Should I carry a gun

imported post

Whenever I'm asked about info for buying/carrying a gun, I ask the person my first question... CAN YOU KILL SOMEONE....and live with it? I must admit first response is about 50, 50. The ones who say they could not do it and have a clear mind, I tell them they shouldn't carry a gun.If they think just having it will be a deterent and make them safe, maybe so. But what about theONE time they will have to choose, kill the attacker or be assaulted because you couldn't pull the trigger.With your decision to carry a gun you must have answered this question yourself. Along with it comes the realization and responsibility of possibly taking a life.

Myself, I have shot at people and been shot. Believe me, it's not fun and....YOU WILL REMEMBER IT! So consider your descision carefuly.

imported post

I don't carry (except for the few times I OC) since I can't get my CHP for another two years, but I would have no problem defending myself. If the attacker dies in the process, so be it. It's either my life or theirs, and I know I didn't do anything wrong, so I choose for ME to live.

imported post

Live with it , yes you have to go on, giveyou nightmares, probably for a very long time, I would always be questioning myself it's in my nature to wonder if I could have done something differently.

Now add to the mix that your shooting a BG saved some one (s) life, now that is a totally different situation, saving a life gives one a sense of accomplishment that has to be experienced to properly understand, (BTDT) believe me the High that you feel when you save a life or life's will outweigh any guilt you may feel for taking one.

Now I am not going to go into the psychology behind fact that the BG you killed likely had a criminal record of abuse, rape, assault, robbery, drugs, and probably murder, may help you cope later.

imported post

I'm glad you have resolved the question for yourself. You make the point of having to justify use of deadly force. When challenged about having to kill someone, I relate the story I seen in (I think) the Det. Free Press. If I remember right (????) there was an elderly lady at a ATM machine. A guy approached her and demanded her to withdraw money for him. As she related to the press, she acted confused and scared. She stated she had to get the PIN no. out of her purse 'cause she never could remember it. Instead she pulled out a .38 revolver and put it against the guys forehead and pulled the trigger. From the still photos you could see the back of the skimask bulge where his brain started to leave home.

I justify her actions as such..... He'll never do it again! And I relate all scenario's in just that way. Make a mistake with a person carrying a gun and it may be your last

I forgot to ask, does anyone here in Mich remember this story?

imported post

I agree with that question, Warchild. It is one I either ask, or a matter I comment on when talking to people who are considering carrying for self-defense or getting a gun specifically for home defense although I phrase it differently. I ask or say, "You need to be mentally prepared to pull the trigger and shoot another human being if you are going to have and keep a firearm expressly for home defense or self-defense carry." Since private citizens only kill the BGs in about 1% of situations, I don't bring up killing anyone.

imported post

deepdiver wrote:

I agree with that question, Warchild. It is one I either ask, or a matter I comment on when talking to people who are considering carrying for self-defense or getting a gun specifically for home defense although I phrase it differently. I ask or say, "You need to be mentally prepared to pull the trigger and shoot another human being if you are going to have and keep a firearm expressly for home defense or self-defense carry." Since private citizens only kill the BGs in about 1% of situations, I don't bring up killing anyone.

Click to expand...

That is absolutely correct. And when discussing home defense, always use the term "stop the threat" never "Kill the BG". My wife and I both know that we will do whatever is necessary to stop the threat. If the BG does not survive our attempt to "stop the threat" then that's his problem. However, if you tell the police "I shot to kill", then here in California there is a good chance of 2nd degree murder charges. Saying that you "shot to kill" shows intent to kill, "stopping the threat" only shows that you were trying to stop the BG, not necessarily kill the BG.

imported post

I totally agree with what you are saying. I don't specificly cite home defense. That's why I related the story in the way I did. No, never admit the intent to kill, no matter what the circumstance or loacation. Me, if the occasion arises, and I have drawn my pistol, I have already made up my mind to killthat person, period! I remenber what an FBI agent (not that THAT carries any clout) told me. If you're the only one alive, there's but one version of the incident to listen to. So, I have told my family, should the occasion ever arise, DONT STOP SHOOTING, TILL THE GUN DOES....

imported post

It would be a wrenching desicion to be sure, my biggest worry is not that I would kill someone, but will the DA not press charges? What if they do? Or what about civil matters like the dead guys family suing me? THAT worries me far more than the prospect of having tokill some bad guy criminal that was intending some form of harm on me.

