Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: We want our senior citizens/retirees to be armed!

  1. #1
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217

    We want our senior citizens/retirees to be armed!

    I mentioned this topic buried in another thread but I think it deserves its own post.

    My friend remarked to me that she felt (and heard her brother say) that we should enable our senior citizens to carry, and carry openly, because this is the segment of the population that is more educated, calmer, more circumspect, slower to anger, more mature and wiser (for the most part) and doing so would have an effect on society similar to 'an armed society is a polite society', IMO.

    I'm talking about retired civil servants, retired professionals, lawyers, doctors, clinicians, and especially retired females. Let them open carry everywhere and across state lines. What's the problem? It wouldn't be one that separates states now (variations in 'training').

    Heck, I think the state should buy all retired females who want to carry, pink handled revolvers, and free training if they want it. (no BG is gonna 'steal' a pink gun, after all, lol)

    Of course, we don't want people who are infirm mentally, the truly elderly to be armed irresponsibly, but otherwise I think it's a brilliant proposition.
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    fl
    Posts
    1,835
    I agree in as far as having a defensive capability. But- how does one go about sorting out those who could qualify from those who should'nt be anywhere near a gun, without discriminating in some form. (and I mean physically/mentally-not whether they have a right or not-before all the yahoos start screaming "TYRANT!" ).

    The reason I say so is simply this: If some of them shoot anything like they drive- they're more of a hazard to themselves and everyone around them, than anything else.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    The elderly tend to be some of the most hot headed psychopaths I've ever met. And it's all because of their age. Everyone not incarcerated in some form or another should have the right to own and carry a weapon of their choice. But I'm not about to advocate giving guns out to the elderly en masse. I don't think it wise.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    The elderly tend to be some of the most hot headed psychopaths I've ever met. And it's all because of their age. Everyone not incarcerated in some form or another should have the right to own and carry a weapon of their choice. But I'm not about to advocate giving guns out to the elderly en masse. I don't think it wise.
    I don't want to pay for it, if they want to be armed buy guns themselves.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by j4l View Post

    The reason I say so is simply this: If some of them shoot anything like they drive- they're more of a hazard to themselves and everyone around them, than anything else.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    The elderly tend to be some of the most hot headed psychopaths I've ever met.
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I don't want to pay for it, if they want to be armed buy guns themselves.
    All of this. Also, pink handled revolvers are theft proof? They must be, because I wouldn't want one

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South end of the state, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    314
    " the right to keep and bear arms , SHALL NOT be infringed "

    Do I see some infringing going on in the above posts?

  7. #7
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Good points, but I was hoping that people would get my drift about a specific class of retirees, and I avoided 'elderly' because it paints an image of 'infirm'.

    I live in a retirement community and almost all of the folks I've encountered are sweethearts.

    Yes some old peeps are irascible. But as a group I -think- they tend to be more careful, thoughtful, wise. (do we have gangs of old folks roaming around knocking over liquor stores, lol?)

    Besides, if the criminals think old peeps are 'scary', so much the better.
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    fl
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    Good points, but I was hoping that people would get my drift about a specific class of retirees, and I avoided 'elderly' because it paints an image of 'infirm'.

    I live in a retirement community and almost all of the folks I've encountered are sweethearts.

    Yes some old peeps are irascible. But as a group I -think- they tend to be more careful, thoughtful, wise. (do we have gangs of old folks roaming around knocking over liquor stores, lol?)

    Besides, if the criminals think old peeps are 'scary', so much the better.
    Gangs of old folks? Yes, hadnt you seen it?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygy7UDADXDg

  9. #9
    Regular Member Steeler-gal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fairfax County, VA
    Posts
    562
    My friend remarked to me that she felt (and heard her brother say) that we should enable our senior citizens to carry, and carry openly, because this is the segment of the population that is more educated, calmer, more circumspect, slower to anger, more mature and wiser (for the most part) and doing so would have an effect on society similar to 'an armed society is a polite society', IMO.

    I'm talking about retired civil servants, retired professionals, lawyers, doctors, clinicians, and especially retired females. Let them open carry everywhere and across state lines. What's the problem? It wouldn't be one that separates states now (variations in 'training').

    Heck, I think the state should buy all retired females who want to carry, pink handled revolvers, and free training if they want it. (no BG is gonna 'steal' a pink gun, after all, lol)
    The state should pay for it AND give them pink revolvers? Except for that, I see no reason why seniors shouldn't own firearms. My mom's been contemplating it. She just can't decide what she wants.

    Personally I think all pink firearms should be outlawed.

    On a side note, aren't seniors just as "enabled" as the rest of us to carry and/or own firearms as the rest of us? I haven't heard of any age restrictions when it comes to gun ownership.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    I would love to see how you are going to finance pink revolvers for the ladies without jacking around their Social Security checks.

    Seriously, if seniors want to be armed they can save up just like the youngsters do and buy their own darned guns - and hopefully ones without mandatory pink stocks. By virtue of being old, seniors should have figured out by this time whether or not there is some advantage to be had by getting a gun and toting it around all day. If they have not armed themselves by this time it seems to be a sign that they determined that there was no advantage. Let them deal with the consequences - at least they had a chance, unlike many folks who do understand but are under the legal age to posses/carry.

    As for the "argument" that some seniors should not be allowed to posses a firearm - that is said about every age group. Anyone that posseses a firearm must consider whether or not there are circumstances that make them unsafe to continue possesing that firearm - be it physical infirmity, mental state, or anything else. If the government starts putting firearms in the hands of folks who are not in the military the government will start taking firearms out of the hands of folks as well. (Gee, ya think so, skid? /sarcasm) it's bad enough now - let's not give them more power and control just to feel good about Grandpa and Grandma.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  11. #11
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    I had to go back and reread, but I confirmed it. Not a single post in this thread stated that seniors should be barred from ownership, the most that was said was that welfare checks in the form of a gun was not a good idea.

    Again, I believe everyone has the right to own and carry a gun for whatever lawful* purpose they so chose.


    *I know that lawful is ambiguous, what I meant was that they don't plan on using it to commit a crime, IE theft, kidnapping, rape, murder etc.

  12. #12
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    As an armed senior citizen, that has OC and occationally CC for over 40 years...I also know several other seniors that carry, and some that own guns, but do not see the need to carry, and some that are flat against guns.

    NO SPECIAL GROUPS!!!! Everyone should be able to carry, if they wish, where they wish....and if they do not wish to do so, that is fine with me too. What I do not want to see is any special treatment for any particular group of people.

    A small town close to where I live has it right. They require everyone to own a gun, and carry it if possible (they do not have a town police force) HOWEVER! There is no penility for not complying with this law. It is more of a statement, rather than the force of ordanance.

    There are just too many variables for a one size fits all solution. The best solution is allow everyone to make their own individual choice as to carry or not. The only restriction should be on imposing one person's ideas on another person or group. Don't freak out when you see my carry, and I won't freak out when I see you have no way to defend yourself.

    As the Amish said during the revolutionary war..."protect us...as we will not protect ourselves" That was their choice.
    Last edited by hermannr; 11-21-2011 at 02:13 PM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Sorry....No Special treatment for a a class of people. Should they be able to own one? Yep...but not funded at my expense and given special consideration just because (Fill in the BLANK).

    Both my grandfathers believed in being armed, one was a preacher. After they passed, their wives carried on. I have one 88 y/o grandmother left whose eyesight is so bad she could hit the broad side of the barn; but would should scare the crap out of someone. The nursing home we just put her in wouldn't allow her to bring her pistol..she wasn't happy. She still asks me to sneak it in to her!

  14. #14
    Regular Member SirTiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Richmond
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    I mentioned this topic buried in another thread but I think it deserves its own post.

