Why I Carry a Handgun

[kidcatfish]

Why I Carry a Handgun:   

My old grandpa said to me son,' there comes a time in every man's life 
when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and usually it's
when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin.’
I  don't carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don't carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.


I don't carry a gun because I'm evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the 
world.


I don't carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.


I don't carry a gun because I'm angry.
I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating 
myself for failing to be prepared.


I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and 
not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.


I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a   
Cowboy.


I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the   
ones they love.


I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing armed thugs, I am inadequate.


I don't carry a gun because I love the feeling.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful 
to  me.

Police Protection is an oxymoron... Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime.  They usually merely investigate the 
crime after it happens, and then call someone in to clean up the mess.


Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take
an ass whoopin.

author unknown (but obviously brilliant) 

**********************************************

A  LITTLE GUN HISTORY


In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From  1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to  defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. 
    ------------------------------ 
 
In 1911,  Turkey established gun  control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians,  unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and  exterminated.
     ------------------------------
 
Germany  established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a  total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to  defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. 
    ------------------------------ 
 
China established gun control in 1935.  From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents,  unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and  exterminated
     ------------------------------
 
Guatemala  established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981,  100,000 Mayan Indians[Tilla Strickland]  (and one white dude named Gef!), unable to defend themselves, were  rounded up and exterminated.
    ----  ------------- -------------
 
Uganda  established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979,  300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were  rounded up and exterminated.
     ------------------------------
 
Cambodia  established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one  million educated people, unable to defend themselves,  were rounded up and exterminated.
     -----------------------------
 
Defenseless  people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century  because of gun control: 56 million. 
    ------------------------------ 
 
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to  surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australian taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
   
List  of 7 items:
 
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent. 
 
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6  percent.
 
Australia-wide, armed robberies  are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
 
In  the state of  Victoria alone, homicides with  firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the  law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did  not, and criminals still possess their guns!
   
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a  steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has  changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. 
 
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian  politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety  has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense  was expended in successfully ridding Australian society  of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
 
You won't see this data on the U.S. evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. 
 
Guns in the hands of honest citizens — who know how to use them — save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
   
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! 
 
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
 
With guns, we are 'citizens.’  Without them, we are 'subjects.’ 
 
During WWII the Japanese decided not to  invade America; ostensibly because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
 
If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.
 
The purpose of fighting is to win.  There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the  brain.  All else is supplemental.

SWITZERLAND  ISSUES  EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!  THE GOVERNMENT OF SWITZERLAND TRAINS  EVERY ADULT AND THEY ISSUE A RIFLE.   SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN  RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! 

A NO BRAINER:  DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET..     
 

American by Birth - A Texan by the Grace of God

In God we trust!

[MAD6Gun]

I was asked once if I was paranoid because I carry a handgun. I said "no,if I was paranoid I would carry a shotgun"......

[Jabba]

AT a traffic stop, an officer asked my brother if he had a gun in the truck.  "Yes", he answered.

"Is it loaded?" asked the cop...

my crippled brother simply replies... "Well, it might as well be a rock if it wasn't!"

The cop snorted in laughter and let my brother go with a verbal warning.

Jabba

[Lyn-Del]

While flying to Baltimore a couple of weeks ago, I got to talking to the young man in the seat next to mine.  He was preparing to head off to boot camp in a few weeks.  I thanked him for enlisting, and we talked some more.

When I asked him this question, he got real quiet and uncomfortable, because he didn't know the answer.  He knew what he thought he SHOULD do but not what he would.

The question?  What would you do if you were ordered to go out and disarm the American people?  Take our guns from us?

So he asked me what I would do if they came for my guns.  I thought about it a bit and replied "I guess it would end up as Suicide by Cop, 'cause I'd rather not live in a world without rights.  They'd have to take them by force."

Easy to say sitting here.  How easy will it be when the knock comes at the door?  They know folks out here have guns, heck, we target shoot out behind the garage!

