Concealing your Pistol
Originally Posted by BocaS2000' date='Feb 11 2005, 05:26 PM
No, it doesn't sound reasonable. What would be more reasonable is: A giant man can kill me and/or my family with a brick. I have no desire to get into a brick fight where me or mine could likely be killed, so I'd do everything within my being to preserve my family and my life by doing the "Mozambique" tactic. That is, first put two rounds in his chest, then one to his head.
Now that would be reasonable. Not a sheep here. Besides, why should the evil will of one person dictate the outcome of another's life if it could be prevented through self-protection?
Now that would be reasonable. Not a sheep here. Besides, why should the evil will of one person dictate the outcome of another's life if it could be prevented through self-protection?
My only goal is to protect myself and loved ones, not to deal out punishment.
Now for all the people form CA they can bite the big one. Carry your guns, make sure you support the NRA, Keep a lock on it, and it locked in a small safe when you do not have it in your direct body. There is nothing better the using your right to own arms.
-mikey
Originally Posted by God' date='Feb 11 2005, 05:33 PM
That is going a little far.
My only goal is to protect myself and loved ones, not to deal out punishment.
My only goal is to protect myself and loved ones, not to deal out punishment.
Granted, I am the first to state that I don't know much of all there is to know, however, I do know some things. Regarding putting down a would be assailant, the "Mosambique" is a proven, reliable method as my (and your) government has ensured that I learned with reason and purpose. More so, in today's America with all of the liberal, activist, pinko LAWYERS, I would opt to kill than be killed, and/or be sued for laming a person who's intent was to kill me or mine.
It would seem to me that if you can not put the gun in a location that can be reached by the passenger that you may have no choice but to carry it on your person. As small as the cockpit is in the S2K, a passenger can reach most any place that would also meet your requirements, there may not be another option.
A shoulder holster, or a cross draw would work (if you are right handed). A strong side, or SOB is impractical for carry in this and most other cars.
The Keltec P-32 as well as the .380 fit nicely in the center console. This meets both requirements for being concealed and securely cased for carry here in Florida but would not meet your states requirements.
I hope that you find an equatable solution to your problem as you should be able to practice any freedom that you have available to you, if for no other reason, just because you want to. This is after all America.
I have decided not to enter the debate. There were some good points made but far too many purely emotional and uninformed responses. This almost always makes truely intelligent gun debate impossible, but it is always intertaining.
A shoulder holster, or a cross draw would work (if you are right handed). A strong side, or SOB is impractical for carry in this and most other cars.
The Keltec P-32 as well as the .380 fit nicely in the center console. This meets both requirements for being concealed and securely cased for carry here in Florida but would not meet your states requirements.
I hope that you find an equatable solution to your problem as you should be able to practice any freedom that you have available to you, if for no other reason, just because you want to. This is after all America.
I have decided not to enter the debate. There were some good points made but far too many purely emotional and uninformed responses. This almost always makes truely intelligent gun debate impossible, but it is always intertaining.
Originally Posted by BocaS2000' date='Feb 12 2005, 10:37 AM
A father, mother, and their 12 year old daughter were eating lunch at KFC. Time was about 1pm, broad daylight. As they walked to their car in the parking lot, out of the bushes from 3 car spaces over came a very large male. He had a brick in his hand and started to beat the father in the head with a brick.
Argue what you like about statistics but there is a price to be paid for allowing guns in the community. Some people have been killed accidentally, in fits of rage or with weapons illegally gained but easily sort.
The question is whether the cost is worth the benefit. I'm sure that family will say yes. The family of a child killed by cross fire might disagree.
Notice I'm not taking sides. I'm just saying there is more than one.
Someone said that as there are so many guns in America making them illegal to possess would mean only criminals have them. That is true. But tell me if this statement sounds a bit pnaff to you, "We have so many guns in our society that we need more guns!".
At the end of the day I don't wish to have an opinion on the gun debate in America. You want 'em, you keep 'em! But I would argue that more lax guns laws for Australia would be a bad idea. We don't have your problems, so we don't need your solutions. And this is an argument I will take a very strong side in.
I agree with you AusS2000 in that America and Australia are two different games, with different players, and different sets of rules. However, we do share a common language, well, sort of mate.
Having been to Australia about a decade ago for joint military exercises lasting a few weeks each, I can attest that Australia really doesn't compare to the larger cities / metropolitan areas of the U.S. regarding crimes and such. If I lived in Australia, or other parts of the U.S. where crime on persons was less prevalent, particularly lethal crimes, I wouldn't feel compelled to carry a firearm for self preservation in the event of "what if".
Having been to Australia about a decade ago for joint military exercises lasting a few weeks each, I can attest that Australia really doesn't compare to the larger cities / metropolitan areas of the U.S. regarding crimes and such. If I lived in Australia, or other parts of the U.S. where crime on persons was less prevalent, particularly lethal crimes, I wouldn't feel compelled to carry a firearm for self preservation in the event of "what if".
[quote name='BocaS2000' date='Feb 11 2005, 08:41 PM']
Granted, I am the first to state that I don't know much of all there is to know, however, I do know some things.
Granted, I am the first to state that I don't know much of all there is to know, however, I do know some things.
Typically I do not go through or into the MD/DC Area. However, the Virginia State Concealed Weapons Permit is not honored by those areas.. therefore if i do plan to travel there, i do not bring my weapon with me.
Originally Posted by Black Nugget' date='Feb 11 2005, 06:57 PM
However, back to my point in hand... during the classes i have taken, and speaking members of local ranges i have learned alot. Our world has become so "i'll sue you" that if an attacker comes into your residence and you open fire upon him, he does have the ability to press charges against you. The trainer for my Concealed Weapons Permit class specifically said, "if you are protecting yourself against an intruder, you do not shoot to injure, shoot to kill".





