Conceal and Carry in the land of 10,000 lakes!

[red5angel]

they just passed a conceal and carry law in minnesota! It's got me thinking. how would that sort of thing change your training if it happened in your state, if it hasn't already. If your state is ok with this does this come into play in your martial thinking?

[rogue]

First I'd ask myself, "What would Carl Dechiara do?" :D

Where've you been Red?

In answer, yes but it opens it's own can of worms for how to carry, how to conceal, where can't I carry, etc.

[Fred Sanford]

Uh, I'm willing to bet that the bad guys in Minnesota were already carrying concealed before this law was passed. It's cool that law abiding citizens can do it now though.

If you do carry a gun though, you can't afford to lose a fight.

What happens to you if you get your ass kicked and your opponent finds your gun?? Or if you struggle with someone and they start reaching for your gun? Any physical alteration could end up with someone getting killed.

[Dark Knight]

Concealed carry shouldn’t change your training unless you will carry yourself.

The bad guys have been carrying already, those who can legally carry now think before fighting. Brandishing a gun is still illegal. That means you cant just pull it out any second and threaten people.

So when a person who is carrying gets into an argument he must think, is this worth pulling a gun? If the gun comes out I may have to shoot, again is this worth shooting someone? If I fight with him he may find the gun and shoot me.

People who carry think about a confrontation before they get into one. The majority of states now have carry permits for the people and we have seen a reduction in crime. This wont effect your training in the sense of a new threat, but a new tool if you decide to carry yourself.

[Shaolin-Do]

People who carry guns are the weakest people of all. I loathe guns.
But if I were to carry one... Id buy a desert eagle .50.
:)
It would actually make me kinda uncomfortable if they passed a conceal and carry law here, but I dont think anyone is dumb enough to pass a conceal and carry law in Texas.

[Dark Knight]

Carry a gun has a lot of responsibilities, you have to go through the class so you know there are consequences to not using a gun properly. After all th9is time you can now carry a gun. Shoot someone for the wrong reasons you go to jail. When you get out you will never own one again, you will no longer vote, you cannot join the military, you cannno0t get the majority of federal jobs.

Take a gun into the wrong places and you will lose your right to carry at the least, you could end up losing more rights.

Doing something wrong with a gun can make you lose more rights than you just gained. Carrying is a double edged sword, one that can cost you if you abuse the right.

[Dark Knight]

SD, why do you feel that way? Guns are used in this country 2.5 million times a year in self defense. Why would you take that away from people?

BTW the .50 is a coll gun but not a good carry gun.

[Shaolin-Do]

Id never carry a gun, Cause I couldnt shoot anyone. Id pull it out and wave it in their face, then put it away cause someones life isnt worth it.
Sure, Im f*cked if they have a gun, but I still wont carry. I want a DE for my house, but that is only for robbery protection. But Im not all that worried bout getin a gun yet anyways, Cause I already have plenty of good long stabbing weapons lying around.
The reason I loathe guns so much, is because its a false sense of power for powerless people.
Kinda like trippin acid. You see things, but they arent really there. Most people carry a gun, and feel powerful. Doesnt mean they really are powerful. Shows to me that they lack other means of resolving a conflict, hence showing lack of cognative thinking skills, the inability to cope with situations.

[red5angel]

LOL!@ Rogue! I have been around, had some things to do, took a break from the madness that is KFO.

For the record, I don't carry and don't plan to. I also agree that the bad guys carry and will continue to carry legally or not. however now any idiot who takes the time to fill out the proper paper work can carry one concealed. That does funny things to people. Not only that, but take a guy who would normally not mind a tussle in the local pub, has an anger management issue, and has had a little too much to drink and is feeling powerful with that handcannon now has tucked away in his jacket or truck.
What about those guys who get angry and act before they think?

[Dark Knight]

They have laws for those types. If someone were to pull a gun, they have to have a good reason, just to scare someone or prove something is not a good reaon, they then go to jail.

The DE is a cool gun, and many sports for that monster. As far as home defense you have to consider walls, other people and penitration for safty reasons. But that does not mean you cant. I keep my Gock .40 next to th bed, but I carry my Springfield 1911 .45.

People carry for different reasons. Some just because they can. But its not something you want to advertize. Guns have saved more lives than they have cost illegally. Thats why the carry laws are going through in most states.

But I agree, if you are not willing to shoot if you have to, dont carry if you are not going to follow through in a self defense situation. Pulling a gun and waving it around is not good.

But then if you have to pull a gun you are having a bad day.

[Dark Knight]

Not only that, but take a guy who would normally not mind a tussle in the local pub, has an anger management issue, and has had a little too much to drink and is feeling powerful with that handcannon now has tucked away in his jacket or truck.

Most states made it illegal to drink while carrying. Again in order to carry you went through the class and know this. That guy will lose the right he just got just because he sat down and took a sip.

Also many states made it illegal to be in an establishment that makes it business selling alcohol.

Gun owners think of this, thats why states with carry laws do not have problems. The amount of times it does is unbelievably small. Compare it to how many times a gun is used for self defense.

[red5angel]

true Darknight but it is also illegal to drink and drive. Im not saying that some of those people willing to carry a hand gun and drink illegally aren't already, but this opens up the potential.

[Shaolin-Do]

Its also illegal to smoke and drive :)
I like to go for a cruise while I get stoned a lot... hehehe
Nice country roads to drive on.
Yeah, it would be pointless for me to carry a gun. I wouldnt shoot anyone. I could beat someone half to death with the hammers attached to my wrists :D , but never shoot someone.

[red5angel]

so what exactly is the difference for you between shooting and beating someone to death?

[Dark Knight]

Not just anyone can get a concealed carry permit. Lets say that guy with the anger problem has hit his wife and went to court. He lost his right to own the gun, let alone carry it. (If he were carrying no law would change that because he is already breaking the law)

We could say the same about a knife. Anyone could buy Paul Vu’s tape on knife fighting, get enough info to be dangerous and carry a gerber gator. Now he sits in a bar, gets a few in him and starts cutting. He will take out a couple people before he is stopped.

