stevepaa, do you favor the death penalty if someone kills your parents?

would you do the noose?

Shawn, I've seen you chime in on gun threads in the past, so I know your position. My comments were not directed at you. How can you possibly be a ninnie when you drive the Gruppe B-tul mascot? No, try as you might, you will not be mistaken for the real deal. We have been joined by one of their poster children; you have been far out-classed. Sorry.

no and no.

so what is your point wrt to CCW

The reason I list that book is because what Jeff Snyder has to say is true, and it allows others to see his reasons for coming to the truth.

You don't want to hear the truth, that's understandable. That does not mean others do not.

you got a religion you are starting up, Pat?

again, I think you guys can have your CCW, just don't start in with the "it's the responsible thing to do and if you don't you are immoral" crap.

that is rationalization.

just accept that you feel the need to carry based upon your experience and others don't.

tabs, you brussels sprout!! i order the newspaper so i can have someone throw the target, thats called skeet, target coming TOWARDS you .heck with those throwing machines.

and if it is in my drive, its "fair game"

I'm not a big OT poster, but I found this thread interesting. I just changed jobs, from Siemens to First Data Corporation, and both will not hire you if they find a CCW in your background check. The reason given to me is that they don't want people in their workplace that could attract trouble. To further explain it from my handbook, the feel that if you fear for your life, and must be armed, that there must be a reason and they don't want that reason here.

I also interviewed at Conoco Phillips and they had the same policy, not sure how many others out there do as well. So if your changing jobs you may want to hold off until after your hired.

stevepaa, buy a gun!!

just as in healthcare(sic) i will get the best justice money can buy.

Back on topic ... I hope

John, check http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin/index.php good info.

It's okay Jeff. Pat said he would make the shirts so the pressure is off.:D

steve sure looks like a hell of alot of fun, hell of alot of time, hell of alot of money and headaches to get a CCW in kalif. IF YOU CAN GET ONE!

"IF"- BEING THE KEY WORD!

why dont you apply today feb. 1st 2007 and get back to us when you finely have it in your hand.

i know the gun laws of kalif. all to well. my boss lives there at times. actually has (2) places there. i know you have to register your ruger 10/22 pop gun and rem 1100 shotgun as evil black nasty "assault weapons".

boss who is a man of wealth and means GAVE UP trying to get one. and he has a spotless record!

please tell us of the brilliance of the city of san francisco banning all handguns!

read the fine print. and read about reality getting a CCW in kalif. same crap about city county state "approving your lic." that went on with non-gun states over full-auto weapons. they dont "have to approve it". and they dont!

there is no difference in getting federal $200 tax stamp for full autos. non-gun states will hold your permit up til hell freezes over. pro -gun states will background check and then whip it through to feds.

kalif. has MORE ANTI-GUN LAWS THAN ANY STATE OR COUNTRY! and yet my neighbor is murdered in downey while working/living there. alot of good those laws did for her. the only people in kalif. with guns are the bad guys. and they dont give a fuch about the laws in the first place.

today is 2/1/07 go get in line and see HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET A CCW IN KALIF.

i once had a garage sale . i did mention to the people that i would tarde for quality guns. believe me, or believe me not, a lot of people are carrying a lot of guns in their vehicle, and not one had a sticker on the windshield.

well why do you think they call it the bible belt?

attract problems???????????????? your kinda trained to walk away or run away from the threat if at all possible.using deadly force as last resort.

personally.........if i had choice btwn CCW employee and non CCW employee.....................ID HIRE THE CCW GUY/GAL in a heartbeat!

why? i get a FREE city/county/state/FEDERAL background check for free! what a deal. look up what a background check costs nowadays.

those companies are treading on very thin legal ice with those hiring practices. if i was a regional mgr. traveling via car thru multiple states, i wouldnt go to work for them if i couldnt carry concealed.

so u need to submit your resume to colt, remington, Mo Dept of Conservation, and the FBI:)

an example from the website

The Alameda County Sheriff's Office is the issuing authority for all CCW permits in this East Bay county, which includes the cities of Oakland, Berkeley, Alameda, San Leandro, Fremont, and Hayward. Local PD's defer to the Sheriff for permit issuance. The requirements for a CCW are: 1) Residence in the county and being at least 21 years old; 2) "Good Character" as proved by a clean DOJ background check; and, 3) "Justification," as expressed in the application letter. The first 2 requirements are easily proven. The third is a bit vague and discretionary, but it seems that the Alameda Sheriff is more liberal than, say the SFPD in regards to what constitutes "justification." I would suggest you make the best case you can in this part of the application. Being a shop owner in Oakland, for example, seems adequate justification for the Alameda Sheriff. The SFPD doesn't seem to think so.

If you satisfy the 3 essential "prerequisites" for the CCW, you will be asked to submit the $175 fee for a 2-year resident CCW permit. You must then show evidence of having passed a firearms safety course. The NRA course is currently acceptable, but there are plans to require an 8-16 POST-type course. Then you must undergo a 4-hour psychological evaluation. You will be given the same psychological tests and psychological interview that are used to evaluate Sheriff's Deputy Recruits. (cost=$150). If you pass this, you will be scheduled for range qualification (current cost=$50), which you must pass with a range score of 75% or better, using the gun you will carry loaded with the ammo you will carry. Finally, you are required to carry $1 million in personal liability insurance. This can be obtained as a rider on your homeowner's policy at fairly reasonable cost (mine was about $50 more per year).

