Why we should all carry guns

Compare the murder rates of Canada and the United States.See if you can figure out which country allows it's citizens to bear arms.

missing the big difference

Christopher di Armani is missing the big difference between the person who comes with a gun when I call 911, and the average person pulling a concealed carry out of their bag or purse: training.

It's one thing to join a gun club and learn how to target shoot, but it's quite another entirely to engage hostile targets in a combat situation. Police are trained to handle those situations, to be able to focus despite the stress. Further, they have well-thought out rules of engagement and procedures drilled into them till it is instinctive, and in the time of crisis those rules help prevent innocent bystanders from becoming collatoral damage. Police are also part of a network, a team of police who co-operate and back each other up, so that together they are stronger than the threat they face.

In contrast, the average person with a concealed carry is an untrained, nervous and quivering when the crisis comes, prone to make mistakes, to shoot too hastily, shoot the wrong person, and in the end cause more pain than they prevent.

Sure, Israel might have armed school teachers, and that might have worked, but you also forget that in Israel military service is compulsary, and thus all those teachers had previous combat training.

It's naive to think that everyone can just go buy a gun, watch a rambo movie, and then be qualified to "cut out the middle men." For the safety of us all, why don't you put your gun away and leave law enforcement to the professionals.

"It's one thing to join a gun club and learn how to target shoot, but it's quite another entirely to engage hostile targets in a combat situation."

Of course. However, taking self-defense training helps to prepare the civilian for more than just plinking a target.

"Police are trained to handle those situations, to be able to focus despite the stress. Further, they have well-thought out rules of engagement and procedures drilled into them till it is instinctive, and in the time of crisis those rules help prevent innocent bystanders from becoming collatoral damage."

First, "collatoral" is spelled "collateral."

Second, you'd be surprised to learn the proficiency of many police officers ... or lack thereof. Of course, this doesn't mean that ALL officers are suspect, but to say that ANY officer can proficiently maintain and operate their weapons as well as demonstrate adequate situational awareness is fallible.

"Police are also part of a network, a team of police who co-operate and back each other up, so that together they are stronger than the threat they face."

But, the police cannot be everywhere at once and, generally, cannot respond immediately to a summons for help. In many situations when they are called, they respond AFTER the fact, rarely during or before.

"In contrast, the average person with a concealed carry is an untrained, nervous and quivering when the crisis comes, prone to make mistakes, to shoot too hastily, shoot the wrong person, and in the end cause more pain than they prevent."

And how did you come to this conclusion? You are aware that a civilian who wishes to possess a license for concealed cary must pass a proficiency test, do you? Experience, of course, helps. But, that does not mean that training and constant practice is useless.

"Sure, Israel might have armed school teachers, and that might have worked, but you also forget that in Israel military service is compulsary, and thus all those teachers had previous combat training."

"Might have worked?"

Try doing some independent searching of such situations. There are many, many stories of those who had successfully defended themselves with their weapons without causing "more pain than they prevent."

"It's naive to think that everyone can just go buy a gun, watch a rambo movie, and then be qualified to 'cut out the middle men.'"

That was never suggested. Rather, it is suggested that people be better able to defend themselves in situations where a call for help won't cut it. In situations where you are on your own, you either deal with it or let it deal with you. In the case of a murderous madman, you either deal with it or die.

To top if off, it's also not about some macho nonsense that you seem to be implying. This is about survival in the event that you get caught up in the worst case scenario. And, don't think that it cannot happen to you. There are, unfortunately, many people who never thought the worst would happen to them. In that case, you're either prepared or you could be dead.

"For the safety of us all, why don't you put your gun away and leave law enforcement to the professionals."

This assumes that the civilian with a conceal-carry permit will act as a vigilantie. You are sorely mistaken.

The typical conceal-carry licensed civilian understands quite clearly their responsibilities and, more importantly, that their weapons are for defensive uses only whenever it is appropriate. It is very much like studying a martial art; you are taught that there is NEVER a first strike, EVER. You respond only when compelled to do so to stop an attacker from hurting you or those you are responsible for.

In summary, a concealed-carry licensed civilian KNOWS he/she is not out to enforce the law. They have their weapons only because they understand that they may have to use such force to survive an attack from a criminal where there is simply no time for law enforcement to stop that violence from taking place.

It's naive to think that a violent crime, such as rape and murder, cannot happen to you. It's prudent to own a gun and obtain the necessary training to use it properly and appropriately for the sole purpose of self-defense as well as hope that you never have to use them.

True civility is never attained through complete passivity, but only through a balance of freedom and justice. - Reinhart

Why we should all carry guns

Reinhart, you are correct.. you can never have enough training. That is still no guarantee you'll be able to act like you'd like, but when you are hiding behind a desk, waiting for your turn to be killed, raped, or assualted by some kook, wouldn't you rather have the means at hand to defend yourself, even ineptly? Who are you to make this decision for everyone anyway?

Look, gunfights are dangerous, there is no guarantee you'll survive or not be injured, but all in all, having a gun at a gun fight you didn't ask for sure beats the alternative, doesn't it? The real danger in attitudes like yours is that it breeds a nation of cowards who are unwilling to risk anything to take care of themselves. You can be submissive, take the bullet or the walk to the crematorium, or you can stand up and fight back, win or lose. At least by being armed you have some chance.

Finally, if you legalized carry, most people won't. Guns are heavy, you have to steel yourself to do it every time, lest you be caught without it when you need it, and you need to have the warrior mentality to use it. Frankly, most will never do it. However, it doesn't take everybody. As usual, the sheeple will cower, and the citizens will do the right thing. Time for everyone to decide to be a citizen or a sheeple, don't you think?