Are concealed carry permit holders a certain type of person?

[soberbyker]

A long but good read.
(lifted from "Quora")

Are concealed carry permit holders a certain type of person?






Al Nolf, former Senior Chief (E-8) at United States Navy (1968-1989)
Answered May 11 · Upvoted by Matthew Moore, 10 years as an NRA instructor, 30 years owning guns, much reading


Yes, I believe that they are. Concealed weapon carriers are people who have made a rational, life changing determination for themselves.
Some say ( usually with an evil grin ) that I am "Compensating for something", and yes, I guess I am.

Let’s face the awful truth: I’m not as young as I once was. I’m in pretty good shape for an old guy, but I’m no Bruce Lee. You won’t see me on the silver screen doing one of those spectacular spinning back-kicks that miraculously knock deadly weapons out of the hands of people standing clear across the room. I’ve had just enough martial arts training to know that, in a physical fight between two people, the smaller of the two is generally at a tremendous disadvantage. Unless that gap is narrowed by significant training, the smaller person is going to be in a world of hurt — and this goes doubly if the smaller person is an old guy fighting an aggressive younger, stronger man. Believe me, I’d give it my best rather than simply giving up or giving in, but I’m a realist. Realistically, an undersized "old guy" defending herself against an enraged young man is going to get his butt stomped. By carrying a gun, I’m compensating for that.

I’m compensating for having grandchildren who are still too small to beat off a kidnapper with their bare hands. The day my first baby was born, I looked into his eyes and swore I would never let any harm come to him that I could prevent. I took that vow seriously. I’m compensating for that too.

Somehow I’ve never been able to wrap my brain around the idea of throwing myself on the mercy of assailants who give no mercy. I cannot imagine betting my very life (or the lives of my grandchildren) on my ability to reason with the unreasonable. Nor am I alone in that skepticism, because you know what? SWAT teams often negotiate, but every single one of the guys on the team has a deadly weapon available too. I guess those guys are compensating for having the same skepticism that I do.

It just seems to me really unlikely that the intended victim could "talk" a Son of Sam or a BTK or a Hillside Strangler into quitting. In some circumstances, that’s worth trying, but it’s sure not worth putting all your eggs in that basket.

I’m compensating for wanting a decent back-up plan.

Come to think of it, I’m also compensating for not having a policeman in my back pocket. When seconds count, the police are usually minutes away. Or more. The average police response time to an emergency call inside city limits in America is around 10 minutes. An awful lot of very bad and very permanent things can happen even in ten minutes: it’s enough time for a shooting, a stabbing, a strangulation, a successful kidnapping, or a rape. There’s just never a police officer around at the very moment you most need one. This is no slur on the officers, by the way. These are good people doing a thankless job. Being there when a crime first begins is simply not in their job description. That’s not what police officers do. Their job is to catch evildoers who have already committed a crime. I’m compensating for not wanting to be the dead victim of the next murder my local police will be investigating after it happens.

For those who would rather use a less-lethal means of defense, I absolutely support your right to choose whatever tools or techniques you feel you need in order to protect yourself. Kudos to you for your determination to stay safe! Like you, I see that awareness, avoidance, de-escalation, and deterrence are the absolute best first line of defense. Whenever possible, the smart choice is to avoid situations which may make physical self defense necessary. Stay away from dangerous people and places. Pay attention to what is happening around you. Listen to the little voice that tells you something might be wrong, and get away before trouble starts. Do not escalate unpleasant encounters, but rather use your calm, confident demeanor to remove yourself from the situation as quickly as possible. Use whatever means you can contrive to convince the potential attacker that it is not worth the effort it will take to assault you. Learn the body language of empowerment and capability and use it. If you do get attacked and cannot defend yourself physically, remember that negotiation, misdirection, and outright lying in order to escape are all perfectly acceptable. If the criminal just wants stuff, give him stuff; stuff is less valuable than human lives. These simple, intelligent precautions can save you from a world of grief.

But when all that fails, what’s left? Do we just ignore the danger from a brutal, determined, vicious assailant simply because we are afraid of the consequences of an effective defense? Do we choose not to defend ourselves to the uttermost because our best means of defense may result in the criminal’s death?

If a criminal attacks me without provocation, why should he — the aggressor, the malefactor, the bad actor — get to choose which one of us survives our encounter? In initiating such extreme violence, the criminal has already chosen that at least one person will die or be seriously injured as a result of his acts. The law allows for lethal self-defense because wise people through the ages have recognized that in some circumstances, literally the only choice left for another person to make is whether the intended victim or the person who attacked him will be the one to survive.

Whatever form my response to the attack might take, it has to happen RIGHT NOW and it simply will not wait for someone else to arrive on scene. Unlike the typical police officer dealing with a criminal, the ordinary citizen does not have the luxury of waiting to initiate contact until the time is right. The criminal attacks with little or no warning. The odds are already stacked against the intended victim, or the criminal would not have chosen that time and that place to attack him.

There are any number of "less than lethal" alternatives: Lights, Lasers, Tasers, Pepper Spray, Whistles, Alarms etc. that "might" be effective to draw the help of other people in the area. (and this is the ironic part), What do we expect the passers-by to do in response to such alarms? We want a knight in shining armor to swoop to our defense, and use the violence we were not willing to use on our own behalf. This seems very doubtful to me. If I am unwilling to defend myself, what right do I have to expect a stranger to defend me?

So what it boils down to is that the single most effective and reliable means of stopping a determined criminal attack, a firearm, is also likely to result in the criminal’s death. That thought is horrible. But far more horrible is the thought of an innocent person who lost his/her life simply because some violent predator decided to amuse himself by killing him/her. More horrible still is the knowledge that the criminal, unstopped, could go on to attack the innocent again, and again, and again, with multiple fresh victims abused and killed for the murderer’s pleasure. A serial killer survives and thrives in part because the only people who ever learn that he is dangerous are the people who meet him at the very moment he is most deadly, at the time and place of "his" own choosing when he violently and unexpectedly attacks. Think of Ted Bundy, the Green River killer, Coral Eugene Watts, the Nightstalker, Dennis Rader, the Bike Path Rapist, the Central Park Rapist, and the Hillside Strangler. These serial offenders could each have been stopped by just one intended victim who had an effective tool to defend herself,and the mindset to use it if necessary. Although each was eventually caught and brought to justice, at what cost to the innocent did these predators continue so long undetected?

I do not carry a concealed weapon to force my will upon others,
I carry a concealed weapon so that "others" can not force their will upon me.

[Berncly]

Some decent talking points for future discussions.
Probably could be half as long, but still worth the read.

[Gun]

Life is always about compensation, and adaptation.

[bamboomaster]

OP, great post...

[JenniferG]

I'm compensating for not being able to carry my swords because people get really nervous and upset when they see someone carrying a sword set in an obi belt so I must adapt.

[RockIsland]

I'm compensating for not being able to carry my swords because people get really nervous and upset when they see someone carrying a sword set in an obi belt so I must adapt.

I think you'd be ok in a kimono and a top knot.

[internet troll]

I was at a graduation party tonight. I have found out over the last two years that a lot of my extended family has their ltcf. Me and my wife. My cousin who was holding the party and her husband. My other cousin and her husband. And two other people I did not know had their lctf.

And I think we all share ideals that were in the OP article. Felt good talking to so many others who had their ltcf. It’s the type of thing that anti’s just don’t get.