[Wetrudgeon]

No prophet are we, but we think registration will come first.  We understand that is how it happened in Australia.  The Govt mandates registration but assures that it is only a crime control measure.  Of course, the law abiding citizens comply.  That is what law abiding citizens do.  Any one who does not register becomes, by definition, a criminal.

From there, the authorities will not have to come and take them.  They will simply mandate that they be surrendered.  Law abiding citizens will comply and bring them in.  That is what law abiding citizens do. 

For those who do not comply, the Govt will not necessarily need to use force.  It will be a simple matter for the Govt to block those who do not comply from obtaining normal consumer goods and services:  Make it illegal for businesses to extend credit, provide utilities, or sell normal retail items or goods or services to them. (Using your bank card regularly for purchases instead of cash?  So do we.)  One either complies with the "turn in mandate" or struggles against the sanctions.  No force will be necessary.  Using these measures the Govt will have to forcibly disarm only the "criminals."  No right thinking citizen will side emotionally with the "criminals."

It can happen.  Let us do all that we can now to see that it does not.

We trudge on. 

[Master Blaster]

the NRA if you are not already a member.   Hussiens grab for power is unpresidented, and his manifesto is sure to include disarming the public.  Already calling for the so called assault weapon ban that is so broad that ordinary hunting and plinking rifles may be included.  Has fielded the idea that along with it being our fault for the Mexican drug wars, the Cartels are being armed from the USA through illegal gun sales.   Another excuse for more restrictive laws and bigger government.  Very few of our lawmakers are willing to stand up and defend our constitutional rights, but are aiding and abeting this silde toward socialism.  Think about it, the idea that our troops may have to aid in taking away our rights even a year ago was ludicrous, but now its not an uncommon topic, and not just on this board.   

[R J]

the NRA if you are not already a member.   Hussiens grab for power is unpresidented, and his manifesto is sure to include disarming the public.  Already calling for the so called assault weapon ban that is so broad that ordinary hunting and plinking rifles may be included.  Has fielded the idea that along with it being our fault for the Mexican drug wars, the Cartels are being armed from the USA through illegal gun sales.   Another excuse for more restrictive laws and bigger government.  Very few of our lawmakers are willing to stand up and defend our constitutional rights, but are aiding and abeting this silde toward socialism.  Think about it, the idea that our troops may have to aid in taking away our rights even a year ago was ludicrous, but now its not an uncommon topic, and not just on this board.   

Very true Tom.

They will have to pry the SOB from my cold dead fingers.  It will not go to them easily........

[Andy]

If they do come for our legally owned guns and everybody resists where will they put everybody? Aren't the prisons already overcrowded with real criminals?

[Duffy]

I don't carry a gun, never have. Still it is good to know I have that right.

I do not believe the government will take gun rights away. If they try, the masses will rise in revolt! (Perhaps led by many here.)   

Now, if they come up with a requirement of firearms training to own a gun, I will support that.    Say, for example Plexico Burress could use some safety training!

[MP]

So, Duffy, you think that to exercise 2nd amendment rights to own a gun, you can be required to take training?
Do you support that for all rights?  ie, is it necessary to have training to exercise your right to free speech?  Or, do you need special gov't training to exercise your freedom of religion?
I think it is a terrible idea.
If that would be true, there is NO right.

[Master Blaster]

Some people are just naive.  Most dont realize that all your rights under the Constitution are dependent on the 2nd Amendment.  The right to bear arms was concieved for one thing, and that is to give the general public protection from their government.  Without it the government would have total power over the people and we would be subject to any whelm these idiots come up with.   An armed citizenry keeps the specter of Civil War out there and acts as a deterrent to the self serving Pols.  If they could they would have the public in total subjugation, now they only weald the power that we allow them, but are constantly seeking to erode the controls we hold over them.  They very quickly forget they work for us, and believe the opposite is true.

