It Does No Good To Have A Permit and NOT Carry

[JohnKSa]

Am I a disgrace to the Second Amendment if I don't?

Absolutely not! It's certainly every permit holder's prerogative NOT to carry and NOT to engage and, IMO, they shouldn't have to answer to anyone for making those decisions.

Does the argument fault them?

IMO, it only faults them if they trumpet the value of permit holders in preventing and mitigating mass shootings all the while knowing that they likely wouldn't have a gun on them or, even if they did, would never do anything about one if they were in the situation themselves.

IMO, if a person won't carry, or they do carry but have made the decision not to interfere in a mass shooting, then they need to be very careful arguing the point that permit holders provide valuable deterrent/mitigation against mass shootings.

I just think that the facts show that the gun community has massively oversold the value of permit holders against mass shootings because too many of us assume that other permit holders are carrying more than we are, or that other permit holders really would engage even though we know we won't. As I said before, it's too easy for someone with half a brain to look at the facts and to realize that although permit holders can theoretically make a difference, reality is that they almost never do--even when the circumstances are such that it's virtually guaranteed that a number of permit holders were on the scene.

Also, I think that too many permit holders have this bizarre idea that they can somehow magically pick the day that they're going to need their gun and that allows them to only carry once in awhile and still have some chance of actually having the gun when they need it. Maybe incidents like this one will start to drive home just how much that strategy doesn't work.

I try to be honest about things, and frankly, after looking at the numbers on the El Paso shooting, if I want to continue being honest, I'm going to have to change my tune about the value of permit holders against mass shootings. The facts show that they only very rarely seem to make a difference, and I think that is becoming obvious to all of us who are willing to look at the facts, and it's also pretty obvious why it's true.

[OldMarksman]

I am one of those people that has a carry permit but chooses not to always carry my weapon

So am I.

I like to practice reasonable and balanced risk management.

When the streets and parking lots are covered with ice, the risk of encountering a violent criminal actor outdoors is probably reduced.

On the other side of the equation, the risk of falling is increased, and the risk of incurring injury from such causing injury is probably higher if one is carrying.

I very rarely carry outdoors when there is slick stuff on the ground.

In February, when I was returning home on foot from across the street, the run-off from melting snow and ice had re-frozen and turned into black ice. I did not see it. I went down. I suffered few scrapes, and I was sore for a couple of days.

In April, I went down a flight of stairs feet first. I suffered excruciating pain, which is finally becoming barely noticeable.

The worst of the injury was caused by the impact of the firearm in an inside waistband holster.

I think OWB carry may have been better.

Risk management.

I really should quit stalling and get a life alert system.

[TunnelRat]

Oftentimes the refrain after a shooting is, "If only someone was carrying." For all we know someone was carrying and chose not to engage due to positioning, time, or frankly will. If someone wants to carry that's fine. To me it's a conscious decision that requires a degree of commitment. I think many get carry permits "just in case". How effective that mentality is in something as potentially overwhelming as a mass shooting remains in question for me.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Ed4032]

Same argument can be made... I only wear my seatbelt when I know I’m going to have an accident.

The first rule of a gun fight is to bring a gun.

[FireForged]

I am no public sentinel.. it may not sound impressive but I do not carry a gun to fight someone else's fight. No matter if I am right, wrong or sideways, I do not have a healthy expectation of coming out of any gun fight unscathed. The potential for suffering injury or substantial civil liability is likely to be high. It will likely cost me plenty even if I do everything right. This is why I reserve armed self defense action for circumstances where myself or my family are in imminent danger and [I] simply must act to preserve my life.


That said, I do have a willingness to step in and help my fellow man but the moons and stars would have to align perfectly and I am rather skeptical of that happening.

[briandg]

When the streets and parking lots are covered with ice, the risk of encountering a violent criminal actor outdoors is probably reduced.

