This is a discussion on I think I know the answer but? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; the only reason this person does not carry all the time is because legally they cannot as they do not have a permit to carry ...
Array
the only reason this person does not carry all the time is because legally they cannot as they do not have a permit to carry in the state they work in, which is different than the state they live in. I totally agree that it is worth the wait to thoroughly check out the weapon for safety and functionalilty! I did not start carrying my gun until it had several hundred rounds through it, including my carry ammo. I just wanted to hear other peoples opinions!
Array
Seems like a very bad idea to me.
Don't do things you don't want to explain to the Paramedics!
Stupidity should be painful.
Array
What is the model / brand of the gun in your aviator ?Originally Posted by los
Array
if my only choice? well yea of course better than having nothing, but would certainly never do that if any choice whatsoever was given.
Georg BüchnerWo die Notwehr aufhört, fängt der Mord an
(Murder begins where self-defense ends)
Array
Semmerling LM4
What we've got here is failure to communicate.
Array
A gun that you are not familiar with or don't know whether or not it will operate if and when the times comes could be more dangerous than not having a gun.
SA XD-45ACP
Glock G36
Bersa Thunder .380
Ruger LCR
SIG P250 Full Size and SC 9mm
Array
I'm with Saber on this one. If it was a decent revolver, in good shape, and I'd had a chance to handle it, dry-fire, etc. to make sure it functioned smoothly, I wouldn't be too hesitant to carry it.
A semi-auto would be a tougher call.
Regards,
Jim
If it were a wheel gun I would be less concerned. Better then nothing at all I say.
The Ruger MKIII 22/45 is the worst handgun in history to take apart, but is one of the funnest to shoot...
Array
How so? If "the time" comes to use it, by definition, your life is at risk. Someone is about to either kill you or cause grievous bodily harm, right? What do you have to lose by trying an untested/unfamiliar firearm? I've only put 10 rds through a 1911 and don't own one, but if one was handy in a life-threatening situation, I'd certainly attempt to employ it and wouldn't consider it dangerous.
I think it unwise to pass on a gun...any gun...in a life-threatening situation. I'm honestly not trying to be sarcastic, just trying to understand your reasoning.
Array
if you are so unfamiliar with a gun that you dont know how to operate. you may fail, the bad guy takes it from you who knows how to use it, and shoots you.
I am assuming the gun in questions is a 'normal' gun. I certainly dont know of any guns currently in production that one would find at a normal gun store that i dont know how to use.
Georg BüchnerWo die Notwehr aufhört, fängt der Mord an
(Murder begins where self-defense ends)
Array
I don't know why someone couldn't get to a range and try it out within a day or two, but with that being said...yes, I would rather carry an untested gun than nothing. I'm assuming the owner has it in his/her possession so they can inspect it, make sure everything moves as it should. According to your posts, they have some experience with firearms so they should have some idea of what they are doing...since they got their permit I also assume they had to qualify. Anyway, I go with the thinking of "better a .380 in your pocket then a .45 at home"...better an untested gun on you then nothing. You shouldn't be planning on using it unless there are no other options available anyway...at that point you aren't losing anything.
NRA Member
"I like a man who grins when he fights."
~Winston Churchill
Array
Any port in a storm, I'd carry it if I had no other option.
Array
To answer the question would require a lot of assumptions... the condition, the type, the method among other things.
In short and with many assumptions yes I would. As per my signature it is better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.
If it is a gun I am not familiar with then figuring it out right quick would be a good thing.
There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Array
For those of you that would carry a weapon without first having the opportunity to test fire it, I completely understand the mentality behind your reasoning.
One thing to point-out is , assuming the subject weapon is functional and will actually fire, you really have no idea on it's accuracy.
If the subject weapon is not accurate to point of aim, innocent by-standers (children) could get seriously hurt if they're even remotely near within the the line of fire..
Of course, one doesn't normally think about those kind of things when the SHTF and you're suddenly confronted with a life or death SD situation, especially if you're proficient with your accurate CCW.
What we've got here is failure to communicate.
The choice: something or nothing.
Something.
Even though I hadn't fired it, a simple functional check would show whether it worked or not. I'd rather have a gun I'm unfamiliar with, then be empty-handed.
Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone - 1978. Oh, to be young again...
Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
