Bennett Richards
New member
Better to be judged by tweleve than carried by six.
CCW vs. Unlicensed Carry?
- Thread starter DeadCalm
- Start date
- Status
cornered rat
Moderator
Where I live, CCLs are just about impossible to obtain. Hmmm...
On a related note, I just watched "The cold summer of 1953" on video (a great gun-containing film) and it showed all those Russians, law-abiding to a fault. They went with the party line on the least details, partly because of the threat of punishment.
The punishments were, in fact, handed out mostly randomly, but who knew that? They had assumed that the State found out their petty transgressions and feared they its agents.
Very few people had gone hunting for the NKVD staff or other practicing mass murderers. Moreover, when these people knew that they had nothing to lose, nothing at all, hardly any had even tried to take an escort for the road to Valhalla. Something to reflect on.
In 1939, when Stalin and his helpers had put another half-million of his compatriots behind barbed wire or into mass graves, a single Finnish farmer with a Mosin-Nagant rifle plugged over five hundred Soviet soldiers all on his own. Something else to think about.
------------------
Cornered Rat
http://dd-b.net/RKBA RKBA posters
http://dd-b.net/olegv Portrait, nature photos
On a related note, I just watched "The cold summer of 1953" on video (a great gun-containing film) and it showed all those Russians, law-abiding to a fault. They went with the party line on the least details, partly because of the threat of punishment.
The punishments were, in fact, handed out mostly randomly, but who knew that? They had assumed that the State found out their petty transgressions and feared they its agents.
Very few people had gone hunting for the NKVD staff or other practicing mass murderers. Moreover, when these people knew that they had nothing to lose, nothing at all, hardly any had even tried to take an escort for the road to Valhalla. Something to reflect on.
In 1939, when Stalin and his helpers had put another half-million of his compatriots behind barbed wire or into mass graves, a single Finnish farmer with a Mosin-Nagant rifle plugged over five hundred Soviet soldiers all on his own. Something else to think about.
------------------
Cornered Rat
http://dd-b.net/RKBA RKBA posters
http://dd-b.net/olegv Portrait, nature photos
Thank you all for your responses. I think I'll go the CCW route.
I still worry about the example of slow and then sudden loss of firearms possession in Australia. I'm not a "black helicopter" kind of guy, but it seems to be an easy step for us to go Down Under. Anyone else out there having these mild flights of paranoia? I hope you'll say I'm nuts. But if you don't, please tell me why I'm not.
I still worry about the example of slow and then sudden loss of firearms possession in Australia. I'm not a "black helicopter" kind of guy, but it seems to be an easy step for us to go Down Under. Anyone else out there having these mild flights of paranoia? I hope you'll say I'm nuts. But if you don't, please tell me why I'm not.
While reading this interesting thread I'm reminded of a person that was "featured" on the crap A&E's Guns In America series. This person, a woman in Chicago, worked as a pizza delivery driver. One night she had a delivery in a very bad area--guess what, nobody was home, and as she was going back to her vehicle 3 armed thugs attempted to rob her. She pulled her illegal revolver and fired, I'm unable to remember if she hit any of the BG's but she was sucessful in protecting herself as the 3 BG's fled.
Now the interesting part. She, as any normal law-abiding person would do, called the police--who arrested her for her illegal firearms carry. She initially went to court without representation; whereupon, the Judge advised her to get representation as she might end up in jail for a long time. At this point the NRA came into the picture with help and a lawyer. She was found not guilty.
In Chicago I believe it is difficult to obtain a CCW. She, a young mother who worked nights to help support her family--husband worked during the day--didn't have the money, friends, or connections to obtain said CCW in order to continue to earn money for her family. Seeing as how she was unable to obtain any other type of employment, after she was found not guilty she went back to her delivery job. While she didn't come right out and say it, I was left with the impression that she continues to carry illegally. I think her story represents the idea that it might be better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
I don't carry legally or illegally, and I don't advocate illegal carry--however, I think I know what I'd do in her place.
------------------
RKBA!
Now the interesting part. She, as any normal law-abiding person would do, called the police--who arrested her for her illegal firearms carry. She initially went to court without representation; whereupon, the Judge advised her to get representation as she might end up in jail for a long time. At this point the NRA came into the picture with help and a lawyer. She was found not guilty.
In Chicago I believe it is difficult to obtain a CCW. She, a young mother who worked nights to help support her family--husband worked during the day--didn't have the money, friends, or connections to obtain said CCW in order to continue to earn money for her family. Seeing as how she was unable to obtain any other type of employment, after she was found not guilty she went back to her delivery job. While she didn't come right out and say it, I was left with the impression that she continues to carry illegally. I think her story represents the idea that it might be better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.
I don't carry legally or illegally, and I don't advocate illegal carry--however, I think I know what I'd do in her place.
------------------
RKBA!
To: RikWriter
I can understand your preception of me being hypocritical. I'll not apoligize for my opinion. When I was carring w/o a permit I was single. I had no responsibility for anyone but myself. If I was caught I was willing to assume the probable consequence. Now however, I have a wife, (who is pro-gun and carries an Elishewitz folder, even to work as a primary grade teacher) and a daughter. The consequence of losing my career permanetly and the respect of my daughter is more painful to me than the probably of losing an encounter. I have survived two encounters. I'm quite fit, 6 ft.and hold a black belt in San-Soo (Not a sporting martial art.). I usually carry two folders and know how to use them. I don't think I'm invincible. In fact I'll run away from a confrontation if I'm able to. I made this decision based on what will probably happen if I end up employing deadly force.(I hate the disparity of force argument.) It is cheaper for me to run than to become ensnared in an expensive legal quagmire. I don't care to justifiably kill someone and then have his proletariat relations take my Rover, Beretta SO-9 and my summer home. This is reality in the Peoples Republic of California. I agree with you in that if one is able to obtain a CCW by all means do so. However my decision to no longer carry w/o a permit in CA is based in my belief that the repect of my family and the modeling of obeying the law to my daughter outweighs the benifits of maybe being able to employ a handgun to defend myself. My priorities are different. Do not believe for a moment that I don't try to get an unjust law changed. My ENTIRE family are NRA members. Even my daughter was a member within a week of being born. I am also a member of an NRA members council. I call many people, attend many political function etc. I am active.
I can understand your preception of me being hypocritical. I'll not apoligize for my opinion. When I was carring w/o a permit I was single. I had no responsibility for anyone but myself. If I was caught I was willing to assume the probable consequence. Now however, I have a wife, (who is pro-gun and carries an Elishewitz folder, even to work as a primary grade teacher) and a daughter. The consequence of losing my career permanetly and the respect of my daughter is more painful to me than the probably of losing an encounter. I have survived two encounters. I'm quite fit, 6 ft.and hold a black belt in San-Soo (Not a sporting martial art.). I usually carry two folders and know how to use them. I don't think I'm invincible. In fact I'll run away from a confrontation if I'm able to. I made this decision based on what will probably happen if I end up employing deadly force.(I hate the disparity of force argument.) It is cheaper for me to run than to become ensnared in an expensive legal quagmire. I don't care to justifiably kill someone and then have his proletariat relations take my Rover, Beretta SO-9 and my summer home. This is reality in the Peoples Republic of California. I agree with you in that if one is able to obtain a CCW by all means do so. However my decision to no longer carry w/o a permit in CA is based in my belief that the repect of my family and the modeling of obeying the law to my daughter outweighs the benifits of maybe being able to employ a handgun to defend myself. My priorities are different. Do not believe for a moment that I don't try to get an unjust law changed. My ENTIRE family are NRA members. Even my daughter was a member within a week of being born. I am also a member of an NRA members council. I call many people, attend many political function etc. I am active.
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
I don't see the debate here...
It is a simple matter:
Obey the Law. If your not - well then you could be damaging our cause for all of us. You will be villafied and shunned... And I doubt you'll get a Four Runner out of it like Richard Jewel did.
