Who Keeps You Safe? You Do
In life there are a myriad of fundamental questions, ranging from ultimate ones that deal with the metaphysical to proximate ones related to earthly matters.
Sadly, many among us go through life without asking questions from either category, preferring instead to live on assumption (or presumption).
And while there may appear to be endless reasons for not wrestling with such questions, we must face the fact that our lack of inquisitiveness is not good. It not only demonstrates an intellectual laziness but also reveals a blind trust in people and things that might not be worthy of that trust. It also translates into lives lived without meaningful reflection on the individual responsibilities and duties which are ours by birth.
Questions about the existence of God fall under the ultimate heading while questions about the inner workings of the U.S. government, although important, are proximate. The one question we can ask ourselves which ties these varying points together by dealing with our well-being is: “Who keeps us safe?”
What earthly power, agent of the state, or technique do you trust to protect your life on a day-to-day basis?
If we think seriously about it, safety is one of the biggest issues we face daily as Americans. Yet it also seems to be one of the things we most easily take for granted. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we’re accustomed to seeing firemen, police officers, and even military personnel driving through the streets of our cities, sitting in cafés beside us at lunch, or standing guard around certain buildings and subways when we feel especially threatened.
Yet while we ought to fully support and honor our firemen, police officers, and military personnel in their service to our communities and this nation, we must be realistic enough to understand that they are called “first responders” for a reason: they show up after the accident, or incident, has taken place. In other words, they don’t prevent bad things from happening, they respond once bad things have happened.
So who keeps us safe during the time in which an incident is actually taking place: the time before the police are alerted, when we find ourselves face to face with a criminal intent on carrying out his most devious desires? The answer is that we individual citizens are the only ones who can truly keep ourselves safe at that moment.
Our Founders knew this, and described self-defense as a duty no less than a right. Said Samuel Adams: “The duty of self-preservation … [is] the first law of nature.” Such a worldview sheds light on the philosophy behind George Washington’s maxim: “Free men ought to be armed.” Those who framed this nation knew that each citizen, as a free person, would ultimately be responsible for his or her own safety. To put it another way: those who framed this nation knew that each citizen, because free, would ultimately be responsible for his or her own safety.
Understanding this goes a long way in explaining why a government that responds to crimes with promises of more gun control is a government that actually makes us less safe. For it demonstrates an intention to limit access to the tools law-abiding citizens need to defend themselves: tools that are preferably handguns in the caliber of your choice.
But such is the silliness of liberals who wish to expand government instead of freedom. They pass bill after bill, making every crisis an excuse for more centralized control, yet they cannot keep us safe in the moment. Rather, they can only make it harder for us to keep ourselves safe.
As free people, it is crucial that we think seriously about these things. And upon comprehending the fact that our safety is our duty, it is incumbent upon each of us to acquire the tools to carry out that duty.
Over the past few weeks some lawmakers have done this very thing, by announcing their decision to carry a concealed handgun in the wake of the Tucson shooting. It seems they finally realize that when push comes to shove, the difference between life and death lies in their own hands.
If carrying a gun is good enough for their safety, it’s good enough for ours as well.
“Perhaps this is due to the fact that we’re accustomed to seeing firemen, police officers, and even military personnel driving through the streets of our cities, …”
In addition to some writers perpetrating the fallacy that (the hero) cops are there to protect you, even when the SCOTUS has ruled that protecting an American citizen is not one of the duties of the LEOs.
That said, only some 4% of us have chosen to obtain the carry permit. How many carry, I don’t know.
I do know, however, that when the S did HTF I was the one left to protect myself and my loved ones. My wife (and the rest of the family) has been forced to carry now too for some years, and she is quite accustomed to it. She’s also very proficient in self defense thanks to the DHS, FBI and local cops who, among certain group of people, taught us a lesson we’ll never forget.
Get to the range. Get familiarized with firearms. Go shopping. Receive the education. Obtain your permit and keep on training. The bad guys are coming. Stay safe.
