A Question (1) For Gun Control Advocates

[GreenStormCloud]

I expect to post future questions, so that is the reason for the (1) in the thread title. Although the question is directed to gun-control advocates I expect other to enter the thread too.

My wife and I are Senior Citizens. We both have minor infirmities normal to our age. We are not able to win a hand-to-hand fight with a young male street criminal, or even a middle aged one for that matter. Nor can we outrun a younger person. Street criminals often select older people as victims because they know that we can't put up much resistance or run away.

What tools would you allow us to carry that could give us a chance of successfully defending ourselves if we should be attacked?

[Cronus Protagonist]

1. A Medicalert bracelet

Stop being so fearful and get on with your lives.

[Deep13]

8. Street crime does exist you know.

And being prudent is not the safe as being afraid.

[Cronus Protagonist]

22. Interesting Freudian slip you made there!

Especially when f is not anywhere near m in the keyboard! lol

[Deep13]

30. I make errors like that all the time.

Anyway, if it is a Freudian slip, what did I mean by it? :shrug:

[frebrd]

18. You forgot your sarcasm icon!

:)

[Cronus Protagonist]

24. lol

Maybe it wasn't needed after all! :^D

[rd_kent]

52. Gotta love an honest answer to an honest question.

Too bad you could provide none.

[Cronus Protagonist]

64. Gosh some people have no sense of humor

Well, maybe only a little.

[paulsby]

67. the fear canard

an oldie but goodie. good to see it back

note: you will see this often amongst illogical anti-gunners. look for it.

it's right up there with the penis canard and the need canard.

[iverglas]

90. if it quacks like a canard

then it might be.

You really do need to exercise a little analytical thinking, and stop glomming this crap all over the board.

The "canard" to which you actually refer is the one that goes:

If you can't prove you need it then you can be prohibited from possessing/using it.

None of the posters to whom you have offered this nonsense in reply in recent days has made any such assertion.

To assert that someone who insists on carting a firearm around with them everywhere they go is living in fear isn't a "canard" or any other kind of fish, fowl or other organism. It is a reasonable conclusion from the stated facts.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

149. That statement has been made here many times, recent days are meaningless.

[Statistical]

2. Nothing you right to life, liberty, and freedom are less than the "right" of others to not be scared

You should be happy to take an ass beating for the good of society.

/sarcasm

[T Wolf]

3. I suggest you lock yourself in your house and arm yourself with automatic weapons.

That way, you can be assured of being safe.

But venturing out into the world is risky and you cannot be protected out there.

[GreenStormCloud]

5. What is wrong with protecting ourselves? N/T

[iverglas]

9. ah, it's the magic gun force field

It "protects" you.

[Deep13]

12. That's not exactly how they work. nt

[PavePusher]

70. Ah.

You haven't chatted with some of the other anti-self-defense-tools personalities here much, have you?

:toast:

[GreenStormCloud]

No. I protect myself, skillfully using a tool to accomplish the task.

The best tool for that is a gun.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

55. Those evil magic guns again that make their owners shoot people they don't intend to.

[Deep13]

10. If POTUS comes to town, feel free to bring them to the speech. nt

[GreenStormCloud]

21. That would depend upon whether or not I am inside the secure zone.

If I intend to go into the secure area, the guns will be locked in the trunk of our car. If I stay outside the secure area, I will be armed.

[Deep13]

28. Um, really?

:wtf:

[GreenStormCloud]

36. I do not understand your confusion.

There is a "no guns" zone surrounding a POTUS. If I am going to be going inside that zone, then I have to leave the guns in the car.

There is a zone outside the "no guns" zone that where guns are allowed. The "no guns" zone may be large, but it is not infinite. If the POTUS comes to speak in the North part of Dallas, then the South part will be a normal area. If I am going to the South part of Dallas, I will definately be armed. (S Dallas is a high crime area) Unless the POTUS is going there too.

[Deep13]

37. I meant if you were actually going to hear the speech. nt

[GreenStormCloud]

39. I would assume that would be in the "no guns" zone. Leave them in the locked trunk. N/T

[SteveM]

96. A reasonable approach: arm yourself with a firearm you are confident in using.

There is no warranty or guarantee when having a weapon on-hand to defend oneself, but it affords better protection than nothing should you suffer a home invasion or other armed, forced entry.

I'm sure the person(s) who you responded to have seen a lot of the world "out" there; you have no patent on leaving the front door.

I am curious about: "...you cannot be protected out there." Do you acknowledge that the police can't handle this? If they cannot, then who can? I suggest that persons "venturing out" are left with that responsibility. Now, we are ready for the discussion.

BTW, automatic weapons are strictly-regulated and licensed; only 2-3 hundred thousand people own them. Far better would be a semi-automatic arm, a shotgun or revolver.

[GreenStormCloud]

103. I doubt that the poster you responded to knows the difference...

between automatic and semi-automatic firearms.

[SteveM]

105. Well, I have to go through the motions. (nt)

[Deep13]

4. A lawfully owned handgun after complying with all legal requirements.

Gun CONTROL allows such things. We already have gun control. You are talking about a prohibition.

[GreenStormCloud]

14. Some here in the Guns forum also favor prohibition.

Some states do not allow concealed carry, or greatly restrict it. Some places do not allow a citizen to carry pepper spray.

I will admit that my question is addressed to the more radical of the gun controllers.

[Deep13]

16. Yeah, I'm not one of those, so I don't have an answer.

I rather doubt those who support sweeping bans do either.

[GreenStormCloud]

26. So far none of the prohibitions have offered an answer.

All I have seen from them is distortions of my situation, or mockery. None have actually wanted to seriously discuss the issue. I am not surprised at that.

[iverglas]

60. who "they", white man?

So far none of the prohibitions have offered an answer.
All I have seen from them is distortions of my situation, or mockery.

