My response to the "alcohol and guns" debate

This is a discussion on My response to the "alcohol and guns" debate within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Oneshot you are right we would all defend our homes but in todays society you may also have to defend your actions simply because alcohol ...

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 165

Thread: My response to the "alcohol and guns" debate

  1. #46
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,040
    Oneshot you are right we would all defend our homes but in todays society you may also have to defend your actions simply because alcohol was involved at the time of the incident. I honestly dont know how that would work but again I do not think that the fact you were under the influence would be ignored especially if the BG lived or his family sued in civil court if it is allowed following the criminal trial.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoMonkey View Post
    And by doing so, you are putting everyone on the road in imminent danger. You get in that car and you drive drunk... head on into a family of four, and they died. Good job. Firearms are tools. They can be used for protection, or they can be used to hurt people. It depends on the operator. They are dangerous, and for the most part a healthy respect for them mitigates that danger. If you are drinking you have no business behind the wheel or holding a firearm.

    Here is an idea. If you are drinking, have a DD. Better than that have an ARMED DD.
    You missed the point of the anecdote, so you're saying if it is you and an armed attacker with the immediate intent of malice against you, and your only way to prevent death is by getting into the car (intoxicated) you would think of the family you might hit on the way to safety?

    Some people might call that responsible, I call it foolish. But if you're okay with being attacked, and potentially killed, why do you carry in the first place?

  4. #48
    Member Array TangoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ft Benning, GA
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    You missed the point of the anecdote, so you're saying if it is you and an armed attacker with the immediate intent of malice against you, and your only way to prevent death is by getting into the car (intoxicated) you would think of the family you might hit on the way to safety?

    Some people might call that responsible, I call it foolish. But if you're okay with being attacked, and potentially killed, why do you carry in the first place?
    I carry to protect myself and my loved ones. I just don’t get drunk in the process.

    I get the point of the anecdote, and yes I would think about that family. I hope you would too. I hope you would think about how you are going to responsibly carry and respond if ever threatened. Is your plan to do anything to save yourself with no regard whatsoever to anyone else that is around? Sounds like you might be more dangerous than the BG. I guess we can all just "death blossom" if we are threatened. Screw the family that happens to also be in the area. That is what you are saying when you get behind the wheel for any reason after drinking.

    I understand that every situation is different. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best option, but let’s not delude ourselves by saying there is no consequences for our actions. Protecting ourselves is one thing. Putting others at risk might be necessary, but we should take all precautions to mitigate the risk. If it is me or the BG, he dies. If it is me or my daughter, or your daughter, I would have to choose to save her.

    Again, I know I am long winded, and this is one scenario out of a million. As responsible armed citizens, we need to be just that, responsible. If we want to drink, have a plan. Don’t drink and drive, and secure you firearm. You have options, drink at home with friends, don’t drink, or have an armed DD. I have been learning a lot from everyone on this forum, thanks for all the great advice from all the threads. Drinking and driving is sensitive issue with me.

  5. #49
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,692
    Here the law is a bit different ;

    1. If you are legally intoxicated, .08 or above, you lose your license.
    2. If you are below that and judgment / actions are impaired, it can be used against you in a court.... that you should not have been carrying or in control of a gun ....
    3. If you shoot someone while intoxicated, and are in possession of the gun only long enough to defend yourself ..... and it normally would be considered a justified self-defense, then essentially... it's still self-defense and not illegal.

    the distinction is , not "carrying" while intoxicated and/or impaired.

    I don't drink. I don't want to be reliant on the judgment of people who I've seen that do drink and think they are doing great .... when in reality they aren't.

  6. #50
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoMonkey View Post
    I carry to protect myself and my loved ones. I just donít get drunk in the process.

    I get the point of the anecdote, and yes I would think about that family. I hope you would too. I hope you would think about how you are going to responsibly carry and respond if ever threatened. Is your plan to do anything to save yourself with no regard whatsoever to anyone else that is around? Sounds like you might be more dangerous than the BG. I guess we can all just "death blossom" if we are threatened. Screw the family that happens to also be in the area. That is what you are saying when you get behind the wheel for any reason after drinking.