“the SCOTUS has ruled that protecting an American citizen is not one of the duties of the LEOs.”
Then who ARE the LEO’s there to protect?
If it isn’t the American citizen, it’s the government (at all levels). The LEOs are there to preserve public order ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY that is writing their paychecks.
Think about what that implies.
Good connection on the recent SCOTUS ruling. I was shocked when that came down. THE CAT IS NOW TOTALLY OUT OF THE BAG NOW about the purpose of law enforcement.
The buzz term used by governments…maintaining STABILITY.
I beleive what the SCOTUS was referring to is not so much that LEo does not have a “duty”, but rather does not have the “capability” to protect each and everyone of us 24/7.
I live in a very rural county in Tennessee, All we have for LE is the Sheriffs Dept, and it’s stretched pretty thin. Every Deputy I’ve talked to preffer that residents get their carry permits and be prepared to be THEIR OWN first responder, because they know that they’re not likely to be able to come to our rescue in time to save us. It’s just logistically impossible.
As one deputy told me one day, “Knowing that many of our residents in the county are licensed to carry means I might get emergency backup in a pinch.”
“I beleive what the SCOTUS was referring to is not so much that LEo does not have a “duty”, but rather does not have the “capability” to protect each and everyone of us 24/7.”
Nope, it’s the duty – no duty.
Read, for example: TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO v. GONZALES
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=04-278
“…the SCOTUS has ruled that protecting an American citizen is not one of the duties of the LEOs.”
Then who ARE the LEOs there to protect?
They are, in effect, a domestic army being paid to maintain public order on behalf of whatever governmental body is paying them.
Think about what THAT implies.
“She’s also very proficient in self defense thanks to the DHS, FBI and local cops who, among certain group of people, taught us a lesson we’ll never forget.”
Tim, what was the lesson?
Sorry, Alan,
This is the Internet after all, but you can draw your own conclusions from the players.
Stay safe.
Tim
I do not need a permit to carry. If you have to get a permit to exercise a right it isn’t a right at all. The statement that “…The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” is an absolute statement. It means that any law that says I can’t carry my weapons anywhere I want whenever I want, without someone’s permission, is illegal.
Buddy, what is there left of the Constitution anymore?
Since you’re replying to my post, please elaborate your argument regarding my opinion on the subject.
Recall that Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor did not answer the question posed by Senator Coburn, “do we have the right to defend ourselves?”. A simple “yes” would have sufficed, but her not answering the question should have disqualified her from sitting on the SCOTUS. Some of the senators who voted to approve that justice are up for re-election next year. It should be hoped that the electorate remembers that vote, and vote in their own self defense.
She didn’t have to answer…she’s the “wise Latina” or didn’t you know…
And Elena Kagan seemed to have no idea what “Natural Rights” were, or something. Two clueless, batty broads who know nothing about their own country now help to interpret the Constitution. We’re so screwed.
A little closer to home, Zionists know that armed and ready is better than clueless and dead.
I cannot tell you how many times Israelis, carrying sidearms, have prevented Arab terror.
In fact, one of the most glaring examples involved the use of ‘tractor terror’. Arab jihadists-gainfully employed to work in construction!-turned their tractors into deadly weapons.The only thing that stood between many Jewish deaths, and the Arab jihadist, was armed Zionists who shot the son of a bitches….and that’s just one of MANY examples.
NEVER, and I mean NEVER, give up your Constitutionally lawful right to bear arms, giving the advantage to both criminal/terror elements, as well as an out of control government bent on stripping freedom from the citizens.
It is very difficult to obtain a private permit for firearms in Israel but most of the rules would anywhere else in the world, except America, be considered common sense.
All weapons are listed, registered and individually licensed. The Ministry of Interior is responsible for the licensing of weapons and gun shops. Every 5 years a licensed firearm owner has to pass a physical and mental health check, criminal background check, qualify at the range, and pay a renewal fee for the carry permit.