When the tornado went through joplin it wiped about 1/4 of it almost flat. the looters bolted outside even before the rain had stopped and they were tearing through anyplace that they could reach. The police arrived at the intersection of 20th and rangeline, and looters were already tearing through the rubble of a collapsed walgreens store, looking for controlled substances. There are hours of things to talk about.

Nobody set foot outside of the homes during any of the epic ice storms that we have had, despite the easy pickings of collapsed buildings and houses.

[FireForged]

I agree with Brian.. the badguys are nearly always the first to organize.

[briandg]

It was madness. The people from servicemaster were hired to clear the apartment that my kid lived in. They looted the place. dozens of people reported things stolen from the unoccupied (but mostly intact) rooms.

They broke my daughter's jewelry box open and stole everything that looked valuable. a couple of heirloom pieces, even. Then they destroyed what they packed up. a sodden drawing pad, a huge newsprint pad was stuffed into a box of clothing. Her litter box was dumped into a box of books. It took me years to realize that they had a reason for that. Boxes of property were left in the room and any trash they had to take to the dumpster outside. It was easier to pack a box of filthy, we litter in with her possessions than it was to bag it and carry it to the dumpster.

Why a natural disaster should be seen as an opportunity to shred the lives of those affected by it is beyond me.

Once again, that was service master.

[Don Fischer]

Ya know, someone doesn't want to carry, that's their right. Someone get's a carry license and carry's part time, that's their right. I have a carry license and carry 24/7. Doubt I'll ever have to take it out but fact is I did one time, stopped the guy in his tracks! Doubt I'll ever have to take it out again but rest assured if I do, I'll have it with me. I do not have to engage a shooter to help anyone else. Family and friends first. If someone else actually engage's the shooter, once family and friend's are safe I hope I have it in me to fall back and help that guy. He is making a effort to protect his own! Maybe I'm wrong, but that is my right! Have no problem with people that don't choose to carry, that's their right. If you carry part time, that's your right, no guff from me. But the day could come when you wish you had carried that day. At that moment your ship could sink, your choice.

Something else, I do not believe in open carry. Believe it or not there are people that are actually afraid of just the sight of gun's, I have no wish to offend them! My feeling about open carry is it is nothing other than an in your face deal because you can!

[TRX]

I carry all the time, other than when I have business in GFZs like Federal buildings or some state offices. I haven't had business in one of those in several years.

However, if I'm in an area where there's an "active shooter", I'm not going to engage him if there's any way I can withdraw from the area safely. Everyone else made the decision not to carry, or made "poor life choices" that made them ineligible to carry. That's a big "not my problem." They paid their taxes for people to protect them; people who wear uniforms and get paychecks. That's not me, a private citizen. And one that, given the prosecutors in my area, would probably wind up in jail and charged with manslaughter or murder. And most of the people I "saved" would probably be enthusiastically in agreement with that.

So, no. "Be a good witness" like the police informercials say. I'll be sidling out the emergency exit.

You want someone to help, you make at least some effort to help yourself. And don't vote for people who will try to send them to prison if they do.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Don Fischer

Have no problem with people that don't choose to carry, that's their right. If you carry part time, that's your right, no guff from me. But the day could come when you wish you had carried that day. At that moment your ship could sink, your choice.

Something else, I do not believe in open carry. Believe it or not there are people that are actually afraid of just the sight of gun's, I have no wish to offend them! My feeling about open carry is it is nothing other than an in your face deal because you can!

Yup, kinda standard pablum but

"rather have it and not need it and need it and not have it".

If it's a PITA to carry, find a different gun or holster or place or something...

When I see open carry..I think..'the guy could pass the background check but couldn't pass the CCWP check'...it's dumb, IMHO..Open Carry.

BUT personal choice..I carry when I leave the house, always..and most times when at home..

[OhioGuy]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

Absolutely not! It's certainly every permit holder's prerogative NOT to carry and NOT to engage and, IMO, they shouldn't have to answer to anyone for making those decisions.IMO, it only faults them if they trumpet the value of permit holders in preventing and mitigating mass shootings all the while knowing that they likely wouldn't have a gun on them or, even if they did, would never do anything about one if they were in the situation themselves.