Should you take the rights of 99.999% away because a few might do something wrong?

The start banning cars, more people from drunk drivers each year than guns legally owned by concealed carry people.

About 10 years ago a woman in Reno NV took a car down a sidewalk out of anger, she hit 17 people, I forgot how many died. There is the possibility that can happen.

And who ever thought there was a possibility that someone would crash a plane or two into the world trade centers.

Sure there is a possibility, but does that small possibility mean everyone should be punished?

[Dark Knight]

On a positive note, what do you think of the Springfield XD compact?

www.springfield-armory.com

[Dark Knight]

For my CCW brothers, my post on tactical reloading...

If you are into competition or serious self defense, a tactical reload should be something you know and practice. This is what is taught at Gunsite, thunder ranch and other training schools.
Basically it is when you are in a lull in the shooting, lets say you fired three rounds, then ducked behind cover. When you come back out you may fire many times more or not again, but whe you come out its better to come out with a full magazine, not short a few, even if you carry 17 rounds.

Here are the steps: Step one requires you to retrieve a fresh magazine from your ammunition carrier with your weak hand. At the same time, you will bend your elbow and bring the pistol about half way back and rotate the bottom of the pistol so that you can see bottom of the magazine well. Remember to maintain the target in line-of-sight.

In step two, you will place your weak hand under the magazine well and release the old magazine so that it falls into your weak hand, which also contains the fresh magazine.

Step three is to insert the fresh magazine into the pistol. Note that the fresh mag is held between the middle and forefingers, while the old magazine is stripped with the thumb and forefinger. The new magazine is seated with the butt of the weak hand.

Step four, stow your used magazine, release your slide, and reacquire your target. It is important to note that your old magazine should never be stowed in your ammunition carrier (practice stuffing the used magazine in waist of your pants). By doing so, you could inadvertently mistake the old magazine for a fresh magazine, and end up taking an empty gun to a gunfight.

This also allows you to have a half magazine left in reserve if you burn up a full magazine.

[red5angel]

DK, don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with it, like I said I feel that the bad people are going to carry anyway, this may even things a little. But I do believe for a serious martial artist that the issue needs to be thought about because things change when laws liek this come out.

[Dark Knight]

Demi Barito teaches SD that includes gun training. Check him out.

http://www.demibarbito.com/

"Martial arts practitioners view Self Defense, Self Protection or Self Preservation as a series of "empty hand" problems which they feel they will be able to solve within the framework of "their" art, generally ignoring the issues of larger/more skilled assailants, armed assailants or firearms. Gun people have a tendancy to see things as a series of shooting scenarios, always assuming that they will be able to get the gun in their hand from it's concealed carry holster or somehow have it at the ready and then miraculously be able to "fight" with it.

At The C.S.P.T. we do not view Self Preservation as a "boxing problem" or a "grappling problem" or a "shooting problem"... We view it as a survival problem! Whatever weapon you may be depending on is only a tool. You are the weapon. Your survival begins and ends with you."

[Shaolin-Do]

I think that I should legally be allowed to carry a kwandao with a razor sharp blade and cut off peoples hands for acting a fool.

Oso - are you sifu matt?

[Dark Knight]

Gun sef defense is pretty broad. Alot of poor techniques are tought, just like knife defense.

Im not sure if you have to worry that more people are carrying legally, they are not the problem, and those that change for no reason, mabey the best self defense is you communication skills.

[red5angel]

my communication skills are always my first defense, unless you are in my house in the middle of the night without permission. I am however not convinced that it can't be a bigger problem because of this. It most likely puts more guns on the streets, and slightly encourages their use, why else would you want to carry concealed unless you felt you might have to use it?

[Shaolin-Do]

Cause you like the feeling of cold steel on your junk?

[Dark Knight]

I understand what you are saying, but in all the states that made it legal for concealed carry, none have seen a rise in shootings from people who can legally own a gun, and crime has dropped. If the opposite were true than these states would not pass carry laws. Look at cities where guns are banned like DC or LA and the crime and murder rate. DC was the nations murder capitol for years; guns are banned.

The people carrying guns are those who can legally own one. Criminals with records cannot buy guns legally, and no law will stop them. Gun control does not work, it just disarms people, and people who have no other means of protection.

Gun owners have to be more careful than those who don’t, get in a fight with your wife and get arrested, you will no longer be carrying.

If you drink and drive you will eventually get your license back. Not with a gun, you will lose that right forever, its almost impossible to get it back.

Right now we have a record amount of people carrying in this country, if the theory of more guns means more deaths, then people should be dropping like flies.

[rogue]

Something else to consider when you're going to carry is your employer. While it's legal for me to carry, my clients many times have rules against guns on their premises.

[ewallace]

It would actually make me kinda uncomfortable if they passed a conceal and carry law here, but I dont think anyone is dumb enough to pass a conceal and carry law in Texas.

Uhh, we've been able to carry and conceal for quite a few years now.

[red5angel]

with some of the laws and attitudes being adapted in minnesota after 9/11 some are starting to call us the new texas. I draw the line at the big cowboy hats and "yeehaw" though.

[Shaolin-Do]

I dont hear yeehaw ever.
Yall is common speach, I say it too. :)
You all just sounds funny, and more neckish to be honest (especially when you hear a redneck say the 2)
Cant say anything bout the cowboy hat... Know lots and lots of people who wear them. I know some chicks that look hella sexy in them tho :)

[Shaolin-Do]

Really?
No one does it legally then.
:)
NO ONE.
err wait... I remember hearing about that now.
Its required to be concealed if your going to carry it however... Stupid Texas.
All these **** reagan kids are spending mommy and daddy's money on guns and heroin now days... f*ckin rich kids. what happened to buying weed?
:)

[fa_jing]

A few years ago Philadelphia's gun laws were changed to conform with the rest of the state - you can get a gun permit now for reasons of self-defense and conceal and carry. It didn't make a difference except maybe a positive one.

