"I'd rather be caught with it than caught without it."

[danweasel]

I realize that this is going to be a can of worms. I'll post it anyways.

So, I have a buddy who lives in a really bad neighborhood. He is not eligible for a CCP where he lives (due to stuff that he was semi-involved with 12 or so years ago). He also carries a concealed pistol and has for many years. He is a decent family man and a good guy (for the sake of this post it would be nice if you could just trust me on this but it's not neccessary I suppose) and he has never got into any trouble over the gun although he told me he has had to draw it at least 10 times. At least twice was in his home. I don't know if he can own no pistols or just not get a CCP. Anyways, I don't really have a question I just was wondering what to make of this and would like to hear some opinions on it. I guess one question would be what can I say to make him even consider the consequences of carrying illegally?

By the way, the title of this post is what he says is an unoffical motto of sorts where he lives.

EDIT: This question is most likely out of line... If it was you, If tommorow your permit got revoked would you stop carrying if you felt you where in danger? By revoked, I mean possibly for getting into a bar fight and having a bad lawyer or something along those lines. This is incidentally NOT the case with my friend. I don't expect anyone to put an answer ti this out there on the internet. Just something to think about I guess.

Thanks,

Dan

[troy_mclure]

better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

i WILL do WHATEVER it takes to protect myself/family.

[jesus5150]

Hmm, I'd probably go with no... I know your family is the biggest priority but you're not gonna do your kids any good in jail/prison, (yes i know that not having a gun could potentially eliminate that issue but...) there are other non lethal alternatives (yes i know they suck, but you'll be legal and it'll drastically increase your survival for MOST situations) So i'd say, Screw the felony.... Swallow your pride and buy a Kick-ass Tazer gun that has some range on it. (Assuming that's not illegal too)

Just my 2 cents. But then again i'm not married, I have no kids, and I am totally allowed to have a CPL so i can't say for sure. I don't want to sound like a dandy but if it was my friend i'd tell him that i care about him and don't want him to go to the hot house, and i'd encourage him to check his options.

[marine0341]

Well, it is our right to bear arms peroid. That was before the ATF and state laws requiring Conceal Pistol License. All the RED tape is for the birds and we have to abide by it while criminals don't and if cought the criminal gets a slap on the hand, and trust me the BG will still carry.

So bottom line CARRY IT and screw the RED tape reverse protection. If you had to pull it out then you must carry it. I would only pull it for one reason and that is to put someone down and i don't shoot legs and arms.

[AZAK]

Dan you are talking interior Alaska at this time of year?

Get the man a squirt gun. Super Soaker for the home, something smaller for CC. A couple of shots of H20 to the eyes, -50 F first blink eyelids/lashes stuck together, BG is effectively blinded.

That will get him by until break up, and then it's a whole nother ball of wax!

Good Luck! I can understand your concern. Didn't realize that Fairbanks was that dangerous!

[Sixer]

AZAK, thats life on the streets in Juno... kill or be killed, lol.

Seriously though, I have to agree with JESUS. I mean I literally HAVE to agree with him because he's JESUS. I see his point.

On the other hand, this guy has been in 10 situations that already required him to pull his gun, and he's still around to tell about it. If it was me in his shoes, I wouldnt carry A gun... I'd be carrying TWO.

For better or worse, I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

[alloy]

some penalties and the crimes/charges associated with gun violations are more severe with a permit than they are without.

[csmsss]

Honestly, if what you presented here is all you know, I'm not sure you know *enough* about the situation to give him any sort of counsel. But from what you did describe, it certainly sounds like your buddy figures he's already got his own situation all worked out and that he's not likely to do anything differently. I'd suggest that the best thing for you to do might just be to keep your mouth shut.

[SoldiersSon]

You could tell him that he won't be able to protect his family from a prison cell. In response to your second question, I would not carry if my permit was revoked for some reason.

[Musketeer]

Not being eligible to Conceal Carry is very different in many places from not being allowed to own.

1. Having to draw 10 times in recent memory as a civilian means one should be more aware of their surroundings and practice avoidance much better.

