New stuff at the Shooters’ Carnival
Les buys a 22 and I tell you what not to do with that concealed weapon.
3 Responses to “New stuff at the Shooters’ Carnival”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 5th, 2004 at 10:17 am
In reference to your “Litigation Prevention” post, I have to say that the impression I’m left with is “do everything you can to appease the anti-gun crowd and maybe they’ll be nice and not lock you up for asserting your legal right.”
Do you really think carrying a ‘stock gun’ or carrying ‘cocked and locked’ will make a difference? Your logic only applies when dealing with people who are logical. But if they were logical, then why would you need to jump through the non-compulsory hoops in the first place?
“Another good idea is to ask a local policeman what guns and ammo they are issued. If you carry the same gun that the police carry and the same ammo, it lends credibility to the fact that you are not acting maliciously”
I totally disagree with that statement in particular. You’re suggesting that someone buy a gun based solely on a police department’s criteria. Why not go one step further and say you should buy whatever the military buys? After all, they’re the true professionals. And besides, the District Attorney that prosecutes you could easily argue that you’re a vigilante because you were mimicking a law enforcement officer. It’s a no-win situation. So trying to play the appeasement game is pointless.
But back to the point… I once bought a HK USP40 because a guy in a gunshop recommended it. It was a very accurate gun that a was 100% reliable. I sold it 3 months later because it felt awkward in my hand and I wasn’t confidence carrying it. The point being that someone else’s recommendation should have very little impact on what YOU think is right for you. Find a gun that suits you. Carry ammo that is effective. It’s better to be standing in court defending your actions, than to be lying in a casket because you didn’t want to worry about being arrested.
As for the ‘cocked and locked’ issue… if the gun is designed to be carried that way. Do it. As long as you are competent with the weapon. But if you’re not competent with the weapon, you shouldn’t be carrying it at all. And the jury isn’t going to give a damn whether your gun was a single action or double action system. Again, use what you understand and practice with.
January 5th, 2004 at 10:50 am
While i think you make good points, perception can be reality. The likelihood of getting someone on a jury who knows much about guns is slim (prosecutors tend to like to make sure gun folks aren’t on juries).
A point repeated in the post is that to rational gun owners these things are not abnormal and not not denote malicious intent. But to others, they can cause the perception.
I respect and appreciate your point but an ounce of prevention and all that.
January 5th, 2004 at 2:20 pm
I understand.. and I’m not trying to be contrary for the sake of argument.. but I feel that personal protection is not something that should be compromised for the sake of ‘giving a good impression’.. it’s about survival.. and I’m sure you know that ‘giving an inch’ to the anti-gun crowd means they’ll demand a foot.. if we all acted by your suggestions, the liberals would be emboldened to make all sorts of demands regarding what our CCW permits should entail
better to get a good lawyer than a gun that doesn’t do the job.. while the lawyer may be expensive, having a gun that you can’t operate, or that won’t stop a murderer, rapist, robber, etc. can be more costly in terms of lives
I don’t devalue your advice.. if someone is comfortable and safe following your guidelines, that’s great.. but I’ll stick with my 1911 (cocked and locked) and .45 ACP hollowpoints