However, don't be stupid like someone I know and get in a fistfight with multiple people while carrying a gun (albiet legally), then have them claim that you took the gun out. Big trouble.

Also, the law clearly states that if you draw your gun, you must shoot. In other words, if you judge that there is a deadly threat, you may NOT draw your gun and simply order the assailant to stop. You must shoot, otherwise it's considered brandishing.


Hey Red5, you should get on the WingChun forum, there's been some great action going on lately. Also we would like you to engage Marcelino31 in a debate.

[red5angel]

fa_jing, whats the deal with marcelino31?

[Black Jack]

Hey stoner-

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity"- Sigmund Freud

Maybe you should check into that.

All law abiding adults should be able to get issued a CCW. I like the Vermont style of carry. Talk about low crime rates.

[Shaolin-Do]

*******-
"A fear of weapons"

"Besides, I have various other weapons lying about my house"

:rolleyes:
:eek:
:D

Vermont has low crimerates cause its all cows and pastureland. and farmers. and grass. And cows.

[Shaolin-Do]

the *'s said j a c k a s s
;)

[fa_jing]

He likes to debate things about Wingchun, claims to know better than people who have studied for far longer. I remember that you liked to debate, so we wanted to sit back and watch the sparks fly. Anyway you should check out the "Understanding TWC" thread, it is actually a good read and very informative regarding this branch of WingChun. UlitimateWingchun is Victor Parlatti of NY, who you may have heard of. He combines TWC with Catch Wrestling in his teaching.

KenWingJistu is a MA with WT experience who's fought some MMA events. You might be interested in some of his posts.

[red5angel]

I have been watching kenwingjitsus posts, some interesting stuff there. I read through the "Understanding TWC" thread, some good posts in that as well. However, the wing chun forum seems to be plagued with more people not worth listening too then worth listening too. Even the ones who usually have some pretty good things to say usually end up getting sucked into some pretty ridicuous behaviour and I have decided there is really no point in visiting. Although my attitudes have changed now that I am not a mouthpiece, the wing chun forum is 80% circus, 10% wingchun.

[Black Jack]

It's not my hang up. It's yours. Seek help.

You loathe people who carry firearms. Ya know everyday folk, women, men, the elder, people who are handicapped. You are a criminals wet dream. You stated you would rather get almost beat to death, if not all the way, then save your life with a firearm, but for some reason you think stabbing a person with a kwan do is cool.

If all your money is spent on mary jane then I am sure their are assistance programs in Texas that can get you looked at.

[Shaolin-Do]

lol
I dont spend hardly sh!t on mary jane, and dont think stabbing people with kwandao's is cool. I have bills to pay.
You have the worst case of misconceptions I have ever seen, and have misunderstood and assbackwardsly replied to sooo many posts I have made... I dont know if the name SD makes you think Im backwards or what, but read my posts before you respond.

[red5angel]

shaolin-do, still waiting to hear what the difference is to you...

[Shaolin-Do]

the difference in what?

[Shaolin-Do]

btw, 80% circus 10% wing chun.
Whats the last 10%?
:)

[red5angel]

between hacking someone to pieces and shooting them. You said you wouldn't shoot anyone but you wouldn't have a problem cutting someone up.

[Shaolin-Do]

No i didnt.
I said I have stabbing weapons, not that I stab people. Ive never put a blade in someone, and dont intend to. Human life is more valuable than that. I said Id bloody someone up with my hands, I wouldnt kill them tho. Break someones teeth out, sure, shoot their face? stab their neck? f*ck no. Only instance I would use a gun or weapon - someone breaks into my house while Im sleeping.
thats about it.

[red5angel]

Yeah, it would be pointless for me to carry a gun. I wouldnt shoot anyone. I could beat someone half to death with the hammers attached to my wrists , but never shoot someone.

I misread this post of yours shaolin-do, apparently those "hammers" are your fists and you would only beat them half to death.

I have no probelm with guns or their use, when it's legitimate, I carried several for Uncle Sam for four years and was prepared to use everyone. I am not concerned that violent crimes will rise however I am willing to bet that death by gun shots happen more frequently now whether by accident or not.
I didn't start this thread to debate whether it is right or wrong, like abortion, who really knows, and frankly I don't care either way is fine by me. We were fine without the conceal and carry law and I am sure we will be fine with it. My only issue is just thinking baout it froma martial arts point of view, does it change the way I change at all, even in the slightest? Does it change my mental attitude towards fighting and self defense? For instance, what if Hillbilly Joe starts a fight with me, has a gun legally concealed and decides since he is getting his ass kicked by me, and no one is around, he is going to shoot me and claim it was in self defense?

[Shaolin-Do]

"could beat someone half to death with the hammers attached to my wrists , "
Yeah, that was meant more of a joke. its hard to convey sarcasm without a tone of voice tho.
:)
Concealed gun laws make me more uncomfortable. And if your going to shoot, shoot to kill, otherwise its your word vs theirs in court. Or just go for the KO fast if you dont have your gun and hillbilly joe does.
****... Guns suck. Make sh!t so unfair.
:)

[red5angel]

Make sh!t so unfair

Thats the idea in combat you want the odds to be unfair and in your favor. If you don't bring a weapon, I bring aknife. If you bring a knife, I bring a gun, if you bring a gun I bring a take, if you bring a tank I bring abomber, if you bring a bomboer I bring an atomic bomb.
Conflict, isn't about honor or fairness, it is about survival. there is room for honor in the ring, or in the kwoon, but when it comes down to conflict, all those things are thrown out the window and anything goes.
I would rather die fighting then die honorably but senselessly.