[chief120865]

There seems to be a gap between the right to own a gun, and properly training and safety for handling them. You have to be able to prove you can operate a motrocycle don't you? I have 10 guns, and it just frightens me when I see a new gun owner brandishing a gun without a clue (same goes for the idiot who drives a new bike off the showroom floor)

[MP]

The difference is:  where in the constitution does it give a RIGHT to drive a motorcycle?  It does not.  Do not confuse Rights with Priviliges.

[Duffy]

So, Duffy, you think that to exercise 2nd amendment rights to own a gun, you can be required to take training?
Do you support that for all rights?  ie, is it necessary to have training to exercise your right to free speech?  Or, do you need special gov't training to exercise your freedom of religion?
I think it is a terrible idea.
If that would be true, there is NO right.

No MP, I don't think it should be required for all rights, just the dangerous ones where I could be killed by someone that is excercising thier rights; just like driving. If I am required to prove competency to drive the Valk to get a license, I think that is reasonable to expect the same to get a gun license. I don't think the government has to be the trainer. There are many qualified folks that could be trainers. I think it would be to my benefit for those that want to own a gun to get some safety training.

I know that criminals will not comply, but they are criminals. I am just hoping to encourage gun safety to all that are willing.

[MAD6Gun]

I agree with MP on one statment he made. Owning guns is a right, Driving is a privilage given to us by our states. PERIOD. Now with that said I do also agree with Duffy. There should be some training to carry a gun. Me and my father are NRA home firearm safety instrutors. We were teaching classes on this subject. Its getting hard to get people to even take this course because it is not required.  i have seen some guys at the local indoor range that could not hit the target or even get close. I have to wonder that if they had to use there gun to protect themselves or others could they hit the "target" under that stress when they cant hit a paper target 20 feel in front of them.  Carrying a gun is a great responsability. If you are going to carry a gun you must be able to use it effectively and not hurt others. My point to this is a little training never hurt anyone. Indiana is one of the many states that alow carry. Indiana has a lifetime permit and don't require training. Ohio does not honor our permits but do honor Michigans. The only reason I can see for this is Ohio requres training to carry a gun.......

[Duffy]

OK, I see your point about Right vs Priveledge, that's fair. 

My hope is that training will help prevent accidental deaths and even some (possibly) emotional reactions that might be defused.

Take the scorned women (sorry ladies, just an example) that finds out her husband/boyfriend has been going behind their back. She may go out and buy a gun and shoot the fool before she has time to think things through. If the training was require, there may be time for cooler heads to prevail. 

I'd be more likely to buy a gun if I felt that right was in jepordy.  (Do we have spell check on this new site?)

[Bagger John - #3785]

Take the scorned women (sorry ladies, just an example) that finds out her husband/boyfriend has been going behind their back. She may go out and buy a gun and shoot the fool before she has time to think things through. If the training was require, there may be time for cooler heads to prevail.

The fallacy in your argument is as follows: Someone who first resorts to lethal force to settle an argument is neither rational nor law-abiding, and as such doesn't possess a "cool head" in the first place. Gun-safety training isn't what's required in that particular scenario. That would be something more along the lines of 'Anger management' and 'Conflict de-escalation', for starters.

I'd be more likely to buy a gun if I felt that right was in jeopardy.

The vast majority of gun owners don't care one way or the other about someone's preferences when it comes to owning a firearm - or not. What they DO care about, on the other hand, is denial of their rights to legally own and use said firearm...

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

The problem with government mandated training is that it might prevent those who need to carry a firearm the most from being able to do so.  I could afford to take a class but I’m not a likely crime victim although I carry just in case.

It’s the single woman, the divorced mother, the elderly and injured who are most likely to be looked on as prey by the criminal element. These are the same people who can least afford to take a class just as they are the least likely to own an expensive handgun. If classes are required or the less expensive handguns are regulated out of existence these are the people who will suffer because of it.

Although the poorly trained sometimes make me cringe it’s a cost I’m willing to put up with for the greater good.