There surely has been mockery. Goodness, what else could there have been?

Can you identify which bits of mockery etc. were coming from "prohibitions"? by which I take it you mean: Some here in the Guns forum also favor prohibition.

Post numbers will do.

[rl6214]

147. Mockery you say?

iverglas (1000+ posts) Wed Sep-02-09 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. question (just one) for you

Whatever did your grandparents do? Or maybe they all died tragic deaths at the hands of young toughs ...

Oh, what the heck.

Why would you consider getting into hand-to-hand fights with young male street criminals or trying to outrun younger people? Those sound like kind of risky behaviours, to me.

My mum's pushing 80. She hasn't asked for a pocket pistol for the occasion. She must be a moron.

[billh58]

29. I live in a State

(Hawaii) that currently does not allow either CCW or open-carry (Chief of Police decision for each County), am getting on in years, and have many "older" friends. I support your right to carry a gun where it is legal but like the overwhelming majority of American citizens, I and everyone that I know, don't feel the need to carry a weapon in public.

That is why I strongly support State Rule on limited gun-control (mainly as it applies to CCW and open-carry) that complies with both the Constitution, AND the wishes of the majority of a given State's citizens.

[iverglas]

6. question (just one) for you

Whatever did your grandparents do? Or maybe they all died tragic deaths at the hands of young toughs ...

Oh, what the heck.

Why would you consider getting into hand-to-hand fights with young male street criminals or trying to outrun younger people? Those sound like kind of risky behaviours, to me.

My mum's pushing 80. She hasn't asked for a pocket pistol for the occasion. She must be a moron.

[TPaine7]

17. A couple of generations ago, people carried guns to school without inducing breathless hysteria.

Why would you consider getting into hand-to-hand fights with young male street criminals or trying to outrun younger people? Those sound like kind of risky behaviours, to me.

Because the alternative might be laying down and dying or watching his wife abused or killed? (I bet your mum could have figured that out, given the context.)

My mum's pushing 80. She hasn't asked for a pocket pistol for the occasion. She must be a moron.

Your mum may not be a moron. Her daughter on the other hand...

[enlightenment]

27. Could I have a source for your statement, please?

About people carrying guns to school a couple of generations ago? I assume you're talking about the 1940s or 50s, as a generation is about twenty-five years.

Thank you.

[Treo]

35. I Carried A Gun To School Last Night Does That Count? NT

[GreenStormCloud]

38. When I was in high school it wasn't a big deal.

However, none of us carried the gun around on our person. I remember one student that did a demonstration of how to reload ammunition. Some of the guys had gun racks in their pickups with a shotgun or rifle in the rack. Nobody thought anything of it.

Our high school band did a routine that involved a shotgun firing a blank. Nobody got excited about the gun.

In college, we preformed the play "Oklahoma" and the prop guns were real guns. Nobody gave it a second thought.

[Treo]

40. I Was In A College

And carrying concealed (legal under Co law)

[TPaine7]

41. See post 38.

I've read many more like it here.

[enlightenment]

44. Oh. Well I was hoping for something less

apocryphal and more quantitative (being a collector of information). Thanks, anyway.

[iverglas]

47. not to mention

that the thread is actually about handguns being carried for "self-defence", and all these hoary old tales are about rural children taking the family hunting weapon to school so they could hunt after class let out ...

[Treo]

48. Except my post

Which was about me sitting in an urban college class room W/ my handgun that I was carrying for self defense less than 24 hours ago
EDIT: typo

[iverglas]

56. if my post had been in that subthread

your comment might be relevant.

So you carried it "for self-defence". Against what/whom did you defend yourself?

Oh, nothing/no one? You mean: you promenaded around with it because you felt like it.

Okay.

[Treo]

62. Actually you're absolutely right

I carried it because I felt like it. I've only had to use a gun once for self defense, but that ONE time I needed it I am damn glad I had it.

[pipoman]

66. I carried a shotgun on the school bus

when I was 14. We had a trap shooting unit in physical education. The school had an armory with several single shot shotguns for people who didn't have their own gun. Anyone who had their own shotgun was welcome to bring it. There was also a trap and skeet club affiliated with the high school. The unit in pe consisted of hunters safety certification in 8th grade, then 9th thru 12th had trap, skeet, and rifle marksmanship. This was in he late 1970's.

[AtheistCrusader]

93. My dad MADE a gun in high school metal shop.

With the instructor's assent and assistance. My high school used to have a rifle team.

[SteveM]

97. I gave instruction to my 8th grade classmates on using a shotgun...

back in 1962. I took a Remington shotgun to class, disassembled it, demonstrated its safe operation, and a method for cleaning the weapon. No one was upset and the teacher thought it was a good idea. Is this what you had in mind?

[GreenStormCloud]

19. Actually, one set of my great-grandparents was murdered.

Of course you asked about my grandparents. Natural deaths, in all cases.

I do not desire to fight with the young, but if one of them attacks me then I won't have much choice.

I will not venture to speculate on the status of your mother.

BTW - I count two questions in your post, whereas your title says one.

[Deep13]

34. Different choice =/= moron.

"Whatever did your grandparents do?"

That's changing the subject. Maybe they lived to a ripe old age. Maybe they were murdered in their beds. (I'm not suggesting one is as likely as the other.) Maybe in the days before gun control, they carried firearms. Maybe, as most people did in those days, they died of an illness for which there was no cure. By asking whatever we did before such and such, you are assuming that they did pretty well. That is not necessarily the case. The example that comes immediately to mind is, "What did our ancestors do before they had all these pills?" Answer: they died of infections.

[iverglas]

46. uh huh

The example that comes immediately to mind is, "What did our ancestors do before they had all these pills?" Answer: they died of infections.

What did your ancestors do before people started toting sidearms with them everywhere they went every minute of their lives?