[fa_jing]

I think the Hillbilly would still have a tough day in court, having to prove that his life was threatened so he had to shoot you. Anyway the obvious solution is to carry your own gun. An armed society is a peaceful society, said the founding fathers---and people will get in less fights if everyone has a gun on them.

[Shaolin-Do]

"Anyway the obvious solution is to carry your own gun."

And we can all drive drunk so we swerve at the same time, thus avoiding accident.

:cool:

"An armed society is a peaceful society, said the founding fathers"

They also said "every man is equal" while most of them owned slaves. Im not as into all the government sh!t as I was back in my "rage against the machine" haydays, but the founding fathers said and did some really f*cked up assbackwards sh!t. (founding fathers not to be classified in a group, but individually)

[Shaolin-Do]

"Conflict, isn't about honor or fairness, it is about survival. "

I have seen more fights (conflict) than I can count, and not one person has died yet. In your average fight, no one gets killed. Unless someone in the fight or one of their frieds was a Billy Badass who was carrying what? A GUN! Then what happens? Someone gets shot. Why? Cause someone had a gun, cause they felt powerless without, because they WERE. If you feel the need to carry a gun, then what was the point of the countless hours and dollars you have poured into your martial arts training? Does it not suffice to keep you protected? If you are going to carry a gun all you need is a few drawing and firing classes. Or you better be able to whoop some serious ass in a fight, otherwise that guns going to do a lot more than you wanted it to for the other guy.

[red5angel]

fa_jing, no intentions of carrying my own gun, it doesn't worry me that much. However, Hillbilly Joe just needs to show the marks around his neck from where I was trying to strangle him (whether I was or not) and how lucky he was to be carrying because I would have killed him obviously.

[red5angel]

my point shaolin do is that it is about degrees. If you feel you can't defend yourself properly without a gun then ok, if like me you are ok with your martial training, then ok too. However I don't by into fair or honorable when it comes to warfare on any level.
In the marines I was taught to get in, kill the enemy and worry about the clean up afterwards. We didn't knock, or let them know we were coming. It wasn't dishonorable it was life.

[Shaolin-Do]

I think royce would choke out hillbilly joe.
Im going to lunch.
BBL.
:D

[red5angel]

I see that joke as old as it is has not yet run its course, or maybe it has...;)

[Radhnoti]

Found an article in today's news that fits (vaguely) with this subject:

"Bedridden man shoots, kills home invasion suspect
KOMO 1000 News

"Police in Tacoma have found the body of a man they believe was
killed by a disabled homeowner, after he attempted to rob the
bedridden man in his Tacoma home Monday afternoon. A 64-year-old man,
reportedly a paraplegic, told authorities he heard someone enter his
house in the 600 block of 88th Street at about 12:30 p.m. That's when
he armed himself with his gun. When the masked intruder entered his
bedroom, the man fired at least one shot at the suspect, who fled
from the home." (06/03/03)

http://www.komotv.com/stories/25168.htm
"

It's easy for the strong in our world to downplay and suggest the "unfairness" of guns. The strong don't NEED them. It's the weakest members of a society that benefit from guns AND the POSSIBILITY that they COULD legally be carrying a gun. Anything that makes the bad guy think twice about assaulting someone is a good thing. A gun can be the great equalizer in a confrontation, as that article I quoted above showed. A paraplegic versus a masked intruder and the paraplegic WINS? You gotta credit the gun there, and MAYBE someone else who was considering invading someone's home will think twice because of this one story.


Dark Knight...I am SERIOUSLY considering buying SA's XD SUB-compact for CCW. There's a GREAT board discussing the pros and cons of all the XD's incarnations HERE (http://www.hs2000talk.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi)
Drop me a PM if you've heard anything you think I should know, please. :)

Shaolin-Do, I think everyone is assuming you were serious with your comment of :"I think that I should legally be allowed to carry a kwandao with a razor sharp blade and cut off peoples hands for acting a fool." You preceeded this statement with, "I wouldnt shoot anyone. I could beat someone half to death with the hammers attached to my wrists..." and I'm pretty sure red5 (like myself) missed the "half " and "could" part the first time he read it. Preceed THAT with, "People who carry guns are the weakest people of all." and then factor in that several people posting on this topic DO carry and you might begin to have an idea why you're catching some flak. You might want to clarify that sometimes you just talk out of your arse for the fun of it. :D Not meant to be a slam, just pointing out that some of your posts are just "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"....like, "Cause you like the feeling of cold steel on your junk?" It didn't add anything to the discussion, you just threw it out there...which is fine, but be ready for people who are serious about the discussion to call you out from time to time.

[red5angel]

nice article radhnoti, I like to see justice served from time to time.

[Black Jack]

I don't have any misconceptions. By the information presented to me over the course of your posts I know exactly who I am talking to and what you represent.

If firearms are not how you wish to protect yourself then fine. I can understand that. But other people do use that consitutional right as a means of protection. To slander them because of your own ignorance is wrong and uneducated.

The main purpose of a sidearm is to protect. Real gun control is being able to hit your target. It is just a tool, like a knive, baton, or even a weedwacker for that matter. Its not that I am pro-gun it is that I am pro-rights. In specific pro-self defense.

Banning firearms to reduce crime is like banning sex to reduce rape.

[Dark Knight]

Concealed gun laws make me more uncomfortable.

Because it is something you know very little about?

Crime has gone down everywhere that CCW laws have passed. You make that statement based on how you feel.

Criminals prefer unarmed victims. And will martial arts save you from everything?

The Wichita Horror

By Scott Rubush

FrontPageMagazine.com January 12, 2001
get a printer-friendly version of this article
email this article to a friend


IT WAS A QUIET NIGHT for five friends gathered at a townhouse in Wichita, Kansas-until an unspeakable crime interrupted their evening and abruptly ended four of their lives.

The night of terror began December 14 when two men burst in on the group of young professionals, in their twenties, and held them at gunpoint. While rummaging through drawers and shelves for valuables, the thieves found an engagement ring.

