An ode to CCW
As I prepare to purchase my first personal defense weapon, I found this story from LawDog: That didn't hurt for long.
I highly encourage you to read all of it. The clencher for me deals with the kindly and helpful nieghbor carrying the Glock 23. The particular weapon I am pursuing at this time (except it being the compensated version).
posted by FlaK @ 05:41
6 Comments:
I understand the concept of protecting oneself with a concealed weapon, but it doesn't mean they should go unpunished or barely punished if they kill someone. In this story, for example, couldn't non-lethal force have been used? Wouldn't one round into the guys leg have been enough to knock him down and disarm him? Then paramedics could have been called and his life spared. Why was it necessary to unload 2 rounds into what I assume is his belly? If anything, I think this is a story against having the right to conceal a weapon. If the owner of the Glock had not had a gun on him he might have been able to take a little bit of time and realize that the offender had a bb gun. As it is, he reacted so quickly and violently that the person was dead before he realized what type of weapon the man was pointing at him. And the writer of the story wasn't at all upset that a person was killed, he and all the people that left comments were upset that the police took away the weapon. The weapon that was just used to take someone's life. I dont know where I stand on this whole conceal and carry thing. I believe a person should have the right to protect themselves but there needs to be more stringent laws about who can own a gun before people should get to carry them concealed. I have seen too many stories of people killing other people, sometimes kids, because they thought they saw a gun only to find out it was a water gun or something. I dont know what the solution to today's crime problem is, but I dont buy the idea that "criminals will be less likely to rob someone if they think that their victim might be carrying a gun". It is my opinion that people that wouldn't normally be criminals will become criminals because they acted without thinking because their emotional state, whether it be fear or anger. I guess my main issue with this isn't whether or not a person conceals a weapon to feel safe and protect themself, it is glorifying those people who carry and kill someone. The man in this story isn't a hero for killing the guy who he saw as a threat to his life. Whether or not he killed the guy in self-defense, he still killed another human being. And that makes him a murderer in my opinion, not a hero.
Nate, you bring up some good points...and I'm actually thinking of making a post. As a quick reply, though, I'll share my opinion. I see a stark difference between killing and murdering. Killing is sometimes nescessary in certain circumstances (times of war, self-defence, capital punishment). Murdering is a sin...and, at least I feel, defined by a warrentless taking of life. In this case, a man threatened another with what appeared to be a weapon. This is all that is needed, in my mind, to move to self-defensive action.
The reason for the attitudes you see here is do to the feeling of responsiblity. Would a "responsible" person have drawn a toy gun, pistol-whipped an individual, then point it and threaten to shoot them. The fact is that this person's actions put them on the "stupid criminal list."
As to the deaths each year attributed to toy guns, we need that personal responsibility. Robbing a bank with a toy gun still is armed robbery...and once again, if a police officer believes his life is in danger, he will take appropriate action. In real life, we don't have the time to hesitate.
Even police officers are supposed to use non-lethal force if at all possible. Thus the invention of non-lethal weapons. I think that should cross over to the general public as well. If you dont feel safe in the world, maybe try one of those guns that shoot out the hard plastic as high speeds. From what I have read those things hurt like a son-of-a-gun. I agree that there is a difference between murder and killing. In war there isnt an option. Of course there are those that believe war is wrong, but I wont get into that. If the general public wants the right to carry a concealed weapon they should have to fulfill some requirements first. They should of course have to fill out an application so the government knows exactly who has one. Then you should have to take some kind of class similar to a defensive driving course to make sure that they will be responsible with the gun. Part of this class should include some kind of shooting test to see how jumpy the person is. After the person passes all of the testing required they should get some kind of card that they must carry on their person when they are carrying their weapon. Police then should have the right to search anyone who gets pulled over for any reason and if they find a concealed weapon on the person and they dont have a card, they should spend 30 days minimum in jail. This would encourage people to take the registration and class seriously. Every 3-5 years the person should have to take a refresher course. If a person really wants to have the right to carry a concealed weapon they should have to prove that they have the personal responsibility to deserve the right. Also, a person could argue that anyone that is a criminal is stupid, especially those that get caught. If "stupid criminals" deserve to get killed (or murdered) why not just have police officers pull out their gun and shoot the person in the head as soon as they get caught robbing someone or dealing drugs or whatever. That would save the country a lot of money in housing these people in jails. And hey, why stop at stupid criminals. Why not expand that to all stupid people. Let's make, " I killed him because he was stupid" a valid defense. I have done a lot of stupid things, so I guess I should have been killed by now. (Just being sarcastic now). This is an interesting debate, we should have debated stuff when we were roommates.
Glad you didnt mention abortion in your list of acceptable reasons for killing. Otherwise I would have had to beat you about the head and face region. :)
My wife would have beaten me very badly if I had included abortion...in the time it took for your to get here, she'd may very well have buried me in the woods :0
Now, as to the discussion, to carry a concealed weapon you must obtain a licence (state level) by attending an 8-hour class, range time (depending on state licence), and a background check. To purchase my handgun, I had to get a permit at the sherrif's office. So, not just anyone can holster up and go. In addition, your status as a CCW-licensed individual goes on your driver's license...and is accessable to any LEO who swipes your card.
As for the the use of non-lethal weapons, they have thier place...but, hurting someone coming after you does not always work. If your assailent is drugged, you may shoot him several times and he won't stop...nevermind just injuring him. There are stories from Iraq of Marines emptying out a 30-round magazine into a single individual (5.56mm rifle rounds), and he still didn't stop (he was heavily drugged). In the end, when life/death decisions must be made, there is never enough time.
As for stupidity, you nor I have ever been "stupid" enough to pretend to pull a weapon on a LEO or some random stranger or otherwise threaten someone's life.
Maybe my view on this would be different if I had gone through bootcamp and been trained about the unfortunate reality of having to take another person's life in order to protect your own and the lives and livelihood of the citizens of our great nation. Perhaps I just havent experienced the reality of needing to protect myself against another human being. If I am ever put into a life threatening experience I am sure my view on this topic may change. But for now, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Hope you never have to kill someone to protect yourself or a loved one. Be careful.
Post a Comment
<< Home