Paranoia as a Favorite Topic on This Forum

[butch50]

I have noticed that paranoia is a common topic on this forum. Paranoia is introduced in jest, and ofen in all seriousness in many threads. Sometimes I even wonder if I am acting paranoid. No I don't take a shower with a pistol, but I do carry just about everywhere in public, even playing golf. So, I decided to see if the average CHL is indeed paranoid. The following quotes suggest not:
The odds of being a victim of a violent crime during adulthood are greater than 2 to 1. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Youth Violence Research Bulletin — February 2002)

More than one in three (35 percent) of adults are estimated to fall victim to violent crime. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Youth Violence Research Bulletin — February 2002)

http://www.witnessjustice.org/news/stats.cfm#violentcrime

Far from being paranoid, according to the CDC and DOJ, we are very likely to be victims of violent crime. The odds given here are startling. I know that statistics are malleable, but these are pretty stark, and they appear to be from reputable organizations, and from a reputable source - url is given so check it out for yourself.

These are averages of course and YMMV, but on average, watch your average non-paranoid back!

[xXStarScreamXx]

There is a distinct difference between awareness and being prepared for a situation and being paranoid.

Most people here are the former, a few of you are deep into the latter.

[BlueTrain]

I don't like the source of the statistics. It isn't that I disagree with them, it is just that I don't care for them. You can almost say whatever you want with statistics.

For one thing, violent crime is not a disease and if it is, the cure might be worst than the disease. It is a point of view.

And I definitely don't like a law enforcement point of view. It is never in the interest of law enforcement generally for crime or crime rates to drop. Criminals are always dangerous. I must admit that the media, especially television, plays up anything like violent crime, car chases, fires, anything like that. That is always what's on first on the local evening news. Politicians also like to play up the "crime wave" angle, too. Remember when canditates ran on a "law and order" platform?

Likewise, from the standpoint of government generally, it also appears to be to the government's advantage for there to be an emergency or near emergency, whatever that might be, in order for the government to have "emergency" powers, like the Patriot act.

But maybe I am just being paranoid about it.

[Twycross]

The statistics are not enough. Do they say that one in three average americans will be a victim, or do they really mean that the it's just the bottom five percent of the population beating the snot out of each other?

[butch50]

It says that more than one in three (35%) will be a victim. Sounds like for every 100 adults in this country that 35 of them will become victims of a violent crime. That would be on average, so say in some locales that 100% will be victims and in some others that 0% will be victims.

If you are the glass is half full type then you could look at it that out of every 100 adults 65 won't be victims of violent crime.....:)

[Pointer]

No paranoia here...

I just hate bullies... :barf: especially the ones who terrorize and murder helpless people in the schoolyard, and McDonald's. :mad:

I'm not paranoid. It's not my fault if everyone's out to get me!! :eek:

[Sulaco2]

Even paranoids have enemies....My wife used to think I was slightly paranoid for carrying off duty when it was not required until we walked into the middle of a gang shooting at a large mall where one person died and we had to chase down the suspects. (I and other officers, not my wife) She does not mention it now, either do my kids...

[Wildalaska]

you cant look at those stas without putting them in a geographical and sociological context.

If you lead your life based on those raw stats you are indeed paranoid

WildstoptalkingaboutmeAlaska

[gddyup]

"Paranoia is an illogical fear not based on fact" - Doug Lamb

The fact is that the world is not a nice place. Never has been, never will be. We all prepare ourselves to face that world the best way we feel is neccesary to protect ourselves and our loved ones from it. Some of us feel that one 5-shot revolver without extra ammo is all we need. Some don't feel safe unless they are carrying a full-size .45 IWB, a .45 compact on the ankle, a .32 NAA Guardian pocket, a 6" bowie small-of-back, while walking with a 2oz can of Fox OC in hand for getting the mail. It's all in what makes you feel comfortable. Bad things happen to good people everywhere. It can happen at home, at work, at the mall, in the shower, playing with your kids at the park, anywhere! Being prepared for "it", whatever form "it" may be, is just common sense. I saw a thread on here last night that leads me to my next thought. The stats make no difference to me. I might be a victim I might not. It's not whether or not I'll be a victim that matters as to why I prepare, I prepare simply because of what's at stake. My safety and that of my family, friends, and those around me are why I prepare. Not that I think we may end up being a victim, but if we ended up in a situation where we might, I'm prepared to defend what's at stake. I just started CCW'ing this week and I'm heading out to dinner tonight with my wife with my XD9 sitting 2:30 IWB with 1 extra mag on the holster. That's all I feel I need to be safe.