Why, they were mugged incessantly, and chased down the street by young thugs every time they set foot out the door.

That's why the homicide/robbery/etc. rates were multiple times then what they are now.

Oh, and it's why there are multiple times more homicides/robberies/etc. now than you'd think just by, oh, reading the statistics. Because all the people who weren't festooned in firearms when somebody looked at them sideways got killed/robbed/etc., while the minute fraction of people who were festooned in firearms all walked away unscathed ...

[Deep13]

51. I don't know what they were then.

I do know that a high population usually more criminals for the simple reason that some people are criminals and more people means more of them. Higher population density puts more victims close to those few criminal members of society. Plus the problems of industrialization cause more people to become criminals, of to feed drug habits which are available in highly dense populations.

[rd_kent]

53. " My mum's pushing 80. She hasn't asked for a pocket pistol for the occasion. She must be a moron"

I see the apple does not fall far from the tree

[iverglas]

57. your mother wears army boots

which I believe I said first, long since.

[rd_kent]

61. You may be right....

about being the first to say that. You are that old....and bitter.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

119. You know your mom better than we do.

[TPaine7]

7. It is your civic duty to die if necessary so that others may feel safe.

You should not have guns. You should call the police and rely on them for protection.

If the police cannot get to you in time, or if they choose not to come you have no recourse against them--the state being infallible. You are allowed to engage your assailant(s) in hand to hand combat or to use ordinary items as weapons if your life is threatened.

If, as in your case, these will not suffice it is your duty to die, or to submit to whatever atrocities your attackers wish to mete out. What do you think--that you, not being under the direct control of the state should be allowed to possess and carry a GUN?! *Cynical laugh*

Die or take whatever they dish out. It helps me feel safe.

:sarcasm:

[CC]

11. Anything you can think of that

will not hurt you or anyone else should the same criminal take whatever away from you and/or your wife one way or another.

[Deep13]

15. Not good enough.

That assumes that the couple has a duty to become victims just so the bad guy doesn't get even more dangerous when he rolls them.

[CC]

23. Not really or not my

intent. If they are so fearful and ailing that they only feel safe with a gun then they are in no shape to keep control of the same gun, or a knife or pipe or bat or anything else that could cause harm. Brains and awareness would go a lot further toward protecting them that a gun.

[GreenStormCloud]

25. We are not that far gone.

But we would not be able to defend ourselves, hand-to-hand, against a young male. There is a difference between being a total invalid, and knowing that a young mugger can easily kick my ass.

[Deep13]

31. That last sentence is a certainly given. nt

[PavePusher]

71. Baloney. n/t

[slackmaster]

13. It's perfectly natural for the old and weak to be beaten or killed by the young and strong

It's time for you and your wife to get out of the way and make room for someone else. Man up and take your lumps.

:sarcasm:

[maxsolomon]

20. it's unlikely you'd be able to unholster the gun in time

so both of you need to walk with a gun in each hand, and point them at every young male you encounter, as soon as you see them.

can i ask which locale you plan to visit that prompts your well-considered bait, i mean question? Gotham City is fictional, you know.

[GreenStormCloud]

33. Depends upon how the gun is carried.

I carry a S&W 642 in the right front pocket. If a situation looks threatening, I just put my hand in my pocket and have the gun in my hand, but still concealed. It can be drawn in about 1/2 second.

Fortunately, most areas that we go to are very safe from street crime, but some aren't as safe. An example of a less safe place would be an outside ATM at night. Parking lots and parking garages at night can be more hazardous too.

A criminal has to approach to within striking distance. The phases of an attack are, victim selection, approach to victim, attack. So is a suspicious looking person starts trying to approach us in a higher threat area, he will be told to "Stay Away". We will not engage him in conversation. If he continues to approach after being warned, then in Texas we can draw the guns. If he still trys to approach after the guns are out, or attempts to rush us, then we can and will fire.

It is only in the movies that it is easy to disarm an armed person who is willing to defend themselves.

[maxsolomon]

42. where do you live anyway? it sounds like a war zone.

i getting this feeling that i've had senior citizens with their hands on pistol triggers at the sight of me walking down the street.

on edit: oh, you live in Dallas. now i get it.

[TreasonousBastard]

32. I am also entering geezerhood and have several infirmities...

that would prevent me from putting up good fight if need be-- as if these small infirmaities were all that would put me at a disadvantage should I face a badass with bad intentions.

I have rarely thought about what to do if so confronted, and even more rarely been so confronted. So, since this is not a major of concern of mine, I have no recommendations for any tools you might want to carry along that might help you conquer this fear.

Perhaps an enormous bodyguard would help. Your local high school may have a few defensive linemen who need some extra money.

(Or the girls' wrestling team?)

[The Wielding Truth]

43. First,exercise then self defense lessons then a home security system.

If you are so insecure, contact the police who will patrol your neighborhood, and perhaps mental counseling might help.

If you feel that your life is in enough danger that you feel the need to posses a deadly weapon that you would have to be willing to use to mortally wound someone to save your lives, then I would say for you to take the necessary training, and purchase a license weapon that you would promise yourself to only think about using if your life were in mortal danger.

I also have no problem with those who hunt - owning hunting rifles to hunt when hunting season is established to protect their property from being ravaged by deer- or if they must hunt for food.
Possessing a hand gun is logical if they must put down a rabid or mad animal that is aggressive.

I see no need for any weapon that goes beyond the need for personal security and the ownership of anatomic weapon should not be an option for an elderly couple concerned with their personal safety.Any reckless possession should be illegal.

Seriously guns are dangerous and should be taken seriously.Would you have explosives, poison or unsecured trap doors in your home? No. So why would you expect to have deadly weapons in the form of guns as your first line of defense?