In addition, rifles are generally issued by the IDF and carried by Servicemen and Reservists. Police, Civil Defence, Ambulance Drivers, Firemen, Security Guards, residents of high risk areas, and those who can prove a need all can carry weapons.
There is some limited sport shooting and hunting. Many of the native species are slowly building up after over hunting for centuries.
There is no right to bear arms. only a restricted privilege.
The weapons used in the ‘tractor terror’ incident were all legally licensed to the holder not as might be assumed from Adina’s comment the result of arms carrying citizens just happening to stop a terror incident.
Sounds like the “restricted privilege” is rather widely granted.
The security provided by firearms is collective. Once enough individuals are armed then it changes the decision calculus to commit crimesand deters criminals.
The US has a rather violent culture compared to the rest of the developed world and it has little to do with gun ownership. Seventy five years ago Canadians had the same access to firearms as Americans yet their murder rate was far lower. It has actually increased recently because of the immigration from third world. The Swiss are armed to the teeth with fully automatic assault rifles in their homes yet few murders occur in Switzerland. However, one thing can be said is that where there are guns in the US crime there is less crime. That has been true throughout the county’s history. 19th century NYC was a far more dangerous place the so-called Wild West where everyone was armed. More guns in the hands of citizens equals more collective security
I agree with most of your excellent points. People seem to think that Swiss’ low crime rate is due to the number of guns; it isn’t.
“However, one thing can be said is that where there are guns in the US crime there is less crime. “
There exists no city in the United States with more cops (and guns) than D.C., yet the crime rate is through the roof.
It’s the people. Shower Japan with guns and the murder rate will not go up.
Let us not forget that while the United States of America is seen as having a violent culture there is a large portion of that violence committed by non-citizens! Interesting those very numbers/stats never seem to make it in the news coverage. The news also doesn’t show the millions (estimated at over 2.5 million and counting) of people who effectively defend themselves from criminals. George Washington’s maxim “Free men ought to be armed” is a true statement. If firearms are regulated at any level it does not a free man make -
Let us not forget that while the United States of America is seen as having a violent culture there is a large portion of that violence committed by non-citizens!
Excellent points! ~80% of the crime is committed by ~800,000 gang-members.
The news also doesn’t show the millions (estimated at over 2.5 million and counting) of people who effectively defend themselves from criminals.
An old ATF stat showed some 75,000! That is what the .gov knows, but I believe the 2,500,000 figure is closer to truth.
I’ve experienced several incidents that I never reported.
Your facts are correct.Nevertheless, many civilians I know carry personal sidearms, and the streets are full with firearm carrying soldiers who get the job done-even while off duty.
So, at the end of the day it is proven dangerous to disarm the civilian public.Terrorists and criminals abide by the laws of the jungle, thus leaving citizens exposed and helpless.Police generally respond after the fact, so good luck with that…
I’ve always felt safe in Israel (except the one early morning in the Old City after a night at the Danish Tea House).
BY the way, your last paragraph misquoted me. In no way did I suggest that citizens were not carrying registered firearms when stopping the tractor terrorists.They were and thank G-d for that!!.
I would be all for licensing and required training if I thought for a moment that it was done in good faith, i.e. to put qualified firearms users into the populace. It is clear to anyone familiar with the debate, however that these laws are NOT passed in good faith. They are like pythons, trying to constrict more and more with the intent of deterring and eventually forbidding private ownership of firearms. This is clearly and anathema to good sense, so I will fight against these infringements, not because I completely disagree with licensing, but because I realize the intent of the politicians attempting to institute them.
So you are saying that Israelis have the privilege of defending themselves if the government decides it’s OK?
You apparently know nothing about Israel??
Most of the population in Israel do compulsory military service. For the record, I served, my wife served, two of my children have already served and my daughter is doing her service now. When the IDF gave me a weapon during that service and the one a month a year reserve duty it was my constant companion. When the IDF told me to, I returned it to the armory until the next time.
