Delete

[rugershooter]

Ruger, I am not referring to everyday Americans who simply want to exercise their rights, or want to show others that it is normal. I am referring to those who do so with the intent of starting **** with others. That isn't "teaching," that's giving the rest of us who wish to carry, a bad name.
I spoke with a family-friend of ours who is a LEO for the Huntington Beach PD. Before going through the academy, he felt that open carry was an outstanding idea. He still feels that it is necessary, but throughout the years, has realized that some people are doing it just to start ****. His words, "I can't tell you how many times I've come close to drawing my gun because the guy I was talking to decided to "educate" me by flailing his gun in my face, and saying "I have a right to carry this where and when I please!"
These are the guys I am talking about, and the difference I am referring to.

All that said, I am applying for my CCW, and again, have no issues with those who carry.

P.S. At not point did I tell anyone how to practice or exercise their rights. I simply stated my opinion. You know, exercising my first amendment rights.

You still haven't defined exactly what the difference is. Why does the motivation matter if the person isn't violating anybody's rights?


You're denigrating the methods people use for exercising their rights based on their motivations. In other words, your posts give the impression that you don't have an issue with someone carrying a gun ("especially one that is concealed") as long as the reason for doing so is self defense, but you somehow thing it's not a proper way to exercise a right by carrying a "to prove a point" because that causes people to be afraid.

As stated before, there is a difference between defending ones self (carrying a firearm to do so, especially one that is concealed) and attempting to raise awareness in a manner that, as a byproduct, raises fear.

You still haven't explained that difference. You imply that method and motivation for carrying a gun determines what is acceptable and what isn't even though people who carry "to prove a point" aren't violating anybody's rights.

P.S. At not point did I tell anyone how to practice or exercise their rights. I simply stated my opinion. You know, exercising my first amendment rights.

That's exactly what you tried to do when you wrote this:

Raising awareness is perfectly fine, but raising fear is not. That said, I wholeheartedly believe in our right to bear and carry arms.

Even though people who carry in a manner that isn't socially acceptable aren't violating anybody's rights, you don't think that it's "perfectly fine" for them to carry in certain ways because those methods "raise fear".

[colossians323]

I think people with home owners insurance are way over the top. How stoopid are they, are they paranoid that someone is going to rob their belongings, or even better yet, do they really think that someone will set their house on fire? What are these insaniacs worried about???? so stoopid and paranoid to have homeowners insurance

[MrSam]

You still haven't defined exactly what the difference is. Why does the motivation matter if the person isn't violating anybody's rights?


You're denigrating the methods people use for exercising their rights based on their motivations. In other words, your posts give the impression that you don't have an issue with someone carrying a gun ("especially one that is concealed") as long as the reason for doing so is self defense, but you somehow thing it's not a proper way to exercise a right by carrying a "to prove a point" because that causes people to be afraid.


You still haven't explained that difference. You imply that method and motivation for carrying a gun determines what is acceptable and what isn't even though people who carry "to prove a point" aren't violating anybody's rights.



That's exactly what you tried to do when you wrote this:



Even though people who carry in a manner that isn't socially acceptable aren't violating anybody's rights, you don't think that it's "perfectly fine" for them to carry in certain ways because those methods "raise fear".

The difference (again) is that some people are carrying their firearms for the purpose of telling off the police. Defense is "second" to many of them. Again, I am not referring to those who carry to defend themselves. I am referring to those who carry for the sole purpose of pissing off police, in an ATTEMPT to prove a point. Yes, I understand that the manner in which a person carries should not matter, but we still need more votes on the side of pro-gun.
Again, if people want to carry, I believe they should have the right to. I personally feel that we need to come off as responsible Americans, in order for the anti-gun kiddies to feel more secure with firearms. Yes, I understand that those people should suck it up, and deal with the fact that the most important document in the United States gives us the right to bear arms. Ultimately, our laws and rules are decided on a majority vote.
Sadly, the majority of Americans feel that firearms are "unsafe" and "the devils weapon" (or whatever idiotic argument happens to be floating around regarding firearms).
I will agree with you, we do have to change the norm regarding carrying. To do so, we should (mind you, I said SHOULD, not "have to" -I'm not forcing anyone to do anything or think a certain way, just as I wasn't in my previous post) show that simply carrying a firearm should not be an issue. And if handled by responsible Americans, the right to carry can actually be beneficial.

Ruger, again, I agree with you that Americans should have the right to carry. However, these anti-gun advocates are like children. They need to be spoon fed information, and patted on their shoulders every few moments - God forbid we say anything to offend them...-. Despite the fact that I don't believe we should have to "baby them" until they realize that many firearm owners are responsible adults, they are still voters.

Maybe a little more gun education would do everyone (especially the anti-gun nuts) some good.

Regardless of how I feel about the method of "proving a point" there is one thing that will never change...the average response time of a 911 call is 20 minutes, the response time of a .357 is 1400 feet per second.