[GreenStormCloud]

50. My Response

If you are so insecure, contact the police who will patrol your neighborhood,
My neighborhood is fine. It is a very, very low crime area. But sometimes we go to higher crime areas at night.

and perhaps mental counseling might help.
How would that stop a mugger? Oh, I get it. You think that violent crime doesn't exist.

If you feel that your life is in enough danger that you feel the need to posses a deadly weapon that you would have to be willing to use to mortally wound someone to save your lives, then I would say for you to take the necessary training, and purchase a license weapon that you would promise yourself to only think about using if your life were in mortal danger.
We have taken the training for and have CHLs. Of course we would only use them if we reasonably believed our lives were in danger.

I see no need for any weapon that goes beyond the need for personal security and the ownership of anatomic weapon should not be an option for an elderly couple concerned with their personal safety.Any reckless possession should be illegal.
What is an anatomic weapon? I went to the dictionary and anatomic means "of or related to anatomy". You will have to explain what you mean using it as an adjetive here.

Seriously guns are dangerous and should be taken seriously.
What make you think that I don't?

Would you have explosives, poison or unsecured trap doors in your home?
I do have poison in my home. Roach spray. We rarely see any and are agressive about killing them. In the garage we have poisons for fire ants, and for aphids, and for wasps. Also fungicides for the lawn and the roses.

No.
Yes.

So why would you expect to have deadly weapons in the form of guns as your first line of defense?
First line of defense is awarness of surrounding and avoidance if possible. The guns would come into play only "in the gravest extreme." We would use them because they are an extremely effective tool that gives us the ability to defend against violent human predators.

The entire tone of your post seems to be a denial that violent crime exists and that innocent people are attacked.

Although I have said that our neighborhood is very safe, even here bad things happen. A few months ago, only a two blocks away from us, a couple were murdered (Knife attacks) in their own home. No suspect has been found.

[iverglas]

59. "But sometimes we go to higher crime areas at night."

Y'know, there really are solutions to that little problem ...

Do you sincerely believe that if you are carrying firearms you will be safe and secure from all alarm? Like I wuz saying ... the magic force field.

A firearm does not protect you from bad things happening. Really. It may enable you to deal with bad things that happen -- but it may not.

I just don't know what kind of idiot would go somewhere that they considered to be unsafe, where they would not go without a firearm, just because they have a pistol in their pants.

Does the expression "looking for trouble" come to mind?


The entire tone of your post seems to be a denial that violent crime exists and that innocent people are attacked.

D'ya think? I don't think ya think.

I think ya think what I think: that the poster found your post to be ridiculous, and nothing but an apologetic for the usual gun militancy nonsense and bullshit.


If it isn't safe to go somewhere, it isn't safe to go there; it isn't safe to go there in a box, it isn't safe to go there with a fox, it isn't safe to go there with a goat, it isn't safe to go there on a boat, and it isn't safe to go there with a gun.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

129. Little Miss Disingenuous

You wrote, "Do you sincerely believe that if you are carrying firearms you will be safe and secure from all alarm? Like I wuz saying ... the magic force field."


I missed where the poster said that firearms will keep him safe and secure from all alarm. Perhaps you could link to that quote. In actuality the poster said something quite different he said, "First line of defense is awarness of surrounding and avoidance if possible. The guns would come into play only "in the gravest extreme." We would use them because they are an extremely effective tool that gives us the ability to defend against violent human predators."


Iverglas, you are quick to rail against those who are disingenuous and engage in what you call intellectual dishonesty. I'm just curious how is your behavior above not categorized in that manner?


David

[AtheistCrusader]

145. Hey, that didn't rhyme.

Sometimes we have to go those places anyway. For instance, when I was working night shift, I had to pass through what even the press deemed 'the most dangerous place in seattle'. At 2am.

Yeah, I guess I could have bought a car, and skipped the whole area, but I don't consider sticking to my bicycle, AND carrying something for personal protection to be 'looking for trouble'.

I just do what I gotta do, and plan for contingencies accordingly.

[The Wielding Truth]

92. If, as you say, you wish to have a mortal defense against the

small chance that you may be mortally attacked,then I say that you are overly concerned with your personal safety, unless you are in the habit of putting your self and your spouse in situations which are unreasonably dangerous. Just think of all the social workers and gas meter readers,and handymen who don't carry guns yet work their whole lives in "bad" neighborhoods and never get attacked.

If it is a violent random act that concerns you, then you are overly worried.
I would suggest that you always wear a helmet when you are driving because you are more likely to be mortally harmed in a car crash then personally assaulted when you are in other neighborhoods than your own.

I said before that if you need a gun, it's legal. But to go off on being so afraid of a random act, it's silly.

IMO, you are to smart to be this afraid. Guns are, more times then not, a danger all on their own.

Don't be pressured by silly NRA public relations and sales.

[GreenStormCloud]

101. An electricity line repair man posted here about his experience.

There had been a storm, he was in a bad neighborhood, at night, assesing the storm damage to the lines. He was outside his truck and a street criminal approached him, drew a knife and demanded his wallet. The lineman drew his gun. Street thug ran like hell.

People who are in those occupations do not have immunity from attack. I have admitted that the chance of actually needing the gun are small. I have posted that only about one in four CCW holders will actually use (Usually just display to deter the immeninet attack, no shots fired.)their gun, which means that 75% won't. But just in case I happen to be in that 25%, I carry.

I am a retired private investigator, so I have some familarity with crime.

My guns are not a greater danger to me. If that were true, and known to be true, then cops and armies would refuse to carry guns, wouldn't they?

[rrneck]

63. Nah, forget it. nt

[paulsby]

68. ooh, the fear canard again

See: the equation of the desire to carry a firearm with "insecurity"

and then in the next to last paragraph, we get the NEED canard.

all we need is the penis canard and this poster would have hit the trifecta.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

128. By and large you have to be very well off financially to own automatic weapons.

That in itself almost precludes everyone but the middle aged and elderly. I wonder where would one find a wheelchair based self defense class.

