Concealed carry owner shows restraint

[leopheard 2]

It's funny how this mindset is only reserved for gun owners.

Yeah, what an awful mindset. Wanting to provide an alternate viewpoint including more accurate information rather than opinion.

What a crazy way to be! And the right to self-defence is something I'm acutely aware of where everything from a gun to a spoon is illegal. And if you've ever been to the UK, having no right to bear arms doesn't mean it's a quiet non-violent country.

[Teddy B 17,251]

Yeah, what an awful mindset. Wanting to provide an alternate viewpoint including more accurate information rather than opinion.

What a crazy way to be! And the right to self-defence is something I'm acutely aware of where everything from a gun to a spoon is illegal. And if you've ever been to the UK, having no right to bear arms doesn't mean it's a quiet non-violent country.

You are certainly not the first poster here with this view, we have plenty of gun nutters here and I use that as a term of endearment.

And you are responding to someone who is ex-military in that post, there are plenty of different mindsets here. It's usually a good idea to test the waters a bit before diving in off the high platform.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Teddy B

[Teddy B 17,251]

Oh, and welcome to the forum leopheard!

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Yeah, what an awful mindset. Wanting to provide an alternate viewpoint including more accurate information rather than opinion.

What a crazy way to be! And the right to self-defence is something I'm acutely aware of where everything from a gun to a spoon is illegal. And if you've ever been to the UK, having no right to bear arms doesn't mean it's a quiet non-violent country.

Just thinking that this mindset is used for gun owners when so many people are killed by gun violence. But anyone else and it's like let's get rid of them or kill them.

I've been to Japan, which has no right to bear arms(or it's so hard to get a gun it's not even worth it). Somehow I survived 3 years there. How is that possible? I also grew up in the number one dangerous city in the US without being armed as well. But here I am.

I don't knock folks who want to carry. I just know it's not the end of the world if I don't.

[Boiler 43,397]

Just thinking that this mindset is used for gun owners when so many people are killed by gun violence. But anyone else and it's like let's get rid of them or kill them.

I've been to Japan, which has no right to bear arms(or it's so hard to get a gun it's not even worth it). Somehow I survived 3 years there. How is that possible? I also grew up in the number one dangerous city in the US without being armed as well. But here I am.

I don't knock folks who want to carry. I just know it's not the end of the world if I don't.

I have never carried, nice to know I can.

[leopheard 2]

Well I'm glad you're still around!

Here's a good counter argument I suddenly realised a while back: I studied wing chun for 9 years or so and got quite good at it. Not once did someone say to me "God you're so paranoid and weird! What do you want to do, kill a man with your bare hands or something?".

Wierd huh?

[Teddy B 17,251]

Well I'm glad you're still around!

Here's a good counter argument I suddenly realised a while back: I studied wing chun for 9 years or so and got quite good at it. Not once did someone say to me "God you're so paranoid and weird! What do you want to do, kill a man with your bare hands or something?".

Wierd huh?

How is that a counter argument? Are there many folks skilled in the art of wing chun or any other of the martial arts that go around killing people in public? The students of martial arts are taught to use deadly force only when absolutely necessary. If anything the martial arts are the exact opposite of using a firearm for self defense.

[Merrytooth 5,748]

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I have never carried, nice to know I can.

Me either, except when on AD.

Well I'm glad you're still around!

Here's a good counter argument I suddenly realised a while back: I studied wing chun for 9 years or so and got quite good at it. Not once did someone say to me "God you're so paranoid and weird! What do you want to do, kill a man with your bare hands or something?".

Wierd huh?

I took taekwondo when I was younger and dabbled in Belgian Kickboxing while I was stationed in Mons. Wing Chun? IP man's fighting style? That's a good style to learn, I wish I knew about it before I advanced in age.

There's nothing wrong learning to defend one's self. There's nothing wrong with owning a weapon for the same purpose. It just bugs me that we're so quick to judge many over the actions of a few, but when it comes to guns, this logic isn't applied.

[leopheard 2]

How is that a counter argument? Are there many folks skilled in the art of wing chun or any other of the martial arts that go around killing people in public? The students of martial arts are taught to use deadly force only when absolutely necessary. If anything the martial arts are the exact opposite of using a firearm for self defense.

A counter to show how one sided the anti-gunners are. Why do they criticise the need for a firearm but never someone who is just as deadly with their bare hands?

And no, martial arts are not the exact opposite and you just confirmed what I've been saying. "Only when absolutely necessary". What you have just said is that a martial arts person is very reasoned and would only use it when really necessary, but you have also suggested someone would pull and use a gun when nobody's life is at risk or no risk of serious bodily injury by saying it's the opposite of a MA person?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

A counter to show how one sided the anti-gunners are. Why do they criticise the need for a firearm but never someone who is just as deadly with their bare hands?

And no, martial arts are not the exact opposite and you just confirmed what I've been saying. "Only when absolutely necessary". What you have just said is that a martial arts person is very reasoned and would only use it when really necessary, but you have also suggested someone would pull and use a gun when nobody's life is at risk or no risk of serious bodily injury by saying it's the opposite of a MA person?

Easy. How many massacres are carried out by martial artists? When a person walks into a school, movie theater, mall, or anywhere else and murders 10+ people with nothing but their bare hands, then your argument gains some validity. Heck a kid with a knife tried it some time back and I don't think anyone died from it.

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/westmoreland/2014/04/09/Multiple-stabbings-reported-at-Franklin-Regional-High-School/stories/201404090148

The fact is, guns are weapons that are designed to kill. And folks keep acting like they're harmless, they want to ban everything BUT guns.

[Teddy B 17,251]

A counter to show how one sided the anti-gunners are. Why do they criticise the need for a firearm but never someone who is just as deadly with their bare hands?

And no, martial arts are not the exact opposite and you just confirmed what I've been saying. "Only when absolutely necessary". What you have just said is that a martial arts person is very reasoned and would only use it when really necessary, but you have also suggested someone would pull and use a gun when nobody's life is at risk or no risk of serious bodily injury by saying it's the opposite of a MA person?

The number of people killed in the US every year by firearm is approx 12,000 give or take. How many are killed by people schooled in themartial arts? If you want to pursue this avenue of debate, I would appreciate it if you would first qualify your stance by providing me with the number of kills per year in the US the people schooled in the martial arts are responsible for. Otherwise we might as well argue whether or not the Hamburglar kills more people than Mayor McCheese.

[leopheard 2]

Easy. How many massacres are carried out by martial artists? When a person walks into a school, movie theater, mall, or anywhere else and murders 10+ people with nothing but their bare hands, then your argument gains some validity. Heck a kid with a knife tried it some time back and I don't think anyone died from it.

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/westmoreland/2014/04/09/Multiple-stabbings-reported-at-Franklin-Regional-High-School/stories/201404090148

The fact is, guns are weapons that are designed to kill. And folks keep acting like they're harmless, they want to ban everything BUT guns.

You're talking about the frequency of something making guns bad. I'm on about the double standards of considering one thing more deadly than another.

And yes, school shootings etc. are awful. Here's the problem, they mostly enforce a gun free zone but fail to actually make any efforts to actually make it so. No armed Police or security on the doors, no access control, etc. All a GFZ is basically amounts to a sign which will never stop someone going in. Probably why 96% of massacres are in GFZs. They either need to make them actually physically enforceable or take down the signs and allow people to carry (or have the threat of people carrying). Yes I know the latter will get everyone up in arms but nothing's ever done about it

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

You're talking about the frequency of something making guns bad. I'm on about the double standards of considering one thing more deadly than another.

And yes, school shootings etc. are awful. Here's the problem, they mostly enforce a gun free zone but fail to actually make any efforts to actually make it so. No armed Police or security on the doors, no access control, etc. All a GFZ is basically amounts to a sign which will never stop someone going in. Probably why 96% of massacres are in GFZs. They either need to make them actually physically enforceable or take down the signs and allow people to carry (or have the threat of people carrying). Yes I know the latter will get everyone up in arms but nothing's ever done about it

So you think a well trained marital artist is more deadly than a person with an assault rifle complete with a 100 round drum? Sorry, but when a master of the arts starts slaughtering people in the same vein as a untrained monster with a gun, then we can address that.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/18/us/texas-campsite-killings/index.html

Texas is about the most gun happy state we have and this happened. 6 people killed. Also, remember Chris Kyle? He was killed at a gun range, of all places, where guns are everywhere.

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/eddie-ray-routh-found-guilty-in-death-of-american-snipers-chris-kyle-2015252

I know folks try real hard to justify their reasons to carry, but GFZ's aren't the reason these things happen. Maybe it's access to all that firepower?

[Teddy B 17,251]

You're talking about the frequency of something making guns bad. I'm on about the double standards of considering one thing more deadly than another.

And yes, school shootings etc. are awful. Here's the problem, they mostly enforce a gun free zone but fail to actually make any efforts to actually make it so. No armed Police or security on the doors, no access control, etc. All a GFZ is basically amounts to a sign which will never stop someone going in. Probably why 96% of massacres are in GFZs. They either need to make them actually physically enforceable or take down the signs and allow people to carry (or have the threat of people carrying). Yes I know the latter will get everyone up in arms but nothing's ever done about it

Wouldn't the most important qualifier of how deadly something is be the number of people it kills each year?

People do not have a fear of martial arts because there aren't many people killed by the use of martial arts. It simply isn't a problem, nor is it even close to being a viable comparison to firearms.