I didn't mean for this to be a CCW debate and am trying to do nothing more than answer other questions/comments.
I agree with this point you make. It's a danger of private carry we all have to be aware of. IMO the best choice is to do what you have to do to put the gunman down, then find a safe place, holster your weapon and lay down waiting for the cops.
That's a very narrow viewpoint. While I'm certain some, or perhaps even many, permit holders have very little training others are far better trained than law enforcement. While I understand your feeling (and personally wouldn't oppose mandatory training and annual recert for a FEDERAL LIMITLESS permit) because my situation is different I can't allow such fears to restrict my freedoms and place my safety in jeopardy.
I agree it's a tough choice, and civilian caualties are always a danger. I just know that I couldn't live with myself if I stood there while someone else was injured or killed either. It's a no win scenerio once a criminal begins his act. In my opinion the best we can do is the best we can do.
I understand this view, but I disagree with it. I believe there are basic rights which are absolutely inalienable. Period. I shouldn't be allowed to hold slaves just because it's private property. I shouldn't be allowed to discriminate and I shouldn't be allowed to endanger anyone. That's what restricting my access to a weapon does; it endangers me. Unless the private property owner is providing incredible security and assume full liability for any inuries that I suffer then I have to have the right to protect myself. The problem is that money allows control which superceded reason and right. A mall can push other stores out of business and create a virtual monopoly on required goods, leaving a person with no choice but to shop there or face undue difficulties. Because of that I believe they should not then be able to restrict the rights of the general public. A homeowner is a different situation because there is no actual 'need' to go into that home, and the homeowner does not act in a way that alters another individuals options (generally speaking). The problem seems to only arise with businesses, schools, and other large areas for public use.
I agree, but there needs to be more than just sorrow and empathy. We need to be aware of the underlying situations and act to prevent them from occuring again. To sit by and say 'how sad that is' and then do nothing to change is yet another tragedy and in no way provides meaning to the losses suffered.
You can blame that on the general publics' lack of attention span. The media outlets do what they have to do to get ratings and the traditional news stories just don't pull in enough people. So, if you want to start somewhere, start with the current publics' attitude regarding newsworthy events.
as an FYI, I asked a couple of CCW Utah residents, and even though they post the signs, they can still legally pack at trolly square or any other place of business. If the business knows they pack, they can have them leave, but they cannot deny weapons with a posted sign. Both of these CCW's said they would have drawn and ensured safe exit of their family/friends/immediate people, but not engaged the man unless they or their family were in immediate danger (i.e. gun pointed at them). They said they have thought long and hard about what decision to make in this instance (prior to this happening).
FYI, both of those took the 4 hour class for CCW, but also have taken 3 firearm classes that are much more advanced (and most folks who have CCW do around here)
FYI, both of those took the 4 hour class for CCW, but also have taken 3 firearm classes that are much more advanced (and most folks who have CCW do around here)
They put pictures of decapitated bodies and walls splattered with blood & gibs in the local paper here all the time.
(Lots of people like blow up stuff in this country)
(Lots of people like blow up stuff in this country)
I won't quote again just because this is turning rather long, but I'll try to speak to some of the issues that were brought up.
1. It is a fine line to pull out your gun and confront this person without being ID'ed as a LEO. With how quickly this particular case went down, as a betting man, I would've bet that if a civvie had a weapon out, he would've been taken out also. Obviously, this is a personal choice, but it would really suck to be taken out by cops when you're trying to do the right thing.
2. I would tent to disagree and say that my viewpoint is actually pretty broad. I would counter that it's pretty narrow to think that the majority of people who carry continually get training and put rounds through their firearm. My assertion is that those who do get them, rarely do any more training than is necessary, or at most are weekend plinkers. Let's face it, shooting anything other than a .22. or .38 can be expensive, even if you are doing your own reloading. I cannot state this for a certainty, but once again, given the odds, I'd lay money down on it. That being said, I have no idea what your profession is and how often you fire your weapon. You seem like a very conscientious firearm owner however, from your postings. I don't doubt for a minute that you know how to handle your gun (there's a double entendre there somewhere
). I would feel much more comfortable with CC's if in this state, not only were there annual certifications, but semi-annually, or even semi-monthly proficiency requirements that were to be met. Like I said, if the only requirement is to not have a felony, that opens doors to a lot of people who I don't necessarily feel comfortable with the "right" to CC.
3. You're right, it's a tough choice to act or not act. If somebody were in the same situation as the cop, I say do it. However, knowing the layout of Trolley Square, where the incident happened, the risk would've been huge - at least in my book. Also...now that I'm thinking about it....if let's say the cop were there and you were there, would you let the cop handle it as he's the "pro" or would you join in? Just curious.
4. I guess this is just one point where we'll disagree. I'm a pretty strong libertarian, and really would rather have less gov't involved in my life. There is no inalienable right to safety. There is a right to bear arms, but I probably interpret that differently than you do. Private property is private property to me. You can do with it as you please. Given enough reasons, gov't can compel owners to do things. Fine, that's established in case law. I can live with that. However, my take on it is as long as you're not discriminating against one of the protected classes (you used slavery as an example - race is a protected class) you can pretty much lay out the rules as you see fit. Don't like tinted windows? Ban them from your parking lot. Does it make sense? Not really, but hey, it's your property. If you want to lose sales, so be it. As far as an undue burden, rather than say a mall, let's take a church as an example. This is private property that has public access and is basically a monopoly. Most churches in this state have asked that firearms not be taken in to their facilities. I respect that. That probably puts an undue burden on worshipers who want to practice that religion but that's the price you have to pay. Which is more important in this particular case, your god or your gun? Let's say this happened in a church. Would you sue that church? I know I wouldn't.
