Guns in Public, and Out of Sight

[Atypical Liberal]

48. Judo is a physical contest of strength.

I wonder why you discount other, far better options, though fleeing is not a bad option.

Fleeing is good, if you are unable or unwilling to stand up to bad people.

You might want to consider using your brain. It's amazing how successful it can be in such situations.

What mind powers did you have in mind when you are being attacked by a violent criminal.


And rather than a physical contest of strength, I would suggest a few classes in Judo.

When I say "a physical contest of strength", I am talking about any engagement of with your attacker that involves the physical use of your body's strength to thwart your attacker. Judo, or any other martial art, is a physical contest of strength. You have to be physically strong enough to be successful.

Way more effective than a gun as a weapon of self-defense. A handgun is the last thing you need in a physical confrontation, especially with a more powerful adversary, unless you have both the element of surprise, which is highly unlikely, and you have a killer instinct (also unlikely if you're one of the "good" guys).

There is no better weapon than a firearm for dealing with a violent attack. It is why the police carry them instead of relying on martial arts training.

You seem to be very concerned about what you describe as "engaging in a physical contest of strength". Let's be serious here. What do you mean by that? I'm having trouble imagining what you are trying to say.

I thought it was pretty straight-forward. As I said, if you are using the strength of your body to thwart a violent attack, then you are engaging in a physical contest of strength with your attacker. That's great if you are stronger than your attacker, or a more skilled martial artist.

Regarding that bit of paper. It and $3.50 will buy you a coffee at Starbucks. If I felt the need to carry a gun, I would, regardless of any bit of paper "sanctioned under law". The permit would be the last thing on my mind. The first thing on my mind would be who I'm going to shoot and how I am going to shoot them.

I agree with you, and this is precisely the mindset of armed criminals today.

But it is refreshing that normal, non-criminal citizens can also carry firearms without risking punishment from the state. Law-abiding people don't have to break the law to carry firearms.

Because I can think of no other reason to carry a gun as a private citizen.

So you think the only reason people carry firearms is because they are hoping to shoot someone?

Do you wear seatbelts because you are looking for a car accident? Do you have smoke detectors or fire extinquishers because you are hoping for a fire? Do you carry a spare tire because you are hoping for a flat? Do you have health insurance because you are hoping to get sick?

People own such things not because they want to use them, but in case they have to use them.

Firearms are the same way.