Pistol-packing soccer mom sues county sheriff

Ah, NO!

A criminal can attack at any time, anywhere. A police response at best takes a few minutes...do you know how much damage an attacker can do in that time interval? How many people an attacker can kill in that time period?

Answer: A whole frickin' lot.

Those who choose to arm and protect themselves are not vigilantes. They are not running down criminals and administering their version of justice. Those who carry seek only to defend themselves in the event of an attack. They are not replacements for a police force, they are not trying to "be a hero", the are not "compensating for something", and they are not "little vigilantes". I will not stand for that "vigilante" name calling BS. I'm sick and tired of that slur applied to citizens who strictly abide by the law and jump through the hoops in order to equip themselves with the most effective tools for self defense.

I would also like to add that all of the people I know who carry concealed weapons go out of their way to avoid situations where there may be trouble. Carrying a concealed weapon means you are carrying a lethal weapon. You are responsible for every bullet you fire.

Those who are against plain ordinary people carrying weapons love to take cheap shots at us, calling us hothead, vigilantes, stupid rednecks, etc. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Admittedly, we have had a few incidents where concealed carry permit holders have committed crimes. Once incident comes to mind is that of two guys, both concealed carry permit holders, who became hostile over a road rage incident and began exchanging fire. However, incidents such as these are extremely isolated and rare. 99.99% of permit holders are law abiding and upstanding citizens. Simple reason is, criminals wouldn't bother with getting a concealed weapons permit if they came free in a cereal box, much less bother with the background check or training courses- they just carry their guns (usually stolen guns illegally obtained on the street corner) and don't care one whit about the law, for by definition, they are criminals.

 

You sure are speaking for a lot of OTHER people.

 

And you sure are painting with a broad brush.

We shooters are law abiding, upstanding citizens who just want to be left alone to enjoy our hobby and our means of defense. We do not take vigilante action against criminals (believe me, it would be extremely easy for me and others to do so- pick up a rifle and start cleaning out the 'hood), but we choose to obey the law and let the police do their job.

When you hear of concealed weapons permit holders starting to "take the law into our own hands" let me know...cause it ain't happened yet...

Hang around a firearms board...you will see the near universal consensus of avoiding trouble at all costs and only using a gun as a last resort.

 

Wow you like to argue and i must say your gun happy. LOL

 

Then, by all means, please clarify.

 

You are right, I love to argue.



.

 

At least he makes a good argument. An argument that you obviously paid zero attention to.

 

You have a bad attitude, you should not be allowed to carry a weapon

 

Oh, I think his attitude is pretty good for a guy with a gun and someone irritating him.

I use to have a key chain my husband gave me that said " I've got PMS and a gun, now what did you say?"

 

The Luby's massacre in 1991 is a prime example of how carrying a concealed weapon would have saved lives and resulted in Texas becoming a shall-issue state. Suzanna Hupp lost her parents in that restaurant and it didn't need to happen since she left her pistol in her car, in accordance with local firearms laws. Had she had her weapon, she would have had the time to pull it out and neutralize the suspect before 23 people were killed and another 20 were wounded.

Virginia Tech was another travesty that shows the inherent flaw in the "gun free zone", also known as the "free fire zone".