[pastureofmuppets]

Yeah. Read this...

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/06/daniel-zimmerman/p320-entry-ill-minutes/

Crime may be down, people may live in safe neighborhoods. Why? because people take care.

I should also point out when there's news footage from the scene of a violent crime there is inevitably a camera pointed at a neighbor saying "this kind of thing never happens round here!"

Well, it just did.

Again.

There may be is a lot of bravado but you know... men and guns. I know a lot of armed women and you don't really get a lot of that with them.

[FromTheGrave]

I think people with home owners insurance are way over the top. How stoopid are they, are they paranoid that someone is going to rob their belongings, or even better yet, do they really think that someone will set their house on fire? What are these insaniacs worried about???? so stoopid and paranoid to have homeowners insurance

Geez man. Analogy fail.

[Artema]

Geez man. Analogy fail.

I think it was apt. It's about preparedness, just not the same type he was talking about. I'd equate it more to a fire extinguisher, a medical kit, or a spare tire, etc.

[FromTheGrave]

I think it was apt. It's about preparedness, just not the same type he was talking about. I'd equate it more to a fire extinguisher, a medical kit, or a spare tire, etc.

I think a better analogy of the OP would be:

Normal

Guy gets in his Honda to drive to grocery store, puts on his seatbelt in case of an accident.

"over the top"

Guy puts roll cage and 5 point seatbelt in his Honda, puts on racing suit, and helmet to drive to the grocery store.

[Artema]

Guy puts roll cage and 5 point seatbelt in his Honda, puts on racing suit, and helmet to drive to the grocery store.

My car has a 6 point. 5 point is uncomfortable, no?

[FromTheGrave]

My car has a 6 point. 5 point is uncomfortable, no?

You're leaving out important details to support your case. I purposefully mentioned the grocery store in order to deter those types of responses.

I'm going to assume the car you're talking about is not your "grocery getter".


Homeowner's is a bad example. Anyone with a financed home has to have homeowners.

[philobeddoe]

I think it's more of a big belly small di** syndrome.





Compensation for other short comings. That and just another thing they can raise hell and throw a fit about.

Weak sauce.

My tool is 5" longer than my carry gun.

It's a burden but I don't complain.

[mag360]

since I got my carry pemit I haven't left the house unarmed. Not worth it to not be armed.

[Artema]

You're leaving out important details to support your case. I purposefully mentioned the grocery store in order to deter those types of responses.

I'm going to assume the car you're talking about is not your "grocery getter".

I know we're on a tangent, but yes, my V6 Accord Coupe (at least it is based off the Acura TSX, designed and built in the USA). I made it way faster than stock, but definitely a "grocery getter" haha.

[FromTheGrave]

I know we're on a tangent, but yes, my V6 Accord Coupe (at least it is based off the Acura TSX, designed and built in the USA). I made it way faster than stock, but definitely a "grocery getter" haha.

lol you weren't kidding. I know you have "Over The Top" tattooed on your lower back (read: tramp stamp).



i'm just kidding (maybe)

[camcojb]

I get that. I mean some OC spray or a pocket knife is not unreasonable and would even be considered prudent in many cases (walking/running at night, unknown area ect). I just think some take it too far.

I also remember a guy carrying on about not being able to carry on school grounds when picking up his kid. Stuff like that just makes us look loony. It's as if the firearm is some kind of force field for crime and the ultimate multi-tool to solve any problem.

I like to shoot as much as the next man and believe everyone should have a gun for home protection and personal protection when need be but I think the fear culture, scenario/event planning, and constant "on patrol" hunt that many display is quite odd and boarders on crazy/irrational occasionally.

The danger around every corner, everyone is out to kill you, heightened alert at all times, hyper vigilant at all times folks even when going to the store, picking up your kid, going to work at a desk job, answering the door, ect people just make us look crazy. It's kinda funny most of the time but sometimes it can make you think twice about someone and get a bit concerned about the stability of such thinking.

Get me a list of people who knew when they woke up or left their house that they were going to be mugged, robbed, beaten up, raped, murdered, etc. Every account you read the people had no idea it was going to happen to them. That's the entire point.

If you want to only carry at times or areas that you deem it necessary then that's your right. If I knew when something was going to happen I would not put myself in that place or position. Because I do not (and nobody does) I would rather be prepared.

[jrwhitt]

I know we're on a tangent, but yes, my V6 Accord Coupe (at least it is based off the Acura TSX, designed and built in the USA). I made it way faster than stock, but definitely a "grocery getter" haha.

You're going to hurt yourself with the harness installed that way if you crash.

A 6pt harness needs the crotch straps to hug you thighs and should drop down straight (or slightly to the rear) from your crotch. A compromise fittin is to take the crotch straps back to where the waist belt attaches so as to form something like a parachute harness.