Sometimes showing sorrow and empathy is enough. Not every tragedy has to have a lesson, just like not every TV show has to be educational or entertaining. In this case lives were lost, and that's tragic. Was any lesson learned to prevent it? There is no way to prevent random acts of violence. Statistically these are outliers that can never be charted or predicted. That's why they're random. Can we do things to try and help catch these people before they get to this point? Sure. Can we practice our responses once these events start? Sure. Can we prevent them? No. Maybe CC's could've saved a life or two, but from the timelime I saw in today's Salt Lake Tribune, 3 were dead no matter if we mounted automatic machine gun turrets on every corner.
1. It is a fine line to pull out your gun and confront this person without being ID'ed as a LEO. With how quickly this particular case went down, as a betting man, I would've bet that if a civvie had a weapon out, he would've been taken out also. Obviously, this is a personal choice, but it would really suck to be taken out by cops when you're trying to do the right thing.
2. I would tent to disagree and say that my viewpoint is actually pretty broad. I would counter that it's pretty narrow to think that the majority of people who carry continually get training and put rounds through their firearm. My assertion is that those who do get them, rarely do any more training than is necessary, or at most are weekend plinkers. Let's face it, shooting anything other than a .22. or .38 can be expensive, even if you are doing your own reloading. I cannot state this for a certainty, but once again, given the odds, I'd lay money down on it. That being said, I have no idea what your profession is and how often you fire your weapon. You seem like a very conscientious firearm owner however, from your postings. I don't doubt for a minute that you know how to handle your gun (there's a double entendre there somewhere
). I would feel much more comfortable with CC's if in this state, not only were there annual certifications, but semi-annually, or even semi-monthly proficiency requirements that were to be met. Like I said, if the only requirement is to not have a felony, that opens doors to a lot of people who I don't necessarily feel comfortable with the "right" to CC.3. You're right, it's a tough choice to act or not act. If somebody were in the same situation as the cop, I say do it. However, knowing the layout of Trolley Square, where the incident happened, the risk would've been huge - at least in my book. Also...now that I'm thinking about it....if let's say the cop were there and you were there, would you let the cop handle it as he's the "pro" or would you join in? Just curious.
4. I guess this is just one point where we'll disagree. I'm a pretty strong libertarian, and really would rather have less gov't involved in my life. There is no inalienable right to safety. There is a right to bear arms, but I probably interpret that differently than you do. Private property is private property to me. You can do with it as you please. Given enough reasons, gov't can compel owners to do things. Fine, that's established in case law. I can live with that. However, my take on it is as long as you're not discriminating against one of the protected classes (you used slavery as an example - race is a protected class) you can pretty much lay out the rules as you see fit. Don't like tinted windows? Ban them from your parking lot. Does it make sense? Not really, but hey, it's your property. If you want to lose sales, so be it. As far as an undue burden, rather than say a mall, let's take a church as an example. This is private property that has public access and is basically a monopoly. Most churches in this state have asked that firearms not be taken in to their facilities. I respect that. That probably puts an undue burden on worshipers who want to practice that religion but that's the price you have to pay. Which is more important in this particular case, your god or your gun? Let's say this happened in a church. Would you sue that church? I know I wouldn't.
Sometimes showing sorrow and empathy is enough. Not every tragedy has to have a lesson, just like not every TV show has to be educational or entertaining. In this case lives were lost, and that's tragic. Was any lesson learned to prevent it? There is no way to prevent random acts of violence. Statistically these are outliers that can never be charted or predicted. That's why they're random. Can we do things to try and help catch these people before they get to this point? Sure. Can we practice our responses once these events start? Sure. Can we prevent them? No. Maybe CC's could've saved a life or two, but from the timelime I saw in today's Salt Lake Tribune, 3 were dead no matter if we mounted automatic machine gun turrets on every corner.
I agree with this for sure. People were lucky it was a cop, who is well trained. The response time on that was fantastic (thumbs up to the SLCPD) although the PD is like, 4 blocks away? (maybe 6?). CCW are not the end all be all answer to violent crime, and could easily and quickly cause MORE problems in a situation like this. TBH, Nevada CCW is supposed to be the best (not sure on recert). It's like a week long class to get, but is almost universally accepted across states.
If cops are present it's on them, though I would assist if asked. The only time I act is if it's directly against me/mine, or if I'm the only thing supporting someone elses safety. I hate violence in general, and guns especially. I only use it as an absolute necessity.
I would, of course, prefer to find a church that didn't make that a rule. If there were none in the area then I would probably just go ahead and carry anyway, and if they threw me out so be it. Of course, I don't really personally believe in worshipping at a church, and I personally believe in justice over laws, so this situation is pretty easy for me.
Out of curiousity, what's the argument (from the point of view of those who support CCWs) that's given if a CCW loses control and shoots someone out of rage or anger? If you spend a few minutes in LA traffic you will immediately see the detriment of allowing CCWs.
This is one of many reasons why I no longer go to malls very much at all. I can get everything online nowadays.
Find me one and then we'll talk. I think if you research it you'll find it's easier to find incidents of law enforcement committing murder than CPL holders.
TallBill
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2001
- 46,017
- 62
- 91
Waiting until the gun is pointing at them is entirely to long to wait. That is usually when you get shot! I think seeing a few people get blasted would be good enough for me to draw, fire, and lay my weapon down to wait for the police.
But I wouldn't be able to do that, because I live in Illinios. I carry a gun daily at work, but can't at home, because that would be dangerous!!
Since it's impossible to change the country's aggregate opinion, the media could take the proactive approach and reform how they do business.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter