• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open Carry VS Concealed Carry Why?

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
I see many people have still failed to completely read my post. I, at no time, indicated I am against OCing. I am just trying to create a dicussion between the differences of OC and CC. If you cant handle that coversation, the internet is not a place for you and please grow up.
If you don't like the ensuing conversation that follows your words, it is time to review your delivery.

QlivinLEO said:
To all the people that say, "You can put all these 'What If' events for everything". Sure they are what if events that may or may not have taken place. Nobody had ran a plane into the world trade center 10 years ago either. If only we "what if'd that". I perfer to try to think of what a criminal might do and PREVENT it rather than picking up the pieces later.
Good for you. That is WHY people say "don't talk to cops." But, they don't need to "think of what a cop might do and prevent it." They have but to look to the existing examples where it actually happens and KNOW that the best response is to keep the yapper shut. If you don't like that, change it. If you don't like hearing about it, don't tell us to do the opposite of what is common sense.
QilvinLEO said:
To those who say, "The criminal didn't F with me cause I was carrying and decided to go attack another". I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude. Personally, If I can do anything to help prevent bad things happening to other people, I am going to do it. Not just hope they go do it to somebody else.
So you would advocate a vigilante law where we can pass the death sentence for attempted crime? Interesting.
QilvinLEO said:
To the poster that said "QilvinLEO is an executioner" blah blah blah

If I, God Forbide, have a reason to draw and fire my firearm, I fired that pistol to immedatily stop a criminal from ending my own or somebody elses life. If that invovles the death of the criminal, so be it. Always aim center mass. Your not John Wayne. Stop thinking you can shoot a gun out of somebodies hand. This isnt HollyWood.
Your word in this forum hopefully will NEVER be used against you in a civil action, or a criminal action. But, if the worst happens, the mother/daughter/son etc of the guy in the body bag may cherish those words all the way to the bank.
 

For Pete's Sake!

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
42
Location
USA
I see many people have still failed to completely read my post. I, at no time, indicated I am against OCing. I am just trying to create a dicussion between the differences of OC and CC. If you cant handle that coversation, the internet is not a place for you and please grow up.


To all the people that say, "You can put all these 'What If' events for everything". Sure they are what if events that may or may not have taken place. Nobody had ran a plane into the world trade center 10 years ago either. If only we "what if'd that". I perfer to try to think of what a criminal might do and PREVENT it rather than picking up the pieces later.

To those who say, "The criminal didn't F with me cause I was carrying and decided to go attack another". I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude. Personally, If I can do anything to help prevent bad things happening to other people, I am going to do it. Not just hope they go do it to somebody else.

To the poster that said "QilvinLEO is an executioner" blah blah blah

If I, God Forbide, have a reason to draw and fire my firearm, I fired that pistol to immedatily stop a criminal from ending my own or somebody elses life. If that invovles the death of the criminal, so be it. Always aim center mass. Your not John Wayne. Stop thinking you can shoot a gun out of somebodies hand. This isnt HollyWood.



I thought I did a pretty good job responding to your request. I was civil, I stated my opinions with reasoning, and I did not refer to "cause its my right" at all. I did list 5 thoughtful reasons for OC and didn't get a response. Where's the "dialogue"?
 

ElectricianLU58

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
228
Location
Warren, Michigan, USA
To those who say, "The criminal didn't F with me cause I was carrying and decided to go attack another". I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude. Personally, If I can do anything to help prevent bad things happening to other people, I am going to do it. Not just hope they go do it to somebody else..

just what, exactly, are you promoting here, officer? i have no desire nor legal rights to protect "other people". all i can do is protect myself and my family. i do not want "bad things happening to other people", but bad things happen every day. i have big dogs, security, defensive handguns and situational awareness. if seeing a gun on my hip deters a criminal from hurting my family, and some other family is hurt instead... well, at least my family did not get hurt. my family is my only concern.

i am not John Wayne or Chuck Norris. i think that, maybe, you think you are.

as far as your statement: "I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude."... i think you are just plain arrogant. you are the kind of cop that makes cops look bad. you made your points (note: i do not care what some arrogant, narrow-minded pinhead cop thinks is tactically better. cite some statistics, and show how it is better, or shut up). now just do your job. open carry is legal and it is a good thing, accept it and move on.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
It seems to me that you are more concerned with trying to trap me into something I said instead of having a meaningful conversation. Please FULLY read my post before attemping to bash me again. THANKS.
Rather annoying isn't it, now just imagine someone with a gun and badge doing it.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
My answers to QilvinLEO are in red with additional comments below the quote:

I see many people have still failed to completely read my post. I, at no time, indicated I am against OCing. I am just trying to create a dicussion between the differences of OC and CC. If you cant handle that coversation, the internet is not a place for you and please grow up.

Reid vs. State, 1840, Alabama Supreme Court: (paraphrased) This decision characterizes CC as an "evil practice" and offensive in nature. It also characterizes OC as defensive in nature. Those, to me, are the major differences. Add to that the premise that OC is the God (or deity of your choice) given right to self-defense/RKBA that all of us have. CC is a state-permitted privilege.


To all the people that say, "You can put all these 'What If' events for everything". Sure they are what if events that may or may not have taken place. Nobody had ran a plane into the world trade center 10 years ago either. If only we "what if'd that". I perfer to try to think of what a criminal might do and PREVENT it rather than picking up the pieces later.

Precisely why we open carry. To prevent a criminal targeting us or our loved ones.

To those who say, "The criminal didn't F with me cause I was carrying and decided to go attack another". I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude. Personally, If I can do anything to help prevent bad things happening to other people, I am going to do it. Not just hope they go do it to somebody else.

Very easily. I have no, repeat NO, duty to protect anyone but myself and my family. Should I be able to prevent something bad happening to someone else without endangering my family, I will do so. I do not hope the criminals will go do something bad to someone else. I have seen firsthand, however, the deterrent effect that an openly-carried sidearm has on those elements of society who are up to no good.

To the poster that said "QilvinLEO is an executioner" blah blah blah

If I, God Forbide, have a reason to draw and fire my firearm, I fired that pistol to immedatily stop a criminal from ending my own or somebody elses life. If that invovles the death of the criminal, so be it. Always aim center mass. Your not John Wayne. Stop thinking you can shoot a gun out of somebodies hand. This isnt HollyWood.

We have continuously stressed on this site that the aim of a defensive use of a firearm is to stop the threat. I also do not believe anyone here thinks they can "shoot a gun out of somebodies hand".
 

VW_Factor

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
1,092
Location
Leesburg, GA
Is it really trolling if they honestly believe what they are saying?

Yeah I dunno. I just keep seeing a bunch of rehashed blah blah blah'ing from some posters in the thread. The thread has continued this far, making me wonder if that was the intent of the OP to begin with. Also, reading some of the OP posts the attitude behind them makes me lean towards towards trolling. Especially that since the people who have answered in a thorough and thoughtful manner to the OP's "concerns" are greeted with flak and conjecture as a response.
If the OP was really looking for what he/she has asked,
QilvinLEO said:
If you cant handle that coversation, the internet is not a place for you and please grow up.

One would hope they would take their own advice. Seeing that by large meaningful "conversation" has not come from the OP, one could conclude that he/she is indeed trolling.

If the OP really truly believes in what they are posting, with that attitude.. I am glad that they don't work for my local PD.
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
Oh I have noticed that he generally ignores the best posts and only focuses on the more blunt (or rude as he likely views them) and the ones that don't use facts/cites to back up what they say. I would absolutely love for him to properly address my first post with facts and cites as opposed to conjecture and hypotheticals. But alas I don't expect him to as I doubt he can find any. I would also love for him to answer why cops OC and why they make themselves so obvious to the general public.
 

For Pete's Sake!

