Hawt Two Good A2ACTU Control Incidents.

Thousands of people actively carry and incidents of irresponsibility or brash behavior are an extreme rarity, thus making that concern invalid through every day real world proof.

Yeah, you're right. That's because most people who carry will live their daily lives without needing their firearm. It would suck dick to be a casualty in that extreme rarity.

This will sound paranoid and cheesy, but whatever....

The police show up to write a report and call someone to clean up the blood. Whose blood they clean up is entirely up to you.

To me it does, but a lot of people feel the same way you do.
 
Yeah, you're right. That's because most people who carry will live their daily lives without needing their firearm. It would suck dick to be a casualty in that extreme rarity.

The alternative is you, yourself, being the casualty when that extreme rarity happens to you and you have no way to adequately defend yourself.

Which is ultimately more valuable to you? Your own life, or someone else's?
 
Are police and laws on hand to protect you every second of every day? Not even close. So what you're really saying is that you have a natural right to have your life defended by force, if necessary, about 5% of the time, if that. And that's fine, if that's what you believe. But I have a natural right to defend mine by force 100% of the time. And I will. I don't need to rely on others to do that for me.

I'll do my best to respond. I'm saying that in public area, the use of lethal force is usually not necessary and in extreme cases, such force can be hazardous to the public.

Urban populations are ever expanding, while criminal justice and public health systems are already overwhelmed. There aren't enough resources to hold or treat the people who need it. I've been assaulted by mentally deficient homeless people downtown who had nowhere else to go, and I've been assaulted and threatened by "normal" assholes looking to prove a point and/or make some money. Never once was there a cop in sight. So while you rely on LEOs to show up and save you, I will rely on myself. I think that's really the crux of the argument. Self sufficiency and right to life.

I have too, and I guess my question is, if you were carrying at the time would you shoot them? That's a big decision to make.

I remember having my wallet taken from my at knife-point. If I had my pistol on me and did not use it, they would have found it and at the very least taken it. If I had pulled it out, it means I have to be willing to use it. What is my potential liability if I kill someone even in self defense? Am I better off just letting them take my $40 cash and my credit card? These are hard questions to answer in a split second.

I've also had my car broken into several times over years worth of parking downtown. Police don't even show up for that anymore when you call them. They don't have the manpower.

Are there states where you can shoot car thieves on public roads? I'm not sure about that.
 
The alternative is you, yourself, being the casualty when that extreme rarity happens to you and you have no way to adequately defend yourself.

Which is ultimately more valuable to you? Your own life, or someone else's?

Everyone's own life is more valuable than someone elses. That's why I would be uneasy with my fellow citizen carrying and why I am totally fine with people defending their own homes -- lethally.
 
Everyone's own life is more valuable than someone elses. That's why I would be uneasy with my fellow citizen carrying and why I am totally fine with people defending their own homes -- lethally.

More people carrying guns = less guns being fired at other people. Everyone knows that everyone around them is carrying so why cause trouble?
 
More people carrying guns = less guns being fired at other people. Everyone knows that everyone around them is carrying so why cause trouble?

I think the truth behind that statement ultimately depends on the data you choose from. Violent crime in Hawaii is retardedly low (Yes Castle Laws, No carry) in comparison to, say, Texas.
 
I'll do my best to respond. I'm saying that in public area, the use of lethal force is usually not necessary and in extreme cases, such force can be hazardous to the public.

I have too, and I guess my question is, if you were carrying at the time would you shoot them? That's a big decision to make.

I remember having my wallet taken from my at knife-point. If I had my pistol on me and did not use it, they would have found it and at the very least taken it. If I had pulled it out, it means I have to be willing to use it. What is my potential liability if I kill someone even in self defense? Am I better off just letting them take my $40 cash and my credit card? These are hard questions to answer in a split second.

Are there states where you can shoot car thieves on public roads? I'm not sure about that.

If I had been assaulted while carrying I would have drawn on them, as is my right. I wouldn't have thought twice about it. I don't have mental or emotional hangups when it comes to pulling a gun on someone, and when I consider shooting someone who is a hindrance to my health I don't much care about that, either. You pull on gun on severe threats, not friends. Common sense.