2. If he can own there is no reason he cannot defend his family in his home.

3. You have no RIGHT to carry. You think you do but the SCOTUS does not and their answer goes with regards to the COTUS no matter how we feel on the matter. The law is clear on the matter and your refusing to acknowledge the facts of the matter are irrelevant.

4. How well will he be able to protect his family from a jail cell?

5. The odds of having the weapon be found are far greater than having to use it. Car Accident, Heart Attack, Flashing in front of the wrong people, telling people you carry illegally who then post it on the internet or tell others or sell the information to get themselves out of deeper personal trouble to them... All of these mean the odds of being found out are far greater than really needing it if you behave accordingly. If found out then refer back to point 4.

[zxcvbob]

What's the penalty there for concealed weapon w/o a license? In Minnesota, it's just a gross misdemeanor. That'll mess up your life if caught and convicted, but not permanently like a felony.

(I thought Alaska didn't require a permit -- almost like Vermont)

[big_bang]

Does your friend live in AK, and if so why would he need a CCP? If not, ignore my post.

[SoldiersSon]

My train of thought was that since Alaska doesn't require a license to conceal, that what we were actually talking about was that he isn't eligible to own a firearm.

Did I read too much into it?

[Sam06]

Dan is he in Alaska? If so:

Legal Overview: Right-To-Carry Law Type: Shall Issue. No permit required carrying concealed in Alaska. HB 102, signed by the Governor on June 11, 2003 changes Alaska Statute 11.61.220 to allow anyone 21 or older, who may legally carry a firearm to also carry it concealed without having to obtain a special permit. The possession of a firearm at courthouses, schoolyards, bars and domestic violence shelters will continue to be prohibited. Alaskans may still obtain a concealed carry permit if they want reciprocity with other states or want to continue to be exempt from background checks when purchasing firearms.

Note "Legally Carry a firearm"

But to answer your question.........Yes

[Flyover Country]

I generally concur with Musketeer. I live in the People's Democratic Republic of Illinois, and apparently exist outside the protection of this Second Amendment thing I hear so much about from citizens of the United States :rolleyes:, so I have no personal frame of reference on CC. If he is breaking the law by carrying, then that choice is personal, and he must weigh the consequences of that decision. Does he carry, potentially needing it to defend life/family and risking jail, or does he not carry? If I'm in urban Detroit or East St. Louis, I might risk the chance. If I'm in suburban Illinois, I might not.

He has other options: if he is legally able to own, but not carry, he might be able to transport legally in his vehicle and carry a Taser on his person. Any deterrence is better than none. It might be much slower for him to retrieve from a vehicle and engage in a SHTF scenario, but the likelihood of him needing that firearm is lower than the possibility of him getting a stay in the hoosegow for illegally carrying.

I appreciate the sentiment of "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6", but the odds of one are greater than the other. No option is perfect in this case, and discretion is typically the deciding factor. YMMV. I'm not a legal eagle.

[Brian Pfleuger]

If he has "had to" pull his gun 10 times, he is one of the following:

1) A bad judge of when he needs to pull a gun

2) NOT a decent family man and hanging in places he shouldn't, most likely for reasons he shouldn't

3) Terribly ignorant and unaware. His ignorance takes him to places he shouldn't be and his lack of awareness keeps him from avoiding bad situations in those places.

[onthejon55]

If he has "had to" pull his gun 10 times, he is one of the following:

1) A bad judge of when he needs to pull a gun

2) NOT a decent family man and hanging in places he shouldn't, most likely for reasons he shouldn't

3) Terribly ignorant and unaware. His ignorance takes him to places he shouldn't be and his lack of awareness keeps him from avoiding bad situations in those places.

:barf:
just because he is willing to protect himself unlike you does NOT make him a bad person.

[Rachen]

Just like:

It's better to have one and not need it, than needing it and not having one.

Period.

[Wildalaska]

He is a decent family man and a good guy

Not if he's carrying a gun he's not. Hope he gets locked up. I'm sick of the gun crime up here and if this guy has a prior felony, hope they lay a felon in possession charge on him.:mad:

WilddontgetmestartedAlaska ™

[Recon7]

If he has "had to" pull his gun 10 times, he is one of the following:

1) A bad judge of when he needs to pull a gun

You don't understand man, sometimes somebody cuts you off and the middle finger just won't do.:p

I have a buddy who lives in a really bad neighborhood.
He needs a ryder moving truck not a Ruger. I'm sure your felon pal was innocent, but maybe he should lay low and try the proper channels to get his rights back. There is a process in some states, dunno how it works though.

I have this strange prejudice against felons

[Redneckrepairs]

While i wont advocate breaking this law , I do understand the described fella's choice , and ill note that if your already a felon of any sort there is little incentive for you not to carry and protect yourself or your family . If i liked the fella he would stay my friend .... but i sure would not sell him a pistol lol .

[KUHIO]

The law is the law, and your buddy is breaking it. Like you, I don't know if your friend is legally allowed to even possess a handgun, but he certainly shouldn't be carrying concealed.

You do realize that people who break gun laws are the ones who provoke more strict ones!

[BuckHammer]

3. You have no RIGHT to carry. You think you do but the SCOTUS does not and their answer goes with regards to the COTUS no matter how we feel on the matter. The law is clear on the matter and your refusing to acknowledge the facts of the matter are irrelevant.
The government doesn't grant rights, they are granted to men by God. The government can only unjustly remove them.

[Wildalaska]

The government doesn't grant rights, they are granted to men by God.

Pshaw. There is no God and thus there are no God given rights. Time to move this one to Law and Civil Rights if you want to discuss social contracts and the nature of government.

WildimnotantigunimantifelonAlaska ™

[BuckHammer]

Pshaw. There is no God and thus there are no God given rights. Time to move this one to Law and Civil Rights if you want to discuss social contracts and the nature of government.
Yeah, you're totally right. John Locke was a dumbass :rolleyes:. So was Thomas Jefferson. In fact anyone who was influenced by him is, too (Founding Fathers). Oh hell, why do we need a constitution or a bill of rights, since the ones who made it were total idiots? :rolleyes:

BuckauthoritariansneedtomovetochinaoranothercommunistcountrycanyoureadthisprobablynotsinceitsallbunchedtogetherwhatsthepointofthisHammer

[Dresden2001]

I would agree with the poster who suggests that there are no God given rights. There are those rights that Americans (and others) have acknowledged belong to all men, prompted by their inclusion in the constitution. They include the right to free expression, self-protection, freedom from self incrimination, search and seizure by the government, right to counsel, women's suffrage, equal protection etc. These rights are interpreted by the judicial branch, and influenced by statutes passed by the people's representatives.

One of the more influential statutes in this argument is the law that says felons can't possess firearms. I think that is a perfectly sound restriction, pretty much in the same way that I think that convicted sex offenders should register their whereabouts so that the public can keep track of them and drivers ought to have valid licenses that demonstrate their awareness of the rules of the road.

IMHO, if a felon or a dv misdemeanant chooses to carry a gun, despite legal prohibition, he DESERVES to go to jail. Those with knowledge that he is breaking the law can look the other way, but no one should wring their hands or complain if he gets caught and goes to prison. Its no different than driving under the influence or on a suspended license. Free will affords irresponsible men little comfort if they are caught breaking the law.

I don't like gun criminals. I don't much care if they are "good guys" "family men", or "teenage thugs" like Klebold and Harris. If the majority of people of this country abide by its laws wait til they can legally own guns and don't get convicted of crimes that would bar them from firearms ownership, I don't have much sympathy for those who have broken the law and are now convicted felons. Regardless of their motivation, crooks shouldn't own guns, unless and until their civil rights are restored.

[BuckHammer]

I would agree with the poster who suggests that there are no God given rights. There are those rights that Americans (and others) have acknowledged belong to all men, prompted by their inclusion in the constitution.
Basically, you have taken the God out of "God given rights", which is fine if that is your thing, because this is America, but it means the same thing.

