Badger Johnson
Regular Member
In the thread about WVCDL, one poster related:
I just don't get this because 'children are present'. Is it because they are the height of the gun belt, because they might run up and get under foot? Because they might try to play with the gun and get it away from the OC-er?
Is it because seeing a gun (which they see on TV all the time) is traumatizing? Will the gun be more likely to go off?
If it "goes off", is it ok if only adults are accidentally shot? An adult, a breadwinner or parent being shot is actually worse for their family, though emotionally a wounded or killed child is a devastating loss in terms of the abject horror of seeing a bleeding child, I suppose.
Obviously, there are adult subjects, like pron, taxes, politics, but I just don't see how covering or removing a HG helps, or how a child being there is bad in the presence of a holstered HG. I really don't see it.
Anyone have any ideas, right or wrong, as to what these 'advocates of children' are getting at?
I was stopped at the Quaker Steak and Lube at the Highlands last year by a Sheriff's Deputy who told me to cover my gun (since children were present). He was at all times professioal, but just did not know the law.
I just don't get this because 'children are present'. Is it because they are the height of the gun belt, because they might run up and get under foot? Because they might try to play with the gun and get it away from the OC-er?
Is it because seeing a gun (which they see on TV all the time) is traumatizing? Will the gun be more likely to go off?
If it "goes off", is it ok if only adults are accidentally shot? An adult, a breadwinner or parent being shot is actually worse for their family, though emotionally a wounded or killed child is a devastating loss in terms of the abject horror of seeing a bleeding child, I suppose.
Obviously, there are adult subjects, like pron, taxes, politics, but I just don't see how covering or removing a HG helps, or how a child being there is bad in the presence of a holstered HG. I really don't see it.
Anyone have any ideas, right or wrong, as to what these 'advocates of children' are getting at?