    My friend remarked to me that she felt (and heard her brother say) that we should enable our senior citizens to carry, and carry openly, because this is the segment of the population that is more educated, calmer, more circumspect, slower to anger, more mature and wiser (for the most part) and doing so would have an effect on society similar to 'an armed society is a polite society', IMO.

    I'm talking about retired civil servants, retired professionals, lawyers, doctors, clinicians, and especially retired females. Let them open carry everywhere and across state lines. What's the problem? It wouldn't be one that separates states now (variations in 'training').

    Heck, I think the state should buy all retired females who want to carry, pink handled revolvers, and free training if they want it. (no BG is gonna 'steal' a pink gun, after all, lol)

    Of course, we don't want people who are infirm mentally, the truly elderly to be armed irresponsibly, but otherwise I think it's a brilliant proposition.
    I was never good at math but age = wisdom? I don't think so.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    I mentioned this topic buried in another thread but I think it deserves its own post.

    My friend remarked to me that she felt (and heard her brother say) that we should enable our senior citizens to carry, and carry openly, because this is the segment of the population that is more educated, calmer, more circumspect, slower to anger, more mature and wiser (for the most part) and doing so would have an effect on society similar to 'an armed society is a polite society', IMO.

    *I'm talking about retired civil servants, retired professionals, lawyers, doctors, clinicians, and especially retired females. Let them open carry everywhere and across state lines. What's the problem? It wouldn't be one that separates states now (variations in 'training').

    Heck, I think the state should buy all retired females who want to carry, pink handled revolvers, and free training if they want it. (no BG is gonna 'steal' a pink gun, after all, lol)

    Of course, we don't want people who are infirm mentally, the truly elderly to be armed irresponsibly, but otherwise I think it's a brilliant proposition.
    Hey, Badger? What do you think of us retired military who've learned a few lessons over the years with respect to keeping a cool head? I've carried for 23 years, and have OC'd for more than 2 years. No issues. Ok by you?

    You mentioned a lot of professions, here *, but didn't mention one of the few professions in our country which has proven themselves through thick and thin, able to keep composure in the worst of it, and able to come home again.

    "Worthless because we are military?" If so, you're seriously missing the boat. If not, I welcome your dialogue.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Steeler-gal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Fairfax County, VA
    Posts
    562
    Quote Originally Posted by SirTiger View Post
    I was never good at math but age = wisdom? I don't think so.
    LOL! I thought the same thing. I know plenty of people my age who seem to have virtually no wisdom at all. Should they not be allowed to carry? (kidding)
    =============================
    NRA Certified Instructor & Range Safety Officer
    Teaching classes in Lorton VA & Springfield VA
    PM me if you need a class, RSO or safety briefing

  17. #17
    Regular Member RPGamingGirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    62
    I'm not sure about encouraging seniors, who otherwise wouldn't be inclined to arm themselves, to do so. The ones that already are armed though? More power to them.

    Here's an idea: get to know the senior citizens around you. Listen to their stories, learn from their experiences. Find out what the current situation is. Does he or she have a reliable weapon, but fear using it because they're too arthritic to take it apart and clean it properly? Offer your time and help them out. Are they on a severely fixed income? A box of ammo would make a suitable and thoughtful Christmas (or 'thank you for telling your stories') gift.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by RPGamingGirl View Post
    I'm not sure about encouraging seniors, who otherwise wouldn't be inclined to arm themselves, to do so. The ones that already are armed though? More power to them.
    I like this approach. By the time they're seniors, if they'd had an inclinations to start carrying, they'd probably have done so. They don't need convincing. They deserve our respect.

    Here's an idea: get to know the senior citizens around you. Listen to their stories, learn from their experiences. Find out what the current situation is. Does he or she have a reliable weapon, but fear using it because they're too arthritic to take it apart and clean it properly? Offer your time and help them out. Are they on a severely fixed income? A box of ammo would make a suitable and thoughtful Christmas (or 'thank you for telling your stories') gift.
    I think your idea is wonderful!
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    I think everyone is missing my point.