"That's for you," Jason Befort reportedly told his girlfriend as they huddled together in terror. She hadn't known about the ring before the thieves found it. "I was going to ask you to marry me," he told her.

After driving their prisoners to an ATM and forcing them to withdraw money, the thieves then took them to a deserted soccer field.

There they ripped the clothes from the two women - including Jason Befort's fiance - and raped them as the three men watched. Afterwards, they forced the two women to perform sex acts on each other, and the three men to have sex with the women.

Finally, the five prisoners were ordered to kneel on the ground and were shot execution-style.

Only one survived. It was Jason Befort's fiance.

She walked more than a mile, bleeding and naked, through the snow, before finding help.

The four people killed on that soccer field were only the final victims in a week-long crime spree, for which two brothers -- Jonathan and Reginald Carr-have now been charged. In the days before the soccer-field killings, the brothers allegedly robbed a man at gunpoint outside a convenience store and murdered a 55-year-old cellist near her Wichita home.

[GreyMystik]

here's the problem i have with concealed carry. you can get a permit (if you fit the criteria, as mentioned earlier) to carry a piece of machinery that literally puts someone's life in your hands. by all accounts , a handgun is a very lethal weapon to have control over, and a person with minimal training can use one. this means if i fit the criteria, i can obtain a handgun and legally carry one (concealed) and potentially take your life with it.
now, if one can do something such as this, and it is "permitted" by law, why can't we carry such things as butterfly knives? nunchukas(for those who favor them)? shuriken? other concealed martial arts-type weapons that are somewhat less lethal (if used by a trained person with self-control) than handguns? these weapons require more training and knowledge to use than handguns (at least effectively), and yet they are still illegal to carry (concealed or not, no permit etc)

why are handguns legal (in certain circumstances) but other weapons not?

[fa_jing]

I had a license to carry after they passed the law in Philly, however I almost never did so. OTOH, my pops who is a gun nut carries all the time.

Anyway I'm glad you got the point about the hillbilly, Red5. Even before they passed the carry law, he could have had a gun and shot you if he fought with you. And it would have been similarly illegal. What is legal now, is to carry your gun and use it in legitimate self-defense, which is something that we should all support. There are over 100,000,000 small arms in this country and it is preposterous to think that passing more laws against gun ownership or whatever is going to take a gun out of the hands of a criminal who desires one. Yes, even in states that allow carrying for legitimate purposes, there are still laws against unreasonable uses of a gun, this point should not be glossed over.

I always support self-defense rights (in my head anyway). Sometimes you see police groups coming out against the easement of gun ristrictions, but I have to think it is because they want the people to be reliant on them as possible.

PS regarding founding fathers, sure I agree. But the argument stands on it's own: an armed society is a peaceful society.

[Fred Sanford]

I am SERIOUSLY considering buying SA's XD SUB-compact for CCW. There's a GREAT board discussing the pros and cons of all the XD's incarnations HERE

Glock is superior.

[Dark Knight]

Glock is superior.

So speaks a man who owns a junkyard, and is telling Elizabeth he's coming.

[Fred Sanford]

So speaks a man who owns a junkyard, and is telling Elizabeth he's coming.

Do you honestly think the XD is better than a Glock? It's a cheap wannabe imitation of a glock with additional and unneccessary safety features.

The XD shoots fine when taking single shots, but I didn't think it was all that great for double taps.

next you are going to say you like Sigs too? :rolleyes:

[Dark Knight]

I was just giving you crap for the name.

So how is your son?

[Fred Sanford]

Lamont is just a big dummy.

[Black Jack]

Fa Jing- I have often wondered that myself with anti-gun police groups.

A small part of firearm education or martial education in general is understanding the levels of force continuum and what is considered justifiable.

The essential concept being that there are differing levels of force that you can be confronted with, and that level constrains the amount of force you can respond with. In terms of our personal armory we need to have to have the ability to respond to all levels of threat with an appropriate weapon. At least in theory.

An intelligently armed person should try to provide themselves with the capability for responding with different levels of force, everything from verbel commands like DON'T MOVE or DON'T MAKE ME SHOOT", to other verbel descalation methods.

The on to empty hand techniques, OC spray, white light, stun gun, impact weapons like a baton, pocket stick or sap, edged weapons, and sidearms. If not all, which may be overkill, pick a few you like, but still cover the spectrum.

Just thoughts.

[Dark Knight]

BTW, I can think of a reason to own one of each of most handguns.

I own a Glock in .40, Love my Springfield 1911, The DW .357 is a great gun and the others are fun.

Id love to own the new XD, even if its a clone. (That small light is pretty cool, especially designed for the XD compact)

[Black Jack]

S&W has a their new 1911 .45ACP that looks interesting. It is true to the original details and has a bunch of custom features on board.

[Shaolin-Do]

The reason I hate guns is because a good majority of gun owning people i know, are ghetto gun toting vato locos or east side home boys ect. who have no legit use for it. I know people who have been shot as a somewhat random act of violence. Its
bullsh!t. And its laws like these that help put guns into their hands easily. The guns they get come from the gun show come from legit rednecks with liscences who want to make some extra$. These are the same laws that put guns into all kinds of people who are liscenced but have no reason nor the mental capacity and coping skills to carry a weapon. Your sanity or cognative thinking skills, your conception of right and wrong, isnt tested when you get your gun liscence. Yes I do half the time talk out of my arse, but as I already said, theres no tone of voice on the internet so its hard to convey sarcasm. And you are talking about a bedridden 64 y/o bedridden parapalegic. Im talking about perfectly able people, High school kids, college kids, even wanna be tough ass adults, who pull guns all the time. Yes a 64 year old parapalegic in HIS HOME IN HIS BED has use for a gun for self defense. I said myself I will one day own a desert eagle in my home most likely, but it would be in my home for the purpose of if I were robbed only. But we are not so much talking about having a gun in your home, but carrying it. There is a huge difference between a trained martial artist CARRYING a gun and a 64 y/o in bed with one. I dont mind the flak, I know how this forum works. Sh!t, I came on with the name Shaolin-Do. Anyhow, this entire post was off topic, only in response to what went on while I was gone. Albeit, Id rather a trained MAist own a gun than a thug.