I've drawn my gun on someone once. Technically I didn't draw it "on" them, I simply retreived it from my car and held it against my leg. Three men followed me and a friend of mine out to my car after we beat them in a game of pool at a bar about a year ago. We won $40 from them. They began talking sh*t the moment the game ended, and it didn't feel right so we immediately left. They followed us out, approached my car, I told them to f*ck off, they pushed the issue in a very beligerent way, and my friend and I both climbed out of the car with our guns. As soon as we did that the situation was over and they ran off.

Would I have shot them? That completely depends. What if they had been carrying too, and reached for theirs? I could imagine a whole slew of hypotheticals, but ultimately who cares? The point is that without the guns any number of things very likely would have happened. But they didn't. Because we were armed. Was it a terrifying experience that clouded our judgment? Not at all. It was more like telling a bunch of punk kids to go bug someone else. It wasn't scary at all and I don't feel that the safety of the public was in any way jeopardized. My friend and I have been shooting for a long time, and I like to think we would've gone for the thighs before wildly shooting in every direction or towards any nearby retirement homes or school dorms. We aren't cowboys, we're normal people who protect our lives and our property.

Would I have drawn it on someone who pulled a knife on me and asked for my wallet? Of course. Why would you carry a gun if you aren't willing to use it? You probably cleared that up the moment you tucked it into the holster.

And I didn't mean I would have shot the person who broke into my car. I would've drawn my gun on him and let him run off, however. The point was that you can't rely on cops because there aren't enough of them.
 
Last edited:
I think the truth behind that statement ultimately depends on the data you choose from. Violent crime in Hawaii is retardedly low (Yes Castle Laws, No carry) in comparison to, say, Texas.

There's a slight population disparity there.
 
Everyone's own life is more valuable than someone elses. That's why I would be uneasy with my fellow citizen carrying and why I am totally fine with people defending their own homes -- lethally.

What do you mean by this? Are you worried about being hit by a stray bullet or something?
 
Are there states where you can shoot car thieves on public roads? I'm not sure about that.

In Arizona we have the "Stand your ground law", which basically extends Castle doctrine to anywhere you can legally occupy while carrying a firearm. So, if I were threatened on a public road in Arizona I legally could shoot someone.

Does that mean that I'll walk away from the situation scott free? No, it doesn't.

http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/images/stories/journal/Network_2010-9.pdf
 
if by nobody you mean quite a few people then yes, nobody

Very few people that I know personally open carry, even before AZ went free concealed, and most of the people that I've met that do open carry are some of the most pompous gun culture douches on the face of the planet.
 
I guess my concern with carry is that the public is at the mercy of a citizen's judgment. People are prone to mistakes, and surely some but not everyone who carries is responsible and properly trained.

I hear all the time "better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it." May be. But how many people have they shot in their lifetime? The answer is almost always zero. We have laws and Police that thankfully do most of the shooting for us. If we're carrying just for the sake of carrying then the whole thing seems silly to me.

couple of fallacies with this

First of all, who else's judgment is the public mercy to? As opposed to judges, cops and juries? Just because someone is in a position of power doesn't make them better capable of making a decision about an event after the fact than someone who's there in the moment.

Second, few people carry without the proper training. Those that understand the responsibility of carrying know full well that their gun is useless unless they know how to use it properly. Besides, who are you to decide who is or isn't responsible?

Third, most cops have shot zero people in their lifetimes. Doing so once doesn't make you more capable of doing it a second time or necessarily imbue one with better judgment on a similar situation in the future.

Fourth, do you have your own personal cop following you around? Because I sure as fuck don't. There are roughly two thousand people for every uniformed officer in the country. Even if they were all on duty at the same time, the idea that we should rely solely on them for protection is downright insane.
 
I'll do my best to respond. I'm saying that in public area, the use of lethal force is usually not necessary and in extreme cases, such force can be hazardous to the public.
If my life is in danger, lethal force is necessary. Simple as that. The only difference between me making that judgment call and a cop doing so is that the cop is protected from liability in case he's wrong, meaning we as civilians have to be more responsible than they do.
I have too, and I guess my question is, if you were carrying at the time would you shoot them? That's a big decision to make.

I remember having my wallet taken from my at knife-point. If I had my pistol on me and did not use it, they would have found it and at the very least taken it. If I had pulled it out, it means I have to be willing to use it. What is my potential liability if I kill someone even in self defense? Am I better off just letting them take my $40 cash and my credit card? These are hard questions to answer in a split second.
I'm more concerned with by ability to continue breathing than my potential liability.
Are there states where you can shoot car thieves on public roads? I'm not sure about that.
If you're in the car being threatened, yes.