Negative reactions towards having a gun...

[StraussiE WousiE]

So as I sit in my office, I ponder. I came up with a bit of a theory if you will.

There are a few times when I will get a negative reaction when I come across somebody who knows I'm carrying my sidearm. I try mostly to justify my reason for carry. It seems like most times it goes unheard. People who do not own guns seem generally against a weapon for the purpose of protection. They will actually feel more comfortable if I (or you), a person who has the ability to use a tool for protecting myself and others if need be, would not carry. It seems that is a point that most of us gun owners, and avid carriers seem to get hung up on. Why are there so many people against carrying a firearm? Most general responses are, "Nothing bad is going to happen here", "Do you really feel in danger?", "You're looking for trouble."
I had an epiphany, and it's some food for thought. Do you think that a percentage of people who feel uncomfortable around a person carrying a firearm kinda wish they had one as well? And what I'm getting at is, could that wish of wanting to carry be because they are truly threatened by you? Or maybe they like the thought of being one step ahead on the SHTF train. Some people are clearly afraid of guns, but I'd think they still must respect them. Maybe some people wish they had the respect and trust of a firearm to be able to incorporate one into their life.


OK, so now after that little bit of reading, and getting all that into your brain. Here's the little fun part. I want full participation from the class.

Hypothetical: Your in a house, with 10 people. These people are have no acquaintance with each other, including you. All you have to do is live with these people for a month. You have full amenities, and no need to buy/need anything. Your stuck in a house with 10 strangers for a month, ugh. Question, if you were to prefer one over the other, which option here would you choose.

1. You have a gun.
2. Everybody has a gun.
3. One other person has a gun, and you do not.
4. Nobody has a gun.

Base your choice on what would make you feel most comfortable.


I think depending on how you answer, this will get you thinking. There are many factors that weigh on your decision. I hope this sparks some good discussion.

[ungawa]

#1 is a given. #2 is fine as long as everybody had safe handling skills and nobody turns into a psychodouche. #3 and 4 would only be if I was forced into the situation. I would choose 3 in that case.

[Dannytheman]

I hate what if scenerios..

I of course think everyone should have a gun. An armed society is a polite society!!

[stephpd]

Well I'll answer your question first. I spent time on board ship in the Navy. Guns not generally allowed except for certain jobs. So most everybody didn't have a gun. And I doubt that if their was one gun or everybody having a gun it would have made any difference.


When confronted by someone with a gun, civilian, LEO or criminal the only time the gun made a difference to me was when it was pointed at me. Friend, foe or LEO all got a similar reaction from me that their action was unnecessary and to stop pointing it at me, usually with hands held high.

The beginning of your story may lie in several factors. Some have never held a gun let alone used one (range, hunting or killing humans, ie war) so they see no need. They've made it through life without one and don't feel a need. Let them pray that they never find themselves in situation where they might need to fight for their life or their loved ones.

Others have seen what a gun can do, are against killing anything and are vegans. Let them eat grass and not think about the dangers of the world. They are true pacifists that would rather die then defend themselves.

Other have had their life ruined by having a loved one killed by guns and hate the gun, but not so much for the person that did the crime. They need to think that the guns are the problem and their solution is to rid society of this malfeasance. They are the most dangerous in that they learned the wrong life lessons. They see every gun and gun owner as the problem. I pray most for these misguided individuals.

Some are just filled with anger and project that onto everyone else. They should not be allowed near guns because they are a danger to society, with or without a gun. They are the ones most likely to commit crimes if they haven't already.

Lastly we come to those who have a gun. They have experience using it and respect what it can do. Whether from war, hunting or just plinking at the range they see a usefulness of this tool. If they pay attention to the world they carry because they know that bad things happen to good people. It doesn't empower them with a need to force themselves on others, make up for a small penis or make a point when other options fail. It's use in interactions is a last resort when life is on the line (or to provide sustenance).




So there are many differences of opinion on firearms and their usefulness depending on many factors. Some should never be allowed near them, some haven't yet seen a need (possibly never will) and those who see a much larger picture and think they are useful.

The former I'd like to never has the ability to be near them but it happens and that's why we carry. The others who don't understand or feel the need are no problem to me as long as they only put those rules on themselves. When they try to impose their senseless ideals on me is where I draw the line.

[TXDMERC73]

there is a business executive that i know he wears a concealed bulletproof vest, he also has a bulletproof (suit vest) . he said he feels alot safer wearing a vest then carrying a gun , cuz when someone pulls the trigger you dont get the chance to draw your gun . its a good idea to have a concealed Bullet resistant vest under your shirt or jacket it can save your life before you get the chance to stop the threat.

i want to buy one but they are costly and i will be able to stop a threat more effectively wiht the vest and a gun. i would feel a whole lot better then just carrying a gun.

[General Geoff]

I'd say I choose #2, but keep in mind this question is very vague. What if the 10 strangers are all children aged 12 and under? What if they're all convicted murderers? Maybe they're college students, or war veterans, or certified psychopaths?

[ddefazio]

If I was somehow forced into staying in a house with ten other strangers I would want them to have guns. I would want us all armed so that we could all go up against the nutbag that locked us in the house for a month.