IMO, if a person won't carry, or they do carry but have made the decision not to interfere in a mass shooting, then they need to be very careful arguing the point that permit holders provide valuable deterrent/mitigation against mass shootings.

I just think that the facts show that the gun community has massively oversold the value of permit holders against mass shootings because too many of us assume that other permit holders are carrying more than we are, or that other permit holders really would engage even though we know we won't. As I said before, it's too easy for someone with half a brain to look at the facts and to realize that although permit holders can theoretically make a difference, reality is that they almost never do--even when the circumstances are such that it's virtually guaranteed that a number of permit holders were on the scene.

Also, I think that too many permit holders have this bizarre idea that they can somehow magically pick the day that they're going to need their gun and that allows them to only carry once in awhile and still have some chance of actually having the gun when they need it. Maybe incidents like this one will start to drive home just how much that strategy doesn't work.

I try to be honest about things, and frankly, after looking at the numbers on the El Paso shooting, if I want to continue being honest, I'm going to have to change my tune about the value of permit holders against mass shootings. The facts show that they only very rarely seem to make a difference, and I think that is becoming obvious to all of us who are willing to look at the facts, and it's also pretty obvious why it's true.

I agree with all of what you said. And I think the shooting in Dayton (my hometown, sadly) shows another point -- the shooter was clearly not deterred by the threat of armed citizens -- he wasn't deterred by armed police, as he attacked on of the most heavily policed areas in the city -- he also brought body armor along.

If a criminal/terrorist is bent on launching an attack, and all he has is a hoodie and a handgun, he may think differently if he knows other shoppers could be armed. Or, he could get body armor an an AR and up the ante. Unfortunately I think the deterrent value of CCW also diminishes if criminals just take the next step in an arms race. All our petty squabbles and funny memes about 9mm vs .45 vs. 357 look pretty stupid when talking about shooters who wear body armor.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by JohnKSa

I just think that the facts show that the gun community has massively oversold the value of permit holders against mass shootings because too many of us assume that other permit holders are carrying more than we are, or that other permit holders really would engage even though we know we won't. As I said before, it's too easy for someone with half a brain to look at the facts and to realize that although permit holders can theoretically make a difference, reality is that they almost never do--even when the circumstances are such that it's virtually guaranteed that a number of permit holders were on the scene.

True.

I live in a town with a population of a bit more than 10,000 people. I have learned from the State Police that there are slightly more than 450 carry permit holders in my town. (The State Police can tell me how many, but they are not allowed to tell me who they are -- which is a feature, not a bug.) Aside than one friend in town who I know carries almost all the time, I don't know of a single other person in town who carries. I think most of them have the permit to facilitate purchases of guns and ammo.

Of course, "concealed is concealed" and it's possible I have encountered other people in town who were carrying and who effectively maintained concealment. Considering the demographics of this town, I consider that possibility to be extremely unlikely.

Two out of 450 isn't a great ratio. That's less than one-half percent (0.44% if you want to be picky).

Of course, my town also doesn't allow any firearms on any town-owned property, so if there was a fair or a concert on the town green and somebody decided to shoot it up ... if I were there (unlikely) I would be unarmed, because I don't believe in breaking the law.

[Lohman446]

I was in a town (about 1300 people) the other week and at least 4 other people were carrying "concealed" in the gas station / convenience store / eatery I had stopped at. Judging by "prison style" visible tattoos on two of them they were not too concerned with legality. It is a fairly rough area in that spot.

[OhioGuy]

I saw a guy in a local grocery store the other day wearing an NRA hat, a "God, Guns & Trump" shirt and pistol openly carried on his hip.

I'm grateful knowing that if something ever goes down, he'll draw fire while I have time to escape.

[manta49]

Its down to individual choice, i could carry a firearm but choose not to.

[Flicks]

I understand the sentiment, but in the end people are going to end up doing them. Just wish them the best TBH.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by manta49

Its down to individual choice, i could carry a firearm but choose not to.