[JonQ]

45. Just use karate

if he has a weapon, just take it away and use it on him.

If his karate is superior to yours, run away faster than he can run while dialing the cops.

[Treo]

49. An Answer (1) to your question

Don’t you read all the Brady campaign literature about how you’re twice as likely to have the gun taken from you and used against you?

Just take the bad guy’s gun away from him and use it against him

All you have to do is ask your self WWSD ( What Would Sarah Do?)

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

58. What are infrimities?

[GreenStormCloud]

65. I have already addressed that in post #25 & #33.

end of discussion,
Are you claiming to be a mod and locking the discussion?

freeper.
Name calling is not discussion.

[iverglas]

79. hmm

Name calling is not discussion.

If I call Hitler a Nazi, is that name-calling?

[GreenStormCloud]

86. I shall decline to get into a semantic fencing match.

Such does not produce fruitful discussion.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

89. semantics

is my bread and butter. I have a 200-page glob of pretty much pure semantics, in two languages, two weeks overdue as we speak. So you stop cybercheating on the wife now, please.

[GreenStormCloud]

91. Godwin Alert ! Automatic forfiet for first use of Hitler for iverglas. Game to me. N/T

[iverglas]

124. y'know

It's actually possible that you were serious.

It speaks badly of what the world has come to, if so, but there's probably nothing to be done.

[GreenStormCloud]

132. I thought it was funny. I assume you know about "Godwin's Law".

If you don't, google is your friend.

[iverglas]

133. glad to hear that

Because I was afraid you actually thought Godwin's Law -- i.e. what most people seem to think it is -- applied.

Now, the real Godwin's Law, maybe. But hell, Hitler being a Nazi is just such a good example of a statement of the obvious that it may be one reason the law is true. ;)

[GreenStormCloud]

139. Sorry, I don't feel like explaining my sense of humor.

Either you get it, or you don't. Sorry, but there was still another way that I meant that.

Maybe, like Data, you will laugh seven years later.

[iverglas]

141. pfft

Either you get it, or you don't

Or there was actually nothing to get.

Another spurious invocation of Godwin's Law. Big whup. Eh?

Mildly amusing if it was intentionally spurious, was my point.



so few words, and still a typo ...

[Kaleva]

69. You'll probably lose a gunfight with a 17 year old...

who may not hesitate to kill you for the spare change you have in your pocket.

I have little chance of winning a fight or of outrunning a young male but feel no need to carry a weapon with me for self protection because assaults are so rare were I live. guns are commonplace but I know of no one, other then police officers, who carry a weapon on their person for self defense.

If you live in a high crime rate area and want to tough it out, then a handgun might be an option but another course may be to consider relocating to a place where the crime rate is low.

[PavePusher]

72. Are you volunteering to fund their move? n/t

[Kaleva]

73. If I thought my family's lives were in grave danger, I'd find a way.

There being no way I could provide 24/7 armed security for my family(my youngest isn't old enough to own a handgun and it's illegal for my wife to have one also because of certain medical conditions), relocating to a safer climate would be the most prudent course.

[Treo]

74. So You're Advocating Surrender?

You’re advocating that we let the thugs have our cities what next? I have a novel idea, why don’t we each acknowledge that ultimately the responsibility for our safety lies W/ us?

[Kaleva]

75. Safety of one's family always trumps machismo

"I have a novel idea, why don’t we each acknowledge that ultimately the responsibility for our safety lies W/ us? "

Nothing different then what I've been saying. Look back to what I said earlier. If the situation was bad were I lived, I'd find a way to move my family to a safer place. I wouldn't pass on my responsibility to someone else.

[Treo]

76. Call It What You Will

The world is becoming a very weird place and I really don’t think there are safe places left therefore I choose to exercise my RKBA. Although I live in a relatively safe city it still has its hazards and as much as I’d like to leave I can’t. The jobs are here, the grand kids are here and school is here (for one more quarter).Since I am going to live here for a while, I carry a fire arm every where I go, as does my wife. I can’t plan emergencies. I don’t know that some whack job isn’t going to bring a gun to school tomorrow. I don’t know that some moonbat isn’t going to take exception to a bumper sticker on my wife’s car (true story).
I don’t know that a carload of teenage maniacs isn’t going to pull up next to me in rush hour traffic and start waving baseball bats (another true story) just because. It’s not a question of “machismo” It’s a question of preparedness.

EDIT: Grammatical

[iverglas]

78. oh dear oh dear

I don’t know that some moonbat isn’t going to take exception to a bumper sticker on my wife’s car (true story).

Yes, those crazy/evil liberals/progressives/d/Democrats. Dangerous, they are. They'll be forcing you to have health insurance any day now.

Have you enjoyed your visit?

[Treo]

80. I would think

That by definition the person that went off on my wife would be a reactionary, not a progressive you certainly presume quite a bit don’t you?

Have you enjoyed your visit?
Yes

[iverglas]

81. Missing something? I didnt.

"moonbat"

Not a word one commonly sees in these parts ...

[Treo]

83. Moonbat

Ohhh, now I get it. Sorry I just like the word. I even call on of my dogs (she’s a coon hound so I guess that means I’m a racist) “Moonbat

[AtheistCrusader]

146. Some words can be co-opted for entertainment value.

I have a vaxxer/birther co-worker. You should have seen her detonate when I called her a far right barking moonbat.

[GreenStormCloud]

77. It think I am MUCH more skilled with a gun than the typical street criminal.

It is true that if one is hesitant to use a gun when that rare occasion does arise, then the gun can be more dangerous to the defender. If my family or my own life is in danger, I won't hesitate. The typical street criminal can't hit anything. Look at the way they typically hold a gun - sideways. They do that because it is style, it is cool to hold it that way, but guns were designed to be fired vertically.

I have already stated that we live in a safe area but sometimes have to go to less safe areas. One higher risk place is any large parking lot after dark. But sometimes bad things happen in good areas too. A few months ago, about ten houses down the street, and one street over, a couple was murdered (By knives) in their own home.

[Kaleva]

82. You won't know for sure until it actually happens

I'm referring to your comment "If my family or my own life is in danger, I won't hesitate.".

But I've read several of your other posts and you have come up with and use very good ideas which ought to go a long way in keeping you and your family safe. I think you have the opinion that your gun is a tool of last resort.

[Treo]

84. When it actually happens

It would be better to have a gun than not

[GreenStormCloud]

85. I know I won't hesitate.

In a manner in which I do not wish to describe, (Most people would not understand.) I have already been tested, about 15 years ago. I didn't hesitate to bring deadly force to bear. The other is alive because he dropped his threat and quickly, in the bare nick of time, retreated. I didn't have to kill him. We both lived, and I was very glad of it.

It gave me an amazing look into myself - a moment of self-discovery - that I reflected on afterwards.

Thank you for the compliment regarding my other writings. You are correct that the gun is a last resort. But it is a resort that I refuse to be without - just in case.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

150. What about gun vs. knife or gun vs. physical assault?

[GreenStormCloud]

94. All the anti-RKBAs ducked the question.

Despite all the discussion, not one anti-RKBA addressed the question: "What tools would you allow us to carry that could give us a chance of successfully defending ourselves if we should be attacked?"

[Kaleva]

95. Can't answer the question because there are too many varibles

A gun may offer you a chance in some situations and in others, it may not. I guess you have already decided to carry a firearm and there is nothing that anyone can say here that would change your mind.

I don't have any issue with someone deciding to carry a firearm for self protection. I do wonder though about some here who appear to have the idea that carrying a gun is the only thing they have to do to protect themselves, their family and their property.

[Statistical]

99. Who said that? (strawman)

I live in nice neighborhood, trim bushes near the windows, make sure burnt out lights are replaced, invested in good door and locks, installed my own alarm system (far better than the crap peddled by ADT)

AND

I own a firearm.

Hopefully all the passive defenses I have in place means nobody will ever attempt to break in, if they do hopefully the alarm will scare them off but if it doesn't I have final line of defense.

[Kaleva]

108. Where did I write that someone said that?

Read my post again. You'll see that I made no such claim and thus there is no strawman.

[Statistical]

110. "I do wonder though about some here who appear to have the idea that carrying a gun"

"I do wonder though about some here who appear to have the idea that carrying a gun is the only thing they have to do to protect themselves, their family and their property."

I am sorry for assuming when you say "appear to have the idea" that you were not speaking literally and that instead you are basing this claim on the words written or spoken.

Maybe I a wrong and instead you can see other peoples ideas (kinda like though bubbles in cartoons).

[Kaleva]

114. I'll look for one example I read recently in another thread.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

113. Who here has the idea that a gun is the only thing they need for protection?

I have never seen anyone make a statement that would lead me to believe that about them.

[iverglas]

115. you poor disingenuous soul you

"What tools would you allow us to carry that could give us a chance of successfully defending ourselves if we should be attacked?"

What did you want? A hammer? A chainsaw?

A weapon is a weapon. Not a "tool".

Anybody with a grain of sense knows that, and knew your "question" wasn't worth the bandwidth it occupies.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

120. Weapons are tools for a specific task. It's really not complicated.

[iverglas]

123. ah

So if I inquire: What tool should I drive to work today?

you will answer: The Mazda van, of course.


Or will you consider me an idiot for talking in some bizarre and very stupid code?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

127. Tool-a handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task

Main Entry: tool
Pronunciation: \ˈtül\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English tōl; akin to Old English tawian to prepare for use — more at taw
Date: before 12th century
1 a : a handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task

http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tool

[spin]

98. A cane can be used as a weapon...

A book by Andrew Chase Cunningham published in 1912 is still available today.

It's available at Amazon.com



Sword canes are also made.



Cold Steel's design concept for the Heavy Sword Cane was to make a cane that offered significant orthopedic support, and be stylish enough so that it didn't look like a stodgy piece of medical equipment. The result is a very appealing cane with an extra strong partial crook handle made from Grivory, with a black, aluminum shaft that's 2mm thick and heat-treated for strength. The shaft is handsomely tapered and capped with a thick rubber ferrule for better traction on slick, icy sidewalks or uneven terrain.

The concealed sword is easily released by a hard, quick tug on the handle to break the suction of its friction lock. It's an extremely formidable sword too, made from 1055 Carbon steel, a little over 24" in length and 5.5mm thick. It's sturdy enough for both cutting and thrusting, with one long cutting edge, a strong sharp point, and a fully sharpened back edge. It's more than enough to take down any attacker, and the heavy aluminum shaft of your cane makes a fine weak hand parrying weapon and a frightfully effective bludgeon in its own right.
http://www.cutleryshoppe.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=8118

I also suffer from minor infirmities and have been told that I'm a candidate for a hip replacement but that will not help the disk degeneration in my back. For that I'm starting to take a drug called Gabapentin and in the process of building up to an enormous daily dose. In two weeks I get some steroid shots in my back.

Needless to say, much of my martial arts training is now impossible to perform. My son in law bought me a cane, which I might use and I can see how it would be used as a weapon. However, my primary defense weapon is a S&W Model 642 carried in my front right pocket. It's called a belly gun for a reason.

[GreenStormCloud]

100. Illegal to carry sword cane in Texas.

It is legal to own one, just can't carry it.