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
42
Location
USA
Oh I have noticed that he generally ignores the best posts and only focuses on the more blunt (or rude as he likely views them) and the ones that don't use facts/cites to back up what they say. I would absolutely love for him to properly address my first post with facts and cites as opposed to conjecture and hypotheticals. But alas I don't expect him to as I doubt he can find any. I would also love for him to answer why cops OC and why they make themselves so obvious to the general public.


I noticed that to. I to raised the issue of why LE open carry's as well. They can perform their job just as easy with a concealed firearm so why don't they?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I noticed that to. I to raised the issue of why LE open carry's as well. They can perform their job just as easy with a concealed firearm so why don't they?

When I was a university cop we concealed carry during daylight hours, but open carried during night shifts. We were required to wear a blazer during the day that covered the firearm. But then I wouldn't really consider it concealed carry as everybody knew we were armed.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
It does give one pause, doesn't it?

I mean, if an openly carried firearm is such a bad thing tactically and will cause the wearer to "be the first one shot", don't we as concerned, caring citizens have a duty to demand that all Sheriff's and heads of Police absolutely INSIST that officers carry concealed?
Shouldn't those in charge care enough about their men to prohibit them from wearing easily identified uniforms and bright, shiny badges that will alert criminals that there are armed men about and make those officers the first ones to be shot?

If police administrators Really cared.... they'd insist that all police officers go about in plain clothes, that way the criminal element would never know who was an officer and would simply Have to operate on the theory that anyone and everyone they met was a potential officer.





Or, just maybe, visibility IS a deterrent.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
It does give one pause, doesn't it?

I mean, if an openly carried firearm is such a bad thing tactically and will cause the wearer to "be the first one shot", don't we as concerned, caring citizens have a duty to demand that all Sheriff's and heads of Police absolutely INSIST that officers carry concealed?
Shouldn't those in charge care enough about their men to prohibit them from wearing easily identified uniforms and bright, shiny badges that will alert criminals that there are armed men about and make those officers the first ones to be shot?

If police administrators Really cared.... they'd insist that all police officers go about in plain clothes, that way the criminal element would never know who was an officer and would simply Have to operate on the theory that anyone and everyone they met was a potential officer.





Or, just maybe, visibility IS a deterrent.

In the 70's and 80's there was a lot of this sentiment, that police should tone down their appearance, and approach. This is fine for dealing with LAC but not with thugs, they could care less. We had one administrator that believed not wearing a hat encouraged police problems with the public. He had no police experience just a bunch of degrees. He also believed that our crime statistics after midnight did not justify a police presence, so he cut back the midnight shift. After two months he was looking for a job. When the mayors house was burglarized he was done.

What criminals care about is getting caught and getting hurt, they do not see potential cops they see potential victims. Many off duty cops have become a victim, in case many years ago killed in plain clothes. Case was a long time ago but I believe his son was present when he was murdered. CC does cause some caution, but most times if one is observant can tell who is and who is not packing, so much for concealed. Since the popularity of OC, most off duty police officers, at least around here, are OC.
 

For Pete's Sake!

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
42
Location
USA
It does give one pause, doesn't it?


Or, just maybe, visibility IS a deterrent.



Exactly! It is a deterrent! I don't understand why some in LE feel they are the only ones capable of deterring crime. Most people don't challenge the police because they know they are armed and the use of deadly force exist. That's my point. OC does deter crime. In fact I'd be willing to bet that most perpetrators will not victimize a unarmed person if they know a armed individual is within the vicinity.

I'm all for uniformed LEO's. Citizens need to be able to identify a LEO right away in the event of a emergency or crime. The duty of a LEO is to respond to a crime or emergency. There is no way they can protect all of us at any given time.

I'm not 100% sure but isn't violent crimes statistically lower in Constitutional Carry states?

Bottom line is this. If you are going to carry a weapon then you alone bear the responsibility for using it. It is your right to keep and bear arms. Along with rights comes responsibilities. If you take a life or injure another person you alone will be held accountable for your actions. Good or bad. Not all self defense claims are found to be valid. You could end up being charged with a crime. I wouldn't recommend anyone carry a firearm unless they are willing to bear the responsibily for using it. That goes with most things in life.
 

MyWifeSaidYes

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
1,028
Location
Logan, OH
QilvinLEO,

I think I have the answer you are looking for.

I open carry because I am a selfish SOB. I don't care about YOUR feelings regarding how I carry.

Regarding an earlier comment you made, I DO think open carry is a deterrence. If the bad guy is deterred from attacking me and my family, then chooses to attack someone else, that IS, in fact, deterrence. I don't WANT to kill the bad guy. I don't WANT someone else to get hurt, but I also don't CARE as long as me and mine are safe. Remember, I'm a selfish SOB.

I have NO DUTY to protect anyone but myself. The police have no duty to protect us as individuals (so says SCOTUS, numerous times). So the next person the bad guy attacks is on their own. Selfish. And proud of it.

If you're embarrassed by it, keep it in your pants.
 

Fisherman

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
160
Location
45R
It seems to me that you are more concerned with trying to trap me into something...

Rather annoying isn't it, now just imagine someone with a gun and badge doing it.

True enough. That is annoying. Instead of getting to the truth, some LEO's seem to just trick innocent people out of their rights or into jail on some technicality like it's some kind of game.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
This LEO joined to instigate. Nothing more, nothing less.

He/She did nothing more than try to tell a bunch of freedom loving Constitutionalists that what a distinguished lawyer with mountainous case history behind him in the realm of civil rights said, is wrong.


He/She did this by saying, "Yo dawg you should talk to the poilice broseph!" on an internet forum, with easily disposed of non-points and fabrications.




Not a single law abiding, firearm carrying, member of this forum is buying into the rhetoric and banana-peel comments this individual has made. We've all heard the "Hey bro you can talk to me casually man I am teh policeman/woman, you can trusts me k?" BS.

Every single conversation with an officer IS a fishing expedition. Period.

There are some damn good LEO's out there, but the wonderful technological and digital communication age has limelighted the reality of LEA across the nation, from coast to coast.

Nobody is buying what you're selling brah. Peddle it elsewhere.
 

REALteach4u

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
428
Location
Spfld, Mo.
To defend my fellow LEO eariler reguarding the the comments about CC compared to OC. Obvioulsy, it is your right to OC. Alot of individuals that OC also have a CCW because of their interest in firearms. My only problem with OC is if you can CCW, why not do it? My reasons for such are because of weapon retention. I know when I am carrying my offduty weapon it is a single retention holster (and most holsters that I have read on here that people carry and encountered on the street). Just pull and fire. Whereas, my duty holster is a triple retention holster, that requires certain movements in order to remove it and those movements should remain a secret to the general public. (Yeah, because that happens)

So, not only do I have training in weapon retention, but also have an extremely safe holster that most individuals do not know how to draw the weapon, and even if they do, it is hard to do it if the firearm is not on your waste, why would you place yourself into the slightly more risky situation of being disarmed?

I'm just being honest and would like to know some responses of WHY not just CC if you can. I dont want to hear "cause its my right". It wont be your right anymore if it results in your death via being disarmed.

I wont respond to flamers or people that just say "Its my right".

Thanks and hope to have honest opinions,
Qilvin-LEO

Is it safe to assume you're young in your LE career?
You'll get honest opinions and I promise you won't like most of them.

CCW is nothing more than taxation of 2A.
The OC regulatory law was apparently written in 1984, when CCW was still illegal by Missouri Constitution. That in and of itself made that 1984 law unConstitutional! Why it is still on the books is appalling as it's STILL unConstitutional being that it gives the municipalities and other jurisdictions the ability to actually FORCE (ie regulate) CCW upon those who wish to exercise their 2A rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.

