Carry and conceal permit

[Mide]

My main concern about carrying is the nightmare that occurs afterwords. I mean I don't know how much of it is in urban legend territory, but I've heard that unless you're in your home and there has been an obvious break-in, if you fire your gun outside on the street, you're going to jail to get processed even if you were the victim. I think the most I don't trust is the court system in America...you often hear nutty stories that just don't make sense. Like you are walking down the street, some guy whips out a knife and demands for your wallet. You pull out your pistol and shoot him, paralyzing him. You call the cops, go through all the paperwork and hassle. The perp sues YOU. HE wins, you pay out the ass for his medical bills and for his pain and suffering even though he tried to rob you.

Yes, your other option in this story is to get robbed but it's the long-term hassle of probable backwards lawsuit that gets me thinking.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Sea Moose


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant <--- This chap here was basically the reason for tight gun control in the land of Aus. I am not asking you guys to not carry guns, you live in a different culture/country to me. I don't understand the need. Your love for guns is deeply embedded in your culture and way of life. Our last prime minister was smart enough to bring in the strong gun control following martin bryants psychotic episode.

Aus is becoming Americanized more and more, and that was one trend that we do not want here.

So one guy (who already had mental problems) goes berserk, and you take away the rights of 20 million people? And you think this was a good idea?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: CrankyMcStank
I've got a Glock G36: http://www.the-armory.com/shopsite_s...product50.html
My gf has a Kel-Tec P-3AT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec_P3AT

I carry the Glock in the car all the time and carry it on my person at night and in the day if I feel like I'm in a dangerous area.
My gf carries the Kel-Tec in her purse and that's where it pretty much stays so she'll have it within reach if she's in the car by herself or out somewhere by herself or with her friends.

I also have a Browning Gold 12 gauge shotgun in the house for in-home protection: http://www.cabelas.com/gun-inv...8403-gold-12-mit.shtml

How do you like the Kel-Tec? I have a Glock 36 and I love it, but I wouldn't mind having something smaller as well.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Mide
My main concern about carrying is the nightmare that occurs afterwords. I mean I don't know how much of it is in urban legend territory, but I've heard that unless you're in your home and there has been an obvious break-in, if you fire your gun outside on the street, you're going to jail to get processed even if you were the victim. I think the most I don't trust is the court system in America...you often hear nutty stories that just don't make sense. Like you are walking down the street, some guy whips out a knife and demands for your wallet. You pull out your pistol and shoot him, paralyzing him. You call the cops, go through all the paperwork and hassle. The perp sues YOU. HE wins, you pay out the ass for his medical bills and for his pain and suffering even though he tried to rob you.

Yes, your other option in this story is to get robbed but it's the long-term hassle of probable backwards lawsuit that gets me thinking.

there is a lot more to the story than that usually. However; you have to thank those that allow these lawsuits....they are usually promoted by those wanting the guns off the streets.

The thing with using a gun is, you have to be in fear of your life and have no other option.

If a thug runs away and you shoot him, that's bad. If a thug is just breaking into your car and you shoot him from a distance, bad again.

However if that thug somehow said He was going to kill you and he appeared to have his own gun, things usually go down differently. I believe in castle law states some extend it to vehicles parked on the property.

It really matters how you explain the shooting.

 

[Mide]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

It really matters how you explain the shooting.

Correct. I understand the whole "self-defense" thing. 2 people break into your house. One intruder points a gun at your wife, you shoot him in the head. The other flees and while running down the stairs you tag him from behind. I am assuming that you'd get charged because it was a shot in the back. Makes sense even though the house-owner probably wouldn't feel the same.

Back to the street scenario though, it would depend on what the attacker was doing at the time of his death and unless there is a camera or a ton of eyewitnesses I don't know how a CSI squad would be able to decipher what went on.

1) Attacker lunges at you swinging the knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

2) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

3) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and point it at him. He would probably run if he is not armed as well or he could be armed, starts running away, turns around and shoots you instead.

I think under our legal system #1 is the only one that would be considered "legal" but who would actually know if he was swinging the knife or just brandishing?

Either way if there were no witnesses and all the cops had was your word, his word, 1 knife and 1 gun, I still foresee trouble for the one carrying the gun.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Mide

Originally posted by: alkemyst

It really matters how you explain the shooting.

Correct. I understand the whole "self-defense" thing. 2 people break into your house. One intruder points a gun at your wife, you shoot him in the head. The other flees and while running down the stairs you tag him from behind. I am assuming that you'd get charged because it was a shot in the back. Makes sense even though the house-owner probably wouldn't feel the same.