It's not worth it. Don't do it.
If you can't carry concealed - carry Open - if you cant carry open either - carry a knife - If you can't carry a knife - carry a cane - if you cant carry a cane - carry SOMETHING else... Carry ANYTHING you can that is LEGAL. A big key chain even. If you cant carry ANYTHING then learn a martial art of some type and BE ALERT. Pick up a rock - the best weapon you have is your MIND... That's what we should ALL be packing as our MAIN WEAPON anyways. Everything else is BACK UP.
------------------
"There is no limit to stupidity. Space itself is said to be bounded by its own curvature, but stupidity continues beyond infinity."
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac
It is a simple matter:
Obey the Law. If your not - well then you could be damaging our cause for all of us. You will be villafied and shunned... And I doubt you'll get a Four Runner out of it like Richard Jewel did.
It's not worth it. Don't do it.
If you can't carry concealed - carry Open - if you cant carry open either - carry a knife - If you can't carry a knife - carry a cane - if you cant carry a cane - carry SOMETHING else... Carry ANYTHING you can that is LEGAL. A big key chain even. If you cant carry ANYTHING then learn a martial art of some type and BE ALERT. Pick up a rock - the best weapon you have is your MIND... That's what we should ALL be packing as our MAIN WEAPON anyways. Everything else is BACK UP.
------------------
"There is no limit to stupidity. Space itself is said to be bounded by its own curvature, but stupidity continues beyond infinity."
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac
cornered rat
Moderator
Obey the law
I respectfully disagree. Pity my law-abiding relatives from the old country are too dead to testify about the benefits of obeying the authorities in all things.
Do not get caught. Try. If the risk of getting caught is higher than other risks and the consequences are so dire that you would rather not risk them, that's a good reason to obey the law. However, respect for a "law" that puts your life at risk is misplaced, IMOHO.
Where I live, the joke of the law is that CHLs are not practically available and penalties are stiff. The correct decision for me would be to move to a better place. The practical decision for now is to stay and enjoy that fish in a barrel feel that comes with being socially naked.
Barf.
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
I respectfully disagree. Pity my law-abiding relatives from the old country are too dead to testify about the benefits of obeying the authorities in all things.
Do not get caught. Try. If the risk of getting caught is higher than other risks and the consequences are so dire that you would rather not risk them, that's a good reason to obey the law. However, respect for a "law" that puts your life at risk is misplaced, IMOHO.
Where I live, the joke of the law is that CHLs are not practically available and penalties are stiff. The correct decision for me would be to move to a better place. The practical decision for now is to stay and enjoy that fish in a barrel feel that comes with being socially naked.
Barf.
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
Obey the law? Sorry, that mantra is very tired. FOLLOW YOUR CONSCIENCE. Do the right thing. Those are much better. Obey the law means that in the 1860s in the US, you turn in runaway slaves. It means that in 1930s-40s Germany you turn in Jews to the Nazis. It means that in some fundamentalist Islamic countries you participate in the punishment of women who don't wear a veil or people who have satellite dishes.
Obey the law is a copout. Use your damned brain, don't be a frigging zombie.
Obey the law is a copout. Use your damned brain, don't be a frigging zombie.
cornered rat
Moderator
Use your mind
Even a finest fire control system is useless if it has nothing to control. My grandmothers had both been issued TT33 pistols when they served in WW2. They can shoot. But they are old and infirm. Are you saying that they ought to use their superior intellects in lue of firepower to ward off muggers with harsh words and stones? And why -- is it because there's no Soviet officer to issue them another TT or because some American police chief says "No" because that's his answer to everything other than bribes!?
I treat anyone who puts an obstacles in the way of people who desire only to be able to defend themselves as scum of the worst kind, basically on the same level as rapists or wanton murderers whom those policies help. To suggest obeying their "laws" because it is the right thing to do....!