It comes down to this with that law: If you cannot afford your CCW class, ammo for the class (thank you Target Masters and Rep. Kelley), the background check, and ultimately the card as well as the renewals then you could face an inability to carry at all IF any of those authorized under that 1984 law choose to outlaw OC.
Both should be options that come as a personal choice, not forced upon the people at the whim of a handful of people who think we're all too stupid to think for ourselves. Those few seem to forget that they too are of those people who are too stupid to think for themselves which begs the question of why they are allowed to make decisions that affect EVERYONE in the State.

Remember, LEOs who work in jurisdictions that have outlawed OC are STILL ALLOWED to OC themselves, both on and off duty. Apply the law to the citizenry, just don't apply it to everyone.


To those of you who like to play the OC as a visual deterrent card, please know that the DOJ's Violent Encounters manual actually refutes that claim to a point. Any individual perceived as a potential threat to stopping the escape of a criminal stands the potential to be attacked by that criminal. There is absolutely no data to show that OC truly is a deterrent. That same manual illustrates that over 50% of violent criminals that have attacked LEOs have sought out how to point shoot or front sight shoot. If they're seeking out that kind of training we have to consider that they're looking to identify high-risk threats to their task and escape....OC is very visibly that. It's been my experience that folks who OC seem to be a bit more aware (alert) to folks eye-balling their firearm than CCW folks (because it's hidden). It illustrates that the OC'ing person's mindset and attitude (how one carries self) can be a very visible deterrent as it communicates a different heightened awareness, because it has to be that way. Oh, and I do OC from time to time!
 
Last edited:

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
To those of you who like to play the OC as a visual deterrent card, please know that the DOJ's Violent Encounters manual actually refutes that claim to a point. Any individual perceived as a potential threat to stopping the escape of a criminal stands the potential to be attacked by that criminal. There is absolutely no data to show that OC truly is a deterrent. That same manual illustrates that over 50% of violent criminals that have attacked LEOs have sought out how to point shoot or front sight shoot. If they're seeking out that kind of training we have to consider that they're looking to identify high-risk threats to their task and escape....OC is very visibly that. It's been my experience that folks who OC seem to be a bit more aware (alert) to folks eye-balling their firearm than CCW folks (because it's hidden). It illustrates that the OC'ing person's mindset and attitude (how one carries self) can be a very visible deterrent as it communicates a different heightened awareness, because it has to be that way. Oh, and I do OC from time to time!


What is missing in every argument that OC will not "act or serve as a meaningful deterrent", is the fact that we are trying to normalize the carry.


Criminals would have to border on mentally unstable to full on psychopathic to engage a society that is known to be visibly armed. Even if that number was 15%.


CC is such a terrible tool. I realize that we are all "in the same boat", and I would lobby just as hard for the right to CC as I do for OC. Frankly however, CC-only proponents are typically prima donnas who typically only care whether their ability to pack a snubnose .38 in their fanny pack is protected by state and federal law.

The tactical decision to counter-ambush an ambush is completely and laughably stupid. Were I of the criminal mindset and committed to putting myself and others in mortal harm to get money or goods illegally, I would shoot the first clown who tried to go "ninja-mcsneaky", fiddle-farting with his shirt, waistband, or legs.

More people visibly, peacefully, and regularly carrying.

Thanks.

/rant
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
To those of you who like to play the OC as a visual deterrent card, please know that the DOJ's Violent Encounters manual actually refutes that claim to a point. Any individual perceived as a potential threat to stopping the escape of a criminal stands the potential to be attacked by that criminal. There is absolutely no data to show that OC truly is a deterrent. That same manual illustrates that over 50% of violent criminals that have attacked LEOs have sought out how to point shoot or front sight shoot. If they're seeking out that kind of training we have to consider that they're looking to identify high-risk threats to their task and escape....OC is very visibly that. It's been my experience that folks who OC seem to be a bit more aware (alert) to folks eye-balling their firearm than CCW folks (because it's hidden). It illustrates that the OC'ing person's mindset and attitude (how one carries self) can be a very visible deterrent as it communicates a different heightened awareness, because it has to be that way. Oh, and I do OC from time to time!