[Shaolin-Do]

Edit:
bedridden 64 y/o bedridden
was typing and thinking fast.
sorry.
:)

[Shaolin-Do]

I apologize if I was too broad with the gun comment, but I feel there is completely no need for a fully healthy adult to be carrying on a regular basis.

[fa_jing]

"And its laws like these that help put guns into their hands easily"

Would you like to explain how? Your talking about

Underage people who carry a gun: illegal

People who brandish their guns: illegal

People who use a gun in a crime: illegal

In fact, your Vatos Locos will probably have a gun, regardless of ANY laws that are or are not in existence. That's the way it was in Philly, back when gun ownership was severely restricted and you couldn't get a license to carry even if your job was delivering money in bad areas. That's what I tried to explain when I said there are already 100 million privately owned guns in this country. Not to mention that you can make a gun, I know because someone tossed a homemade gun in our yard once. And my parents live in a pretty good neighborhood.

"Laws like this" simply allow people to better defend themselves against the kinds of people you are railing against.

[Shaolin-Do]

I know of more than a few vatos that got their guns from legitemate gun owners. From people who buy them legitemately. How many crazy wives, or husbands shoot each other over ignorant disputes each year? Were they not legit gun owners?

[Shaolin-Do]

Laws like this allow people to legally transport a weapon to a crime scene. Regardless of what the law does to them after the fact, the law allowed them to freely move about the weapon.

[fa_jing]

Yes, but did they not commit a crime as soon as they used that gun for an improper purpose?

[fa_jing]

Are you saying that the law should restrict the free movement of people with guns who have commited no crime?

Maybe you should go back and read Radhnoti's post regarding the "incident" in Wichita, Kansas. Those idiotic victims! Why didn't they just call 9-1-1?

:rolleyes:

[Shaolin-Do]

Yes, but did the law not allow them to carry the gun completely worrylessly to where they decided to use it illigitemately?
Thugs arent the only people who commit hate/violent gun crimes.

[Black Jack]

No you are dead wrong. The vast amount of gun owners are law abiding tax paying citizens who have jobs. From housewifes to trained martial artists to ultra rich CEO's. If you think vato locos are your typical gun owners than your world model is screwed up.

Martial arts are not the be all and end all. They are not even close.

"People who object to weapons aren't aboloshing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, where the biggest, strongest men were automatically right. Guns ended that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work"- C.Neil Smith, The Proability Broach.

[Fred Sanford]

Yes, but did the law not allow them to carry the gun completely worrylessly to where they decided to use it illigitemately?

doubtful, because in order to legally have the gun in the first place they can't have a criminal record.

your logic is flawed.

As for having a desert eagle for home defense, LOL.

[Shaolin-Do]

lol.
Whatever. I guess Ill go put on my sh!t kickin boots and plate sized belt buckle and go join the NRA.

"Martial arts are not the be all and end all. They are not even close. "

Never said they were. I been in music longer than MA.

"People who object to weapons aren't aboloshing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, where the biggest, strongest men were automatically right. "

Im only 6' 165 lbs. Thats exactly how I feel.
Right...

[Black Jack]

Severly flawed is an understatment.

A will take the shotgun over the .50 handcannon for home defense anyday.

[Dark Knight]

I apologize if I was too broad with the gun comment, but I feel there is completely no need for a fully healthy adult to be carrying on a regular basis.


Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self defense.

The majority of the time they are not fired.

[Shaolin-Do]

I debated a mosberg as well.
;)

[Shaolin-Do]

wtf?
it says dark knight made the last post but Its not showing anything.
:confused:

[Shaolin-Do]

There we go.

"The majority of the time they are not fired."

Well wouldnt this go against the carry and conceal laws then?

[Black Jack]

Please go join the NRA you might learn something. Plus you get a cool ballcap.

You did not say martial arts was the end all be all. Thats true. But you did imply it with the term "trained martial artist". As if that really means anything.

You are still pretty young I assume....early 20's....maybe late teens....just because you don't understand the merits of right to carry now does not mean you will not get it later....its all about rights. I am pro-right for you to have this ability untell the time you mess it up.

Well maybe not you...... ;)

I didn't get the 6 foot 165 lbs thing. Are you saying you think that is big?

The quote means not just physical size. Look at it from a different angle.

[Shaolin-Do]

God no I dont think Im big.
I dont think Im the most bad ass mofo around either.

[Black Jack]

Most real bad asses are either in jail or dead. I would rather toss an 70 year old lady's salad then get into a fight.

Well....that might be going to far....I am just saying the quote when you really look at it implies far more than just size IMO it implies more about situation.

[ewallace]

Black Jack if you don't go on a date with joan rivers I'm going to kick your ass.

[Shaolin-Do]

Erm...
I guess. Im getting tired of arguing. I need more coffee too.

The only situation I can really see that comment validating is a revolutionary one. And that would be a whole different story, and a whole nother thread.

[Black Jack]

I was thinking more along the lines of digging up that old actress from "muder she wrote" and doing her in the ass.

[Shaolin-Do]

Wow.
If thats what blows your skirt up.
:eek:

[ewallace]

mmmm...Angela Lansbury

[Black Jack]

Would it of been more chic to say pipe instead of ass?

[Shaolin-Do]

Erm... I think more in terms of "laying the pipe" than "drilling the pipe"

[Black Jack]

Either Angela Lansbury or that lady from "Throw Momma From the Train".

Despite the mug she had a nice can. Like two Christmas hams stuck in the back of her pants.

