In other gun threads around here we have been told (by gun owners) that it is laughable to assume a police officer has any decent training with their guns. They even provided anecdotes where police, right in front of them, displayed remarkable ignorance of guns.
I would presume a police officer goes through at least as rigorous a check as a CCW holder in the process of becoming a police officer (if not that is truly messed up).
If that is true then why should anyone assume possession of a CCW permit by default makes the person responsible and knowledgeable of the weapon?
Why? In either case you’re keeping a tool that can solve a potentially damaging and dangerous situation that’s quite unlikely to happen, and if the situation never arises - no harm done, there’s not a significant cost to keeping the tool around if it’s needed.
There was that one time I accidentally discharged a fire extinguisher and killed a guy. And that other time I thought there was a big fire, but it was just something burning in the oven, and I used my fire extinguisher and killed a guy. And how can I forget that YouTube video with the fire marshal demonstrating fire extinguisher safety, and blowing his toe off… funny stuff!
You got me there. At least 94% of people with concealed carry permits end up killing someone.
And his argument - well, not really an argument so much as a baseless insult - was that people who had guns were cowards, they must always be trembling in fear to need a gun. Well, people who have fire extinguishers must be cowards who are constantly trembling in fear at the thought of a potential fire.
I never understood this argument from many pro-gun advocates, a gun is unlike any other tool, and its disingenuous to say it is a tool like any other. That’s why it is classified as a weapon. Thats why I need to have a ccw (concealed carry WEAPON) license to carry one. Thats why I can’t open carry one down the middle of the street. I don’t need a ccw to carry a fire extinguisher, and if I wanted I could pack one on my back everywhere I went. That said, it is every American’s right to own a gun (a weapon of self-defense).
You clearly need training on how to safely operate one. The stunningly vast majority of us who own one, and handle it in an ethical and responsible manner, would never do something as stupidly unsafe as you’re suggesting.
As you should. The whole thread got ridiculous on page 1 when the insults and absurd comparisons began.
Here’s how I feel about this:
If you don’t want someone carrying a weapon legally in your house, it is indeed your right.
If that is the case, it is nothing to ask that weapons not be carried in your house.
The person who is carrying the weapon should mention discreetly that they have one to the owner and should abide by the owner’s decision.
There is nothing else to talk about, really. everything else is rationalization.
This is a social consideration more than anything else. While I don’t understand the depth of hatred here, I am certainly not averse to accepting the rules of the home, as it were, bearing in mind that the rules of my home are different than yours and you do not have the right to impose upon me in my own home that which you would not allow in yours. I simply wonder why there is so much distrust and mischaracterization when these discussions begin. It really is a shame.
Put a real number there, .0001%, how’s that? It’s still about a Brazillian times more likely that someone will be killed by an accidental/deliberate discharge of a pistol than the discharge of a fire extinguisher.
At any rate, even though I do have fire extinguishers in my home, I am capable of walking the mean streets of Montclair without one.
It is, strictly speaking, a tool. It is used under certain circumstances and for a single purpose, just as you would not use a jackhammer to drive a nail. As far as licensing goes, there are other things that you would not characterize as a weapon that require licensing or other governmental permission, guns are hardly singular in that regard.
As far as I know, a gun is classified as a weapon in the state of Texas. I don’t think trying to argue that it is a tool will change the mind of the anti-gun crowd, or make it seem like it is any less dangerous to them. On the contrary I believe that we should treat guns quite seriously as weapons, and take gun safety seriously as well. I think when people see that you do take it seriously, it will make them feel more at ease about you owning one.
This would be relevant if I was making an analogy as to the danger of accidental use of either device.
Dio seems to be saying that all gun owners are cowards. That the only reason you’d want to carry a gun is because you’re so terrified of everything that you want to hold a gun like a magical talisman/substitute penis so you feel like a man. It’s the people who are willing to give up responsibility for their own safety and entrust it to the government that are the real men, clearly!
He’s saying that the very fact that you have a tool that can be used to solve a certain dangerous situation means that you live in utter terror of that situation.
Is that not ridiculous?
So if carrying a gun means you are desperately afraid of being the victim of violence, quaking in cowardly terror so much that you won’t leave your house without a gun, is it not analogous that someone who owns a fire extinguisher is terrified of fire?
Both of those statements are stupid. But they’re analogous.
Really, he’s now saying that anyone who carries a gun is a brooding psychopath who constantly shakes in terror … and he’s saying that I’m the one who has the arguments that are self-evidently ridiculous.
When I refer to a gun as a tool, I don’t mean to say that I don’t treat it with respect. I’m very concious of gun safety. I say it’s a tool in the sense that it’s something available to me that can potentially help me solve a situation. It has no mind of its own, no inherent good or evil to it, but it’s simply a device that becomes an extension of my will.
This is my stance too. Assuming we’re talking about a mere acquaintance and not a close friend, the only problem I see is that for many people the idea that one of their guests might be carrying a gun is so far out of their realm of thinking that Number 2 just won’t happen. If they find out later that so-and-so had a gun, I can see how they might feel surprised or even a little violated. Thus, number 3 should be the default. If someone is strongly against guns, then they should have a sign up or make an announcement or something. But, there are a great number of people who probably never even thought about it until they find out later.
Some people don’t want guns in their house. It is a hot enough topic and invokes strong enough feelings that I think it’s rude for someone attending a party at another person’s home not to ask. Getting back to the OP, it’s unethical to do something that has a high probability of being viewed as rude despite knowing that you may not be found out.
In my state one must pass a criminal background check, a 100 question exam, and annual firearms competency and accuracy tests. If they do all that and the local Sheriff deems them worthy, that is good enough for me. It doesn’t make them an expert or anything but I know that they don’t have a criminal past and have something between their ears besides rocks. It does not make them any more or less proficient than a cop with the same amount of training would be.
Frankly yes, most CCW’ers that I know have much more training and range time annually than the cops that I know. FWIW
That’s silly, if you’re going to do a comparison, make the situations comparable. A person who owns a gun is analogous to someone who owns a fire extinguisher. A person who carries a gun everywhere he goes is analogous to someone who carries a fire extinguisher everywhere he goes. A person who takes a gun to a dinner party is analogous to a person who takes a fire extinguisher to a dinner party.
BTW, you can have MY extinguisher when you pry it from my brown and crispy hands.
Yes, I am sure that you do, pretty sure that most the gun advocates on this board do also, and I didn’t meant to suggest that you didn’t. I agree that all weapons are tools, however all tools are not weapons (by design anyway). I just don’t believe it helps us to compare hammers and guns.
