Do Concealed Carry permit holders live in a dream world ?

[LONG RANGE CAPT]

Thought this might be of interest to those with an interest in shorter firearms.

 

Part 1.

 

 

Part 2.

 

 

 

 

Regards

 

Rob

[Chris-NZ]

I can't help but feel there's a political agenda behind this "experiment"

The thing you can say with certainty is that effective handgun handling under pressure only come with constant practice.

 

Here's an email my US mate sent me recently:

 

------

 

You may recall the liberal media declarations of impending mayhem when the Chicago and Washington DC gun bans were declared unconstitutional not long ago. Here's an opinion piece published on Fox News today regarding the results.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/media-silence-is-deafening-about-important-gun-news/

 

Even I have been surprised a bit at the number of states that have moved to allow concealed carry and enacted laws where absent that protect citizens from prosecution following justified armed defense of their homes.

 

-----

 

The crime stats put paid to the argument allowing concealed carry will increase gun crime.

 

Chris-NZ

[TonyH]

I'm with Chris-NZ. It is hardly a secret that the MSM, in the USA as in most places, have an agenda that is loosely "anti gun", i.e. they constantly reiterate the message that guns are bad, that gun ownership by civilians - especially for purposes of self defence - is bad, and that gun-control measures are a Good Thing. Early on in the first clip, there was a mention of the BBC. Ah hah, I thought: now, do I recall ever having heard or seen anything at all from the BBC that might be construed as favourable toward gun ownership and the shooting sports - except possibly for the rarefied and somewhat decadent Olympic-style target sports?

The message of those two ABC clips is - Gee Whiz! - that using a handgun is difficult, and using one under pressure even more so. Well, who 'da thunk it... I spent years shooting a .45 1911 for Practical Pistol, and I am fully aware of this. So what? The US news media message is that one should give up, play dead, crawl into a corner and use a cellphone (like they say, call for a pizza, call the cops, see who comes first...) - anything but fight back. Very large numbers of people in the USA alone use handguns (not even firing them, in most cases) to defend themselves, their families, their property, every year - I have an idea the figure is in the hundreds of thousands but I'll have to check that. This is barely reported by the MSM, if at all: instead, they play up accidental deaths through personal handgun ownership, etc. If I or my family were threatened with deadly violence I would be entitled in the natural scheme of things, as I see it, to have a crack at defending myself, and in the real world that means with a firearm. The government might have taken away my means to do that - but they can never take away the natural right. ABC TV is not an arbiter of moral rights.

So yeah, the clips are interesting - in the way that slick propaganda is always interesting. Goebbels was quite an interesting man...

Tony

[LONG RANGE CAPT]

Hi Chris,

 

Totally agree with your points, I think ABC news have always seemed to have an anti - gun agenda.

 

I do think that, if one does have the opportunity to be allowed to carry or use firearms that constant training is essential.

 

Some thing on the lines of Shivworks:-

 

 

For UK based individuals with an interest in reality based weapons training or ECQC pistol work - Ian Thomas at Shivworks UK is worth speaking to.

 

 

http://www.urbancombatives.com/sn3.htm

 

 

Regards

 

rob

[TonyH]

...........

For UK based individuals with an interest in reality based weapons training or ECQC pistol work - Ian Thomas at Shivworks UK is worth speaking to..........

 

But we can't own or carry handguns. For all but the youngest, fittest, best trained in martial arts - and with the time/interest to go through all that stuff - anything less is a waste of time. Rather leaves all of us in the 5hit, let alone those little old ladies living in rough areas...

Tony

[Andrew]

ABC is avidly anti gun. The fact that they took kids from a college for this experiment shows the weighted bias. I have shot handguns for over 40 years and would never jabber about having one, nor would I have it buried under an over sized sweat shirt if I was expected to use it. All bullpucky in response to a movement to allow a wider lenience toward armed citizens in public to allow for some citizen defense against a deranged shooter.~Andrew

[DaveT]

I agree totally with other posts here which suggest that ownership of a handgun for self-defense (which I would wholeheartedly support if it were a reality in this country.... holds his breath in pointless anticipation!!!) MUST come with an expectation of taking proper training in its use in that scenario or else we would simply 'freeze' when it was most needed or panic and make things worse.

[Gandy]

For all but the youngest, fittest, best trained in martial arts - and with the time/interest to go through all that stuff - anything less is a waste of time.

 

Tony,

When I was younger I was heavily into martial arts and got to a good standard, I found out first hand that it does not stop a bottle to the back of the head, no matter how much zen or whatever else they tell you about you have at the time!

 

Best not to get involved.

[TonyH]

I agree totally with other posts here which suggest that ownership of a handgun for self-defense (which I would wholeheartedly support if it were a reality in this country.... holds his breath in pointless anticipation!!!) MUST come with an expectation of taking proper training in its use in that scenario or else we would simply 'freeze' when it was most needed or panic and make things worse.