I always thought it strange that when the Government (remember in America the Selective Service System is still on the books) takes you away, forces you to wear uniform, salute, accept all kinds of restrictions and in the last option tells you to kill, that is not a freedom issue. But carrying a lethal weapon is and causes consternation like no other issue.
Is there a movement in America to challenge the licensing of drivers and registration of motor vehicles? In most places, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 13) freedom of movement is a basic human right but somehow they forgot to include freedom to carry.
Sorry have to fly now. Now where is my passport? I can’t leave the country without it!
And three cheers for the armed citizens!
Maintaining a firearm is necessary for dependable self protection. Automatic pistols are more sensitive to fouling, and become undependable without proficient cleanings. Those 15 round magazines don’t help at all when the gun jams.
And you might get to like the smell of Hoppe’s solvent as much as I do.
Oh yeah, keep it clean, except that the owner’s manual of my Beretta Tomcat says specifically not to clean it so much, that many owners wear their firearms out by unnecessary cleaning. So far it seems to work. It’s only a 32 but if you put it in the right spot it will do the job.
I am shocked!!! Totally shocked and amazed that there are ignorant people out there who think that the mighty all-knowing gubmint can’t protect them. . . . .I am responsible for my own actions/safety?!! Who could believe it? Thankfully, there are many that do, and more are waking up all the time. . . .Mr. Kutnicki in Israel has it figured out, and after enough terror attacks here, hopefully we will too. The terrorist scumbags need to die, and if we, as citizens, can do it in defense of our loved ones, so much the better! I await the squeals of the trolls. . . .
I live amongst the liberals in Arlington, Virginia. I have tried to explain to my neighbors why my firearms keep them safe from certain types of crimes such as home invasions. I tell them that burglers make a rational calculation about entering a home where 1 in 3 households in our neighborhood are owned by armed citizens and decide to move to some other less lethal environment to conduct their business. All they do is go on and on about the danger from my guns and why we should ban “assault weapons.” They will never get it and I would bet that if I shot a home invader I would be the pariah and not the perp.
The only thing that will change their minds, is when they are in a life and death situation, and helpless to protect themselves, because of their anti-gun attitudes. IF, they survive that situation, they will be converts.
Indeed. Back in the lat ’80s, southern California was terrorized by a serial killer known as “The Night Stalker”. He came at night, raping and murdering. He hit poor neighborhoods and rich. People were afraid, very afraid. They tried to buy guns. They ran into California’s infamous 15 day waiting period. They were angry!
Yeah, the same libs and “moderates” who wanted that 15 day waiting period were now angry that they could not get a gun for protection NOW.
One good thing that came out of it was that the legislature quickly changed the law so that, instead of a homeowner having a heavy burden of proof of self defense if he killed an intruder, under the new law it was basically open season on any intruder in your home.
As it should be!
Oh, yeah, one more thing. The burglary rate dropped through the floor when this was going on. Seems the bad guys figured out that, with everybody on edge, and many armed, popping a window might just lead to someone popping a cap.
They laid low!
In order to obtain protection from other men, any means for attaining this end is a natural good.”-Epicurus
“Those who possess the power to defend themselves against threats by their neighbors, being thus in possession of the surest guarantee of security, live the most pleasant life with one another.”-Epicurus
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American peoples’ liberty, teeth, and keystone under independance. To secure peace, Security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interferance – they deserve a place of honour with all that is good.”-George Washington
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson
“The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”-Samuel Adams
Today’s politicians want to take away your Second Amendment rights, They do not trust you with firearms. And they do not trust you with firearms because they cannot carry out their social/political agenda if you are armed. And that agenda is NOT the same one the Founders had when they wrote the Constitution. When the politicians talk about “sensible gun control laws”, what they really intend, is to make it so difficult to purchase and own firearms, that your ability to do so will be practically zero.
Remember, the Constitution is about checks and balances to make sure no one branch of government becomes overly powerful and begins to infringe on your Constitutional rights. And so, the Founders saw an armed populace as a check and balance against an armed government. Remember, it is armed governments, NOT armed citizens, that are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of civilians in the last century.