All it comes down to is "what level of protection makes YOU feel safe". If how you come to that decision allows you to sleep at night, then it's the right thing for you. I think the word paranoid and paranoia gets tossed around rather easily here without much thought.

[DocFox]

Wildalaska... you are correct about sociological and geographical context... for example...

according to the statistics (adjusted by soc and geo) 1 out of 3 residents of Montana and Alaska are alcoholics, 1 out of 5 are violent

Also consider the adjusted statistics show that you are 4 times more likely to have your home burglarized if you live in a MIDDLE class neighborhood than if you are in either a low or high end one.

Wildalaska... I lived in Montana for a few years...so this wasn't a jab at you, merely a sobering thought about what you said

[butch50]

Actually I was leading my life before looking up those stats:)

I believe that a socio/economic adjustment would make a significant difference. Say it makes a difference of twice as unlikely for me - looking at the chance of being one of 17 out of 100 victims doesn't qualify as paranoia either.

[mvpel]

You have to also bear in mind that most of that violent crime takes place in cities like New York, Chicago, Boston, and DC, where armed self-defense is essentially forbidden. About 10-15% of violent crimes take place in fewer than 10 anti-gun cities across the nation, while states like Vermont and New Hampshire have a lower violent crime rate than Norway.

[Wildalaska]

according to the statistics (adjusted by soc and geo) 1 out of 3 residents of Montana and Alaska are alcoholics, 1 out of 5 are violent


Now put that in a further sociopolitical and geographic context and tell me how I should behave in my own sociological mileu.


Also consider the adjusted statistics show that you are 4 times more likely to have your home burglarized if you live in a MIDDLE class neighborhood than if you are in either a low or high end one.


Again..needs to be put in a geographical/cultural socioploitical context

WilddigdeepAlaska

[spacemanspiff]

1 out of 3 residents of Montana and Alaska are alcoholics, 1 out of 5 are violent
but what are the odds that a violent person will be an alcoholic?

thankfully i'm 2 of the three and 4 of the five. not saying i havent tried. to be an alcoholic that is. i dont have a violent cell in my body. :D

[pax]

butch50 ~

Some people just enjoy insulting other people. On TFL, they can get away with it as long as they insult an entire group of people ("some of you folks are NUTS!" "all libertarians are fruitcakes!" "anyone who carries a gun in their own home is paranoid!"), but not if they insult any particular person -- so that's what they do. They just want to dance on the line without getting their hands slapped.

Other people simply cannot comprehend how another person could live life any differently than they do themselves ... and thus when it comes out that someone else has made different choices than they did, they're befuddled by that. Befuddled people are sometimes unintentionally insulting, but they don't mean any real harm. They simply cannot comprehend that everyone doesn't live in the same basic demographic situation that they do themselves.

Then there are the folks who need to resort to ad hominem attacks in order to feel like their own choices aren't bad. "Sure, the gangs in my neighborhood all shoot at each other every Saturday night. But I don't run drugs, so no one will ever shoot at me or invade my home; anyone who thinks that way is paranoid!" They're just trying to reassure themselves that their denial of reality is both rational and normal, and the way they do this is to attack other people.

It's too bad, really. All entirely normal. But too bad.

pax

[DocFox]

Wildalaska ... I think you inadvertantly made my point... that was posted to specifically show that statistics are a generalization, and should be treated as such. It is necessary for each of us understand how those statistics apply to us, to educate ourselves, not blindly follow numbers, and to constantly evaluate our lives. This is how we grow as individuals, and how we grow as a society.

[USP45usp]

+1 to Pax.

Well said.

Wayne

[blackmind]

I have noticed that paranoia is a common topic on this forum. Paranoia is introduced in jest, and ofen in all seriousness in many threads. Sometimes I even wonder if I am acting paranoid. No I don't take a shower with a pistol, but I do carry just about everywhere in public, even playing golf.


It goes back as many as four or five years, but I read a story in the newspaper that some violent criminal attacked some guys who were playing a round of golf, and one of the golfers was CCWing and popped the badguy right there on the course.

It's not paranoid to keep things you may need at a moment's notice with you so that they're available at a moment's notice. It's called preparedness.

Don't let pathetic small minds tell you different, and make you modify your behavior to where you act helpless and non-self-sufficient like they do.


-blackmind

[Wildalaska]

Don't let pathetic small minds tell you different, and make you modify your behavior to where you act helpless and non-self-sufficient like they do.

:rolleyes:

:)

:D

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahah

WildproudtobepatheticallyhelplessAlaska

[Wildalaska]

It is necessary for each of us understand how those statistics apply to us, to educate ourselves, not blindly follow numbers, and to constantly evaluate our lives. This is how we grow as individuals, and how we grow as a society.

Kudos to you Doc, spoken like a responsible gun owner!

WildnowwhereismyglockonaropeAlaska

[pax]

Don't let pathetic small minds tell you different, and make you modify your behavior to where you act helpless and non-self-sufficient like they do.
And there's the flip side of exactly the same thing.

A lot of people simply don't understand how someone else can blow his nose differently than they do -- and need to resort to insults in order to feel better about their own choices.

I don't understand it, but I do observe it rather a lot.

pax

[butch50]

Pax, you are 100% right. I have caught myself doing it once or twice, much to my chagrin.:o

I keep trying to do better though.

[PythonGuy]

You can all do as you like of course, I can't CCW in my state so I don't have to make the choice. But to base a point of view on anecdotal evidence, like " a golfer that was carrying shot a bad guy" is pretty silly to. If someone grew up in an area where CCW was the norm, that does change everything. My point of view is skewed because I grew up in NY and such things aren't even an option. I moved to Long Island for quality of life, knowing the gun laws are better then in NYC and I'd be able to own and shoot more freely. I'm not, of course, against guns, or CCW or bans and restrictions of any kind. I get bemused reading some postings because it conjures up images of "loose cannons" that are enamored by their new found power through their gun. To me, its funny reading about someone taking a gun to the shower, or on dates, but I know it is serious to that person so I'm trying to be more understanding. If we all got together and went shooting and talked, I bet we'd all get along great and see each others points of view, better. Good shooting and lets make sure we keep the precious rights we still do, and maybe even expand them!

[sm]

Bad stuff happens to Good Folks. Period.

I do not need some .gov agency to tell me this, or to what "percentage". Just simple matter of fact of the Natural Order of this thing called Life.

I do not have Hurricanes where I live, still I read, listen and pay attention to Hurricane residents because I learn. I can 1) pass on to someone that is in/ or will be moving to an area prone to Hurricanes, 2) I can adapt to my area Prone to Tornados some things from the Hurricane folks.

I am not "paranoid" about changing diapers on baby boys either. I am the eldest male child of 4 - there were 2 boys and 1 girl that came along after me. I do not have kids of my own.

Now it makes no difference what part of the world one lives in, income status, or anything else when it comes to changing baby boys diapers.

I "tried" to tell some folks, in different parts of the US, both male and female adults, of various income levels -Have the new diaper handy, or at least a towel handy when you remove the old diaper...

They "understand" after the first baby boy diaper changing experience.

pax- am I correct? :D

Just because something may not apply to you - does not it may not someday apply to you personally , or to someone else.

I consider myself a "good guy" - granted some would question or argue this - still , a recent incident I had and shared here...well I was not paranoid, just Aware of the fact and Open minded enough to accept things happen to good folks out doing a normal activity one does daily. Parking my vehicle near the front entrance of a store I was going to enter.

Am I Paranoid about doing this same activity ever again? Nope.