Which raises the matter of who gives such training, and whether it would be a requirement prior to a concealed-carry permit's being granted. Private firms? I forsee a huge new bureaucracy dedicated to vetting & monitoring such firms to ensure competence, no links with terrorist organisations, etc. The police? Hmmm... It's the police who never used to win competitions against private clubs pre-1997; who shot that London Irishman for carrying a chair leg in a plastic bag, and a Brazilian plumber on the Underground, plus Ian Hay a mile from where I live (he shot a police dog, see, so they shot him...); who obsess about the necessity for themselves to keep control of firearms certification but who do it badly, arbitrarily, and fail to pick up nutters such as Hamilton and Ryan... I'd just assume that in the highly unlikely event of our ever being permitted "self defence" as a Good Reason again, as we were up 'til the 1950s, the authorities would simply make the conditions about training etc so onerous as to render it all but impossible for most people to comply. In any case, anyone who's done much handgun shooting (I've put thousands of rounds downrange, mostly in .45ACP and 9mm) knows that it requires regular almost constant practice. Would compulsory training come also with a requirement for constant refresher courses? Doesn't seem to do the police much good...

I take a libertarian approach, to do with personal freedom and personal resonsibility combined; individuals must accept the full implications of going armed, including perhaps the legal & insurance consequences of blazing away regardless and shooting the wrong person. At the same time, we have to restore the ancient, inalienable right to defend one's person & property, with a presumption in favour of the armed householder who shoots a potentially aggressive uninvited intruder. I don't trust politicians or the police to instigate & administer any sort of compulsory training regime: it gives them too much scope for screwing people around.

Tony

[TonyH]

Tony,

When I was younger I was heavily into martial arts and got to a good standard, I found out first hand that it does not stop a bottle to the back of the head, no matter how much zen or whatever else they tell you about you have at the time!

 

Best not to get involved.

Absolutely... Without having your level of experience, I decided that for myself many years ago when (briefly) I tried karate...

Tony

[DaveT]

Which raises the matter of who gives such training, and whether it would be a requirement prior to a concealed-carry permit's being granted. Private firms? I forsee a huge new bureaucracy dedicated to vetting & monitoring such firms to ensure competence, no links with terrorist organisations, etc. The police? Hmmm... It's the police who never used to win competitions against private clubs pre-1997; who shot that London Irishman for carrying a chair leg in a plastic bag, and a Brazilian plumber on the Underground, plus Ian Hay a mile from where I live (he shot a police dog, see, so they shot him...); who obsess about the necessity for themselves to keep control of firearms certification but who do it badly, arbitrarily, and fail to pick up nutters such as Hamilton and Ryan... I'd just assume that in the highly unlikely event of our ever being permitted "self defence" as a Good Reason again, as we were up 'til the 1950s, the authorities would simply make the conditions about training etc so onerous as to render it all but impossible for most people to comply. In any case, anyone who's done much handgun shooting (I've put thousands of rounds downrange, mostly in .45ACP and 9mm) knows that it requires regular almost constant practice. Would compulsory training come also with a requirement for constant refresher courses? Doesn't seem to do the police much good...

I take a libertarian approach, to do with personal freedom and personal resonsibility combined; individuals must accept the full implications of going armed, including perhaps the legal & insurance consequences of blazing away regardless and shooting the wrong person. At the same time, we have to restore the ancient, inalienable right to defend one's person & property, with a presumption in favour of the armed householder who shoots a potentially aggressive uninvited intruder. I don't trust politicians or the police to instigate & administer any sort of compulsory training regime: it gives them too much scope for screwing people around.

Tony

 

 

Can't find anything to disagree with there Tony

[The_Dogge]

I'm fully in favour of a restoration of our natural rights.

 

However, if I had the right, would I personally exercise it? No. I estimate the risk from criminal attack in my everyday life is so small that I'd be safer not having a loaded gun on my person.

 

Having read quite a bit of advice from the concealed carry community in the USA (not sure why, I was intrigued) I think many of them actually are "living in a dream world", they talk about being on constant alert, one guy was describing how he would use defensive driving techniques when going through McDonalds drive thru lanes as they were bound to attract robbers! Do these people really live in areas about as dangerous as Kabul? or are they just stressing themselves to the point of damaging their health about non existant threats?

They see danger everywhere (often irrationally) and dont seem to acknowledge the inherent danger of carrying a loaded gun around all day. I was reading one guy's loading tips, he was very firm on not running live ammo into his rifle in the house, but had no problem with carrying a loaded revolver in his pocket all day!

I live in a nice area of a nice city in England, I doubt anyone has ever in the 1000 year history of the place been robbed in a mcdonalds drive thru lane!

If I lived somewhere else or had a job where I came into contact with the criminal classes I may feel different, the risk/benefit balance would be different, it would be nice to have the option.

[TonyH]

... if I had the right, would I personally exercise it? No. I estimate the risk from criminal attack in my everyday life is so small that I'd be safer not having a loaded gun on my person........

If I lived somewhere else or had a job where I came into contact with the criminal classes I may feel different, the risk/benefit balance would be different, it would be nice to have the option.

Hello Dogge (wags tail, sniffs rear end) - your last bit is the key I think. It would indeed be nice to have the option, the freedom, the liberty to arm oneself according to personal preference and judgement. That's the point at issue. I live in a peaceful bit of the countryside, but I'd like the option; and if I lived in the big city again, I'd certainly want the option. As for the USA, I have very little experience of it - but that was in Detroit a couple of times, scary place in parts. My friend there took me to his regular gas station, owned by a very large black man, who after being robbed once took to wearing a .44 mag on his hip, swearing that any bas***d who tried robbing him in future would regret it. At my friend's regular gunshop (Michi-Gun in St Clair Shores, great place) one of the clerks was astonished when I told him we couldn't own handguns any more: "But how are you supposed to defend yourself?" he asked, to which the only possible reply was that we weren't supposed to....

Tony