This is a discussion on I try not to argue, but it's so hard to hold back!!! within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by zacii Ok, let the professionals handle law enforcement. But we'll handle self-defense. I like that. I will have to remember that, hope ...
For freedom is never free someone else just picks up tab.
Kimber Custom II
Kimber Eclips Pro II
Marlin Camp Rifle .45acp
A 9mm may expand but a .45acp won't shrink
Remember there are only two types of Ships in the Navy, SUBMARINES and Targets!
We recently had a "Women on Target" event in Florence. We were told NOT to use the term weapon. I have a CWP (Concealed "Weapon" Permit).
I plan on becoming an NRA instructor this summer and I think "WEAPON" is the correct term for something one carries or uses to defend self or others.
IMO; The term "Firearm" is a little to PC unless you're talking about hunting or sport shooting.
"That I cannot do."
"Give this to, uh, Clemenza. I want reliable people, people who aren't going to be carried away. After all we're not murderers in spite of what this undertaker thinks."
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member
My thoughts exactly. I know an Army Ranger, gentle on the outside, but don't mess with him. He could very easily qualify and obtain a concealed carry license. However, when I asked him he responded that he doesn't want to incur the legal liability. There are many out there just like him. The quantity and complexity of laws has made it a chore for the average citizen to understand all of the intricacies of everyday carry.
Most WARS, are not fought by "professionals".
Not everyone out there feels the need to carry a handgun for self-protection. Just because they feel that way doesn't make them sheep.
As MadMac said, making pejorative comments won't exactly endear them to our cause.
Washington Post 06/28/2010 re: Supreme Court Decision
"The court's decision means that the enigmatically worded Second Amendment... identifies an individual right to gun ownership, like the freedom of speech, that cannot be unduly restricted by Congress, state laws or city ordinances. "
The dumbest thing about people who think like this, is that they would praise every inch of your being if you saved their wife or child by taking out, or preventing a death/kidnapping with your gun that you "should have left at home". Ridiculous hypocrites. Am I wrong that all of these people are hypocrites? Or would they actually still tell me to leave that thing at home after we saved them?
It is utterly illogical to believe that passing laws to reduce gun violence will be successful when those who are commiting the gun violence do not obey the law.
It is easy to see that some on this forum have not served in uniform.
No,you are not to carry any time you are in uniform on or off base. If you want to carry then change into civies to leave the base (I always did anyway) Recruiters are on duty and are not to carry. If you are in the Armed Forces you are governed by the UCMJ and not by the Constitution. Yes, you do lose your civil rights when you are in uniform. this has all been hashed out in the courts and you have to accept it.
I spent thirty years on Active Duty in the USMC and could not carry on base in civies or anywhere in uniform unless it was specified as part of my offical duties by a written order. As a member of the TN State Guard I am again under the same restrictions. If I don't like it I can leave the Guard.
Civilians never will understand how the military operates, but it has to be said.
Master Gunnery Sergeant of Marines
Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.
Last edited by United93; May 26th, 2009 at 06:19 PM.