I would not feel guilty at all however if I stopped some crazed guy intent on mass murder in some public place. Sincemost of them tend to be well armed and possessing hundreds of rounds on them, their original intent would be clear to any investigators, and it would be clear thatI did right, stopping what could have turned into a huge horrible event.

imported post

Your concerns are valid. Here in Mich. we are some what supported by the Castle Doctrine, which is posted on this site on the Mich page. I don't even want to try and explain it all. Look at it and see if there is something similar in Maryland. It's worth checking out.

imported post

I have been told we have a castle doctrine pertaining to ones place of residence or if you own a business, then one can shoot without first retreating both inside and on the curtilage outside.However this is an old colonial era type law, and likley does not protect against civil litigation. Yes I have read of cases in recent years of someone shooting a burglar/home invader and not being charged, but I do not get to hear if there was a civil case or not. Our local news people are ineptand do not report properly on much of anything local, and are not good on followups at all. They tend to focus more on drug dealers killing eachother anyway.

imported post

The Michigan version of castle lawprotects you where ever you have a legal right to be.

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

deepdiver wrote:

I agree with that question, Warchild. It is one I either ask, or a matter I comment on when talking to people who are considering carrying for self-defense or getting a gun specifically for home defense although I phrase it differently. I ask or say, "You need to be mentally prepared to pull the trigger and shoot another human being if you are going to have and keep a firearm expressly for home defense or self-defense carry." Since private citizens only kill the BGs in about 1% of situations, I don't bring up killing anyone.

Click to expand...

That is absolutely correct. And when discussing home defense, always use the term "stop the threat" never "Kill the BG". My wife and I both know that we will do whatever is necessary to stop the threat. If the BG does not survive our attempt to "stop the threat" then that's his problem. However, if you tell the police "I shot to kill", then here in California there is a good chance of 2nd degree murder charges. Saying that you "shot to kill" shows intent to kill, "stopping the threat" only shows that you were trying to stop the BG, not necessarily kill the BG.

Click to expand...

I think you've hit on the bigger issue here. Shooting to kill versus shooting to end a threat.

I've spoken at length about this already, but once the a threat is stopped, I can't see the moral/ethical justification for continuing to use deadly force just to kill.

Maybe that plays into the mentality. I can imagine it's more difficult to pull the trigger if you condition yourself to kill rather than to shoot to stop a threat.

imported post

I also agree with attempting to stop the threat first, with most people. Myself, I'm far from ordinary. I have personaly been aquainted with 2 people who shot to stop a threat. Both were sued in civil court and lost! Both bad guys lived, but charged the use of deadly force was not warranted and they should be compensated.This was back in 1971 and1973 and I have not seen our legal system change, except for the worse, as far as victim's rights. In my opinion, there is no JUSTICE in our legal system and that's why I call it such. Criminal Law, is just that, ways to protect the criminal. But that's a political debate in itself. With these experiences and others I have read about, are why I have always taught my family to shoot to kill for their own safety and protection. Many people will disagree with me on this and that is okay by me. My experiences are what I have based my opinions on. So if the occasion arises where I have to draw my gun and just the sight of it doesn't send the BG on a dead run, then that's he's going to be, DEAD--- I won't shoot to wound and have the SOB sue me later. But that's just my opinion.

imported post

Here is something from LACarry.org, on our CHP page:





Here is an excerpt from an article by Dave Spaulding that appeared in Guns & Ammo Magazine

Concealed Carry Basics- Expert advice on one of the most important decisions you'll ever make.

"The decision to carry a weapon concealed should not be taken lightly. For some, such as law enforcement officers or members of certain military units, carrying a covert handgun is just part of the job. But for the legally armed citizen, it is a choice that should be made only after careful consideration.

Carrying a firearm on one's person is a lifestyle commitment. I have no idea how many times I have heard a person who has applied for their concealed carry permit say: "Oh, I won't actually shoot anybody. I just want to have the gun to scare them away." This person has made a huge mistake. Criminals see you as a means to an end, not as a human being with feelings and family. They will hurt or kill you in less time than it just took you to read this paragraph.

The fact is, a handgun fight is quick, close, pandemonium-filled and bloody, and anyone who is considering carrying a handgun for such purposes must ask himself if he is up to the task of close-quarters combat. If not, then the gun will likely be used against him when he draws it to try to scare away an attacker. Over the last 30 years (seven of which were spent working in the county jail), I have spoken with my share of criminals, and the one thing I can assure you is that they are not afraid of guns but are afraid of the willing person with a gun. And trust me--they know the difference between the willing and those who posture."

Excellent thoughts, Dave!

imported post

WARCHILD: Many things have changed in a lot of states, although I don't know if Michigan is on board. MO, for one example, passed a Castle Doctrine law last year that bars lawsuits against citizens using deadly force for defense if the force is deemed justified by the justice system, ie no charges are brought by authorities or the citizen is found not guilty of such charges by a court and it eliminates any obligation to retreat. In other words, the core of the law says 1) you have no obligation to retreat from a threat and 2) if you use force to end a threat the BG, his representative or his relatives are barred from suing you for any injury or damages to the BG. We were thrilled as the law goes far beyond some other Castle Doctrine statutes that only provide self-defense as an affirmative defense to a civil suit from a BG or his family over injuries suffered by the BG during commission of a crime.