IMHO, if a felon or a dv misdemeanant chooses to carry a gun, despite legal prohibition, he DESERVES to go to jail. Those with knowledge that he is breaking the law can look the other way, but no one should wring their hands or complain if he gets caught and goes to prison. Its no different than driving under the influence or on a suspended license. Free will affords irresponsible men little comfort if they are caught breaking the law.
I tend to agree, but it's worth noting that anything that the prevention of his gun ownership prevents is illegal anyway. Overlapping laws are annoying, overcomplicated, and repetitive. Also, if we're talking about hardcore criminals who "deserve to go to jail", if they want a gun, they're going to get one, legal or not. The government and law enforcement might as benefit from the tax revenue generated in the transaction.

[onthejon55]

They include the right to free expression, self-protection, freedom from self incrimination, search and seizure by the government, right to counsel, women's suffrage, equal protection etc.

Funny you should forget the right to keep and bare arms...

I don't have much sympathy for those who have broken the law and are now convicted felons.

Of course you dnt. Not until its your attorney who screws the pooch and you're the one with the bogus felony charge on your record

[Dresden2001]

I tend to agree, but it's worth noting that anything that the prevention of his gun ownership prevents is illegal anyway. Overlapping laws are annoying, overcomplicated, and repetitive. Also, if we're talking about hardcore criminals who "deserve to go to jail", if they want a gun, they're going to get one, legal or not.

I have to agree with your first point regarding redundant, ill-conceived laws. It would be a much better world if the legislature would have to repeal one law for every new one enacted. Nonetheless, there is a value in restricting the right of an impulsive, anti-social citizen (read felon in my view) to own a deadly weapon.

Funny you should forget the right to keep and bare arms...


Actually, I didn't. It's the right to self protection. The framers were clear that the RKBA was enumerated to prevent governments, and vicious citizens from usurping the rights of free men in the Republic.

Buckhammer's second point is much more nuanced. Seems to me that the friend of OP who has a gun, despite a legal prohibition is a hard core criminal. Every day he carries illegally, he is breaking the law and commits a new offense every time he is in possession of a firearm. Law abiding citizens who don't break the law ought to hope he is caught and punished. If he does it again, I hope he is caught receives more time.

I don't much care if a criminal has commited a non violent felony like theft by receiving over the felony amount, or aggravated assault. Most of us in the US have avoided behavior that would lead to conviction and restriction of our civil rights. I know that sounds callous and haughty, but I have been able to avoid getting arrested despite having done some really dumb things in my lifetime, some that might even have subjected me to arrest and prosecution had the ball bounced a little differently. I know that this may sound incredibly arrogant, but thems that haven't been able to avoid getting convicted of a felony or a crime involving domestic violence are different than thems that have.

[G-man 26]

Quote
You do realize that people who break gun laws are the ones who provoke more strict ones!

Yeah, gun grabbing liberals will leave the rest of us alone and quit passing laws if we will just comply with this ONE MORE LAW. In california these "elected" persons pass an average of 1000 new laws every session. We can't burn a freaking fire in our fire places unless we call a freaking phone number to find out if it's OK. It will never be enough with these freaks.

Sure, we just need the judges and lawyers to tell us who is ok to own a gun, and who isn't. In my state you have committed a felony if you carry your medication in one of those mtwtfss boxes and leave the house with it.

We need less restrictions not more. I say let the felons carry. They are going to anyway. But maybe instead of restricting those of us who actually follow these stupid laws, they could free us up a little. Like make it year long open season on violent felons. Note, I said "violent".

"Don't make it illegal to burn the flag, just make it legal for the rest of us to beat the (tar) out of the flag burners."

I do agree however, if you need to pull your gun that often, you need to change something. Your location, your habits, your ways, your judgment. Most people here would probably agree, showing a little better judgment on your friends part would put everyone a little more at ease with him having a gun. Even if they don't agree on the legality.

G-manisitrealythatviolentinalaska26

[danweasel]

Oops, more info is required.