In a perfect world each American citizen would be taught firearms safety from his parents, grandparents, uncles and other family members starting as soon as they are able to learn. Just as I taught my kids not to walk out in front of cars and not to touch a hot stove I taught them not to handle firearms without permission. By the time they were 7 or 8 they had their own pellet rifles and pistols which they kept in their own rooms and were responsible for. By 12 they had their own rifles and/or shotguns which they were responsible for. The exception was my Daughter who showed little interest in shooting.

I think as shooters we should (and frequently do) step up to help the less experienced whenever we see the need. One good thing we can do is take non-shooters to the range with us occasionally. In that way they can see that shooting is fun, safe and empowering.

[Hoser]

If a license or permit  is required to own a gun, and you get one, you have just registered your gun.  Same applies if you get a CCW.
I wish I had thought of that before I got a CCW.    Hoser

[MP]

Hoser:
Did you have to give the gun #?  Here in ND, there is no gun linked at any time to CCW.  I know some states do.
MP

[Detn8er]

Don't know about other states but in S.C. a CCW is not attached to any firearm......Same when you buy a firearm....all the background check does is verify that you are not a felon. Probably the same for all States as it's an FBI check... 

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

Mark speaks correctly concerning the background check. The beauty of the background check is that thanks to the NRA the government is banned from keeping permanent records of the background checks. (As long as you pass!!) I think they are allowed to keep your name for a month or two then the record of you’re background check is erased. In this way the federal government is banned from compiling a gun owner’s registry.

When I was an FFL holder I was required to keep a “bound book” of every firearm I repaired along with the owners name and address. If I sold a firearm (I didn’t) I was also required to list that in the bound book. I was required to keep this book as long as I was in business and when I went out of business I was required to send it to the government. I don’t know if it’s the same now but at that time the federal government had no idea what firearm you bought unless they went to the dealer and looked at the bound book. That is until that dealer went out of business and sent in his book. That was 30 years ago so much may have changed.

Some state governments due keep a gun registry I believe but not here in Indiana.

[chief120865]

My point was not about rights vs priveleges. It was about responsibility. If you never owned a gun, be responsible and take a safety and handling course before you buy and handle one. I have ridden a motorcycle since age 6. I took a safety and handling course and learned a great deal. Ditto for my gun ownership. I grew up around guns, learned a lot on my own and through parents and relatives. But took a safety and handling course and learned a lot. Show your responsibility, then when they challenge you and your rights, you have all the credibility in the world.

[X Ring]

There seems to be a gap between the right to own a gun, and properly training and safety for handling them. You have to be able to prove you can operate a motrocycle don't you? I have 10 guns, and it just frightens me when I see a new gun owner brandishing a gun without a clue (same goes for the idiot who drives a new bike off the showroom floor)

Except for 1 very important thing.  There is not an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that proclaims the owning and using of motorcycles to be a right.  Unlike the 2nd Amendment.  Why should I have to take a government mandated course to exercise one of my rights guaranteed by the Constitution?  Following your line of reasoning, I would have to take a course to refuse to let a law enforcement officer search my person, places or papers without a warrant when clearly the 4th Amendment gives me that right.

Let's not forget that Driver's Licenses and the Motorcyle Endorsements thereon are a priviledge extended by our state governments after passing testing and paying a fee.

Btw, to answer the original question, I carry a hangun because a rifle is too obvious!

[NiteRiderF6]

You don't have to register all of your firearms.... to get a CCW. I know people who own 30 or 40 firearms, none of them are "registered" with the state or federal government. A lot of people have CCW here in my home state, zero firearms are registered for private ownership. There will be a sales transaction recorded for each firearm sold through a gun "dealer" but many private sales are never documented. That will vary by state, but I seriously doubt that any government agency could confiscate all of the firearms here. I support firearms training for all handlers of firearms. My son and I attended a "Hunters Safety" course together when he was 16 years old and wanted to obtain a Hunting License. I know that he was trained to at least some minimal level of firearms handling safety and therefore have a better feeling about him being in the woods with a high powered rifle. Heck, I had  been handling a firearm since I was eight years old and even I learned a few things that were of value. I just wish that every hunter had this same safety training.