Back to the street scenario though, it would depend on what the attacker was doing at the time of his death and unless there is a camera or a ton of eyewitnesses I don't know how a CSI squad would be able to decipher what went on.

1) Attacker lunges at you swinging the knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

2) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

3) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and point it at him. He would probably run if he is not armed as well or he could be armed, starts running away, turns around and shoots you instead.

I think under our legal system #1 is the only one that would be considered "legal" but who would actually know if he was swinging the knife or just brandishing?

Either way if there were no witnesses and all the cops had was your word, his word, 1 knife and 1 gun, I still foresee trouble for the one carrying the gun.

if the guy is dead, there is no other side.

 

[Mide]

The dead person's family usually usually starts a lawsuit

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Mide

Originally posted by: alkemyst

It really matters how you explain the shooting.

Correct. I understand the whole "self-defense" thing. 2 people break into your house. One intruder points a gun at your wife, you shoot him in the head. The other flees and while running down the stairs you tag him from behind. I am assuming that you'd get charged because it was a shot in the back. Makes sense even though the house-owner probably wouldn't feel the same.

Back to the street scenario though, it would depend on what the attacker was doing at the time of his death and unless there is a camera or a ton of eyewitnesses I don't know how a CSI squad would be able to decipher what went on.

1) Attacker lunges at you swinging the knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

2) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

3) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and point it at him. He would probably run if he is not armed as well or he could be armed, starts running away, turns around and shoots you instead.

I think under our legal system #1 is the only one that would be considered "legal" but who would actually know if he was swinging the knife or just brandishing?

Either way if there were no witnesses and all the cops had was your word, his word, 1 knife and 1 gun, I still foresee trouble for the one carrying the gun.

I think you are over complicating things. Unless the person shooting is a dirtbag themselves or simply has a piss-poor attorney, they aren't going to jail for a clean kill / shooting.

Pop a guy in the back or do something once he's been immobilized and then you went outside the law.

Swinging vs brandishing are no different. You do know pointing an unloaded gun at someone is a more serious crime than if it was loaded (unloaded guns can only be used at a threat, not defense)...

As far as #3 goes...you'd be in the clear to fire and you'd have to be an idiot if the dude can draw, turn and fire prior to you just putting him down.

Most of the people that have been arrested for firing their guns are either lying or not telling the whole truth.

 

[Fear No Evil]

As the old saying goes. I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[CrankyMcStank]

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: CrankyMcStank
I've got a Glock G36: http://www.the-armory.com/shopsite_s...product50.html
My gf has a Kel-Tec P-3AT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec_P3AT

I carry the Glock in the car all the time and carry it on my person at night and in the day if I feel like I'm in a dangerous area.
My gf carries the Kel-Tec in her purse and that's where it pretty much stays so she'll have it within reach if she's in the car by herself or out somewhere by herself or with her friends.

I also have a Browning Gold 12 gauge shotgun in the house for in-home protection: http://www.cabelas.com/gun-inv...8403-gold-12-mit.shtml

How do you like the Kel-Tec? I have a Glock 36 and I love it, but I wouldn't mind having something smaller as well.

The Kel-Tec is nice...it's very accurate but takes some practice to get good with it. It is not a gun for someone who just likes to shoot for fun but is perfect for someone who wants an accurate weapon for self defense. It's size is perfect for carrying in your pocket or in a purse.

IMO, if you want something that will serve as a excellent personal self defense weapon without the bulk the Kel-Tec is it. My gf loves it.

 

[rgwalt]

Originally posted by: Sea Moose
This a very interesting discussion. It is quite a cultural difference.

It isn't a cultural difference... it is a realization by people that the police cannot protect you 24/7 and crime does happen. I have the right to protect myself and my property. If I didn't have that right, lawlessness and anarchy would reign. I have no interest in trying to fight someone, and I have no interest in killing someone over the $13 in my wallet. However, you can't know what is going through the mind of the person who is attacking you. Do they want to rob you? Do they want to rob you, then murder you so you can't identify them? In all probability, they have no interest in killing you either, but that isn't a die I want to roll.

It isn't about the odds, its about the STAKES.

 

[rgwalt]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Mide

Originally posted by: alkemyst

It really matters how you explain the shooting.

Correct. I understand the whole "self-defense" thing. 2 people break into your house. One intruder points a gun at your wife, you shoot him in the head. The other flees and while running down the stairs you tag him from behind. I am assuming that you'd get charged because it was a shot in the back. Makes sense even though the house-owner probably wouldn't feel the same.