I am in the Army at Ft. Wainwright and this man is not up here. Fairbanks is not really a tough community. At least not as far as senseless violence is concerned. He is an old friend from California. He is of mixed ethnicity and looks really white but he lives on the edge of the proverbial "ghetto" leading to all kinds of idiotic problems just living and working where he does. He is also a small dude who has a bit of pride. He does not get along with the "kids" in the neighborhood. Apparently having some very bad stuff go down and then obtaining an incompetent lawyer will doom you to a life of few choices. Apparently.

I know it sounds ridiculous and if it was as simple as a loser packing a pistol around the 'hood then I would not have even brought this topic up. But hey, I like hearing people ideas and opinions.

Thanks,

Dan

[Flyover Country]

Before this completely devolves into a debate in the unalienable rights of man versus the creeping totalitarianism of the State, we need to remember this:

The OP's friend is making a conscious, informed decision that he will break the law every time he CC's. There is no debate about that. I understand his desire to protect himself, but I also cannot argue for the notion that he is being abused by the law. He, at some point in time, must live with the consequences of his actions all those years ago. He may well be a special case, but the law is clear - no felons may carry a firearm. It's a good law, in general, and if there's been some miscarriage of justice, then he needs to address that in the proper fashion. There is a clear line between his special case, and the laws of Illinois and Wisconsin that wholly proscribe CC. That is a gross abuse of a citizen's 2A rights...the OP's friend's case is not.

As one of the posters wrote regarding the apparent danger of the man's neighborhood: "He needs a Ryder, not a Ruger."

[KUHIO]

G-man 26: You totally missed my point. My point is that legislators propose new and/or more strict gun laws to combat gun crime. Though, you, I and every lawful gun owner in America are not the problem. Criminals are criminals are criminals, who will continue to ignore any new laws as much as they do the old ones. New laws do nothing to deter those who already freely break existing ones. So basically, us law abiding folks are the ones who pay for those crimes committed by the scum of the earth, in the form of more strict laws/regs reguarding firearms and their use.

[stephen426]

I would have to admit that I would carry illegally. Lets forget all this God given right stuff since our laws were created by man. Our forefathers had the wisdom to protect our right to bear arms in the constitution.

Lets talk about practicality. Are you going to give up ability to protect yourself because of a mistake you made years ago? Lets assume that the need to protect himself is real and that he was innocent. I find it hard to believe that nobody believes that innocent people are occasionally found guilty.

I am almost positive that the main reason for the flack is the fact you mentioned he has drawn his gun 10 times already. Many police officers go their entire careers without ever having to draw their guns on a suspect. Lets say you are a hard working individual with NO criminal history living in a anti-gun state such as New York or Illinois? Those who are from there or have been there know there are more than a few rough areas. Criminals could care less about gun laws and will just prey on the unarmed sheep. Do you go like a lamb to the slaughter or do you follow the judged by 12 rather than carried by 6? As long as there is a true threat and no other way out, you need to do what you need to do in order to protect yourself and your family.

[tranks]

if i ran into that much trouble where i had to pull a gun out, i'd get up and move outta there tomorrow. theres 49 other states with plenty of cities in them. at least one of them has a safer spot to move to.

sounds like shorty has a bit of an anger issue. but maybe i'm reading into your post a little too much.

BuckHammer:
Buckauthoritariansneedtomovetochinaoranothercommunistcountry...
canyoureadthisprobablynotsinceitsallbunchedtogetherwhatsthepointofthisHammer

i don't know if you meant that to be funny, but i was laughing pretty good at it. i find the faster you try to read it, the easier it is.

[mav88]

i believe it is ok for him to have a weapon at his house for HD and to protect his family incase something happens. Carrying illegally while driving is taking a big risk, since if he gets pulled over...he's pretty much done. He should look over the consequences and if he decides to carry even though he is not suppose to its his decision. He'll regret it though if he gets caught with it..then without it..:confused:

[spacemanspiff]

I'd like to know more details about the 10 situations this guy has been in that made him draw his weapon.
At face value, it sounds to me like he brandishes his weapon whenever he wants to boost his ego. You've already told us he has had problems with the law, so its guaranteed he is not reporting to the police these ten times he claims to have feared for his life or safety, and if the people he has drawn down on havent reported it to the police, that proves those people are representing the criminal element. What is this guy doing around so many thugs? Unless he is one himself.