    I understand that every situation is different. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best option, but letís not delude ourselves by saying there is no consequences for our actions. Protecting ourselves is one thing. Putting others at risk might be necessary, but we should take all precautions to mitigate the risk. If it is me or the BG, he dies. If it is me or my daughter, or your daughter, I would have to choose to save her.

    Again, I know I am long winded, and this is one scenario out of a million. As responsible armed citizens, we need to be just that, responsible. If we want to drink, have a plan. Donít drink and drive, and secure you firearm. You have options, drink at home with friends, donít drink, or have an armed DD. I have been learning a lot from everyone on this forum, thanks for all the great advice from all the threads. Drinking and driving is sensitive issue with me.
    Refer to my old posts, I've addressed this already.

    I don't agree with you and I don't even think you agree with yourself, but you won't realize it until that day comes (which is hopefully never).

  7. #51
    Member Array TangoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ft Benning, GA
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    Refer to my old posts, I've addressed this already.

    I don't agree with you and I don't even think you agree with yourself, but you won't realize it until that day comes (which is hopefully never).
    Please don't insult my intelligence, I feel very strongly about my comments. I would not say something unless I agree with it.

    I support you and all legally armed citizens. I disagree with you too, but I think I understand you. You are going to carry a firearm to protect yourself no matter what. I can support that decision. Your comments say that you do not choose to make responsible decisions while you are carrying. You will carry and drink. I do not support you there. You choose to place you life above the life of an armed attacker. I support that. Your comments say you would put your life above every other person in the area. Not because you made the hard decision to draw and defend yourself, but because you made the selfish decision to get drunk while carrying. When you fire your weapon while intoxicated, I hope you hit your attacker, and not the mother of two standing behind him. I do not support that. Likewise, driving while intoxicated puts everyone in the area in danger. I can understand driving a short distance to get away, but not to get all the way to the Police station.

    I am not saying you should not carry to protect yourself. I am saying that if you are carrying, you should not be drinking. I don't care what a great shot you think you are, or how great you think you drive, when you have been drinking. You are putting others in danger, and you are less apt to be able to defend yourself.

    What happen to the idea that we carry to stay alive. We don't carry to be heroes, kill BGs, or save the world. We do it to protect ourselves, our families, and the innocent people around us. We need to make grown-up decisions. That means we do not drink and drive, or drink and carry dangerous firearms. Nobody here is Superman.

  8. #52
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoMonkey View Post
    Please don't insult my intelligence, I feel very strongly about my comments. I would not say something unless I agree with it.

    I support you and all legally armed citizens. I disagree with you too, but I think I understand you. You are going to carry a firearm to protect yourself no matter what. I can support that decision. Your comments say that you do not choose to make responsible decisions while you are carrying. You will carry and drink. I do not support you there. You choose to place you life above the life of an armed attacker. I support that. Your comments say you would put your life above every other person in the area. Not because you made the hard decision to draw and defend yourself, but because you made the selfish decision to get drunk while carrying. When you fire your weapon while intoxicated, I hope you hit your attacker, and not the mother of two standing behind him. I do not support that. Likewise, driving while intoxicated puts everyone in the area in danger. I can understand driving a short distance to get away, but not to get all the way to the Police station.

    I am not saying you should not carry to protect yourself. I am saying that if you are carrying, you should not be drinking. I don't care what a great shot you think you are, or how great you think you drive, when you have been drinking. You are putting others in danger, and you are less apt to be able to defend yourself.

    What happen to the idea that we carry to stay alive. We don't carry to be heroes, kill BGs, or save the world. We do it to protect ourselves, our families, and the innocent people around us. We need to make grown-up decisions. That means we do not drink and drive, or drink and carry dangerous firearms. Nobody here is Superman.
    In my other posts I addressed the idea of context of shootings and the lines of self defense, drawing and shooting being the last one.