So I would strongly suggest that:
1. You buy firearms NOW for your personal protection.
2. You get training in marksmanship, the operation of your weapons, and the laws in your state regarding the use of deadly force.
3. If your state offers concealed carry permits GET ONE.
4. If you live in a state that does not issue concealed carry permits consider moving to a state that does.
5. Take your firearms to the range on a regular basis and practice, practice, practice.
6. Join the National Rifle Association. They are the only organization with the political clout to effectively fight against those who would reinterpret the Constitution to deny you the Second Amendment rights the Founders meant for you to have.
No gun control law has ever taken a single firearm out of the hands of a criminal determined to obtain one, and never will. Gun control is all about disarming you, the law abiding citizen.
Remember, if the worst should happen, the police will not get there in time to save you. You will be responsible for saving your own life.
Here are two of the best places to get serious firearms training:
http://www.thunderranchinc.com/
http://www.gunsite.net/
If you can afford the course fee and the travel to these schools, they are both excellent. If not, there are many opportunities locally/regionally nowadays to get good firearms training. Remember, if you are going to own or carry a firearm, it is incumbent upon you to be proficient in its use, and to know the law regarding same.
‘If you live in a state that does not issue concealed carry permits consider moving to a state that does’
And if you own a business that employs people take it with you, and state publicly why you are doing it.
Minor quibble — George Washington never said “Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself…etc.” The quote never appears in any of his writings. A clue that would tip you off — he wasn’t a very terse writer, and loved to use 10 words where 1 would do. Good idea to search on quotes before posting — there are so many that float out on the Internet that are falsely attributed.
I’ll recheck that quote, I googled “quotes from George Washington” and that was one listed.
As I recall, I already asked you, or someone, months ago, to source the GW quote and never got a reply.
Well said! Don’t just go buy a gun and head to the range! Get some training. Start with your local NRA handgun course, but don’t stop there. That’s adequate to keep you from hurting yourself, but not much more than that!
Get some serious training, like those mentioned above. See also this fellow:
http://www.defense-training.com/
Lousy website, excellent instructor. His training is on the same level as the best of the best.
Check his schedule – he may be coming to a range near you.
Where is the best place to buy weapons.? I live in CA.
At your local gun store. I assume they still have some of those in the Peoples Republic of California.
Try gunbroker.com. They have dealers and citizens selling within your state that know and abide by the California restrictions.
As always; “Caveat emptor.”
John Farnam is definitely one of the best. I’d like to train with him myself.
If you have taken training from your typical local NRA instructor, and thought you were proficient, then take training from Farnam (or Thunder Ranch, etc.) you will be shocked at how little you knew!
Not that NRA training is bad – it’s a great starting place for beginners.
But it’s not anything like good enough.
kjatexas, I agree with your comments, with one exception: “Join the NRA”.
It is indisputable that the NRA has been directly involved in the drafting of every piece of federal gun-control legislation since 1968. The NRA has actively capitulated and compromised away the natural right of We the People to defend against isolated acts of tyranny, whether from government or criminal predators. They have depleted the treasury of the organization’s membership to support left-leaning, openly anti-gun candidates for public office.
Go with Gunowners of America, The 2nd Amendment Foundation, KABA.com, or Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership if you support a no-compromise/no capitultion position on “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Great piece AWR. I am encouraged that our population is slowly moving back toward the understanding that each man must be responsible for his own life in the way you describe. I know it cultivated in us down here in Texas.
Although I appreciate the role police officers play in our cities and towns, I know that I feel far safer because of the handgun I keep in my purse for self-defense. Even the best police officer remains what Hawkins described as a “first responder” – I hope carrying a gun insures that I won’t be the victim of a crime they’ll have to respond to.
If you won’t carry a gun to protect yourself then at least carry a gun to protect your wife, children, and friends. Do you love them or not ? Cops and big brother government show up after the fact. You are on your own. Think about it !