[Socrates]

Let's see. My Italian-american communist, literally, uncle was mugged, living in Fruitvale. With no weapon, and advanced age, he was a target.

He moved into the valley, retired, and died.

His family lives in a not so nice part of Oakland, and, due to their Spanish ancestory, appear to have no problems, yet, despite that, I've been checked out a couple times there, loading and unloading around Christmas. I was not oblivious, and, suffice to say, I was NOT going to be mugged on Christmas Eve. Minding my own business, bringing presents in, yet about 3 folks decided they wanted to get into our business. I avoided the situation, and, the three got to enjoy their own Christmas.

I know two white guys that live in West Oakland. A legal carry permit for a 9mm is out of the question. They carry Beretta 92's, all the time. Everyone knows it, and, they have never been hassled, by police or local gang guys.

When legal citizens with clean records, can't get permission from their government to protect themselves, or their families, the question you present is impossible to
answer, in this forum that advocates following the law. The only legal solution is to remove yourself from this area. In other words, you have effectively lost your right to live where you want, and go where you want, since the government will not allow you to protect yourself, or, protect you, which, by the way, many SC cases will tell you they have no duty to do.

All I can say is know your police force, know your DA, and know what you are getting yourself in for. Also, know the Kali laws in the area you live in.

His 10 brandishings is REALLY a concern, since in Kali, you are more then likely going to have to have clear evidence that your life was threatened. That means something like the 10 stiches in my head from the butt of a Walther PPK/S, being knifed, or stabbed.

It never ceases to amaze me, but, criminals will call police, when they were actually considering a crime, and complain that the defendant brandished. The police are supposed to investigate.

A friend with one of the few CCW's in Contra Costa County came out one day to find a couple guys starting to steal the transmission out of the truck he owned. Tools out, starting to go to work. He pulled his Glock, pointed it only at the ground, and said that they should be on their way.
They called the police, and, they came out. They of course said he pointed the gun at them, and made a bunch of stuff up. He never admitted anything, but, it became an issue when they evaluated his application for a CCW, many years later.

Please draw your own conclusion about what I think of this stuff, and, I would recommend your friend get a GOOD lawyer, and see if he can clear his record. Why, I don't know, because even those with perfect records aren't going to get legal CCW's in Kali, in some areas.

[armedandsafe]

I will say only that I lived and owned a business in California for 20 years. I often carried large sums of cash and very often complete multi-computer systems. I have carried every day for over 50 years.

Pops

[supergas452M]

I have carried every day for over 50 years.

Good for you, Pops!:cool:

[Maximus856]

My question is, how many carried while under the age of 21?

I personally think its BS that Uncle Sam can give someone an m16 and say die for your country, yet they can keep them from owning a personal weapon and say die for a politicians stupidity.

-Max

[danweasel]

Thanks a lot guys,

I floated the "Ryder not a Ruger line" to him. I hope it makes a difference. I know he already knows it anyways.

I really appreciate the honesty,

Dan

[G-man 26]

Well KUHIO, I owe you an apology. I totally missed your point there.

Living in southern california, I'm just sick and tired of all of the laws and restrictions on our lives. It gets harder every year to tell the "abused by the law" types from the "need to stroke my own ego by pulling a gun Hollywood style" types.

I saw on this site a while back, someone telling us that everyone thinking Obama is going to take our guns is a crazed, panic prone doof. We still live under the assault weapons ban of the '90s here. While the rest of the country enjoys one version of the 2nd, we know better than most what is coming for the rest of you. We live it every day.

I know a guy that has a felony record because an illegal search turned up a couple of ar-15's. Now he can't own a gun, move, or breathe with out a P.O. breathing down his neck. This guy's story touches a nerve, and I don't mean to take it out on anyone, but those of you who don't think this could happen to you...