[Shaolin-Do]

with the change of topic, to people just entering the thread, the title just took on a whole new meaning.

[Dark Knight]

Well wouldnt this go against the carry and conceal laws then?

That means that a person was in a situation that needed them to pull the gun, then the attacker stopped and gave up or ran. Seeing the gun stopped the crime.

But remember, brandishing is against the law, you cannot pull it out if its not needed.

[Shaolin-Do]

But what constitutes nessecity of a gun? Thats purely opinion.
Besides, I thought if you were going to pull it, it had to be fired.

[Fred Sanford]

Besides, I thought if you were going to pull it, it had to be fired.

Naw, for example if some guy is advancing on you with a knife and you tell him to stop, he keeps coming then you pull your gun and he drops the knife and backs off, do you really think you would be justified in pumping a couple rounds into him?

[fa_jing]

Not only are you justified, you are required to. Of course you do have the option of not drawing your gun, running away or anything else. You had the option of saying, stop or I'll draw this gun and shoot you. But if you drew the gun, you should have shot. He wouldn't have had the chance to drop the knife on his own, after you took out the gun, and prior to your shooting. Your example doesn't make sense in that respect.

Know the law. Train for it, if you choose to carry.

[Fred Sanford]

like what you are saying makes sense. If you draw a gun you still have the option of shooting or not. It's stupid to say if you pull it you HAVE to take a shot. What if the situation changes somehow?

[tsunami surfer]

The one thing that has been missing from all these posts about carring concealed is that the armed person has a duty to DEESCALATE any situation he or she comes into while armed. That standard holds true for every state in the union whether they have aCCW law or not. Carrying a firearm is not cowardly or couragous, it is a responsibility and a regulated privalge backed by constitutional rights. As for misuse of firearms its going to happen. Vehicles are constantly misused. Even SD admitted to crusin and tokin and that to me is far more dangerous and stupid as a law abiding person carring a gun. So with that logic we should ban cars because they are or can be misused.

One more thing, the founding fathers were slave owning white men who kept women down yes that is true. But, if you read and study the constitution you will see that they were progressive and forward thinking men who knew that eventually there would be no more slavery and that women would eventually rise to their place in society that they are in today. That is why the constitution is written the way it is. So that these truths would become self evident.

[Black Jack]

He drives and smokes grass........:rolleyes:

I hate that sh!t with a passion. Only scumbags drive drunk or high.

btw- I very briefly mentioned de-esclation with a gun a few posts above

[tsunami surfer]

Sorry Jack I guess I missed it.

[red5angel]

shaolin do, two things, if you want to get any respect in your argument, a - don't admit to driving and smoking weed. DOI! and

b-
Whatever. I guess Ill go put on my sh!t kickin boots and plate sized belt buckle and go join the NRA. don't resort to name calling and generalizations designed to make people who disagree with you, evil, or stupid or any other number of negative things.

Greymystik brings up a good point though, funny how guns and carrying guns concelaed is ok but you can't carry a knife over so many inches long, or a pair of nunchaku, or sai or anything else. Seems a little off kilter to me.

[Radhnoti]

It is my understanding that (at least in KY) the CC permit applies to any concealed deadly weapon. Nunchucks and knives are, I'm told by law enforcement people I've asked, specifically mentioned as being allowed with the permit. Several people in my kwoon intend to get the permit specifically for their traditional Chinese weapons that could be concealed.

[Black Jack]

Maybe one of you in the know can tell me if saps are legal for a non-security/non-leo to carry in IL or where I can find that specific info.

I am talking about saps not blackjacks. I just love the little buggers and figured I should get it checked out quick.

[Dark Knight]

In Colorado................
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_2007383,00.html

Handgun safety classes swelling
Conceal-carry law drives up enrollment

By John J. Sanko, Rocky Mountain News
June 3, 2003

If Colorado's sheriffs aren't yet feeling pressure from the state's new conceal-carry law, the schools and gun shops that train people to use handguns safely certainly are.

Many are enlarging classes and adding night sessions to meet the increased demand since the Colorado law went into effect May 19.

Under the new law, applicants must pass a handgun safety course.

"I'm booked clear into August," with day and evening classes, said instructor Roger Miller of the Firing Line in Aurora.

He also offers private lessons - at $75 an hour.

Similar stories come from operators of The Shootist in Englewood and Rocky Mountain Gun Safety in Colorado Springs. The latter reported a surge in female enrollees, but other gun schools have not.

"We're getting 50 to 60 calls a day asking about our classes," said Jon Vargason of The Shootist. "Not everyone who calls is signing up right now, but there is an awful lot of interest."

The new law requires sheriffs to issue conceal-carry permits to law-abiding citizens with no felony criminal background record and who take and pass a course on handgun safety.

Previously, it was up to each police chief and sheriff to decide who got permits. In areas such as Denver, it was virtually impossible to get one.

Denver has begrudgingly accepted the licensing provisions of the new law but has challenged in court a section of the law dealing with where permit holders can carry their weapons.

The guns are banned only in places where they are prohibited by federal law, such as airports, and at all K-12 schools and at public buildings with permanent security screening.

Private facilities must post no-gun signs to keep them out.

Groups concerned about the new law, such as Colorado CeaseFire, are encouraging businesses, particularly taverns, to post the signs.

"We're watching the situation very closely," said Cynthia Stone of Colorado CeaseFire. "Of course, we're hoping Denver's lawsuit is successful.

"But we also hope people will start putting up 'no guns allowed' signs. That would be a way for people to show they don't believe guns are necessary."

Former Boulder Sheriff George Epp, who now leads County Sheriffs of Colorado, said the reaction among law enforcement agencies to the new law has been mixed. The sheriffs backed the legislation.

"Some (sheriffs) are saying there has been a big demand, but those were the ones who weren't issuing permits before," Epp said. "But I am getting a fair number of calls simply asking questions about details of the new law - things about the training requirements and whether legal resident aliens can apply." They can.

