yep i thought camping in a national forest campground in the middle of BFE was safe?????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????

I read a very interesting essay once regarding this and there were some interesting ideas about this subject. I don't necessarily subscribe to all the thinking but it brings up some interesting points. The idea is this.

If you decide to carry or have a gun in your nightstand you will make a decision in your head under what circumstances you would use the gun. Someone breaking into your house at night and coming up the stairs, get the gun, some one trying to steal your car, get the gun out. In these cases you will be more likely to use the gun than some one that had not made these decisions before hand. Say, you don't have a gun and have never thought about owning or carrying a gun but someone throws one your way in the above circumstance you will be less likely to shoot an intruder than someone that has already thought about it.

Yup, I've already made a decision to shoot any intruder, especially if my wife is in the house. We have no kids and I keep the doors locked when we go to sleep. There is no reason ever for someone to be in my house whom my wife or I have not let in. I also lock my bedroom door because anyone trying to get past it would certainly wake me up in doing so. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to be trying to get into my bedroom while my wife and I are sleeping. Anyone who tries will die. No ifs, ands or buts.

Sounds like an odd hypothetical. A gun owner is more likely to use a gun in X situation than a non gun owner who is given a gun from heaven in the same X situation? If I'm understanding it correctly, it sounds like a very oddball survey.

However, I don't doubt that gun owners plan when they will/will not grab their gun. If I hear glass breaking at night, grabbing my gun is a no-brainer. Like Rick, I will shoot an intruder without a second thought. The safety of my family is my absolute #1 priority. If my wife claims she hears a weird noise (common), I'll walk around the house unarmed without worry. Sounds like simple common sense to me.

Same here, no reason for anyone I don't know to be in my home.

http://www.tv.com/video/15055/dances-with-wolves?o=tv&tag=show_summary;video;thumb

I would if I could but I can't so I don't.

Also have lived 50+ years in Los Angeles and have visited and worked in some bad parts of town but never needed a gun.

I do have a couple of guns at home because I believe in "prepare for the worst and hope for the best" and besides they are just gosh darn fun to play with!

I mean they are in investment... yeah that is the ticket. ;)

As I said above everyone should be prepared with extra food and water in case of a disaster however IMHO some of you are over the top with the end of the world scenarios... for instance So. Cal. is just as likely to have large isolated earthquakes for the next thousand years as it is to have "the big one" that rips the whole state apart.

But of course a geologist who goes to PBS with a script saying "We will have many small quakes over very long time" probably won't get produced.

Tim,

LA has some very bad areas where the rules are not made by the lawmakers. Been there done that.

Everywhere has its bad spots, some are just one person and other places have bigger problems that you can never control with law enforcement.

I wonder how the heller decision will impact the liability of such an establishment????

Long before the Heller decision, I had heard that any place in OH than prohibits CCW is liable for the safety of anyone who steps foot on that property. Dunno if it's true or not. But I'd rather stop a bad guy than be able to sue the property owner later if I was lucky enough and survived.

i subscribe to the thought process..............

"if they shoot at me.............I WILL SHOOT BACK WITH MORE!

if i have a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER IN MY SITES..........i did not have a clear and present danger in my sites, with exception of a white truck. had i seen the shooter, i imagine i or someone else would have nailed him multiple times before he could shoot again in our direction after all the yelling at him ensued to stop firing.from his exact location in campground was only 300 yds away from where he shot at us. he knew damn good and well there were vehicles down amongst trees. hell we could see them from his shooting perch.

by the way other campers climbed up there when we were looking for him and recovered all brass for cops.

now would it have been wise to enter his camp with my SOCOM .308 locked and loaded???????????

only if i had my mind set for containing this bastid once and for all and it probably would have lead into a shootout when he went for weapon.

soooooooooooo................ by carrying concealed CONDITION RED, i found out it WAS HIM, i found out he didnt care a damn bit about anyones safety, i positively ID'ed him, and his beeeeatch, his truck license number, and prior i had ID'ed him from other campers next to him as the shooter, and I WAS READY FOR ANYTHING WITH MY MIND MADE UP IF HE MADE A MOVE TO PULL ON HIM!

soooooooooooo...............carrying concealed DEFUSED a POSSIBLE REAL DAMN FREEKING UGLY SITUATION, I HOPE NONE OF YOU OR I EVER HAVE TO EXPERIENCE EVER IN YER LIVES!

I carry because its better to have it and not need it than to need it and NOT have it. Plain and simple.

When I went for my ccw the instructor asked a simple question, it is a question that anybody who buys a gun for self defence needs to ask themselves. Can I take the life of another human, to defend myself or another person, if presented with a life threatening situation. If you honestly answer the question to yourself, and you answer no, you have no biz. with a gun. If you come after me with a knife, I will put the sights on you, if you come after me with a gun, I will fire on you, if you break into my house, I will shoot you. I should mention that my wife also has her ccw and a nice Smith Sigma. Good looking blond, shiny 986, her odds of being asulted are far better than mine are. My son has his ccw, he has a side job delivering pizza.

The pizza boy is packing heat.

You guys are a crack up.

Right when VA's CCW law went into effect a pizza delivery guy actually was fired, (by Domino's, IIRC) for warding off an attack with his lawfully-carried 1911. It was against Domino's policy. Kinda funny how they won't let their delivery folks arms themselves, yet if they refuse to deliver in bad nieghborhoods, they get sued.

Yes he is, and robbing a delivery guy (of any kind) is a very popular way for people to get drug money. We crack you up huh? I am so glad that we can be at your service.

If you want mushroom, shaddup.
If you want broccoli, what the hell is broccoli anyway? Shaddup with the broccoli.
If you want something crazy like pineapple, I'll kill you.

If you want pepperoni and bullets, you've come to the right place. If not, you're an idiot and deserve to die.

link

I have owned firmarms all my life and never thought of carrying concealed until last year. I witnessed, up close a drug buy. I choose to turn in the dealer and give the plates of the buyer to local vice squad. Shortly there after the dealers "Familia" threatened my life. I now have my CCW and carry my 45 most of the time. I went through a sheiff training where they taught you "not to shoot/brandish". I have never heard from the dealer or his homies, however I will never find myself in a situation "naked" again.

I'm 45 and have never thought "Man I wish I had a gun right now". Like Todd I've been into shady parts of LA and SD and never thought I was going to die. Of course if I wanted to I could have done something really retarded and gotten myself killed but again using the noodle is by far the best option for self defense.

That said I am 100% on board with getting a home protection gun for a Katrina like event. I'm thinking a shotgun and possibly rifle are the way to go. Stored in the attic with a decent amount of ammo.

I fking hate picking buckshot out of my sausage/shroom/onion pie.

Good article:

The Gun is Civilization

Marko Kloos

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.