Since I have started posting here, I have switch my pocket gun to the same one you use. S&W 642. The Bersa .380 now rides inside the waistband. I became convinced to switch to the 642 because it is a .38 and will hit harder. Also a revolver can be fired from inside the pocket if one has to. I have a homemade pocket holster with a shield that prevents it from printing.

My infirmity is weak knees. They don't need surgery yet, if ever.

[spin]

102. I haven't checked on Florida law..

Florida has a concealed weapons law and with a permit you can carry a large variety of weapons, but a sword cane is not specifically listed. If you got stopped while carrying it, you might get harassed by a cop.

It might be neat to add a sword cane to my small knife and sword collection. I doubt if I would carry one.

The Model 642 is also a great purse gun for a woman, as you can fire through a purse just as you can fire through a jacket pocket. My daughter actually tested her accuracy by shooting through several purses she picked up at a good Will. She said she was quite accurate at close range. Most encounters occur at close range.

edited to add comments about Florida concealed weapons law.

[GreenStormCloud]

104. I don't think purse carry is a good idea, unless it is a gun purse.

The 642 is a good gun for those with smaller hands. Most self defense shootings involve three or fewer shots, so it being a five-shot with no rapid reload ability (Unless one gets speed-loaders.)is not that much of a liability.

My wife carries hers in a "gunny pack", which is a specially designed fanny pack. That has the advantage of advertising to street-smart criminals that she is armed without the problems of open carry. When a street criminal sees a woman with both a purse and a fanny pack, he assumes the fanny pack has a gun in it.

[spin]

106. Gun purses are an excellent idea...

GENUINE LEATHER GUN CONCEALMENT PURSE 81 available at Amazon.com




A purse allows easier assess to the firearm. A fanny pack is also a good idea for carry.

I usually carry one speed loader with mine.

[GreenStormCloud]

107. This is a Tommy's Gun Pack.

And in use:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jwy0FqEXig

[spin]

112. I liked the video...

Some people stick a Pepsi or Nike logo on the bag to disguise it further.

[rl6214]

148. I've got the same fanny pack

Love it.

[rrneck]

109. It's tougher for women to carry

but I would prefer that the gun be firmly "attached" to the body of the person carrying it. There's purse snatchers out there too.

[spin]

111. A woman could wear the purse diagonally on her body (over the neck as well as the shoulder)...

a martial arts instructor I had, advised women to carry a purse in this manner as the purse snatcher just wants to grab the purse and run. He also suggested that nothing of any real importance should be carried in a purse, the important items such as drivers license and credit cards can be carried in a small wallet. He used to demonstrate how a purse could be used as a weapon. (With all the crap woman normally carry in a purse, I wouldn't want to get hit by one.)

My daughter carried a S&W Model 64 concealed on her person recently when she had a job that took her into some questionable areas. She's 5 foot two inches and weights a tad less than 100 pounds. She used a IWB holster and placed the revolver in the very front of her pants with a loose fitting shirt to cover the it. She said she was very comfortable carrying this weapon. She said she only noticed it when she was driving, but it was not uncomfortable. She found carrying the weapon IWB on her side more irritating and hard to draw.

S&W Model 64 .38Spl
Note: my daughters firearm has rubber smaller grips.

She also carried her S&W Model 351PD .22 magnum in her purse. This is her everyday carry weapon.

Smith and Wesson 351PD 22 Magnum

[iverglas]

125. why is that?

Women just can't figure it out?

[raimius]

134. Usually one of a couple reasons

The most common one I've heard is fashion. Women generally wear tighter-fitting clothes than men.
The other common reason I've heard is body shape. Some women find that certain methods of carry (belt carry especially) just don't work for them.

[iverglas]

135. oh dear oh dear

Fashion interfering with defending one's self against rape rape rape, uh, lions and tigers and bears. Oh my. Women are such flibbertygibbets and morons, aren't they? Far more important to show off those curves than to conceal the tools for defending them.

Strikes me it should be just as easy for a woman to attach a firearm to her upper body, somewhere under the arm above the waist, and conceal it under a jacket or blazer, as it is for any man. Possibly easier, since women tend to go in at the waist.

Either do it and don't whine or don't do it, I'd say.

[raimius]

142. I'm not the one judging them.

I really don't care if some lady 5 feet away (or 5,000 miles) decides not to carry a firearm. It's her choice.
Heck, I don't carry. It is simply too much effort for too little return, at this point. I live in a no-carry zone, and would only be able to legally carry a few hours a week (and I would spend almost that much time retrieving and returning my firearm.)

At this point, there are enough options for anyone to find a generally comfortable way to conceal a firearm. Some people chose not to. Some don't want to take the time to get a license, they don't like their percieved options, others they simply chose not to carry.
I think it is wise to have the ability to defend one's self. That can take many forms. I'm not going to criticize someone who makes a different decision in how to defend themself, as long as they don't try to stop me from making my own choices.

[iverglas]

143. fine

there are enough options for anyone to find a generally comfortable way to conceal a firearm

Precisely.

Some people chose not to.

You might want to recall that this is not a discussion of whether to carry a firearm.

The specific aspect of the discussion on which I commented was the suggestion that it's difficult for women to carry concealed firearms on their person.

I don't give a flying fuck, myself. I think people who promenade around festooned in firearms, or with firearms dangling off their persons, are cretins and/or nitwits.

I simply pointed out that it is not any more difficult for women to do it.

[Treo]

138. I've also heard

Women say that the types of material that women's clothes are made of don't lend themselves to carrying a firearm. My wife generally goes W/ purse carry

[paulsby]

116. fanny packs are GENERALLY a bad idea

for concealed carry, because to many people they SCREAM "I HAVE A CONCEALED FIREARM IN HERE"

usually, when i carry concealed i do not wish to broadcast that to everybody in sight.

[spin]

117. True, however there are bags that are not quite as obvious...

for example, some are designed to look like camera bags.

