reasons for firearms

OK, I own a herd of guns, so don' take this post the wrong way - I do not carry because there is absolutely no need to do so where I live. I find it very humerous when I see someone carrying in this town. I sometimes wonder why (you know, the old "compensation" argument) some people carry (in this town, not you folks that live in other places).

In Alaska it is possible to conceal carry almost anywhere (other than fed property, schools, banks, etc.) without a permit. Just strap one on and impress yourself. However, in most places (other than Anchorage and Fairbanks) it is really not necessary, and even there if you stay out of certain areas you are safe. We have very little street crime, and the crime there is is usually alcohol related, and I do not frequent bars, and carring in bars while drinking is illegal - so what's the point.

Now, if I was in one of he big cities down south, or in Anchorage of Fairbanks, I would carry for personal proteciton. I am planning on moving this year and will apply for a CCW permit and use it when necessary. I also take a gun along when hiking in those areas where there are brown bear, but not in other bear areas. Again, there is no need in most areas, though a few people (very few actually) look like they are going on safari.

I am not anti-conceal carry, I just feel there needs to be a vaid reason for it.

Xphile firearms provide an illusion of safety but its only an illusion, being tooled up dose not gurantee safety, if anything your more at risk by carrying weapons, its a statistical fact that those who have access to firearms are most at risk from them.

Survival is not about being armed to the teeth thats more to do with the feeling of power that firearms provide. And in almost all survival situations you would not need a gun. If your talking about war, civil conflict thats a different matter. Its simple more guns more dead people and stock piling guns is contradictory to the idea of survival.

JTMA what happens if they come back to your house all armed with guns?

I live in an area where people are absolutely armed to the teeth. Gun violence is practically non-existent. I've lived in a home with firearms all my life, and could use one by the time I was 7. Its all about the owners and their knowledge and willingness to treat a firearm with the respect it deserves.

Obviously, I'm a very strong supporter of firearm ownership. That said, I do not carry a weapon in everyday life and feel no need to. In a disaster scenario, I'd much rather have a firearm than not. In my view, its nothing more or less than an additional, useful tool.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
JTMA what happens if they come back to your house all armed with guns?

That's a possibility, but its equally possible that he could have been seriously injured or killed had he NOT been armed that day. Its clear that they intended to do him or his property harm.

Well mushroom... As I said in the post, by fending them off I was able to call the police, report the entire incident and identify who they were. They could have come back, yes. But had I not been armed I would have been robbed and very likely worse on their initial visit.

BTW, the problem with your 'statistics' is that data of people who have successfully defended themselves with a firearm is not available as it is largely unreported. Also, your 'statistics' include self-inflicted harm by gun owners (e.g., suicide). I would be curious, what percentage of victims of violent crime are gun owners? What percentage of victims of home invasion that resulted in bodily injury or death were gun owners?

I have seen many situations in which a firearm has stopped a crime from happening , some of our friends in other countries are not as lucky as we are.

Guns are a personal choice for sure. I chose not to carry one for more than a few reasons.

The truth is that there is no one way to guard oneself or one's belongings 100%. Guns aren't the end all to survival any more than my knives are. Even with skill and will to live if someone wants me dead or wants my stuff... or both...

I don;t carry a gun nor intend to for the following reasons:

1) I have enough to carry
2) I don;t trust myself with one.


Okay that's only two points...but it's they're damn good ones for me. A gun needs ammo...that gets heavy and bulky. I'm female so my load can't be more than say 65 LBS at the heaviest.

I'm packed so tightly there's no room for a gun and ammo and frankly, I'm a hot head and think I'd be a shoot first ask later kinda gun wielder. I know myself quite well and I'm fairly certain that if I felt threatened I'd be more likely to shoot to kill with little remorse over it.

Even though I am normally peaceful and prefer to talk things out...I don;t think I'd use that skill if i had a gun to make the points for me.

Naturally we all fear being victimized...that fear I prefer to address gunless...safer for me and others around me LOL.

Do I trust others with guns? Well I have no doubt that there are a LOT of people out there with guns that just shouldn't have 'em...but it's dependent on mentality of the owner.

If I had to use a gun I could and would...but overall I think I'd be a menace.

That's 100% honest.