My Dad taught me a few of the most important layman's gun "laws" before I could ever touch a firearm.

1. Never carry a knife to a gun fight.

2. Never point a "gun" at a person that you don't fully intend to kill.

3. Never "tote" a loaded gun.

4. Never advertise that you are "toting".

5. Never be guilty of "careless" handling of a loaded firearm.

6. If you don't know if a gun is loaded when you pick it up, know before you lay it down.

7. Never leave ANY firearm down in a place where children can get a handle on it.

Those will get you by most of the time.

[Hoser]

Hoser:
Did you have to give the gun #?  Here in ND, there is no gun linked at any time to CCW.  I know some states do.
MP

No, no gun info required, however they know who you are and where you live and that you probably own a gun.  THAT makes me me nervous.   Hoser

[chief120865]

I think you are taking my points out of context.
1. I never mentioned anything about governement mandated safety courses. I simply mentioned, be responsible and credible, don't let the liberal media latch on to anything. The NRA has tons of great safety courses. Your local gun club has plenty. Your local gun shop has many. if you are going to buy a gun for the very first time simply because it is your right, then of course that is your right. But do me a favor, don't come brandishing it around me unless you can show you can handle it.

2. My point was not about rights versus priveleges, see number 1. The motorcyle example was just that an example of how being responsible can help you and the overall gun rights causes

[Wingman]

My Wife and I recently took the NRA handgun safety course. While I know it's not required in Georgia to obtain a concealed carry license, I had other reasons for taking it. The course was very helpful in making Diane more at ease with her firearm. The more she shot it, the better she liked it.

The thing that we came away with, apart from an NRA Basic Pistol endorsement, was the notion (on her part) that it would be "fun" to shoot on a regular basis. The more familiar she is with her pistol, the less she will have to think about how to operate it if she is staring a perp in the face!

I've had my license for nearly 15 years, I'm hoping she will get hers soon.

[Detn8er]

It is nice to have an SO that also loves to shoot. Mine gets Po'ed when I go and she can't because of work. And like you said being fimiliar with your firearm is so very important..... 

I stress that to my SO and her Sister when we shoot at the range....It has to be something you can do without thinking of what the next step is. 

[Bigdog]

I'm a PROUD Life Member of the NRA....(they are the only ones doing anything about our right to bear arms )  and also Have my conceal carry permit 7+ years........

[Bigdog]

PS....  Funny how many of us have these things in common.....

[RoboCop]

I like Ted

TEXAS MONTHLY TALKS - TED NUGENT	powered by Aeva

[fordmano]

I also am a fan of Good Old Uncle TED.

I wish he would adopt me and teach me the ways of his world.

We need more DEAD criminals!!!!!!!!!!!

[solo1]

This is a very interesting and educational thread.  Lots of good points.
As noted above, the Second amendment is the key.  The Federalist No. 46 letter by James Madison , January 29, 1788, clearly explains that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to give the people and the states the ability to keep the federal government under control.  The Second Amendment was envisioned as protecting all of our Rights.

As my son, Mad6gun, said, we teach firearms safety and reliability but very few people attend the classes because there's no requirement.  I believe that all holders of CCW's should have some form of training in safety, responsibility, and legal aspects of use of firearms in defense of self, others, and property..  Ahh, but here's the rub!

If the government , local, state, or federal, mandates training, there WILL BE stipulations! Politicians love POWER!  This would not be acceptable.   The only way that this might work is to require a minimum of training by civilian instructors but without a pass/no pass provision.  Of course there will be idiots out there who have no responsibility and no sense of restraint.  These probably would not be good students.  However, in worse case scenarios, they would at least have been exposed to the proper knowledge of firearm responsibility.