[FLA2760]

Hi
It is better to be prepared for an attack and hope it never happens. As far as statistics go I do not put much faith in them. Someone posted that there is a a 35% chance of being a victim of a violent crime. This statement is from a reply to this post and I have NOT researched it. Having said that I was robbed at gunpoint THREE times when I lived in the the peoples republic of New York City. Once was while I was waiting for my girl to get off work at a deli. The gunman came up on the blindside of my car and shoved a BIG revolver into my temple and took my cash and watch but did not take my car or harm me.
I was not as alert as I should have been after all I was a kid with the night's plans on my mind. The next time was at my place of employment ; a Mobil gas station I worked at part time while in college. This time two gunman came into the office and took the night's reciepts and my and my coworkers cash. They then made us drive them away in my car to a housing project the whole time with the guns to our heads. My friend cried I remained calm; they wanted me to run the red lights and I said that it would attract the cops and they did not want that, they looked at each other and said stop for all the lighsts I still do not know where that calm I had came from, and thank God I am still here. Third time and this one is the "charm" was going to my car at my college, parked off campus, after night classes. This time it was the watch and my leather jacket and the little cash I had . It is interesting to note that this all occured after the then mayor Ed Koch declared boldly that if you are caught with a handgun in NYC you get an automatic one year jail vacation. Yeah right; this did alot to keep me safe! I guess the mutts that robbed me were not afraid of jail.. there is a big surprise! Gun control in my book is putting the second round through the hole your first round made! So you can see that I am a statistical anomoly. Gee if my tendency to buck the statistics is still with me I am goiing out to but lottery tickets now. Paranoid maybe; unarmed NEVER. Ps I am in Florida now where the 2nd Amendment is a reality.
Steve:D

[pax]

To me, its funny reading about someone taking a gun to the shower, or on dates, but I know it serious to that person so I'm trying to be more understanding.
PythonGuy ~

Good post. Let me try to find some common ground.

I know what you mean about some posts being funny. You're amused by folks who carry everywhere. I'm bemused when I see threads with titles like, "Do you carry to a friend's house?" "Do you carry at home?" "Do you carry to work?" "Do you carry at church?" etc ad infinitum.

The reason those threads amuse me is because, well, I carry. And I go places and do things. I don't carry "to a friend's house," or "to church" or "at home" -- I simply carry, wherever I might be. My default setting is to carry and if I'm not carrying it is because I made a deliberate decision not to do so right then. The reason I carry is never because I think whatever I'm doing is particularly dangerous; if I think something is particularly dangerous, I simply don't do it (or at least I find a way to do it more safely -- such as during the day instead of at night, or with a friend instead of alone). So all the angst about whether carry is appropriate in a particular venue just leaves me bemused.

A lot of people do the exact opposite. They go places and do things, but their default setting is to leave the gun locked up at home. If they carry at all, it's because they made a conscious decision to carry that day -- generally because they thought they were doing something particularly dangerous. I don't do it that way simply because my crystal ball has never been very good and I've noticed that bad things generally happen to me when I'm not expecting it. If other folks have noticed that bad things happen to them only when they are expecting it and prepared for it, who am I to argue? It's their lives.

I just wish they could refrain from insulting me for my choices, in the same way I refrain from insulting them for their choices.

pax

[blackmind]

Just because someone posted about statistics, why did a bunch of people jump off into believing that we all carry simply because we read a statistic somewhere about how likely we are to get mugged or home-invaded?

I carry because I recognize potential.

I do what I can to minimize my risk, but since I realize it cannot be 100% eliminated, I carry to be prepared if my effort at avoidance of trouble is insufficient to keep me out of it. And of course, there is always the potential for trouble to swim upstream to me.

Some here seem to have started with a false premise, that we carry strictly because we are locked on, mentally, to the statistics we've read. That's incorrect, right from the get-go. Who are you (any of you) to say that anyone else here has not done actual considering, before deciding to carry a gun -- even if it's in the bathroom?


-blackmind

[blackmind]

Good post, Pax.

Taking it a step further,
you mention that you avoid situations where you feel that it would be dangerous to venture forth. This is the discretion of the wise gun owner.