    Who needs to have a firearm to level the playing field? Seniors, retirees, disabled persons, females.

    If we had this mantra, the gubmint might see how predators prey on such people. There's enough confiscated HGs so no tax dollars would need to be spent.

    I'm not suggesting that we force seniors to carry if they have no inclination, but I think the gubmint, if faced with the problem might be convinced to allow people in that group to carry unrestricted in all the states.

    I have to bow, though to the statistics above, if they didn't protect our 2A rights maybe they shouldn't be armed and deserve to die cowering in the back of a 7-11, IDK. I know when I was young and hot-headed it might have been a problem, but now, I am older, slower, but more introspective and cautious.

    If not seniors and retirees, ex-civil servants, then who? Everyone? Sure but how do we get there?
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    I think everyone is missing my point.

    Who needs to have a firearm to level the playing field? Seniors, retirees, disabled persons, females.

    If we had this mantra, the gubmint might see how predators prey on such people. There's enough confiscated HGs so no tax dollars would need to be spent.

    I'm not suggesting that we force seniors to carry if they have no inclination, but I think the gubmint, if faced with the problem might be convinced to allow people in that group to carry unrestricted in all the states.

    I have to bow, though to the statistics above, if they didn't protect our 2A rights maybe they shouldn't be armed and deserve to die cowering in the back of a 7-11, IDK. I know when I was young and hot-headed it might have been a problem, but now, I am older, slower, but more introspective and cautious.

    If not seniors and retirees, ex-civil servants, then who? Everyone? Sure but how do we get there?
    I get it, I just don't agree with you.

    Why are senior citizens a special group? Age? Maturity? So now the gubbermint gets to use these qualifying factors to determine who gets to exercise their 2A rights? Noooo thanks.

    No infringements, no special privileges, no discrimination.

  21. #21
    Regular Member RPGamingGirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    62
    Yeah, i got the point of the original post too. I just think there are better ways to help out our seniors than to ask for government exemptions. As others have mentioned, exemptions require more poking and prodding by the government to determine who qualifies, to what extent, etc. In a perfect world, sure, it could work, but we all know better than to believe it wouldn't effect other aspects of our lives, especially our seniors' lives, and ultimately end up in LESS seniors being able to arm themselves, most likely.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    If you know of a senior/retiree who needs a gun but does not have one, get up off your arsenal and help them out with a gift.

    I'm too lazy to go looking for the Davey Crocket story of him politely telling the rest of the House of Representatives to go to hell over their desire to spend taxpayer money on some private charity act, but this needs the same sort of response. And the fact that the seniors/retirees who need/want/ought to have guns but don't may have some baggage about restricting the rights of the rest of us makes the idea of anything but private chartity seem even more odious. It's like saying the folks who voted for Obama get to go bankrupt last.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  23. #23
    Regular Member SirTiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Richmond
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    I get it, I just don't agree with you.

    Why are senior citizens a special group? Age? Maturity? So now the gubbermint gets to use these qualifying factors to determine who gets to exercise their 2A rights? Noooo thanks.

    No infringements, no special privileges, no discrimination.
    I totally agree.

  24. #24
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by SirTiger View Post
    I totally agree.
    The sad thing is the federal government is the most racist, sexist, and discriminating entity in the nation. Blacks, women, handicapped, foreigners.... none of these groups are supposed to have any rights and for the simple fact that groups don't have rights.... individuals do. But trust the feds to come up with affirmative action (very racist program), quotas, preferential treatment, group set asides and you name it. How perfect a way to pit one "group against another".

    I suppose I would be classed as a senior citizen, but you can bet I'm not about to claim any preferences on that mantra. I get rather disgusted at "groups" who believe they are owed something for being a "group". Somehow, this does not smack of being American to me.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •