But someone looking to harm you doesn't care if you don't like his concealed gun, or whether concealment is legal or not.
Ah - so you've decided to troll me now, is that it? And you even got a couple of likes out of it! Here for your convenience I've collected the relevant parts of the conversation, but yes, it is my personal training that a weapon is never to be brought to bear unless the intent is to kill. Obviously there are many options besides this. But in the context of concealed carry and whatever circumstances bricklayer found himself in: isn't he the one you should be asking whether or not he thinks the only way to use a weapon in self-defense is to kill someone with it?
My guess is you are not a keyboard warrior. You understand once a firearm clears leather, it must be used used to eliminate the present threat, the situation is not like watching COPS, where you might be able to get the threat to comply, no, it's life or death, the only question is who will die. And that depends on your training and who you are trained by. Range is nice but SIM is much better.
Open carry scares people so that would require police to continually answer man with a gun calls wasting their time.
Explain, then, your nonsensical assumption that, by virtue of using his firearm twice in self- defense, he killed two people.
So you support open-carry then? It is interesting the effect the anti-gun/pro-gun division and narratives in the US has altered our perceptions. IME, folks from similar cultures to ours that have strict gun control tend to think that concealed carry is more dangerous than open carry, while anti-gun Americans are afraid (read: offended, imo) at the site of them and would rather they be concealed. If I were one to walk about life worrying about who might have a weapon (I don't) I would prefer to be able to see it... All of us who encounter a hundred people or more daily can at least (I hope!) take comfort in the fact that at least one of them is legally carrying a concealed firearm, and likely another is illegally carrying one, not to mention the multitude of knives and asps, and the vast, VAST majority of us still manage to go unattacked. Contrasted with how many of us have been injured in a car accident but still drive relatively unafraid... makes me LOL at humans.
So don't conceal carry. Funny how crime rates went down with the introduction of concealed carry laws. That's not supposed to happen, at least if you're a liberal.
The only individuals who are put at risk of harm from the legal carrying of concealed firearms, are those who are predisposed to committing criminal acts against others. The fact you feel put at risk by the legal carrying of concealed firearms, is quite telling.
Consider https://news.yahoo.com/police-palestinian-stabs-israeli-woman-114427725.html JERUSALEM (AP) — A Palestinian teenager stabbed an Israeli woman on Tuesday before being shot and wounded by a bystander, Israeli police said. . . . . Maybe those of us who do not own nor carry should be taxed to cover the expenses of those who do defend "us".
Only if a criminal perceives you to be unarmed, however history has clearly demonstrated, the passing of shall issue carry laws, lowers the risk of the law abiding population to be criminally victimized.
Grave danger? Is there another kind? http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/f/few-good-men-script-transcript.html
I don't get it. You made a very specific, statistical claim. Either it is verifiable, or you just made it up.
How many of those people do you think legally own those concealed weapons. If you had a gun would you be likely to shoot an innocent person with it or no?
Why are you against certain people feeling safe enough to go out in public? There are lots of people too scared to go out in public without a gun. Carrying a gun gives them feelings of being safe. Why do you want to take that away from them?