I think anyone who needs to pull a gun that many times, might be looking for it. But maybe, just maybe, he can't change his location because he can't change his economic situation. It would be hard to get a decent job with a felony in your past.

I just think when we jump to judge a "felon", we should all remember how easy it is to gain that status. Especially in the most "liberal" state in the union. We might be "good guys", but we are all ONE mistake from being awarded that title.

Quote: California, the only state with the Russian bear and the Chinese star right on the flag.

[besafe2]

Without reading other replies:
I can not iminage your buddy having to draw at least 10 times. There must be more to this.
The only times I've had to draw was when I was in le other than practice of course. IMHO your buddy needs a new lifestyle or to relocate.

[Conn. Trooper]

I have been in LE for 13 years and have drawn my gun less than 10 times, never used it. My father retired from NYPD after 31 years, including 11 years in ESU and never used his gun either. This guy has drawn his gun 10 times and never used it. He must live in Baghdad.

[kgpcr]

He is a lawbreaker. If its that bad why in the hell would you not move your family out of there. Dont tell me you cant move as you can. Alaska is a can carry state so there is no reason not to get a permit. If he is has a criminal background then he should not have one and again should be locked up if he is carrying a gun. If its that bad move. You can move if its that important. It may not be easy but life is not easy.

[MrNiceGuy]

blanket laws in a bureaucracy are just excuses to take thought, reason, and personal accountability out of the legal system.

a person who rapes children loses the same rights as someone who's crooked accountant botched their taxes.
they are both branded criminals with no differentiation.

just because it is written in our laws do not make it right or just.
a person who's only argument is "but it's against the law" or "but, he's a criminal", is a person who cannot find logic or reason themselves, so they must fall back on a generic and pointless blanket statement.

not all laws should be followed imo.
and given the choice between being able to protect my family or the possibility of going to jail... i'd have to say, it would be a tough choice for me.....

having said that, someone who has had to pull their weapon out so often has obviously shown their attraction to confrontation and their unwillingness to avoid it at all costs.
i've never had to draw my weapon, and if i have it my way, i never will.

[scorpion_tyr]

You say he lives in a really bad neighborhood. I'm gonna go ahead and assume that the 10+ times he drew the weapon were completely warranted. If that is the case, and his situation is that bad, I would say continue carrying. Yes it may be illegal. Yes he may go to jail. Every situation is different and if he has to use the gun in self defense he may or may not go to jail. Depending on the circumstances it could all come down to whether or not the responding officer(s) are having a good day or not.

I know of a few different scenarios where convicted felons on parole (not legally able to even be around firearms) have used a firearm that they kept in self defense and were not convicted of anything. This is because some states have "the lesser of two evils" laws on the books. Basically they say you can commit a crime if you are defending yourself against or stopping a far worse crime.

If he was just walking down the street and for some reason LE found him to be CCing he would probably go to jail. If he stumbled across someone trying to rape/kill a 10 year old girl and he put a stop to it with the firearm, in many places the LE wouldn't even run the serial numbers on the weapon.

Unfortunately this doesn't apply to everyone or every place. I've also seen senarios where people were perfectly legal in their actions and they were convicted to 10 years in prison. If I were in the shoes you described, I would carry. That's just my $.02

[Socrates]

Let's turn this argument on it's head.
IF he's drawn ten times, and he's not been put in jail, he IS in a really bad area, and, the people he drew on where so bad, and up to no good, that they never reported it to the police. THAT is a bunch of REALLY bad people, and, certain areas are like that. If I have to pull a gun, I have little doubt that I'll end up in jail.

Given that he's drawn ten times, and, from all indications, those 10 times were justified self-defense, and, prevented, assault, robbery, or a violent crime, how can anyone say this person shouldn't carry?

We should be saying that the government has to allow felons rights as well. Once you've done your time, you should have full rights back. You already have the cross to bear of having a felony on your record. That makes existence much more difficult, already. Done your time, that should be it...

[G-man 26]

Amen mr nice guy. You preach it and ill sing.