police-respond-to-stabbing-at-East-Topeka-Walmart-413500003.html exemplifies the problem I have with private citizens carrying firearms around.

This incident seemed to work out well, but it could also have gone very wrong:
 - the 3rd party CCW could have shot one or both participants in the altercation.   Not only would he have to deal with the legal repercussions, he would have to deal with the mental stress of killing someone.
- one of the two men fighting could have seized control of his pistol and the violence in the situation could have escalated.
- the weapon could have been discharged and hit a bystander

of course if he had no firearm, the confrontation could have escalated and one of the participants could have been badly injured or killed.   So I don't see a 'right' answer to the scenario.

It's just my opinion, but if someone is going to use a pistol this way, I think she needs to be trained and licensed to do so.   There's no way I'd want someone without regular training brandishing a weapon in public to try and control a violent situation.




JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3981
Re: Firearms in the home
« Reply #2199 on: February 22, 2017, 03:38:30 PM »
Yep, I tend to be pretty indifferent to gun control.   Gun control largely works in Canada and I don't think we should change.   I see no way to implement gun control in the US either, so not much point in trying to change that either.

My impression is that a large part of the US has a bit of a libertarian culture, and owning a firearm to defend yourself is just part of being able to look after yourself.    I can understand the folks on this forum who have their own weapons, and practice with them and store them safely.    I'm a big believer in self-sufficiency.   One of the things Robert Heinlein wrote that I actually agree with is:

Quote
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

I don't understand why society would tolerate someone with a handgun who does not behave in a safe manner.   This person is a danger to themselves and everyone around them.

This story here http://www.wibw.com/content/news/Topeka-Police-respond-to-stabbing-at-East-Topeka-Walmart-413500003.html exemplifies the problem I have with private citizens carrying firearms around.

This incident seemed to work out well, but it could also have gone very wrong:
 - the 3rd party CCW could have shot one or both participants in the altercation.   Not only would he have to deal with the legal repercussions, he would have to deal with the mental stress of killing someone.
- one of the two men fighting could have seized control of his pistol and the violence in the situation could have escalated.
- the weapon could have been discharged and hit a bystander

of course if he had no firearm, the confrontation could have escalated and one of the participants could have been badly injured or killed.   So I don't see a 'right' answer to the scenario.

It's just my opinion, but if someone is going to use a pistol this way, I think she needs to be trained and licensed to do so.   There's no way I'd want someone without regular training brandishing a weapon in public to try and control a violent situation.

The article doesn't mention any training the CCW holder had. Are you implying that he was untrained?

Replace the armed individual with police officer and all of your complaints remain. He could have shot one or both persons, or a bystander, or someone could have taken the gun.