Alameda is pretty slow in issuing permits. Mine took about 7 months from start to finish. They will authorize one weapon on the permit. If you want to change weapons, you must range-qualify with the new gun. The CCW is valid throughout the state. There are commonsense restrictions, such as you can't carry while drinking alcohol or in an airport. The county has issued about 250 permits for about 2 million residents. The number of permits is relatively small probably because of the cost (about $400 for all the fees) and the hoops applicants have to jump through.

I believe in the case of Siemens, which I just left they also had some liability/insurance issues as well, it was never fully explained to me. In fact I only found out about the policy after I tried to get one of friends that had a CCW hired in.

I travel frequently and I find your comment on travel interesting, I never thought about I guess, but I see your point on that.

I think there are some valid points made here, but I fail to see many people looking at the negative aspects. I wonder how good an idea it will be when in matter of persoanl safety the round slips past the assailant and removes the right side of a 4 year olds head, her mother holding her dying daughter in her arms, tears diluting the spattered blood that lays across her weeping face. Probable? no, but possible and I like to think that the possible is always worth considering.

Scott, I can't believe that not hiring someone because they have or had a CCW permit is legal. Knowing how Human resource laws generally favor the employee or potential employee that has got to be borderline discrimination.

Now back on topic to the question asked by John. I carry a small Kimber Ultra CDP II in a Milt Sparks side holster.

http://www.miltsparks.com/

I have tried a lot of different holsters and also lots of different positions. I have found this to be the best for comfort (both for safety and just daily ease of use) and quality. My .45 is significantly heavier than what you plan on carrying, but remember that in order to be effective, you need to be able to get to it. SOB holsters are pretty useless when you are in car for example.

This is a good thread, aside from some of the typical bashing on both sides. At the end of the day, I don't see myself paranoid, just exercising my rights. I have also carried in the past for work, so training is not an issue. I have zero desire to ever use my weapon in defense, but I also don't want to be saying "Gee I wish I had my.......".

Bill

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1170370027.jpg

It's perfectly legal where I live, Colorado is a right to work state. However this was siemens world wide policy, I don't think they have to by law hire you if you have one and you contest it somehow, since they would not hire my buddy regardless.

Psst, I am in Fort Collins and work in Broomfield.

Much food for thought here.

My chosen carry gun = only 5 rounds in cylinder, so can't have luxury of 1 empty chamber. Will be all chambers full, holster covering trigger, keep the stock heavy trigger, no mods to the gun. Probably will use pocket holster vs belt.

Impossible to access anything on belt or in pockets when driving. Use a racing seat, can't even get spare change out of my pocket w/o stopping car, unbuckling, and practically getting out of the seat.

When to carry, guess I'll see what feels appropriate. No restriction at work.

Sheriff who did my CHL training class said he couldn't recall any CHL licenses revoked for behaviour. Only revocations he'd heard of were for administrative stuff, like forgetting to renew or file change of address. That's w/ 16K CHLs in county.

I'm not sure how you can justify this stance as "crap". Honest people do have a moral responsibility to one another to resist evil. One form of that is defending yourself and your loved ones from attack. One happy by-product of that is that maybe, just maybe, you have saved the next guy or his loved ones from attack. It is cowardly and immoral to shirk this responsibility and foist it off upon others. The knowledge that there are folks out there, like you, that will gladly do this and rationalize it to themselves and their loved ones serves to strngthen the resolve of those moral enough to accept this responsibility.

Quote:

that is rationalization.

Actually, it is not. "Rationalization" infers the concept under review is irrational, therefore in need of "rationalization". The desire to defend one's self and loved ones is far from irrational. It can be convincingly argued that the lack of this desire, an absence of desire to defend one's self and loved ones, is pretty irrational. I have never met anyone that would not fight back when severe injury or death was the alternative. I would like to hear some one rationalize that philosophy.

Quote:

just accept that you feel the need to carry based upon your experience and others don't.

I do accept that I have different views on this than others hold. I have absolutely no problem with that. Your personal safety, and that of your loved ones, is entirely your business. I just wish the "other side" of this argument would take a similar "ce la vie" attitude. The problem is they won't. They feel the need to impose their wishes concerning self defense upon me. They would like to remove my chosen means to defend myself; firearms ownership and carry. It's really none of their business. I won't get into theirs, but they sure like to get into mine. That's the rub.

granted poo happens. but anyone who has shot a gun more than a few times, learns about silly little fine print called "you are responsible for your actions".

i really have a very difficult time even thinking of going anywhere w/out a firearm. 49 years of being around lots of guns ALL the time does that. guns here to us natives are really just like a 3/8 ratchet you use it when you need it.


you always know the muy macho guys at the range who show up in camo and start blasting 30 rd clips.