[lcompton]

Good afternoon.

Lastly we come to those who have a gun. They have experience using it and respect what it can do. Whether from war, hunting or just plinking at the range they see a usefulness of this tool. If they pay attention to the world they carry because they know that bad things happen to good people. It doesn't empower them with a need to force themselves on others, make up for a small penis or make a point when other options fail. It's use in interactions is a last resort when life is on the line (or to provide sustenance).

I think this is a key observation. In my experience, I enjoy most the company of people who have reverence for the awesome killing power of firearms. When I was at COMTAC all those years ago, we used to spend equal amounts of time in classroom theory and in the field on tactical lessons and drilling. Chuck Davis, the school's founder and headmaster, used to talk with us about using firearms wisely and recognize the awesome responsibility it carries.

Speaking strictly for myself, I came to the conclusion a long time ago that the best reason not to use a firearm in a defensive situation is because I can. What this means to me is that I'm going to do everything in my power to exit a confrontation peacefully. There is no ego, there is no pride, there is absolutely no reason — other than the threat of severe bodily harm or death — to shoot another human being. Insults don't trouble me and Heaven knows I've received many over the years.

As for people's attitudes toward firearms, my basis for comparison is only the past 15 years. Before a male friend of mine took me out to a range back in 1993 (which is what got me started on guns), I knew zip about firearms and had never fired one. I think I might have shot a neighbor's pellet gun when I was really young.

Anyway, what I have observed during the past fifteen years is that the general public's attitude toward firearms has grown worse. It is my opinion that this is largely the result of a persistent and inaccurate portrayal of firearms in the media. Firearms in the entertainment industry are consistently used for murdering people — often times, gruesomely. The news media is also problematic. I have yet to encounter a news report in which the reporter actually understands the difference between a full automatic and semi-automatic firearm. That's bad. Next, people who commit crimes with guns are consistently referred to as gunman or gunmen in the media. Alternatively, we never hear of criminals who perpetrate stabbings as knifeman or knifemen (at least I haven't heard of that). Granted it would be problematic to refer to someone who perpetrates a murder with a baseball bat as the batman or batmen. But, we could call them baseball batman or baseball batmen. Anyway, the prolific use of the term gunman in our lexicon has a negative connotation that is specific to the misuse of firearms and there appears to be no analogs for other types of perpetrators.

I have often pondered what could be done to improve the general public's awareness of firearms, the importance of same, and more accurately communicate the very minute fraction of gun crimes that are reported disproportionately by the popular media. The truth is, if I could figure out how to do this successfully, I'd be a millionaire. The public appetite for anything gun seems to be continually and disappointingly waning. It doesn't help our cause every time someone who is emotionally and/or mentally disturbed does something irrational using a firearm either.

It may be me, but it seems like the adult public is becoming increasingly infantile over time — increasingly expecting someone else (government) to solve their problems and make their lives better. Surprisingly, many people seem perfectly willing to relinquish an increasing portion of their individual liberties in exchange for the perception that government will take care of them. This is a disturbing trend and I haven't quite figured out what can change this momentum.

Finally, there is a phenomenon in our society in which people seem to like to articulate their support for a particular cause because it is perceived as the right thing to do. This is the most pernicious of all the social phenomena I have observed because it is not based on anything factual, but rather a belief system that is perceived as desirable. I have actually observed people bristle at the suggestion of guns simply because they have perceptually concluded that most people don't like guns. This is very strange — and, disturbing.

Time for lunch...

[Rathmec]

Regarding negative reactions:

People fear what they do not understand. Most people do not understand guns: why someone would carry them, what the legalities are, or sometimes even how they work. A good point to remember is that a handgun always has the potential to become a machine of death. Of course WE know that we're the good guys, and that we carry the gun for good reasons because we have the best interest for ourselves, our families, and innocent bystanders in mind. However, the average Joe doesn't know this. So, in a way, I think people who don't own or understand guns should fear guns (in a way). It makes sense. Some respond with timid fear, and we should instruct them and make them more comfortable. Some people respond by being rude, and we should instruct them and make them more comfortable, although there is a limit to how rude someone can be before they're just an asshole and you should just proceed with proper asshole procedure (smile and walk away).

We must always remember the golden rule: People are idiots.

Regarding your question:

I would probably prefer situation #2. If everyone is armed, then we as a household would be more able to defend ourselves from BGs trying to rob our home of our awesomely supplied and free goods or ZOMBIES.

However, in reference to my previous statements: People are idiots. So situation #1 is also a welcome one.

Man, Real World would've been SO MUCH MORE INTERESTING if everyone had a gun on them.

[rovert97]

a bit off topic, but i was in walmart yesterday after working at the range. still in my work clothes, and OC with my Sig 226 on my strong side. i have a shopping cart with kitty litter, cat food, and some food for me in it. i get into the back isle to get a case of water, and this older jewish man looks at me, sees my gun, hides his kids behind him and throws his hands up in the air.

it just struck me as completely odd and way out of context. he just over reacted to something that id assume he wasnt used to since he was more then likely from NY. i did a mental laugh, grabbed my case of water and strolled on out the isle.

back on topic, as far as your topic goes... ill choose number 2.