    If I were in a crowded area (say a bar, or another public place) chances are I wouldn't find myself feeling threatened enough to not be able to simply avoid the situation by walking away, avoidance is key. However, in the news article I provided in the OP, it was a vacant street where the women was attacked (long enough to have her clothes ripped off and strangled to death) and had there been other people in the area this attack (hopefully) would not have happened, in her situation, I think defending yourself with your weapon would not happen unless you were totally without help and backed into a corner, in which case would I pay attention to make sure what is behind my target? Absolutely. But in pulling out my weapon in the first place it's safe to say that there is no one else around. (before I'm reamed out for this I would NEVER merely assume that was the case)

    These were the comments I was previously referring to, as well as with driving drunk or carrying drunk. I'd never condone the loss of innocent lives. But as you said, a situational basis.

    You call drinking and carrying selfish, I call mugging and raping selfish too. I'll let a jury decide which is more selfish (God forbid).

  9. #53
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    Woman Found Dead in NoLibs Lot Identified | NBC Philadelphia

    There is another article that confirms she had been out at the bar, drinking etc, no BAC listed but she probably wasn't intoxicated. But this poor girl was at the mercy of her attacker and this happens all too often, many people on and off this forum's opinions previously stated in other threads / conversations would have this girl unarmed simply because she was going out drinking and hanging out with friends. This disturbing outcome is all too common.

    This is why I carry regardless of going out to the bar or drinking with friends. I don't think simply because people like to partake in normal and sociable activities that they shouldn't be permitted to defend themselves.


    Just my opinion.

    EDIT: Also, let's say she was armed and successfully defended herself, do you think a legal system would crucify her because her "judgment was impaired"? I hear this argument far too often, my opinion, if you're "impaired" or not, assault / rape / muggings are just as violent and tragic as if you weren't "impaired" and you should have the right to defend yourself regardless.

    IMO, this is the risk we all take....if a woman is truly endangered...drunk or not...she has the right to defend herself. Drunk or not, she must be able to prove the legal necessity to use a firearm. Can most people do this? Otherwise, then it is our responsibility to not drink that much.

    So any gun carrier must use their judgement on how much they can drink and still retain their faculties.

    I am torn on carrying in bars....and at sporting events. On the one hand I can see many reasons why it would make the carrier safer. On the other hand I see alot of *holes* in general that irresponsible people that I'm afraid to drive on the same roads with will still be a danger if carrying. (Personally I'd feel better if people were armed in bars than at sporting events, but that's just me.)

    For a woman in such situations...it's always better to walk out with a girlfriend or ask a bouncer. That's judgement call as well and there's no reason to be ashamed to do so.

    In the long run, I fall back on my sig. like re: safety and freedom. Not sure if it's smart re: bar carry but I'd be willing to risk it.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  10. #54
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by unloved View Post
    There's a fundamental flaw in your reasoning. Don't feel bad, though. Most of our legislators make the same mistake. Laws do not protect anyone, nor are they intended to. Laws exist to provide a framework for punishment of those found guilty of violating them.

    Wut? The laws are there to justify their own existences???? If you dont create them, then no one can violate them. So what is their purpose again?


    Laws have corresponding punishments and sentencing. And the execution of those consequences is intended a) to remove threats from society, b) as punishment of the violater, & c) as a deterrant to committing that and similar crimes.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  11. #55
    Member Array mech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wi
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by oneshot View Post
    What about if your AT HOME, minding your own business, having some alcoholic beverages, and some thugs decide that today is the day they B and E your house. Gonna sit there and give them carte blanche, dial 911 and sit back and hope for the best?
    I didn't think so. All you naysayers are gonna grab your firearms and stop the knuckledraggers, aren't you?

    First, yes, in my home, with a few drinks in me, BANG would be the first response. But...


    There is a big difference in me, firing at intruders in my home after I've had a few drinks in me versus the same situation, BGs coming for me at a crowded bar/street corner/etc..etc. The chances of me hitting someone else in my home, not a BG, are remote, even if the round leaves the house via window, wall or door, where as one poorly aimed round, due to fear/booze/evasion of attack, whatever, KILLS some poor innocent that had nothing to do with it.