KG products makes one such bag, their web site is at http://www.kgproducts.com/. The camera bag type pack is on the right.

[paulsby]

121. some are definitely better than others.

i just know that as a LEO, the FIRST thing i think when i see fanny pack is GUN. i think many criminals do too.

fwiw, this at least used to be a BIG off-duty cop thang. you see a guy with certain clothing/hair patterns AND a fanny pack, and you just KNOW it.

i used to work deep undercover, so i kind of learned what criminals think of when they think "undercover" or "off duty" cop and what they don't.

i think fanny packs are excellent carry devices for things like a picnic, or some outdoors stuff etc. in city stuff, i'd rather conceal under clothing, if i am going to conceal.

[spin]

126. I have to admit that I have never had a desire to own...

a fanny pack. I did known one retired cop who did carry in one.

When I see a person with one on, I usually look to see how study it looks. Gun bags are fairly easy to spot.

[GreenStormCloud]

118. You're a cop. You are trained to look for things like that.

Street criminals will likely look at it the same way, especially if worn by a guy. But I don't think ordinary people would notice anything. Most folks walk around in "condition white" all the time.

[paulsby]

122. most folks do. most criminals

are a little more aware, WHEN THEY ARE COMMITTING A CRIME, than the average joe. that's imo and ime in investigating and responding to crimes.

criminals, for example, when walking into a location where they are about to do a crime, do a threat assessment. they look around, gauge what people might be greater or lesser threats, etc.

i think they do, to some extent and amongst many make the fannypack-gun connection.

criminals are, on average, stupid as hell. some of the stuff they do is hilariously stupid. but they are often reasonably intuitive, and some are very smart.

i learned a LOT from criminals, when working undercover, since i spent all my time hanging around with an almost exclusive criminal element

criminals often make very good informants because, as street people, they know the rhythms of the street, who looks out of place, and notice things your average joe wouldn't.

hookers, for instance. they are phenomenal sources of information as to what is going on in a location.

[GreenStormCloud]

130. Truth! Some criminals can be really stupid.

Like you, I have seen some stupidity by criminals that almost makes you feel sorry for the guy, but you are too busy laughing. I am a retired private investigator, so I know what you mean about some of the idiocy on the streets.

[paulsby]

136. my favorite was a bank robbery we had in hawaii

with a bow and arrow. we go in and ask the clerk "can you identify the guy?" she says "identify him?! here's his signature card. he banks here"

lol

i can understand desperate, but robbing a bank that you are a customer of?

[GreenStormCloud]

137. That's as bad as...

the guys that decided to rob a casino. The guys knew they couldn't put on ski masks outside the casino and walk in, so they waited until they were inside the casino to put on the masks. Of course, the eyes-in-the-sky zoomed in on them and got lovely photos. Every one of them was an employee of that same casino. They were arrested a few minutes later, at one of their residences, dividing up the loot.

I once lived in Ocean Springs, MS for awhile. It is one town over from Gulfport/Biloxi where the casinos were, so we got the news from there.

One guy robbed a bank and went the casino the next day to play blackjack, wearing the same clothes as in his bank video. Casino security works very closely with local law enforcement and the casino recieves pictures very quickly. The guy was truly "busted" at blackjack.

Even the smart ones seem get terminal cases of the stupids. At the business where my wife once worked, the Chief Financial Officer was embezzeling. He was a really intelligent person. He was allowed to select the audit firm and had a contact with the one he selected. For several years he got away with it, but he started living larger and larger and soon he had a better house than the owner. Finally, his embezzeling caused the company to go bankrupt and everything came out. If he had been content to only milk the cow, he would likely still be milking it, instead of being in prison.

[one-eyed fat man]

131. swords and canes

Here, in Kentucky, the CCDW covers all manner of deadly weapons. Being well into my sixth decade, most folks don't give a second look when I am out with a cane. ColdSteel makes a very fine walking stick, without a blade, that is hell for stout, has a quarter pound steel knob, and that makes a formidable weapon in the hands of someone practiced and willing. US Navy Lieutenant Commander Andrew C. Cunningham wrote a book, "The Cane as A Weapon" telling how the walking stick may be used effectually both for defense and attack nearly 100 years ago and it was even favorably reviewed by the New York Times! If you took fencing in college, some techniques will seem very familiar, others will remind you of bayonet training. Regardless, there are methods decidedly more useful than flailing away mindlessly with a stick. Daily practice is at least as good as Tai Chi as low impact exercises.

IF you are going to carry a sword cane, by all means get a good one. Something made of properly tempered steels, not too long and with sufficient spine.

Burger Swords

No point in carrying some Pakistani made POS that can get you into trouble but isn't good enough to get you out. Again, as with any martial art, practice is the key. Locally, they have fencing classes at the community college and they are free. Sparring with young college students is fun and a pretty good workout for an old geezer, like me. If nothing else, it will reinforce the need to make your defense sudden, violent, and relentless to counteract a youthful opponent's speed, reflexes, and stamina. Their surprise won't last long and you need defeat their attack before they get over it.

Lastly, if you ever give someone your "best shot" don't hang around to see how it turns out!

[spin]

140. Actually I looked at the Cold Steel Walking Stick...

and was impressed.

Looks like a good self defense weapon.

The sword cane is a interesting idea, but might get you in considerable trouble if you actually used it. People seem to dislike knives more than guns.

The Burger Swords are beautifully crafted. They are works of art.

[one-eyed fat man]

144. Burger swords are excellent!

I am unreservedly pleased with mine. As you point out, knives tend to unnerve people more than guns do. Exploiting that common fear for its psychological effect certainly was the rationale behind chroming bayonets for crowd control duty.

Sometimes, your only options are to "die, or die trying." And it is better to be prepared when you are trying.