A lot of places have a long way to go on these issues. Especially the west coast and the northeast where the criminals still appear to have more rights than the law abiding citizen. However, many states, and many people, especially in the south and mid-south, have reached their limits and there the pendulum is swinging back towards common sense and the recognition that it is the BG who gives up rights and civil liberties when committing the crime rather than the victim.

LC: I like that excerpt. It states the issue quite well.

imported post

DEEPDIVER: Mich, also has a Castle Doctrine and compared to the old days is quite broad in protecting your rights to defend yourself and family. Yes, people have finally had enough and views are swinging the other way. People are tired of being victims of crimes. I'm not saying it is impossible to stop the threat, only that my choice is to eliminate it from the start. Since Mich has passed the oc/cc laws, I know of 3 cases where shots were fired and the attacker was killed. In the one case, it was a pizza delivery man, he was hit in the head with a wrench by 3 BG's, he got off two shots, killing one and sending the other two running. This was on a friday night near downtown Flint. He went to the greybar hotel (jail) till monday, in supposed protective custody whilethey looked for the other two. It was also learned he was attacked in 1972 while delivering and shot that attacker also, who happened to live. Grant you no charges were ever filed, but as the innocent victim, why should you even be taken to jail, much less spend three days in protective custody. I think he just proved he could protect himself quite well. The laws and views are changing but untill it becomes more of an acceptance to protect yourself, I think I will stand by my choice for now. Jerry

imported post

WARCHILD wrote:

Whenever I'm asked about info for buying/carrying a gun, I ask the person my first question... CAN YOU KILL SOMEONE....and live with it? I must admit first response is about 50, 50. The ones who say they could not do it and have a clear mind, I tell them they shouldn't carry a gun.If they think just having it will be a deterent and make them safe, maybe so. But what about theONE time they will have to choose, kill the attacker or be assaulted because you couldn't pull the trigger.With your decision to carry a gun you must have answered this question yourself. Along with it comes the realization and responsibility of possibly taking a life.

Myself, I have shot at people and been shot. Believe me, it's not fun and....YOU WILL REMEMBER IT! So consider your descision carefuly.

Click to expand...

My answer.. YES!

I shoot once a week and the wife does too. We train that if... in our mind we need to draw.. we are going to be shooting! I do not want to shoot someone nor kill them.

But if they are going to be causing serious harm to either of us this just cannot be! We will stop them and will shoot without hesitation.

We do not bother anyone so we expect for nobody to try to cause us any harm. Those that do... are doing so for their own reasons and we do not deserve it.

I used to have dreams I could not pull the trigger no matter how hard I tried. But now I have dreams that I can easily do it when necessary.

I think that was my conscience telling me.. "I trust that you have achieved the knowledge and experience to know when to shoot and will let you."

imported post

Leo 229: THANK YOU! I was beggining to wonder if I was the only one who had this mindset, or if I was coming off as 'shoot to kill no matter the cost" mentality. My decision was made many moons ago when I had brown hair. I found I could shoot to kill, even though the old S&W discharged and a bad casing caused chamber explosion, the shot hurt no one. In return I recieved a .32spcl in the left thigh. My first thought was "What the f**k am I doing here". Thus ended my biker days! So I "DO NOT" consider the fact of taking a life neither trivial or the only way out, but I do know now as then, I can do it without after thought or concern for the attacker. All given to each scenario that may happen. Myself, I was shot after it was seen I no longer proposed any threat. The only good thing about it, he was a lousy shot, and I regret not having a better quality gun at the time. Jerry

imported post

WARCHILD wrote:

I totally agree with what you are saying. I don't specificly cite home defense. That's why I related the story in the way I did. No, never admit the intent to kill, no matter what the circumstance or loacation. Me, if the occasion arises, and I have drawn my pistol, I have already made up my mind to killthat person, period! I remenber what an FBI agent (not that THAT carries any clout) told me. If you're the only one alive, there's but one version of the incident to listen to. So, I have told my family, should the occasion ever arise, DONT STOP SHOOTING, TILL THE GUN DOES....

Click to expand...

If you ever do have to draw and shoot someone, and If the homocide detective who invariably investigates the incident is a bulldog, he may search your computer records and come across the bold staement above.

That could in reality be used to show that you had an intent to kill if ever in a situation where you needed to "stop a threat". I hope that I have never typed words of that effect, should a threat stopping shooting incident turn fatal.

imported post

Decoligny: What you say is definately true and I have accepted this years ago when I learned, in this country you have ALWAYS been guilty till proven or paid for your innocence. But I have also said, I'm not looking to KILL anybody, but if the situation arises that if the sight of a gun doesn't stop the attacker, the bullet hopefuly will. The only point to the begining of this whole thread, was to answer questions of those who have doubts or questions about carrying a gun. I made my choice.

It's the first question they have to ask themselvesBEFORE they take on the responsibility of carrying that weapon.

You do make a valid point and I am, and was aware of what I type. I thank you for pointing it out to me and those who may not have realized it.

Jerry