I'm just curious but did you not read gun facts? Here I'll quote it for you:

Fact: 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.68

68 Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, James Wright and Peter Rossi, Aldine, 1986

I even quoted the source for you. Now I'm sure things could have changed a bit since 1986, but I doubt it would be a drastic swing in either direction. Also note that these are simply the ones who admitted to it, so the number could be even higher. I would recommend everyone who hasn't read it to go and read it as it has a LOT of information and cites for everything.

EDIT: After re-reading your post again I noticed something. The DOJ comment deals with those that stand in the way of a criminal escaping. I would say it's kinda a "duh" comment that if you stand in the way of a criminal trying to escape that you run the risk of getting hurt.
 
Last edited:

okboomer

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,164
Location
Oklahoma, USA
I see many people have still failed to completely read my post. I, at no time, indicated I am against OCing. I am just trying to create a dicussion between the differences of OC and CC. If you cant handle that coversation, the internet is not a place for you and please grow up.

OK, you come into 'our house' and try to 'create a discussion' then proceed to discard people's honest replies with what has been proven to be specious arguments, and then you say 'you can't handle ...' Seriously, dude?

To all the people that say, "You can put all these 'What If' events for everything". Sure they are what if events that may or may not have taken place. Nobody had ran a plane into the world trade center 10 years ago either. If only we "what if'd that". I perfer to try to think of what a criminal might do and PREVENT it rather than picking up the pieces later.

I don't know how old you are, but I was around when the WTC was conceived and built and at that time, a 707 Boeing was the largest plane, and yes, the crash senario was considered, but it was from the point of view of a 707, looking to land at JFK or Newark (hence, low on fuel), and maybe lost in the fog, and accidentally striking one of the towers. It was a different time back then, and no one would have imagined flying fully loaded 767 Boeings into the towers, nor what the resulting stresses and fires would have done to the ~30 year old buildings.

Back to your admonition of 'what if' and how it applies to OC, well, yes, you should do 'what if' for as many different scenarios as possible, but nothing takes the place of situational awareness and an appropriate response to that. And knowing that a gun is not always the solution to a problem.

To those who say, "The criminal didn't F with me cause I was carrying and decided to go attack another". I dont know how you can live yourself with that attitude. Personally, If I can do anything to help prevent bad things happening to other people, I am going to do it. Not just hope they go do it to somebody else.

Actually, yes that is exactly what I want to happen. I am not a LEO and have not taken any oath recently to 'serve and protect' nor do I operate under that code, other than as a former military. I am a PRIVATE citizen and am only concerned with myself, my family, and possibly, a shop owner or other in my vicinity. This is why LEO are paid the big bucks :lol:

And your slam at a 19 year old girl who doesn't know how to use a gun, I say, "shame on papa for not teaching her!"

To the poster that said "QilvinLEO is an executioner" blah blah blah

If I, God Forbide, have a reason to draw and fire my firearm, I fired that pistol to immedatily stop a criminal from ending my own or somebody elses life. If that invovles the death of the criminal, so be it. Always aim center mass. Your not John Wayne. Stop thinking you can shoot a gun out of somebodies hand. This isnt HollyWood.

I also don't see where anyone other than you have brought up any JW scenario or actions, so you should probably find something else to snark about. If you will settle down, slow down, read the past posts, I think you will find that most folks on this forum are level headed realists who take the time to think things through, spend the time to practice their gun skills, and have researched the relevant, applicable laws.

And that leads to another fact you seem to have not considered ... the laws pertaining to use of force vary wildly from place to place. Some states have Castle Doctrine that includes protection of private property, others draw the line at only defense of self or others. This is why it is recommended that folks include at least their state in their profile. It also gives others an idea of what kind of criminal element the poster might encounter. There is a big difference between the criminal acts to be expected in OKC as opposed to Detroit or Chicago, for example.

Or, you may simply be a TROLL posting to try and antagonize someone into making outlandish comments for the amusement of you and your LEO buddies. Jury is still out on that one :)
 
Top