Stone said it's too early to determine the impact of the law until there is some indication of how many permits have been issued in the next several months.

"The thing we're watching very closely right now is the Denver lawsuit to determine where people can carry," Stone said. "But we're watching on many fronts, including whether any of those permit holders commit crimes. They're not all law-abiding citizens that the gun lobby tells us they are.

"In the case of Denver and other cities, there really isn't a reason to have a gun. We're concerned about road rage.

"We're concerned about guns in parks, in stadiums and on college campuses. We'll be watching," Stone said.

Vargason says the novelty will wear off.

"I predict that within three months of getting a conceal-carry permit, most of them will not be carrying a gun everywhere they go," he said. "They're heavy, they dig holes in clothes, they dig holes in the body, they're very uncomfortable.

"The first couple of months, they wear them every chance they get. The next thing you know, it stays home in the nightstand for one day, then two days, then three days a week. Then they just leave them there.

"One place where we do see them is if they're hiking," Vargason added. "There are too many squirrels out there. And I'm talking about the two-legged kind. I've had several stories about guys appearing out of nowhere on these trails."

Anthony Fabian, president of the Colorado State Shooting Association, an affiliate of the National Rifle Association, agrees with Stone that it's too early to determine how the law is working. But he thinks the number of people signing up for training courses is a good sign.

But he also is worried about Denver's lawsuit challenging both the conceal-carry law and another bill that went into effect at the same time requiring that city gun ordinances be no more restrictive than state or federal laws.

Fabian is mistrustful of the case being tried in a Denver court. "I don't have a huge amount of confidence they're going to look at the law as objectively as might occur in a different venue," he said.

"But the law is very clear. As long as a court adheres to the law and the Constitution, this is not going to be a difficult decision to make."

[Dark Knight]

And North Dakota.....
http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/6000570.htm


EDITORIAL: New gun law works

OUR VIEW: N.D.'s experience should reassure Minnesotans worried about concealed weapons.

Minnesota's a bellwether state, known for its policy innovations that so often lead the way. But on one issue, North Dakota had quietly moved out front, and the Gopher State followed the Flickertail State's lead.

That issue is gun control - specifically, the permission people need to carry concealed weapons.

A new law easing those rules in Minnesota is creating a lot of concern there. But North Dakota's long and successful experience with the easier rules suggests that much of the concern is misplaced.

Minnesota's new law made it much easier for residents to get a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Gov. Tim Pawlenty signed the law, which the Republican Party had been trying to pass for years. Now the Republicans are touting it (correctly) as a sign of how the state has moved to the right.

Liberals in the state are aghast at that prospect. They've a right to be worried but are probably wrong about this issue. The reason is that North Dakota (and some other states) has had a similar system for years. Yet the state enjoys one of the rock-bottom lowest crime rates in the nation.

In fact, the concealed-carry law is so nonthreatening in North Dakota, that it's safe to say plenty of people don't even know about it. If you'd listened carefully last week, you might have heard a pro-gun-control North Dakotan getting ready to denounce Minnesota's new bill, then having to backtrack upon learning North Dakota already has it. "Never mind," as "Saturday Night Live's" Roseanne Roseannadanna would have said.

Does the presence of the Twin Cities metro area change things in Minnesota? Maybe, but probably not. Fargo's a fair example of a metro area, and the law hasn't caused problems there. Nor has it in other states that have even bigger cities.

Maybe that's because the new law still keeps important protections in place. Would-be permit holders have to take a gun-safety class and submit to a background check, in both Minnesota and North Dakota. That's too easy a process in the eyes of some disappointed Minnesotans. But in the real world of life experience, it has proven to be enough.

[fa_jing]

Originally posted by Fred Sanford
like what you are saying makes sense. If you draw a gun you still have the option of shooting or not. It's stupid to say if you pull it you HAVE to take a shot. What if the situation changes somehow?

It's stupid of you to argue with me when this is what the law requires in the state of Pennsylvania. NOTE: gun laws vary alot from state to state, again if you choose to own a gun, KNOW the law in your state.


Anyway since you didn't seem to get it, in the state of Pennsylvania you're not supposed to take the gun out at all unless you are faced with an immediate deadly threat that you cannot avoid. If you do take it out, you are to fire immediately. You had the option of threatening them with the gun prior to taking it out. If this did not deter the assailant, then why would they stop when you took it out? That's the reasoning behind the law, if you disagree it's tough luck, THAT is the LAW in the State of Pennsylvania. The whole POINT of the law is to discourage BRANDISHING. THIS is considered more IMPORTANT than the extremely rare/impossible scenario that you are suggesting. You are free to disagree in principle, however it is advisable to obey the LAW in your STATE regarding guns.

[Radhnoti]

...just to note. If you do "brandish" the weapon, the guy who was going to mug you and ran away ain't gonna turn you in unless he's caught. Right?
If, in the few seconds you are drawing, the guy turns his back to run, I don't care WHAT "the law" says. Morality dictates that you not shoot the guy in the back.
Sounds like a law that was simply put into effect so people wouldn't needlessly wave a gun around. An overkill law paranoid lawmakers passed to close up loopholes they expected people to try to wiggle through while carrying and feeling "gun-crazy". :rolleyes:

[Laughing Cow]

Haven't read the whole thread, gone way too long to quick.

One thing I don't like about CCW laws, where I am from ALL weapons have to be carried openly. Concealed Weapon = Jail.
:D

My Grandad had about 30 firearms in his House openly displayed.

Regardless, personally I think the stricter CCW laws might result in more illegal guns being owned, by people that are refused a CCW but got their mind set on carrying.

I understand and like the idea that CCW comes combined with training and good gun education.

Just airing some thoughts.

[Fred Sanford]

It's stupid of you to argue with me when this is what the law requires in the state of Pennsylvania

whatever.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't really think you have a firm grasp on what you are talking about. It's pointless to keep arguing.