It seems to me that there are many more people who CC all the time than there are people who really need to, all things considered.
What defines a "real need"? That's tough to assess. Fortunately, in most jurisdictions today, that's an individual determination, and not something that is imposed on an individual by someone else.
My perspective, often written here, is that at least here in New York, carrying a concealed gun all the time with the intent to use it is potentially fraught with serious legal repercussions and possible criminal charges...
That goes without saying. Isn't it true anywhere?
Perhaps you meant to say, "carrying a concealed gun all the time with the intent to use it
if it should become necessary...". The very emergence of that necessity would itself mitigate most of the risk of the criminal charges to which you allude, and proper training and education will go a long way toward managing the remaining risk.
One must also understand that
not having a gun if it were to become necessary is also frought with serious risks.
If I see the possibility of being at risk in a situation to the extent that using a gun- properly regarded as the last resort- is apt to be where things go, I'll avoid the situation with whatever legal means are available.
Avoiding clearly dangerous situations is always a good idea; I practice that myself, and I do carry a gun.
However, if you were to replace "is apt to be where things go" with "may become necessary", you have an entirely different assessment.
No one can predict with any confidence when the need will materialize.
The
likelihood that anyone will ever have to resort to the use of deadly force is almost always very, very low indeed. The other part of the risk management equation involves the
potential consequence of not being able to protect oneself, should the risk materialize. That could be very severe indeed. It is the potential consequence that makes the risk unacceptable and makes mitigation necessary.
The same thing applies to smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, seat belts, air bags, and having the means of calling for help in a medical emergency. In each analysis, the probability of need is very low; the potential consequence, very severe; the emergence of the actual need, unpredictable; the wisdom of being able to mitigate the risk, obvious.
One can drive safely, keep combustibles away from ignition sources and keep electrical circuits up to code, eat healthily and eliminate hazards, and stay out of dangerous neighborhoods, but one cannot minimize the likelihood of risk occurrence sufficiently to eliminate the need for further mitigation when the potential consequence is sufficiently severe.
So far, that's worked for me and mine which is why I don't CC all the time.
I survived driving without seat belts for years and without airbags for decades. But as they say, past performance is no indication of future results. What has not happened in the past just does not matter today.
This also avoids being in situations that would be made worse by the presence of a gun, situations that would pass as trivial and inconsequential otherwise.
Not sure what you are saying here. Do you feel that having a gun might lead you to unlawful, threatening behavior? If so, you've probably made the right decision--
for yourself. If, however, you find yourself under violent attack and cannot retreat, you may reassess your decision--possibly when it's too late.
Personally, I've always been a calm and reasonably polite person, and when I am armed I am even more so.
I know my obligation to avoid, disengage, evade, and if possible, escape; the gun is a last resort. That means, when it becomes necessary to use it, there is no remaining alternative, and if I don't have it, my options have been exhausted.
Following what others do only because others do it is a really poor way to make decisions, especially important ones with serious consequences. Thinking for one's self, independent from but considering the opinions and advise of others, and making decisions based on one's own analysis of the factors involved is the most credible way to go.
Yep!
Shooting is one of several hobbies I have. Guns, guitars, and fishing equipment can be expensive hobbies. (See how some guys will justify buying that $300 golf club to his wife when he already has a nice set of clubs.) Then again paying my bills, and eating seem to expensive habbits.
That I can easily justify, and they cost a lot more than my hobbies.