I read that post lifting of the DC gun ban (2008), gun sales in the nation’s capital have exploded, especially in the more upscale areas. And that “no one feels secure”, which is a sad statement on contemporary America.
Sadly, many among us go through life without asking questions from either category, preferring instead to live on assumption (or presumption).
It’s worse than that. Way worse.
Minutes away when seconds count.
“An armed society is a polite society.”
- Robert Anson Heinlein
Went to a company picnic years ago. A off duty officer dating one of our associates had a t-shirt, Homicide Division Our Day Begins When Your Day Ends. Ha Ha. I have even had cops tell me that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to have guns, none, zero. That is what the pOlice are for. Then who is to protect us from them? Or a pOlice force that knocks down your door in the middle of the night. The justice system? They are already turning out career criminals with big words like recidisomethingarather, and the states are turning them out of their jails because of budget cuts. Freedom to bear arms is more necessary now then any time in our history.
Hmmmm….let me guess, you live in either Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles, or Boston. No answer expected
Oh….I forgot Detroit.
Isn’t it curious that governments always fix deficits by cutting public safety officers & emptying the prisons FIRST! . Law enforcement Unions want a frightened population willing to increase taxes in order to pay for their lifetime benefits. Even the blind can how the game is played.
There is a great interchange in the computer game Mass Effect 2, where your character is on a space based prison ship and the warden it talking about how the prisoner’s home world pays to keep them there. If you inquire about what happens if the home world doesn’t pay, he replies that they explain to the home world that the prisoner will be released back to his world at an unspecified place and time. Extortion is extortion, and you are right, that is exactly what politicians try to do in order to get you, the taxpayer, genuflect to another tax, and another, another, when none of them ever solve the problems they are supposed to solve.
It is a fact that in the United Sates citizens have a right to be unprotected. However they do not have a right to force other citizens to be unprotected, and that needs to be broadcast.
I have had a long struggle to clearly make the points you make and I thank you for the clear message you present here. One must make the decision to be prepared to defend self and family before hand, and prepare accordingly. Also the police are not required to protect you, they must only make a reasonable effort to get there in time to save you and yours, and if not, to write a report. If your wife or daughter is raped and murdered while you stand helpless, it was your decision.
No matter the message, some will still cling to their unprotectedness. Is it not hilarious that the same people who wish to be unprotected because they pay police to protect them after the crime, are now frightened to death to go to a doctor because they might have to pay for it?
I used to work with a woman in the navy who told me flat out that if she were to arrive home from work to find a man in the act of raping her 12 year old daughter, that she would never shoot that man, even to stop her daughter from being raped. I just cannot imagine that mindset and I was boggled at the time and gave up. People who think it’s ok to let criminals have their way are not true Americans in my opinion. I hope she reads this and thinks to herself, “yeah I was pretty stupid back then.”
I’m going to offer up my “modest proposal” which I periodically bring up:
Our judicial system can give hardened criminals all the civil liberties and extra-legal special rights they want, in return for the rest of us having this one civil liberty: the right to carry a firearm, in ANY jurisdiction in the country.
I think that’s a fair deal, no?
Does not the constitution say that your right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? If they pass a law that says you can’t carry it here or there or without a permit (permission) then that law is illegal.
You would think. But many jurisdictions and states outright prohibit private citizens from owning handguns in particular, and even firearms in general.
There are two elements to proper weapons training. The first is obviously training on how to safely use a weapon. However, the second is often overlooked: Morality.
We shudder when we seek pictures of five year old children holding automatic weapons in a “Palestinian” pre-school. We squirm when we hear of depressed people who kill their families and then themselves. And we shake our heads when some thug mows down a crowd of innocent bystanders with automatic weapons fire.
With the use of weapons comes a strong need to ensure a moral stance. At the local gun range nearly everyone is polite, upbeat, moral to a fault, and generous. This isn’t an accident. Those who choose to learn to use deadly weapons (even if they’re engaging in something as simple as target shooting, trap, or turkey shoots) are not the problem.
The problems are those who ignore the morality, steal a gun and then abuse the weapon, killing innocent bystanders who have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
With freedom comes the responsibility to learn, teach, and defend. We have been raised on too many heroic cop shows and movies. As much as we’d like, they can’t defend us everywhere. Some of us live in places where the nearest cop is the better part of an hour or more away. We know that a wise person keeps a defensive weapon ready, be it a loaded shotgun under the bed, or a handgun under the pillow.
The right to self defense assumes a moral, upstanding person. We need to ensure that this morality isn’t forgotten, or we’ll be no better than those terrible “Palestinian” parents.
I have owned rifles and shotguns for forty-five years. I am now considering buying a handgun for protection in my old age. Why are they so expensive? It seems that one decent one would cost almost as much as all my ten previous guns combined. I don’t need a Rolls Royce; a Ford would do just fine.
Dwight, You can get a good used revolver for under $400 if you look around. Make it a point to practice, or you’re not really helping yourself. Get instruction if you feel the need.
I am in a Rifle and Pistol club and there are folks about who give all sorts of gun courses, even situational semi-combat stuff. I hunt a lot, but rarely shoot. I hear the folks blasting away at the range while I am out alone in the woods, and am glad that I am where I am. Them, I’m not sure about. My wife has enough trouble with my having all the other guns, most of which are always locked in the gun cabinet. although there is a 20G single shot under the bed. unloaded of course, but there are shells nearby. She hates the idea of there being a handgun in the house because of the nine grandchildren who visit all the time. Its the process/practice of storing it in the house, then I taking it, or not taking it, how I carry it, how big a deal other people will make it, all cross my mind. But I am thinking about it.
As for the shooting part, it seems a lot easier to get a bullet into someone coming at you than it is to get one into a deer that is often many yards away and sometimes running like hell. I’m sure there are people who can give you the endless permutations for what you have to be prepared for, what you look for etc., but that starts to become too much of a gun-carrying way of life, which I hear of some here, but am not really interested in. It will not be a passion, but a practical practice. I am a practical man and definitely not a gun worshipper. It is a useful, if deadly, tool to me, not the re-incarnation of the FFers.
Take some reaslistic combat handgun training from one of the uppper level shcools or instructors, and you will soon toss that silly idea. Last time I checked, most deer aren’t shooting back. Adrenaline and incoming fire do strange things to marksmanship.
I can’t think of anything more impractical than having a gun around and not being proficient with it.
And no, punching some paper on the range once in a while does not make you proficient for defensive situations.
Dwight, please don’t take RKV’s advice. If you decide to have a gun around, get some instruction whether you “feel” the need or not.
The need is real.
You have a rifle, yet don’t let it rule your life as you think some people allow handguns to rule theirs.
You have a shotgun, yet don’t …
You have a car or pickup, yet don’t …
A handgun is the same way. A tool that you can gain proficiency with. (What do you do with your crescent wrench?)
However, something I’ve said to many people, “Get a really good holster.” The pistol does you no good locked up, or laying in the weeds somewhere. Better the best holster and a usable handgun than a miserable holster and the best handgun. And carry at home. You can track the kids and the gun better that way.
I’ve used and carried for years without trouble, and with minimal instructions. I would still get those instructions, if they were in my reach.
I suggest you check out: http://www.defensivecarry.com for practical stuff.
You sound like you might enjoy visiting “Greybeard online”, just for socializing. Search on “go2gbo” for links to the forum.
Sounds like good advice, although I’m not sure about the carrying at home. At my house it would be an issue, one that I might overcome, but would have to expend a lot of emotional capital. The comment about the good holster makes all the sense in the world.
Thank you.
For those who are squeamish about guns, there are many other self defense alternatives such as stun guns, Tasers, pepper sprays and alarms. I know many who don’t want a gun handy because of the small children in their house so if they have one, it is locked up and out of reach. That makes it difficult to get in an emergency. Odd thing is that many states have laws against stun guns & Tasers with fewer still having laws restricting pepper sprays. Guess they would rather we have a lethal gun.