I had no option back then but to push the gun out of my face and into a wall which broke the persons hand. However his buddies ended up putting me in the hospital for a couple of weeks.
This is NOT how you initially described it!
You are starting to sound like a certain swine-fellow.
I have been aware since then and a weapon being carried at ready is a hazard to all around.
Do you understand, "Carried at the ready?".
No. You really don't. If you DO, then you clearly misperceived what Leonard actually DID.
He is carrying the firearm in the hand. He is not brandishing it:
bran·dish (br
n
d
sh)
tr.v. bran·dished,
bran·dish·ing,
bran·dish·es 1. To wave or flourish (a weapon, for example) menacingly.
2. To display ostentatiously. See Synonyms at
flourish.
n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish.
THIS, is not a brandish:
Neither is what Leonard did while
carrying the AK.
Yet you would shoot him, as you have stated many times.
You being in Washington I am sure you took the Carry class in the state of Tennessee and are aware of the local laws I carry where I am permitted to carry and ignore the Blue Laws that were meant for another time.
Ah yes! The old, "You don't live here so you don't know" argument.
Newsflash! This just in!
Apparently, the law, is the LAW. Slipping by in cities that specify you must carry the Army or Navy Colt Revolver in hand with a gun on your hip makes you a criminal. "Blue Laws" or not.
So thanks for admitting that you break the law, and you don't even care when you do it.
I have never attempted to lasso a fish though but that would be the same as snaring and that is unsportsmanlike.
If the law prohibits you from lassoing a fish, then please don't. That would make you a criminal.
If the law allows for you to attempt to lasso a fish, then lasso to your hearts desire. May no law enforcement officers give you grief for abiding by the law.
A person who approaches you with a weapon drawn or at ready puts you in a life or death situation.
I love hearing advice from tactically unsound minds.
A weapon drawn is not a threat. This stupidity will get you killed. What if the guy is drawing his firearm because he sees a guy with an ice pick walking up behind you ready to shank you in the neck, and you draw and blow this guy away?
Acceptable friendly fire as you die in a pool of your own blood by being stabbed by icepick, right?
A weapon at the ready I would agree with. Again ,your situational awareness and tactical prowess should enable you to avoid these scenarios.
You have less than a second to respond to the threat.
Wrong.
You have less than a second to make a decision, and evaluate. Unfortunately, you may end up dead if you hesitate. Also as unfortunate, is seeing someone walking towards you "at the ready" and creating a bunghole in their head and learning they were actually trying to protect you, or your loved one.
This all goes back to good situational awareness and tactical response.
You seem very trigger happy to me.
Placing your hand on your weapon is a provocative move so it requires you to follow through and face the consequences because you are probably also protecting a loved one who is walking with you.
Again, you need significant training. I would not trust being around you.
Please apply to tactical schools immediately.
Back to the Wild West. You seem to lack an understanding of history and commerce. The wagon trains hired a guide to lead them to the west and that was a business situation as they also hired guards to protect them but that would have also been business.
You play too much "Oregon Trail".
Private individuals comprised the entirety of the wagon parties in most cases. Not all were accompanied by dedicated trackers. Often agreements were made as to who would do what role, and a compromise would be reached.
This makes it no more a business, than me selling my car to a neighbor makes me a car salesman.
Did you know it was not uncommon for wagon trains to separate over vast distances?
Did you not know that in these situations it was solely up to the frontiersman and women to fend for themselves?
Individuals who could afford weapons carried them for protection but it was primarily rifles that could be used for hunting rather than handguns that are designed to kill people.
Thanks for substantiating heavily, one of my primary points. However, the statement that handguns are "designed to kill people" is completely incorrect.
Handguns are meant as a defensive measure. It does not matter whether the target is animal, or human. You can even eat an animal.
I'd imagine a Peacemaker would make a great tool to quickly dispatch of a stock cattle, were the almighty sledgehammer to come up missing or lost.
I don't know where some of you come up with the "Designed to kill people" bit.
Keep in mind there were several rounds used in rifles to hunt back then that are significantly less powerful than modern handguns. Some modern handguns are nearly as accurate too.
As I stated before I have no problem with people carrying weapons in a non threatening manner.
Like on the back, pointed straight down and no other direction in the hand, or resting on ones chest with no hands near the firearm?
I also believe that the more law abiding people that carry weapons the lower the crime rate will be.
So long as they are strictly regulated "weapons" of your stringent choosing and analysis.
Yes?
That being said I also think with the current unrest within our society it has become necessary to obtain permits to carry weapons just as a means to review a persons legal status to carry.
And this is perfectly acceptable to you?
As far as reverting back to the old west mentality. I think there are to many myths about the old west to know what really happened during those times.
Then you are watching too many westerns.
Here is a good start:
http://www.wildwesthistory.org/