az . all you do is go to CCW shoppe(ie.gun store) fill paperwork out. $89 bucks. my classes were (2) days 7-5pm. shoot 50 rds at end of day sunday. wait (1) month for city/county/state/federal background check. refresher course every (2) years i think. no refresher course............invalid CCW.

already we are talking about spring off road trip once again to utah. literally into the badlands of the escalante river area etc. last mapped area of the u.s. very very rural and i will be armed. for (2) reasons. protection and i enjoy shooting.............alot.

chance of bad guys??????????? about as likely as being in the arctic or antarctic. but why take a chance. life is wayy too short as it is, to rely on some county sheriff to show up and save me and my g/friend from the bad guys!

everyone says it will not happen to me. well excuse the hell outta me for being prepared. if our fellow pelicans family member were armed the other day when he was car jacked and killed, in houston, maybe once again i wouldnt be writing in past tense!


as far as companies having legal right to NOT HIRE YOU, i think they just trampled on some peoples rights and that could REALLY BACKFIRE ON THEM $$$$$$$$$$$$$ that would be a nice discrimination law suit that would afford me my very own trophy truck off road race team and my porsche racing team!

Matt, I don't have a CCW (yet), but what I can tell you is that anyone that carries with a CCW, and even many people like me that don't carry shoot our handguns regularly for just that reason.

The simple fact is anyone carrying a gun or for that matter owning a gun has an obligation and responsibility to know how to operate the gun properly, and more importantly to have the discretion to know when it's safe to discharge the gun and when it's not.

God forbid I ever have to shoot another human being in self-defense or in the defense of my family, but I can tell you right now that if I had to do so, I would not hesitate and that I would plant two or three rounds in the chest before they hit the ground.

Like one of my favorite bumper stickers says:

"My idea of gun control is hitting what you're aiming at.":D

Well, I don't carry much anymore, but when I got it, we had our business's in malls around town, and I had to take & pick up cash banks, and a few of those locations had very high crime rates (and high democrat support areas) and one of our people had been robbed at knife point, another had their car stolen (many businesses pulled out of the worst mall because their loss to shoplifting was higher than the profits,I.E., more was stolen than sold, yet local dems criticized business for leaving, saying it was because it was an Black part of town) but when I had to go to night clubs for work, I wouldn't carry, to me, guns & whiskey don't mix and I'm not going to place myself in that position, that is what my clients bouncers were for. Now days, we no longer have any stores in malls, we just supply them with live entertainment for special events. The only time I carry now (other than to the shooting range, is when carrying large amounts of cash to go buy a car. BTW, my carry is a nice little compact Glock courtesy of thrown_hammer it is smaller than my Smith 10mm or the Desert Eagle 357:D My mother carries a Ruger 9mm:D

nonsense, your stance is you must carry a gun to defend your family and that those who don't carry a gun don't resist evil and would not fight an aggressor,
poppycock


It's like those guys who buy a big SUV or a Volvo and say those with small cars are immoral and irresponsible.

Is that a rational argument?

You may say that all you want, Steve, but the rationalization here is yours, you don't accept your responsibility for your own security, prefering to leave it to surrogates or others. It is immoral to ask someone to do what you should, and could, but will not do for yourself. There are truths in the world, and that's one of them.

Individuals that are armed and use them to stop a crime are involved in "wrong person" dealths approximately 80% fewer times a year than cops. That's while using firearms to stop potential violent crimes millions of times per year, and has stopped over 400,000 crimes in 2007 already.
http://www.actionamerica.org/guns/sdcnt-wdgt.shtml

I agree 100%. my motto is "It's my right to have a gun and it's you right not to have one". Don't take away my right to have a gun and I won't take away your rights. Pretty simple...

Well put Art!

So Pat, you think we should eliminate fire fighters?

Make all house with concrete so they won't burn?

You're obfuscating. I'm quite willing to fight a fire at my house, and pay others to assist me in doing so if it's overwhelming. I'm also willing to assist my neighbors in fighting a fire at their home, barn, or property.

Your position is that you won't fight a fire at your home with the best tool available to do so, and then ridicule others who will.

No, the argument is that I really should have a swimming pool in the back to draw water from to fight the fire in case the city water supply is weak.

You seem to have a mental block concerning this, Steve. Here is what I said in acouple of earlier posts:


Of course not.

Neither is this. Typically childish liberal attempt at trying to make a rational argument, the one that they are losing (or actually lost long ago) appear irrational. Steve, you are dealing with adults here that won't buy into this nonsense. You severely weakened your argument with this unfortunate remark.

"It is cowardly and immoral to shirk this responsibility and foist it off upon others. "

So I should put in that swimming pool?

I have no problems in practicing gun ownership in the home, I guess its just hard to believe that someone would need a gun at the grocery.

LIES!:D

Not all violent crime happens to people when they're at home. That's why many choose to have a CCW. That and the fact that there's a 2nd amendment that grants us the right to keep and BEAR arms.:p

All I read here is "I am unwilling and unable to admit to myself or anyone else that I simply do not have any rational. moral basis for my argument. Therefor, since all else has failed, I shall act like a child."

Ditto, and I guess that ends that.