I lived in Orlando in the 80's and a law was passed at that time that allowed any adult to carry a weapon. Crime dropped overnight. The nightly local news had little to report but Mrs. Kissels cat being stuck in a tree. The liquor store owner down the street from me where I got my laundromat quarters had been robbed about 8 times in 12 months. I went in to get change for my weekly washing and some Rambo wannabe rushed in and pulled a gun on the owner demanding cash. There were about 4-5 customers in the store at the time (soccer moms, etc.) and EVERY ONE of them pulled their own gun on the robber. It surprised him long enough for the store owner to pull his shotgun from behind the counter. The robber gingerly laid his weapon on the counter and turned around and just walked out. The owner gave us all a bottle of wine and we had a good laugh over the incident. No shots were fired, no one was hurt and the robber was unable to bully/terrorize the law abiding citizens of the neighborhood. The carry law didn't last long and as soon as it was lifted, crime again rose to it's previous levels.
Being armed is a state of mind. Anything can be a weapon. Guns are just highly effective and psychologically intimidating weapons. If you pull one on someone you have to be willing/able to kill. If you suspect that you are neither willing nor able to defend yourself/loved ones then, by all means, don't give the terrorists another weapon (yours). Leave self-defense to those who value their lives.

why did they repeal that law about a adult can carry a gun??
Curious about this.

Thanks,
Orangetom

OrangeTom,
Not a clue. I suspect it was a social experiment and whatever data was being gathered in those few weeks gave the experimenters their answer (s). Over the years I've seen a lot of "test the waters" experiments with various laws, statutes, etc. Just something to see how ready the people are to have even more of their rights taken away. Sometimes the social experimenters have to back off because the timing is not right to shaft us further than we are already being shafted.
Just one more reason to own a gun imho.

Originally posted by whitewave
OrangeTom,
Not a clue. I suspect it was a social experiment and whatever data was being gathered in those few weeks gave the experimenters their answer (s). Over the years I've seen a lot of "test the waters" experiments with various laws, statutes, etc. Just something to see how ready the people are to have even more of their rights taken away. Sometimes the social experimenters have to back off because the timing is not right to shaft us further than we are already being shafted.
Just one more reason to own a gun imho.

Hmmm..intresting point you make here about social experiments. I have thought of this concering other issues. For some reason it slipped my mind in this case.

Thank you for reminding me of this pattern. I will try to keep it in mind more often. I am wondering about this with this new congress in session.

Orangetom

I can provide a nice neat list of reasons why I carry almost every time I leave the house anymore at night.

• Rise in gang related crimes culminating with the murder of a pregnant Brenda Paz by MS13 members (it put my county on the national news :/ )
  
• Having a deranged family member pull a gun on my unarmed brother in my presence
  
• Car jacking at a gas station I frequently use
  
• Several incidents of people breaking into out-buildings on my propery and stealing things
  
• ... and the most recent item: multiple armed(knife) home invasions in my housing development within the last month.
  

I might be a big guy (5'11" 250lbs) and not many of the criminal sort see me as an easy victim but for those select few that don't have that level of reasoning power I figure its best to ensure that I can give them an even better reason why they should find someone else.

I'm not old enough to carry a firearm, but I will the day I turn 21 years of age. In my short life I’ve just had way too many confrontations with crazed/drunk/ill tempered people to be satisfied with nothing but my fists or close by objects to protect myself with. My father owns a gun store and for eight years we have heard hundreds of stories that could change anyone’s opinion about owning a gun. I live in a relatively safe location, but we have a gun within reach every 20 feet in the house (false walls, hidden, etc.). Some people may say that’s overkill, but it makes all of the 5 people in our household feel extremely comfortable. And from personal experience I have also found an Air Taser (not a wimpy stun gun) as an extremely useful but non-lethal way in dealing with drunks that occasionally find their way into my backyard.

So yes, of course I support firearms & less lethal means of protection.

I will not second guess any reasons others may give for a decision to carry or not carry firearms. My primary reason for favoring the carry of firearms in survival situations is twofold.

1. No matter what you have seen on the myriad of so-called survival shows, there is no more efficient way to harvest game or any surviving livestock from a distance. There is no better way to engage human targets than from a distance. Anything less than this is simply not good energy economy. The energy expended to obtain protein and the risk of debilitating injury in close combat make these poor choices in an "end of civiliztion" type survival scenario.