    Now, move to trail and suddenly, blood alcohol level comes into play, in this day and age, I don't think it'd make a difference if you were under attack or not. You killed someone while discharging your weapon with alcohol in your blood and damn tootin, guilty will be the verdict.

    I'm trying to get my head around the idea that "responsible" people, who won't drink and drive, would even chance drinking and shooting?
    Damned stoopid, imo.
    SA Loaded 1911
    XD45 Service
    XDs45

  12. #56
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveJay View Post
    A well regulated militia implies that some rules, regulations, are necessary and good...

    Just as anti 2A folks try to take the first part and twist it to mean something it aint...I feel some pro-2A people take that first part and try to completely disregard it...

    Obviously, the Founding Fathers were in favor of private ownership of firearms...but they also were, IMHO, in favor of some regulation of that ownership...otherwise, we would not see those opening words of "A well regulated militia"

    It has been explained to me that 'well-regulated,' in the language of the times, meant 'well trained.' He had sources to back it up.

    Has anyone else heard of that? I should see if I saved the sources.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  13. #57
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by MSteve View Post
    I.
    You also imply, that you carrying a gun is the only means of defending your self. .

    Yowzaa! My hero.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  14. #58
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    If you believe you can't competently defend yourself without a gun in a worst case acenerio then I applaud you. I'm 5'8" 175 pounds and my credentials in martial arts aren't important but let categorize me as healthy, in shape, and have above average self defense knowledge. How do you think I faired against three 6'+ 200+ lbs men from jumping and mugging me? Guess what not so well. To imply that my arguement is guncentric is counter productive to the idea of carrying a gun in the first place. I carry (and I know most people carry) as there last line of defense in an encounter. First lines being avoidance, non lethal situational based defense, and then more lethal means all based within the context of the situation.

    .
    Srsly? You think you are going to draw and overcome 3 guys that had the advantage of surprise and numbers and you didnt even have your gun out?

    Huh? You'd be better off without your gun! If they were armed...they'd shoot you first. If not, they'd still have the overall advantage...one of them would still overpower you...he'd have no choice. It is an example of impairment that would make someone draw in that scenario! Let them roll the 'drunk' or sober patron....at least you might survive.

    (And if you were sober and as aware and qualified as you imply, they'd never jump you to begin with)

    Jeebus, I keep reading your post to see if I'm reading it correctly.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  15. #59
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by ccroom View Post
    For me the decision was, I just don't drink anymore because I carry all the time or my firearm is close to me.

    I've read your posts in this thread and commend you on your committment to safety and the safety of your family.

    I can really only have drink or 2 when out in public because usually I have to drive and to me...that is the bigger issue. It had been that way before I owned a gun and still is.

    I dont really do bars anymore, altho an evening at a pub with friends is fun...but this type of law does restrict my ability to sit in restaurant lounge areas...that's how it affects me most (If we cant get a table in the main restaurant or while waiting.)

    But I dealt with drunks and walking dark parking lots and drinking (myself) for decades without a gun....and would use the same alternatives and best practices now that I did then.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  16. #60
    Member Array 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Afghanistan
    Posts
    448
    Lots of good points in this thread, both pro and con.

    I am struck by the irony that each and every time I've used my weapon in my professional life, I've always been impaired, one way or another, sometimes severely.

    By impaired, I mean lack of sleep, illness, post-blast trauma, prescription meds and yes, alcohol.
    Last edited by 120mm; June 4th, 2010 at 07:41 AM.

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Cheaper alternative to "Blue Guns" or "Red Guns?"
    By SpringerXD in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: June 29th, 2013, 07:14 PM
  2. Student Debate at school "Pro Concealed Carry Side" Help with ideas
    By ccroom in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: October 6th, 2010, 01:05 PM
  3. The "Collapsing Startle Response" aka "Protecting the Core"
    By AzQkr in forum Defensive Knives & Other Weapons
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: May 31st, 2006, 05:43 PM

Search tags for this page

alcohol carrying ct

,

connecticut alcohol

Click on a term to search for related topics.