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; Originally Posted by bladenbullet hows that work for the whole validation thing bethic?..."it cuts both ways"... Originally Posted by DaveJay A well regulated militia implies ...

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 165

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

  1. #61
    Member Array chickdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by bladenbullet View Post
    hows that work for the whole validation thing bethic?..."it cuts both ways"...
    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"

    Actually, from an historical standpoint, the phrase "A well regulated militia..." refers to :

    "a well-regulated militia was synonymous with one that was thoroughly trained and disciplined, and as a result, well-functioning. That description fits most closely with the "to put in good order" definition supplied by the Random House dictionary. The Oxford dictionary's definition also appears to fit if one considers discipline in a military context to include or imply well-trained." (Commentary taken from guncite article linked below.)

    This is born out by period commentary by the framers themselves, as well as others.

    A good catch all reference for these:

    Meaning of the words in the Second Amendment

    Enjoy.
    A girl can never have too much jewelry or too much weaponry.

    - Princess Meredith NicEssus

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #62
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by chickdiver View Post
    Actually, from an historical standpoint, the phrase "A well regulated militia..." refers to :

    "a well-regulated militia was synonymous with one that was thoroughly trained and disciplined, and as a result, well-functioning. That description fits most closely with the "to put in good order" definition supplied by the Random House dictionary. The Oxford dictionary's definition also appears to fit if one considers discipline in a military context to include or imply well-trained." (Commentary taken from guncite article linked below.)

    This is born out by period commentary by the framers themselves, as well as others.

    A good catch all reference for these:

    Meaning of the words in the Second Amendment

    Enjoy.
    ok...how does that change things?....

  4. #63
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    I can't imagine someone saying, "this guy is coming at me with a knife and I need to get away asap....but I did have three beers so I shouldn't drive...."
    sorry...you lost me...where would that even come into play unless you were already someplace, had 3 beers and were intending to drive impaired...youve already made the decision to drive impaired....

  5. #64
    Distinguished Member Array razor02097's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,974
    Alcohol and guns don't mix.

    Carrying while drunk is irresponsible and illegal in most states.



    If you say the woman being armed would have changed the situation you are kidding yourself. You don't know what went down, you only know the outcome. You don't know if the woman could have successfully drawn a gun at all, she was on a bike. She may have been overcome from the start. If she had a gun the BG would have most likely found it after killing her... great now he is a murderous AND armed gorilla. So many variables I believe the whole argument about making this story a point about drinking and carrying is as invalid as the argument about drinking and driving.

    Putting that all aside.... she was trying to make a 4 block trip to her apartment impaired, in the dark, and alone... Can you say that she would be able to defend herself if she was armed....with anything? She didn't stand a chance either way and unfortunately the poor girl paid the ultimate price for her stupidity.
    There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  6. #65
    Member Array Griffworks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Central Arkansas
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by chickdiver View Post
    Actually, from an historical standpoint, the phrase "A well regulated militia..." refers to :

    "a well-regulated militia was synonymous with one that was thoroughly trained and disciplined, and as a result, well-functioning. That description fits most closely with the "to put in good order" definition supplied by the Random House dictionary. The Oxford dictionary's definition also appears to fit if one considers discipline in a military context to include or imply well-trained." (Commentary taken from guncite article linked below.)

    This is born out by period commentary by the framers themselves, as well as others.

    A good catch all reference for these:

    Meaning of the words in the Second Amendment

    Enjoy.
    So, you're saying it's meant as more of a Military "regulated" frame of mind...?

    If so, then I can tell you for a fact that since at least the late 1960's, the US Military has prohibited personnel from handling firearms if they have consumed alcohol within 8 hours prior to assuming their duties or are impaired by alcohol. It's punishable by the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). I'm sure that the regulations stated something similar prior to this - and of course it doesn't discount the fact that someone will slip thru the system at some point or another, particularly during times of war when/where alcohol can be fairly easily found.

    So, if that's your example, you're basically agreeing that people who consume alcoholic beverages should not handle firearms, yes...?
    Arkansas Concealed Carry Instructor #12-751

    If guns kill people, then:
    Pincels miss spel werds;
    Cars make people drive drunk;
    And spoons made Rosie O'Donnel fat.

  7. #66
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by bladenbullet View Post
    sorry...you lost me...where would that even come into play unless you were already someplace, had 3 beers and were intending to drive impaired...youve already made the decision to drive impaired....
    Really? You've never had a drink in your own home?

    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    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.
    What's interesting about this post is it addressed the semantics of a situation that happened to me and not any of the (IMO) very valid points I've demonstrated in my other posts. No where in the post did I say I would draw or imply that I would draw, however, I did imply that sometimes someone can not defend themselves solely based on knowledge alone.

    Do you want to know what I'd do in this situation again even though it is irrelevant to the thread? I'd never walk alone in a neighborhood notorious for crime, I was young and naive and thought that crime only happened on the news and not to me. Reflecting many of my other points I will continue to reiterate this very very very important factor of self defense AVOIDANCE. Avoiding being in these situations is key, however (like I've said in many other posts) context is illustrated on a situational basis by basis.

    You're comments seem very counter productive, trying to demonstrate a contradiction that doesn't exist isn't really contributing to the pro's and con's that have been shared by many members.

    Quote Originally Posted by razor02097 View Post
    Alcohol and guns don't mix.

    Carrying while drunk is irresponsible and illegal in most states.



    If you say the woman being armed would have changed the situation you are kidding yourself. You don't know what went down, you only know the outcome. You don't know if the woman could have successfully drawn a gun at all, she was on a bike. She may have been overcome from the start. If she had a gun the BG would have most likely found it after killing her... great now he is a murderous AND armed gorilla. So many variables I believe the whole argument about making this story a point about drinking and carrying is as invalid as the argument about drinking and driving.


    Putting that all aside.... she was trying to make a 4 block trip to her apartment impaired, in the dark, and alone... Can you say that she would be able to defend herself if she was armed....with anything? She didn't stand a chance either way and unfortunately the poor girl paid the ultimate price for her stupidity.
    You kind of just made my comments for me. Like you said, you don't know. But you mean to tell me that you'd rather be unarmed than armed in an attack? Even if it was OC or a knife that you were competant with? I wouldn't believe you. And to imply that she was stupid is really just sad and I pray you don't judge everyone you've met based on your interpretations of their actions, like you stated you "don't know", but here's some information I do know that I'll be glad to pass along to you. She has made this type of trip nearly every day of her life since living in Philly at 17 (so about three years) and more importantly NoLibs area is notoriously safe which is why this event is catching so much attention in Philly. Also, in this area a four block trip is literally about 4-5 hundred yards, her friends could probably see her apartment stoop from where they were.

    I've learned a lot on this thread so far, but some of these comments seem more for instigation then being constructive.

  8. #67
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    Really? You've never had a drink in your own home?

    .
    you still lost me...i would be escaping from a bad guy by driving away from my own home?..

    i never said i didnt drink or dont believe in it...i also never said i dont think someone has the right to defend themselves when they are drunk...although i am not of the same mind as those who believe their gun is the only defense they have...as many here do...

    i do however believe that one should think and act responsibly if they intend to carry and/or drive...and that involves the responsible consumption of alcohol along with understanding their may be undesireable consequences if they choose otherwise...

    what i see here is a group of people justifying irresponsible behaviour with the premise that they are entitled to defend themselves...not unlike drunks who believe they drive just as well when they are illegal as they do when they are not...paint it any color you want...thats what it is...

    i live in a state where you are allowed to consume alcohol at a restaurant while carrying...but not allowed to enter a bar carrying even though you may only be drinking soda...interesting...i dont think they are trying to protect gun owners from themselves...but from people who are drinking irresponsibly because they can and may be a source of trouble...i dont believe its an effective deterent...but its the law....i have nothing against responsible drinking and carrying...i just question whether its responsible drinking we are talking about in this thread...and whether people who complain about overrestrictive gun laws should be having discussions of this sort on a public forum...

    food for thought...

  9. #68
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by bladenbullet View Post
    you still lost me...i would be escaping from a bad guy by driving away from my own home?..

    i never said i didnt drink or dont believe in it...i also never said i dont think someone has the right to defend themselves when they are drunk...although i am not of the same mind as those who believe their gun is the only defense they have...as many here do...

    i do however believe that one should think and act responsibly if they intend to carry and/or drive...and that involves the responsible consumption of alcohol along with understanding their may be undesireable consequences if they choose otherwise...

    what i see here is a group of people justifying irresponsible behaviour with the premise that they are entitled to defend themselves...not unlike drunks who believe they drive just as well when they are illegal as they do when they are not...paint it any color you want...thats what it is...

    i live in a state where you are allowed to consume alcohol at a restaurant while carrying...but not allowed to enter a bar carrying even though you may only be drinking soda...interesting...i dont think they are trying to protect gun owners from themselves...but from people who are drinking irresponsibly because they can and may be a source of trouble...i dont believe its an effective deterent...but its the law....i have nothing against responsible drinking and carrying...i just question whether its responsible drinking we are talking about in this thread...and whether people who complain about overrestrictive gun laws should be having discussions of this sort on a public forum...

    food for thought...
    What's interesting is that my state has no gun laws in relation to drinking and bars, even more so is that I frequent bars regularly, and I am unarmed and without keys except for the house. However, this has been a personal debate whether I should carry or not when I'm out with friends even though I usually have less than two drinks (drinks are more expensive than ammo, can you guess what hobby I enjoy more?).