Back to the street scenario though, it would depend on what the attacker was doing at the time of his death and unless there is a camera or a ton of eyewitnesses I don't know how a CSI squad would be able to decipher what went on.

1) Attacker lunges at you swinging the knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

2) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and shoot him.

3) Attacker is just standing there with a knife. You pull out a pistol and point it at him. He would probably run if he is not armed as well or he could be armed, starts running away, turns around and shoots you instead.

I think under our legal system #1 is the only one that would be considered "legal" but who would actually know if he was swinging the knife or just brandishing?

Either way if there were no witnesses and all the cops had was your word, his word, 1 knife and 1 gun, I still foresee trouble for the one carrying the gun.

I think you are over complicating things. Unless the person shooting is a dirtbag themselves or simply has a piss-poor attorney, they aren't going to jail for a clean kill / shooting.

Pop a guy in the back or do something once he's been immobilized and then you went outside the law.

Swinging vs brandishing are no different. You do know pointing an unloaded gun at someone is a more serious crime than if it was loaded (unloaded guns can only be used at a threat, not defense)...

As far as #3 goes...you'd be in the clear to fire and you'd have to be an idiot if the dude can draw, turn and fire prior to you just putting him down.

Most of the people that have been arrested for firing their guns are either lying or not telling the whole truth.

It also depends on the state in which you live. If you are going to carry in your state, you had better know the laws in your state. As a rule of thumb, shooting someone in the back is a bad move. However, if you feel that your life is in jeopardy, that the person is going to kill you, then to hell with the laws. Is it better to be dead or in jail?

 

[Mide]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
As the old saying goes. I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

I've never heard that but I like it

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: CrankyMcStank

Originally posted by: JLee

Originally posted by: CrankyMcStank
I've got a Glock G36: http://www.the-armory.com/shopsite_s...product50.html
My gf has a Kel-Tec P-3AT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec_P3AT

I carry the Glock in the car all the time and carry it on my person at night and in the day if I feel like I'm in a dangerous area.
My gf carries the Kel-Tec in her purse and that's where it pretty much stays so she'll have it within reach if she's in the car by herself or out somewhere by herself or with her friends.

I also have a Browning Gold 12 gauge shotgun in the house for in-home protection: http://www.cabelas.com/gun-inv...8403-gold-12-mit.shtml

How do you like the Kel-Tec? I have a Glock 36 and I love it, but I wouldn't mind having something smaller as well.

The Kel-Tec is nice...it's very accurate but takes some practice to get good with it. It is not a gun for someone who just likes to shoot for fun but is perfect for someone who wants an accurate weapon for self defense. It's size is perfect for carrying in your pocket or in a purse.

IMO, if you want something that will serve as a excellent personal self defense weapon without the bulk the Kel-Tec is it. My gf loves it.

In addition to the Kal-Tec I highly recommend the Walther PPS. It is my everyday carry and is not only very accurate for such a small pistol, but also easy to wield, even in .40. I carry the 9mm version which is 8 shots.

 

[lowrider69]

Originally posted by: Sea Moose

Originally posted by: Unheard
I carry 100% of the time, minus showering and sleeping and places I am restricted from doing so. It's not cause it makes me feel like a big man. It's to protect myself in the event I ever need it. I'm a safe driver, yet I still have car insurance. It's about being prepared, not about trying to make an image of myself. I'd leave my gun at home, but a cop is too heavy to carry.

Just because you Aussies rolled over and turned in your guns doesn't mean I am going too. Just because people from the Northeast US are pussies for the most part, doesn't mean I'm going to be a pussy. Firearm ownership is a right. Regulation is unconstitutional, and some states are working to repeal the regulation that our scared gov't has put in place. My home state is one of the states doing this. We have just passed restaurant carry and park carry. We have declared that we are a sovereign state. We have many more bills that are in the working to bring freedom back to America. The freedom that our gov't has taken away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant <--- This chap here was basically the reason for tight gun control in the land of Aus. I am not asking you guys to not carry guns, you live in a different culture/country to me. I don't understand the need. Your love for guns is deeply embedded in your culture and way of life. Our last prime minister was smart enough to bring in the strong gun control following martin bryants psychotic episode.

Aus is becoming Americanized more and more, and that was one trend that we do not want here.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi361.html

 

[sourceninja]

Yea, if I've learned one thing it is that making something illegal keeps criminals from using it. I mean drug dealers wouldn't want to illegally acquire anything.

Making something illegal to prevent crime is a stupid as killing doctors to prevent deaths.