Here's Why I Don't Favor Everyone Carrying

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kanewpadle said:
Sure, but involving government at any level is bad. I don't trust any of them. Especially around here.

Give em an inch...........
Click to expand...

Do you drive a car? Is your Doctor licensed? There are all sorts of things that require a license and those are issued by the state. The CCW is a license in most states. However, that said I don't care if the individual has a license. I just want them safe to carry. Just like a Hunter Safety Course. Do you think that is to much to ask?
 
Last edited:
old tanker said:
Unfortunately, the good pastor likely assumed merely presenting the weapon would allow him to control the situation. He compounded that mistake by being close enough to the assailant for him to initiate a struggle for the gun.

All the soul searching about killing needs to be done before introducing deadly force into the mix.
Click to expand...

That sums it up to me.

A couple questions we'll never know the answer to. Like did the pastor try to fire, only to forget to disengage a safety. Did he forget to chamber a round. We don't know what kind of gun the pastor drew.

I suspect, without any proof, he just hesitated to fire. Tragic.
 
Kanewpadle said:
That's a cop out my friend. You can't have it both ways. Yes you explained why. "You are not in favor of everyone carrying " says it all. It's okay for some but not others.

That statement suggests that you want restrictions on people that YOU think shouldn't carry.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I don't care either way. But your statement says much more than you think it does.
Click to expand...

Actually, no - it doesn't.
 
AJ said:
Do you drive a car? Is your Doctor licensed? There are all sorts of things that require a license and those are issued by the state. The CCW is a license in most states. However, that said I don't care if the individual has a license. I just want them safe to care. Just like a Hunter Safety Course. Do you think that is to much to ask?
Click to expand...

Your forgetting our constitutional right.

Driving is a privilege. Not a right.
 
ladder13 said:
Show me where in the Constitution it says anything about training, fees, AR's, pistol braces, etc.

You all did take an oath, correct?
Click to expand...

Show me in the Constitution where having a driver license is required. We have laws and that is what makes a civilization. Some laws we agree with and some laws we do not. Where in the Constitution does it call for a CCW?

! took an oath to defend the country against all enemies foreign and domestic. Is there someone here an enemy?
 
The most recent article I've seen said the pastor proned the guy out, and then was distracted by his wife, which gave Mytrez an opportunity to jump him and take away the gun and shoot him. Another male was there who was armed and elected to hightail it. He was shot while making for his car.
 
AJ said:
Show me in the Constitution where having a driver license is required. We have laws and that is what makes a civilization. Some laws we agree with and some laws we do not. Where in the Constitution does it call for a CCW?

! took an oath to defend the country against all enemies foreign and domestic. Is there someone here an enemy?
Click to expand...

Driving is a privilege. The Constitution is the law.

Read the 10th A for all the other stuff spouted here.
 
Last edited:
hyena said:
That sums it up to me.

A couple questions we'll never know the answer to. Like did the pastor try to fire, only to forget to disengage a safety. Did he forget to chamber a round. We don't know what kind of gun the pastor drew.

I suspect, without any proof, he just hesitated to fire. Tragic.
Click to expand...

When I taught firearms in the Corps, one of the things we taught was not to let them get close to you if you could avoid it. Always keep the individual approximately 3 yards from you. The Pastor let the assailant get to close. The other thing we taught was weapons take aways. If you had a gun on me and touched me with it, I was going to take it. May get wounded (or killed) but at least try. If you do it correctly and are successful the assailant ends up without a weapon and probably some broken fingers.

Forgot to take the safety off? Maybe. Would training have helped maybe, We were trained as the gun came up on target to take the safety off. Since most of the folks I know do not shoot all the time, for home defense I recommend a revolver (no safety to disengage).

Forgot to chamber a round? We were trained to carry Condition One, cocked and locked and when the gun came out of the holster the safety came off. However, for someone that does not use a gun a lot, then a revolver could be the answer. Load all the chambers and then all that has to be done is pull the trigger if needed. No safety to remove or round to chamber in the heat of the moment.
 
Last edited:
biku324 said:
Presuming to know what another person thinks or wants is fraught with the risk of utterly misunderstanding what was said. I try to stay with what folks say while avoiding extrapolation.

You're correct in believing that we don't agree.
Click to expand...

You said you were in favor of some not carrying guns. How is that a misunderstanding?

It's quite clear. I comprehend English just fine. I simply read your statement and have come to correct conclusion that you want to limit gun rights. There's no other way to interpret your statement. None.

If that's not what you meant then retract or change your statement.
 
Whether or not free non prohibited men and women carry a firearm is their choice to make. I don't really care what anybody believes it thinks about it. That's a pretty high horse to sit on for the "believers" and "thinkers".

"Among those who dislike oppression are many who like the oppress". Napoleon Bonaparte
 
Last edited:
Kanewpadle said:
You said you were in favor of some not carrying guns. How is that a misunderstanding?

It's quite clear. I comprehend English just fine. I simply read your statement and have come to correct conclusion that you want to limit gun rights. There's no other way to interpret your statement. None.

If that's not what you meant then retract or change your statement.
Click to expand...
Your mechanical reading skills seem fine; comprehension seems off. What people say is what they say.

In court I would object that you're simply being argumentative.
 
Last edited:
I got what biku 234 was getting at.

Guys complain about idiots at the range, people with permits doing dumb stuff, people leaving the guns unsecured in some manner. etc etc. Mall Ninjas running around carrying their ARs in public, open carry etc. How can you complain (not favor) this behavior and attack the OP for what he favors. He did not call out for restrictions, laws or mandatory anything.

There are people that I certainly really do not "favor" the idea of carrying a gun.

I certainly "favor" the idea of everyone being better trained in gun safety and handling

I would "favor" everyone better understanding the laws and limits of their abilities.

None of these means that I support any kind of restrictions on a persons right to bear arms or that I want more gun laws. I just "favor" that fewer idiot carried guns.

I would be in FAVOR of mandatory gun safety classes in our schools. I would be in FAVOR of people education themselves and their families.
 
Last edited:
PPS1980 said:
Don't disagree with a thing you said, but I still will defend their right to own and carry a weapon. Again, I think most people are idiots behind the wheel - and that's not a Natural Right embodied in the Constitution, but even then I don't want to ban them from driving.
Click to expand...

In today's world we ban drunks, dopers, and those with no insurance from operating a motor vehicle in most states, as well as felons. I gets back to, is privacy more important than the public good.
 
hyena said:
That sums it up to me.

A couple questions we'll never know the answer to. Like did the pastor try to fire, only to forget to disengage a safety. Did he forget to chamber a round. We don't know what kind of gun the pastor drew.

I suspect, without any proof, he just hesitated to fire. Tragic.
Click to expand...

"Sheriff Larry Smith said at a news conference Woolen (the assailant) was hospitalized Sunday afternoon with gunshot wounds to his hand, but that it's unclear when he was shot."

I was making the assumption the pastor was not mentally prepared for a fight. As a result, he was surprised and, in a struggle for the gun, overcome by an assailant a third his age. Things can go sideways in an instant.

That is often the case. The criminal has the initiative. He has to do something that reaches the threshold to use deadly force. That action has to be recognized and then reacted upon before the assailant complete his action.
 
I do believe that apples and oranges have been introduced into a discussion about avocados!

In my opinion, the OP is questioning the ability of a person without the mindset to potentially take a life, and has mutated into one addressing both proficiency (skill) and judgment (when to use lethal force).

We can train a person so that they can improve their proficiency. We can attempt to indoctrinate a person so that they can make an informed decision on when to use lethal force. But short of combat, how do you "train" someone to alter their mindset? At what point does a person in fear of loss of life adopt the proper mindset?

Being totally facetious, do we require candidates seeking to carry concealed be trained to be Olympic grade marksmen, and then as the final exam require them to fire a course of fire in "Hogan's Alley" with the requirement that they take a life?

There are some things that can be instilled through training, but some things that can't be taught. Sometimes, you never know if a person has the mettle until the time comes!
 
Local speed limits, marriage licenses, drunk driving laws, etc etc are under the 10th A.
You either believe in the Constitution or you don't. Don't take the parts you want and discard the rest.
 
Muss Muggins said:
It's a public discussion on a public forum. If you can't state your opinion publicly, you shouldn't have engaged. I'll just copy and paste anything you PM or email me. Your choice . . .
Click to expand...

Sir, you are just upset that when I wrote "My Hero" that you could not understand I was being facetious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

afriqueart
I love a happy ending
Replies
1
Views
680
Eagle 477
E
bulletproof-791
Norco bank robbery
Replies
8
Views
5K
pawncop
P

Latest posts

Back
Top