    These are some interesting points and I appreciate them, but I never provided a specific scenario in which your life would be in danger and you have had a couple of drinks and your only means and final means of survival is getting in your car. Keeping it that general and not more specific, I think the answer is "Yes, if it is the final and only means of my survival, I would drive that car".

  10. #69
    Distinguished Member Array razor02097's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,974
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    You kind of just made my comments for me. Like you said, you don't know. But you mean to tell me that you'd rather be unarmed than armed in an attack? Even if it was OC or a knife that you were competant with? I wouldn't believe you. And to imply that she was stupid is really just sad and I pray you don't judge everyone you've met based on your interpretations of their actions, like you stated you "don't know", but here's some information I do know that I'll be glad to pass along to you. She has made this type of trip nearly every day of her life since living in Philly at 17 (so about three years) and more importantly NoLibs area is notoriously safe which is why this event is catching so much attention in Philly. Also, in this area a four block trip is literally about 4-5 hundred yards, her friends could probably see her apartment stoop from where they were.

    I've learned a lot on this thread so far, but some of these comments seem more for instigation then being constructive.
    I never said she was stupid. We all do stupid things but not everyone is stupid. I used stupidity in reference to her actions.

    Moving on

    It doesn't matter if she was fresh out of the bar. The fact was she was alone, impaired and it was after midnight. I don't care where you are or how "safe" a neighborhood is. The fact is crime isn't picky when it comes to location.

    Did you know this girl? Did she make her "trip" everyday in the dark while alone and drunk?


    I stated my opinion and what I knew. This thread is a total bait for starting up a topic that another thread spun into and was closed for.

    I will say it again. Alcohol and guns do not mix.

    Saying you have a right to defend yourself while intoxicated and pairing that with carrying a gun is a weak argument. It goes along with the myth that a gun would keep you safe. A gun isn't magic. It's mere presence doesn't necessarily change the outcome of a situation for the better.
    There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  11. #70
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    What's interesting is that my state has no gun laws in relation to drinking and bars, even more so is that I frequent bars regularly, and I am unarmed and without keys except for the house. However, this has been a personal debate whether I should carry or not when I'm out with friends even though I usually have less than two drinks (drinks are more expensive than ammo, can you guess what hobby I enjoy more?).

    These are some interesting points and I appreciate them, but I never provided a specific scenario in which your life would be in danger and you have had a couple of drinks and your only means and final means of survival is getting in your car. Keeping it that general and not more specific, I think the answer is "Yes, if it is the final and only means of my survival, I would drive that car".
    bolded...no...this has been about drinking responsibly and carrying...i know there are many who believe that there should be no alcohol consumption while carrying and they are entitled to believe that even though i would bet they (if not a teatotaler) wold drive after a drink or 2 over a period of time...the thread opened with a a scenario that involved someone who had more than their share and was mugged and the comments were related to that...you just made it about you when others commented on drinking and carrying...

    and then the "we have a right that cannot be infringed" group stepped in and said they can get drunk and carry if they want to cause thats what the constitution is for...

    and the comment has been made...right or not...it does not allow responsible behaviour to go out the window...then it turns into if youre drunk at home and attacked what do you do?..the same thing you do if youre not drunk...defend yourself..whether it be with gun or whatever you have on hand...then avoidance comes up...well here we are...back to square one...a woman who has been drinking is attacked in the middle of the night while on her way home all alone...and somehow it gets back to being about you....

    sorry i cant make it any clearer...but thats how far the lines have been blurred...like i said...there is a theme here and its a bunch of people trying to justify irresponsible drinking while carrying...if you dont drink irresponsibly then it isnt about you...but you will continue to fight it even though you drink responsibly because you want it to be about you....

    i havent commented on the woman in question...but if she was attacked and defended herself with a gun i would commend her for that...but i would still question why she was drinking irresponsibly and put herself in the position she did...a woman alone in the middle of the night with some alcohol in her is almost an invitation for something bad to happen (have a ball with that literates)...and everything we write about here says it...and in addition...i would expect that she would face some serious questioning regarding her condition and the fact that she was carrying in that condition...regardless of whether it saved her life or not...

    have fun with it...

