Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have NO problem with a person carrying anywhere the affected property own has no issues with it, what scares me is the people that feel the NEED to carry everywhere they go.
My state has OPEN CARRY but even the most staunch pro-gun supporters say that it is a very bad idea to OPEN CARRY everywhere you go.
Makes Conservative heads explode when a "Liberal" is PRO gun rights.
I have multiple guns in my house too.
open carry scares me more than conceal, it like asking for a fight.
We went to the gun store yesterday and I already have my eyes on the one I'm going to carry in the near future. I just have to figure out if a Glock is safe to carry as it has a different kind of safety.
open carry scares me more than conceal, it like asking for a fight.
Yeah, it's definitely nice to have the open carry option, but it's usually a bad idea to take advantage of it in public, IMO.
1. It could as you mention create unwanted attention/friction.
2. It scares people that do not understand that it's legal and even if they knew, how do they know you do not have bad intentions? For example, walking into a movie theatre, store, etc. with a gun visibly hanging off your waist will definitely raise some eyebrows.
3. If a bad guy was casing a place with bad intentions in mind and spotted someone with a gun hanging off their waist, they'd be the first target on his list.
A happy medium for me is an OWB (outside the waistband) holster with a loose untucked shirt.
I don't mind that officers who are retired carry, but I do mind when I see they are from states that stop regular folks like myself while putting little addendum's in so they don't get negative press from the boys in blue. Either carrying is needed, or it's not. Putting riders on who can carry what firearm and where is absurdity and contrary to our Constitution.
Yeah, it's definitely nice to have the open carry option, but it's usually a bad idea to take advantage of it in public, IMO.
1. It could as you mention create unwanted attention/friction.
2. It scares people that do not understand that it's legal and even if they knew, how do they know you do not have bad intentions? For example, walking into a movie theatre, store, etc. with a gun visibly hanging off your waist will definitely raise some eyebrows.
3. If a bad guy was casing a place with bad intentions in mind and spotted someone with a gun hanging off their waist, they'd be the first target on his list.
A happy medium for me is an OWB (outside the waistband) holster with a loose untucked shirt.
Nonsense.
Bad guys dont go around looking for targets that might provide resistance. Muggers typcially wacth and pick out soft targets for that reason... why would i want to get into a gun battle when my intentions is to get quick cash or valuables from a person
As for mass shooters ... of course they target those lovely "gun free zones" for a reason.
Bad guys dont go around looking for targets that might provide resistance. Muggers typcially wacth and pick out soft targets for that reason... why would i want to get into a gun battle when my intentions is to get quick cash or valuables from a person
As for mass shooters ... of course they target those lovely "gun free zones" for a reason.
Ever hear of an armed cop, getting mugged or raped?
You have to get the drop on them and kill them first, if you want what they have.
Ever hear of an armed cop, getting mugged or raped?
You have to get the drop on them and kill them first, if you want what they have.
Back when my mother was alive, there was a background concern, enough of one that my mother idly mentioned it to me once, that one of my brothers might try to knock us off to get at the inheritance money.
Obviously, it did not happen but from time to time, I wonder if there are those who might think so and if they evaluate the reasonabilities of conducting an attack against me. Ie, of all that money....no, wait, it would probably be divided 5 or 6 ways before "I" get my share and a head on attack has the potential to be rather painful or messy.
The possibility of "pain" is probably what most criminals think of most. Probably it ranks higher in the thought process than how likely success is. If, to them, there is no possibility of "pain", either direct or otherwise (in my mother's case, there might be a few, still, of my father's friends who would avenge), then they will probably go through with it.
It is, as one ole racquetball opposer once said to me, "Tamara, I have no doubt I can beat you.....it is surviving the encounter that bugs me.", surviving the encounter that might give a moment of reconsideration.
Of course, no one is immortal and a sniper or a car bomb is likely to be successful against me........if someone wanted to go through the complexities of doing it.
NOW, to the actual question at hand........................"That is a matter of internal security and not open for discussion.".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