You contrast with people whose default mode is to NOT carry, and that sometimes they strap on because they're going to where they think it's dangerous and having the gun may become necessary.

They're in the wrong right there: the first thing one should do if one finds oneself thinking that they're walking into a shooting situation is to walk right back out! Don't even go!

So the guy who doesn't usually carry, but does carry when he feels he's heading into danger is using his instincts to sense danger and then making the counterintuitive decision to proceed ...

and he's doing what we all acknowledge is wrong, i.e. he's letting his gun make him feel invincible.

But he'll criticize us because we carry all the time. :rolleyes:


-blackmind

[spacemanspiff]

Just because someone posted about statistics, why did a bunch of people jump off into believing that we all carry simply because we read a statistic somewhere about how likely we are to get mugged or home-invaded?

i'm more inclined to believe the Brady-ites reason for my carrying: compensating for my inadequacy as a human being.

[blackmind]

As a human being, I am woefully inadequate to deal bare-handed with four guys armed with bats and knives,
so I guess the Brady-ites are right. :rolleyes:


-blackmind

[sm]

pax,
I agree.

What you do - how raised

I have always carried on person and/or always had a firearm "handy". This all before .state "said" there was mininum age, or even made availble pieces of paper that said you could. I stopped an immediate threat before I was a teenager.

Perhaps with later years, folks being born after a certain decade, Media, Politics or whatever - these inalienable rights - like carrying all the time were not part / not "allowed" in some jurisdictions.

Only after reaching "legal ages" and getting "permission papers" as "dictated" by .state is the reason we have the Awareness, or Taking of Personal Responsiblity by folks...something many folks naturally grew up doing.

Sometimes it takes hitting bottom, being a victim, or knowing a victim. Perhaps the .gov "failed" to come to rescue fast enough. Reality hits, Awareness kicks in , and slapping of foreheads..."oh my goodness!"

Brainwash the masses - .gov is gonna take care of them, that the Boogey Man is never gonna hurt you, and if for some strange reason the Boogey Man does show up, use 911 and depend on .gov to save you.

[Sulaco2]

Humm, me thinks that to the each person violently attacked and or killed the "stats" are 100%. :eek:

[sendec]

I'd like a straight cite for those figures as they sound more like the rate for property crime, not violent crime, which is at its lowest point since the early 70's. Violence is still a young person's sport, and will further decline as the population gets collectively older. It is also far more likely that you will be victimized by someone you know, versus as stranger.

Carrying a gun doesnt contribute to safety. Leading a safe lifestyle does, and that may include carrying a gun. Believe it or not, a person can be objectively and subjectively safe without a gun. it just doesnt fit in our collective millieu to believe that. To an extent we feed off of violence, as it serves to rationalize our love of guns. Zombie attacks, anyone?

[Wildalaska]

Believe it or not, a person can be objectively and subjectively safe without a gun

Depenmds on what world one lives in I reckon

WildmyworldissafehowboutyoursAlaska

[PythonGuy]

Pax, that was perfectly put and if all the posts read like that I'm sure no one would even blink at gun ownership. I guess the point I'd like to make is, the person should be wearing the gun, not the gun wearing a person. We should all be such a good example of responsible gun ownership and use as your post shows you are.

[gddyup]

Pax - Right on guy. Keep up the good work!

But, you gotta toss out that crystal ball... they stink!

You need one of these.... :p

http://leciram.altervista.org/blog/magic8ball.jpeg

[Derius_T]

Pax, +1 to post #15. Well said.

And gddyup wrote:

Some don't feel safe unless they are carrying a full-size .45 IWB, a .45 compact on the ankle, a .32 NAA Guardian pocket, a 6" bowie small-of-back, while walking with a 2oz can of Fox OC in hand for getting the mail.

WHAT MAN!? YOU WATCHIN ME CHECK MY MAIL!? :D :D :D

[jcoiii]

Just remember

"It's not paranoia if it happens"



(Of course, two month ago some were called paranoid for having thought out a bug out plan in case of natural disaster)