I understand the possibility of differing opinions in the debate on "carry/not carry" based on consequences and willingness to cooperate with the authorities out of necessity, but to make a virtue of it -- never!
------------------
Cornered Rat, now angry
http://dd-b.net/RKBA RKBA posters
http://dd-b.net/olegv Portrait, nature photos
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
Even a finest fire control system is useless if it has nothing to control. My grandmothers had both been issued TT33 pistols when they served in WW2. They can shoot. But they are old and infirm. Are you saying that they ought to use their superior intellects in lue of firepower to ward off muggers with harsh words and stones? And why -- is it because there's no Soviet officer to issue them another TT or because some American police chief says "No" because that's his answer to everything other than bribes!?
I treat anyone who puts an obstacles in the way of people who desire only to be able to defend themselves as scum of the worst kind, basically on the same level as rapists or wanton murderers whom those policies help. To suggest obeying their "laws" because it is the right thing to do....!
I understand the possibility of differing opinions in the debate on "carry/not carry" based on consequences and willingness to cooperate with the authorities out of necessity, but to make a virtue of it -- never!
------------------
Cornered Rat, now angry
http://dd-b.net/RKBA RKBA posters
http://dd-b.net/olegv Portrait, nature photos
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited September 23, 1999).]
cornered rat
Moderator
The discussion started as a question about appying for a CCL that is obtainable. I would say "yes" on that, simply because that is not an issue over which I would go to war. CHL that you can get is, by an large, a formality.
CHL that you cannot get no matter what is a breach of social contract by the enforcers. Also known as an undeclared war.
CHL that you cannot get no matter what is a breach of social contract by the enforcers. Also known as an undeclared war.
Some of these comments remind me of that old joke, "Never bring a key chain to a gunfight." I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck, but seriously. We've got to be able to defend ourselves. My attitude is that I'm going to do everything in my power (realizing that I can't control everything, and realizing that the chances are slim that would ever happen to begin with) to see that my children are not orphaned and my wife is not widowed due to my own stupidity or reluctance to take responsibility for my own personal defense.
We've talked alot about breaking the law/not breaking the law. But what are we doing to change the law? I think our best shot is to get the states (well, a few are lost causes) on our side, get them in the political fight for the Bill of Rights, between us and the feds. I apologize for beating the proverbial horse, but get your reps to consider replacing unconstitutional CCW laws with a Vermont-styled law. That's our best shot right now. That way we don't have to pay a self-defense tax or get "permission" to simply exercise a right. We don't have to get permission to speak, to practice our religion, etc.
I would never advocate/have never advocated illegal carry.
According to the 2nd Amendment, there is no such thing as illegal carry.
Defying those in power is another issue entirely. Yes there are risks. My guess is we will see no changes unless 1)the states follow Vermont's lead, and/or 2)honest citizens challenge unconstitutional law.
We've talked alot about breaking the law/not breaking the law. But what are we doing to change the law? I think our best shot is to get the states (well, a few are lost causes) on our side, get them in the political fight for the Bill of Rights, between us and the feds. I apologize for beating the proverbial horse, but get your reps to consider replacing unconstitutional CCW laws with a Vermont-styled law. That's our best shot right now. That way we don't have to pay a self-defense tax or get "permission" to simply exercise a right. We don't have to get permission to speak, to practice our religion, etc.
I would never advocate/have never advocated illegal carry.
According to the 2nd Amendment, there is no such thing as illegal carry.
Defying those in power is another issue entirely. Yes there are risks. My guess is we will see no changes unless 1)the states follow Vermont's lead, and/or 2)honest citizens challenge unconstitutional law.
Oh come on guys. The great philosophical debates regarding civil disobedience have been going on for hundreds (thousands) of years. The post is not about whether one should turn in slaves to plantation owners or Jews to Nazi Germany. The guy just asked how we felt a responsible gun owner should behave.
George Hill is right. Irresponsible gun ownership does damage our cause. I applaud DeadCalm’s decision to carry his handgun legally. Those gun owners who advocate behaving irresponsibly are (thank goodness) in the minority, and I hope no one gives them much credibility.