2. No matter how well you have prepared yourself and your family, none of your survival supplies, food,drinking water, etc. mean a thing if someone can come and take them away from you. I suppose I would concede this point to someone who lives farther away from major cities than a hungry man can walk, but who knows exactly how far that may be or if the hungry man will necessarily have to walk to get to where you are. Don't think he is coming? A recent ice storm where I live emptied the supermarket shelves in less than 3 hours.

Once the fabric of civilized society is torn it will tear all the way. There will be no one to come and help you. In fact, most of the population will probably die in the first 2-3 months. Less than that if a nuclear exchange occurs. So, in my mind self sufficiency is exactly that. Unless you are prepared to be your own military, police force, emt/doctor you will be at a distinct disadvantage. Whatever your personal decision about firearms carry, I would encourage everyone to take whatever steps you can to become as self-reliant as possible. And remember the most feared words in the english language, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Xphile firearms provide an illusion of safety but its only an illusion, being tooled up dose not gurantee safety, if anything your more at risk by carrying weapons, its a statistical fact that those who have access to firearms are most at risk from them.

Survival is not about being armed to the teeth thats more to do with the feeling of power that firearms provide. And in almost all survival situations you would not need a gun. If your talking about war, civil conflict thats a different matter. Its simple more guns more dead people and stock piling guns is contradictory to the idea of survival.

Your so-called statistical fact is erroneous. I refer you to the works of Dr. Gary Kleck of Florida State University, the only person to definitively study the issue you raise. The truth is that crime rates have dropped significantly in states where concealed carry laws have been instituted. By your faulty logic, all of those gun-totin hillbillies should be dead by now, their lives snuffed out by the very tools they thought would protect them. Your idea of survival I find completely naive. For one thing, a .30 caliber projectile travelling at 2400 plus fps is no illusion. It is a reality that, unprepared for, will end your life. I am actually doing you a huge favor here. You have a chance to gain some knowledge that may prevent you from winding up a victim, your possessions being divided among some gang of low life cutthroats who simply don't care about your "idea of survival." Right now, your attitude is such that I fear you are a casualty waiting to happen. Lastly, firearms are much more than a "feeling of power" as you put it. If you bring a knife, a multitool or a bag of trail mix to a gunfight you wil simply lose. Thus endeth the lesson. Oh......and a little less time spent with the magic mushrooms and perhaps you might have a better grasp of reality.

Originally posted by boaz1234
I have seen many situations in which a firearm has stopped a crime from happening , some of our friends in other countries are not as lucky as we are.

Oh of course. In some situations i've heard you don't even need to have a gun. A while back I had a conversation with an ex gangster (not the mob kind) and he said if his gang saw a guy walking down the street with a girly fanny pack around his waist, they wouldn't rob or attack the civilian because he could quite possibly have a gun on him.
So just to have the appearance can stop predators; but there's always the ballzy ones that dgaf and dont see a difference between a person thats defenseless and having a .454 shoved in their face.



Hey & does anyone know....- In a really bad situation, is it better to shoot to kill or shoot to wound? I hear if you wound them, they can fine your ass big time, even if they had breaking & entering with the intention to kill (maybe not that intense of a situation, but along those lines).

Why I dont rely on guns in a survival situation:

I have never needed to. I can and have effectively hunted without them. Having guns requires a certain level of technology that I cannot manufacture. Having guns requires one to also have sufficient ammunition. There are better things I would prefer to carry than ammo. Having guns puts you on the radar. The govt. requires I.D. to get a firearm permit. Avoiding any govt. attention is a good thing in my book. I can and have avoided deadly situations on a number of occasions without the use of a firearm.

That being said, I have noting against firearms. They are a great tool and it is a good idea to become very familiar with their proper use. If asked I will claim that I do not own any.

Sometimes good people are put in a situation where they have to hurt bad people.

Whatever your method may be or whatever is at your disposal, bad people need to be stopped sometimes.

[edit on 21-1-2007 by Realtruth]

Originally posted by Realtruth
Sometimes good people are put in a situation where they have to hurt bad people.

Whatever your method may be or whatever is at your disposal, bad people need to be stopped sometimes.

[edit on 21-1-2007 by Realtruth]

that really about sums it up, in a nutshell Good job!!!!!