How did you obtain a personal protection permit? My understanding is that those are only issued if the is a "verifiable specific risk" to the life of an individual.

[manta49]

Originally Posted by manta49
Its down to individual choice, i could carry a firearm but choose not to.
How did you obtain a personal protection permit? My understanding is that those are only issued if the is a "verifiable specific risk" to the life of an individual.

Correct, or x or serving police officers, prison officers, army, and a individuals job that could put them at risk. That could be cleaner etc or anyone that supplies or works for the security forces.

PSNI. Summary
(a) For the purposes of this Policy an applicant for a PPW will be deemed to have ‘good
reason’ if it is established that:
(b) There is a specific threat against the individual which creates a real and immediate risk
verified by a specialist police report; or
(c) In exceptional circumstances, a verifiable level of risk is established by other
information and
(d) The possession of a firearm is a reasonable, proportionate and necessary measure to
protect the life of the applicant.
(e) In addition to satisfying good reason primacy exists in the decision-making process to
the requirements of Article 5(2) (a) of the Order in that the applicant must be
considered a fit person to be entrusted with a firearm.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by manta49

Correct, or x or serving police officers, prison officers, army, and a individuals job that could put them at risk. That could be cleaner etc or anyone that supplies or works for the security forces.

You didn't answer the question: How do you qualify to carry a firearm if you should choose to do so?

[manta49]

You didn't answer the question: How do you qualify to carry a firearm if you should choose to do so?

Because of my current and previous employment.

[MTT TL]

I don't care if you carry or not. Your business is your business. There are a lot of reasons to have a carry permit and not carry all the time. However; if you are going to carry Walmart is absolutely the place to do it. Walmart tends to be the center of the plurality of crime in most towns and small cities.

On thefts Walmart is going to be the most stolen from location with losses in to the millions at each location. On drugs Walmart typically serves as a meet up location in the parking lots and bathrooms for delivery drivers and customers. Practically every drug addict in most towns steals from Walmart to help fund their habit. Vehicle burglaries and car thefts are extremely common. Car jackings are not at all unusual. Domestic violence is a daily occurrence in parking lots and the store. In short all the criminals go there, partly because Walmart is open all the time and partly because it is easier to steal and hide in a crowd. To top it off Walmart security is focused only on loss prevention and nothing to do with the security of their stores or providing a safe environment for their customers.

So if you go armed anywhere, Walmart is the place.

[Mannlicher]

If I leave the house, I have at least a J frame in my pocket. Been doing that for the past 50+ years.

[bamaranger]

One cannot predict when and where a violent assault may occur. I think it's important that an individual with a carry permit to get past the "it can't happen to me" mentality, or "I won't really need it" and start thinking more along the lines of my first sentence. An LEO with the "won't happen to me" mentality needs to find another line of work.

That is not paranoia, it is simply the truth. If we could predict a threat, heck, as a citizen, just don't go, send the SWAT team, call the cops, ....etc. Accepting that there well could be an attack against you is one less mental hurdle you must overcome when it happens......you are not (as ) surprised. You will have your firearm with you when you desperately need it.

I do not want my last thought to be, ....if I only had my gun.

[Tactical Jackalope]

I can't not have it on me. The only two times it is off of me is when I'm asleep, nude, or in the bathroom. And in those instances, it's literally within arms reach.

Now the other instances when it's not on me I simply am not in charge (unfortunately) of these events. If I am flying or in a venue where I have to walk through a metal detector or even worse, pat-downs. Or if I am visiting NYC/Jersey. Where printing would out me and it'd be a felony because I don't have reciprocity. Which is sad.

Also when I go to South America and have to rely on my Benchmade 810 Contego, Leatherman Wave, and Surefire E1D Defender. I also have a SOFF-TQ and Combat Gauze. I was able to carry a Glock 26 breifly, but..Ah well.

Anyway, ABCs...Always. Be. Carrying.