  12. #71
    Member Array PRSOrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Reading, PA
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by bladenbullet View Post
    bolded...no...this has been about drinking responsibly and carrying...i know there are many who believe that there should be no alcohol consumption while carrying and they are entitled to believe that even though i would bet they (if not a teatotaler) wold drive after a drink or 2 over a period of time...the thread opened with a a scenario that involved someone who had more than their share and was mugged and the comments were related to that...you just made it about you when others commented on drinking and carrying...

    and then the "we have a right that cannot be infringed" group stepped in and said they can get drunk and carry if they want to cause thats what the constitution is for...

    and the comment has been made...right or not...it does not allow responsible behaviour to go out the window...then it turns into if youre drunk at home and attacked what do you do?..the same thing you do if youre not drunk...defend yourself..whether it be with gun or whatever you have on hand...then avoidance comes up...well here we are...back to square one...a woman who has been drinking is attacked in the middle of the night while on her way home all alone...and somehow it gets back to being about you....

    sorry i cant make it any clearer...but thats how far the lines have been blurred...like i said...there is a theme here and its a bunch of people trying to justify irresponsible drinking while carrying...if you dont drink irresponsibly then it isnt about you...but you will continue to fight it even though you drink responsibly because you want it to be about you....

    i havent commented on the woman in question...but if she was attacked and defended herself with a gun i would commend her for that...but i would still question why she was drinking irresponsibly and put herself in the position she did...a woman alone in the middle of the night with some alcohol in her is almost an invitation for something bad to happen (have a ball with that literates)...and everything we write about here says it...and in addition...i would expect that she would face some serious questioning regarding her condition and the fact that she was carrying in that condition...regardless of whether it saved her life or not...

    have fun with it...
    I knew that as soon as I wrote that bolded statement I should have altered the wording because it would be skewed. You took my words out of context. I was explaining that for a long time I have had a personal battle with deciding whether to carry or not when going out to a bar. I was not commenting on the content of this thread. Then I should have explained that this thread and it's content was going to help shed some new light and information that I previously would not have concluded on my own, which speaks to the merit of the people posting on this forum. I figured it was implied, but apparently that went right over your head. Some people in this forum demonstrate what many of my professors tried to slam into my brain, be precise and clear with your words and very specific because people in general cannot comprehend the English language in ambiguity and must have everything explained to them, I apologize.

  13. #72
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by PRSOrator View Post
    I knew that as soon as I wrote that bolded statement I should have altered the wording because it would be skewed. You took my words out of context. I was explaining that for a long time I have had a personal battle with deciding whether to carry or not when going out to a bar. I was not commenting on the content of this thread. Then I should have explained that this thread and it's content was going to help shed some new light and information that I previously would not have concluded on my own, which speaks to the merit of the people posting on this forum. I figured it was implied, but apparently that went right over your head. Some people in this forum demonstrate what many of my professors tried to slam into my brain, be precise and clear with your words and very specific because people in general cannot comprehend the English language in ambiguity and must have everything explained to them, I apologize.
    no apology necessary...the explanation is fine...ambiguity and the printed word without inflection or the advantage of a verbal conversation that can be immediately explained makes communicating in forums difficult to decifer correctly at times...

    understood...

  14. #73
    Senior Member Array unloved's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southeastern Pennsylvania
    Posts
    568
    Quote Originally Posted by bladenbullet View Post
    ...there is a theme here and its a bunch of people trying to justify irresponsible drinking while carrying...
    Really? Which people? I just went back and re-read the entire thread. I don't see a single post that is "trying to justify irresponsible drinking while carrying..."

  15. #74
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,112
    To be Honest I think everyone in this thread needs a beer....I understand that we take our rights with a great amount of passion. Lets all try to remember that they are RIGHTS....
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

  16. #75
    Member Array msb45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    187
    A few thoughts:
    - Before the "well regulated militia" fired on Lexington Green they "mustered" at the tavern on the green for a pre-game shot of mead.
    - a drink is not drunk, personal responsibility is key
    - In PA guns are allowed where alcohol is served, don't give gun banners a leg to stand on. Otherwise you couldn't go to a family restaurant that serves liquor.
    - You shoot somebody you WILL be sued (In PA)
    - This girl was a waitress and worked late nights
    - A gun may not have helped in this situation, but for this poor girl what more harm than being beaten, raped, and strangled with her own bra could come to her. Who else was at risk on a deserted street?

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... 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.