George Hill is right. Irresponsible gun ownership does damage our cause. I applaud DeadCalm’s decision to carry his handgun legally. Those gun owners who advocate behaving irresponsibly are (thank goodness) in the minority, and I hope no one gives them much credibility.
So, Ankeny, saying people should defend themselves despite unjust and unconstitutional laws are irresponsible? I believe, if you are able to read and comprehend plain English, you will see that I advised him to get a CCW is it was available. So, this debate is just academic for you? It isn't academic for those people I mentioned, and I am shocked that you dismissed them so lightly. It makes you think that you are one of those people who doesn't learn a damned thing from history.
Ankeny,
There is nothing irresponsible about illegally carrying a firearm, only in its illegal use (murder, attempted murder, celebrating the New Year, getting a better table at dinner, robbing a liquor store, etc.) or irresponsible use (violation of the 'gun safety rules'/common sense).
There are risks to illegal carry. Live with them. I'll respect you for which ever you do and disrespect the State and its minions for any enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
(Though I won't be around for bail money, just in spirit
)
____________________
**** the government!
There is nothing irresponsible about illegally carrying a firearm, only in its illegal use (murder, attempted murder, celebrating the New Year, getting a better table at dinner, robbing a liquor store, etc.) or irresponsible use (violation of the 'gun safety rules'/common sense).
There are risks to illegal carry. Live with them. I'll respect you for which ever you do and disrespect the State and its minions for any enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
(Though I won't be around for bail money, just in spirit
)____________________
**** the government!
No to wimp out of what is obviously becoming a heated debate, but if I could not get a CCW in my state, I would carry the following: a Woo neck knife, an Emerson Commander or REKAT Pocket Hobbit or both, and would train in at least one discipline of martial arts. Since I can and have gotten a CCW, is that all I do to protect myself and my family? Nope. I carry a Woo neck knife, an Emerson Commander and a REKAT Pocket Hobbit, and continue to train every day. The point is the handgun is great, it's superior firepower, but it's just another tool to defend myself. Will I carry it if doing so contitutes a risk of prison? Hell no. Do I think that this risk is unjust and unconstitutional? Hell yes. That's why I'm an NRA member and write lots of letters. And buy lots of knives.
j.s.parker
New member
In the early 80's in the san fran bay area in calif. my wife and I were almost victims late one night on the freeway. I turned in a full report to the chp.(licence, type vehicle,etc.)but there was nothing they could do. let's face it ,you're on your own to protect yourself and your family. After that I bought my first handgun, a walther ppk. Carried a handgun in my vehicle for twelve years before I got out of calif. Was stopped for speeding tickets with a handgun under my seat and sent on my way. It's simply worth the risk! Better judged by twelve than carried by six!
No offense to anyone intented, but here goes. I think it's silly to say "I only carry when I really think I need to." or "I only carry when going to a bad part of town." Both arguments go against common sense, and can get you in legal trouble. Whether or not you have a permit. If you think that the part of town you're going to is really bad, then don't go there. Duh. Unless, your job requires it of course. (Couriers, delivery persons, paramedics, taxi drivers, etc.) In MN, if you are found to be a "willing participant" in which you shoot, you are going to jail. If you have a specific reason to think you'll need to use your gun because of the part of town you're going to, then you are a willing participant. The only place you do not have a duty to retreat from is your home. (At least in MN.) How many of the deadfolks we read about in the paper were killed in a "bad part of town"? It can happen anywhere. If you carry sometimes without a permit, then carry all the time. If you have a permit, there's no reason not to carry. JMO, -Kframe
I live in a state that does not have a CCW so my only choice is to carry and break the law or not carry and hope for the best. I don't carry because the remote risk of being caught is not worth the risk of losing my job and possibly going to jail. The legal nightmare you probably will face might make you wish you had made a different decision. Not to mention that you may lose the right to legally own any firearm.
- Status