Packin' heat

[thebodyguard_69]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

My guess is: When someone calls a weapon "a piece" ... they got a lot of their "training" and "insight" in front of the television or at the "movies."

ugh, I agree 100%. just like how some people call the magazine of a firearm a "clip"

[texasjohn1965]

Originally Posted by thebodyguard_69

ugh, I agree 100%. just like how some people call the magazine of a firearm a "clip"

I am ex-military and have had the terminology beaten into me for many years, but this smacks of grammar police caliber remarks. Don't be the elitist.

How many here would preclude our wives, daughters, sons, or grand parents the possibility of armed self protection, because they have not been through boot camp or because they don't compete at IPSC events on a regular basis? I have not shot competitively in over 10 years, should I turn my guns in?

[thebodyguard_69]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

I am ex-military and have had the terminology beaten into me for many years, but this smacks of grammar police caliber remarks. Don't be the elitist.

what does my statement have to do with grammar??? smh....

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

... How many here would preclude our wives, daughters, sons, or grand parents the possibility of armed self protection, because they have not been through boot camp or because they don't compete at IPSC events on a regular basis? I have not shot competitively in over 10 years, should I turn my guns in?

No, but here IS my point with a question:

In "boot camp" or "competition" were you trained or judged on being "ambushed" by yourself in a 20 x 30 foot room in low light unexpectedly by some asshole pushing his way through the door while his "partner" was next to you or in close proximity so that you had at most a couple of seconds to evaluate and respond to the situation unexpectedly presented to you in a manner that does not injure or kill those collateral present who were either outside or next door (downstairs) even, who were non-threatening?

My other point IS that some of this "testosterone" and "machismo" ... with the chest beating .... gets people hurt.... and in trouble. Some folks actually believe the shit they see on the internet, on TV, and in the movies.

Should I answer? The football coach.

John, I am not advocating no firearm carrying. I am advocating knowing what must be LEARNED through repetitive, intense training and continual "refreshing" to be able to adequately protect oneself in an uncontrolled environment when the incident unfolds in seconds....without that skill and knowledge the introduction of a firearm increases the risk to yourself and those around you. The CHL standards are minimum, just like driver's education is to a driver's license.

Are they "Indy-500 ready"?

[Don T. Lukbak]

I rarely go to inkalls but when I do, just as in the case of any other private residence, I never enter armed without her permission...this only occurred once, it was the 1st time she ever held a handgun, and now she wants me to take her to Top Gun whenever she comes to town.

Outkalls to my place, however, might as well occur in an armory. Only once have I had a complaint, predictably by a nitwit who was well aware there were weapons all over the place that she somehow missed seeing the other times she had visited, but this time she caught sight of a revolver that was where it had always been, only visible this time. Nitwit. I guess she thought it would sprout legs and chase her around. The squirrelly thing is that she already knew weapons were thick in there; she was like the see-no-evil monkey. NEXT!

[texasjohn1965]

Originally Posted by thebodyguard_69

what does that have to do with grammar??? smh....

because you want to laugh at someone for their use of an incorrect term, much like those that want to correct someones spelling/grammar on line.

[thebodyguard_69]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

much like those that want to correct someones spelling/grammar on line.

much like?... that has absolutely no relevance to correcting someone's spelling. But I'm not about to get into grammar etiquette with you since it seemed to have bothered you much. By all means, if you refer to a magazine as a clip, then be my guest. I just hope you don't call a pistol, a "piece" either...

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

.... because you want to laugh at someone for their use of an incorrect term, .....

I don't, because it is not funny. Particularly when that someone is touting themselves to be the "trained and requalified" evaluator of those other STUDENTS participating in the CLASSES.

And I will "step it up a notch" .... "packin' heat" .....

One of the unfortunate repercussions of shooting people, or even shooting at people and missing, is, like our "pistol-packing" coach, that one must testify in some capacity or another and during those uncomfortable moments choice of words, description of equipment and materiel, not to mention the type of weapon and ammunition used are all subject to inquiry, and did I mention the extent of training and evaluation?

That is probably, with all due respect, an area that the DI neglected to cover in depth and was not an issue when preparing for competitive shooting on a controlled range environment.

All that "machismo" might make a lady's panties wet, ...
.....but it won't get her home .... safely!

[texasjohn1965]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

No, but here IS my point with a question:

In "boot camp" or "competition" were you trained or judged on being "ambushed" by yourself in a 20 x 30 foot room in low light unexpectedly by some asshole pushing his way through the door while his "partner" was next to you or in close proximity so that you had at most a couple of seconds to evaluate and respond to the situation unexpectedly presented to you in a manner that does not injure or kill those collateral present who were either outside or next door (downstairs) even, who were non-threatening?

What are the chances of the average citizen, compared to a police/military professional, to encounter this situation? Devide the training by the differential. It is not practical to expect the average person to spend 500 hours a year, every year, training for what might happen once in their life. I am not "anti-training", but I am for realistic training. I enjoy military style training, most people dont. Give (granny/wife/whoever) a weapon they can control, shoot well, and operate in the dark, and take them shooting. Make them comfortable. During CHL class, they can learn the legal ramifications.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

My other point IS that some of this "testosterone" and "machismo" ... with the chest beating .... gets people hurt.... and in trouble. Some folks actually believe the shit they see on the internet, on TV, and in the movies.

granted. Do you remember when the CHL law passed? The predictions of wild west shoot outs in the streets. It did not happen. When I moved to Miami for a couple of years, I got my Florida CHL. They make the Texas test good. The shooting test there...... one round, can you pull the trigger, and they supplied the revolver. I was shocked. Still no wild west shoot outs there either.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Should I answer? The football coach.

John, I am not advocating no firearm carrying. I am advocating knowing what must be LEARNED through repetitive, intense training and continual "refreshing" to be able to adequately protect oneself in an uncontrolled environment when the incident unfolds in seconds....without that skill and knowledge the introduction of a firearm increases the risk to yourself and those around you. The CHL standards are minimum, just like driver's education is to a driver's license

.


Once again, the chance of it occuring, for the avarage person, is nill, but does not preclude basic training. I wish I still had the time/money/energy to shoot 2000+ rounds month, but I don't feel less able to shoot bad guys because of it.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Are they "Indy-500 ready"?

The race-guns are gone. Can you imagine the shit storm of popping an intruder with a full tilt race rig?

police: Why did you shoot him 5 times, in the head?
me: habit
police: get in the car

might as well mozambique, either way the DA is going to bury you.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

What are the chances of the average citizen, compared to a police/military professional, to encounter this situation?

The people on this board are not "the average citizen" when it is being "touted" to carry a handgun to a meeting in a motel hotel apartment house (incall) with a person or persons unknown to the person carrying the weapon to the meeting by his or herself .... and I would say based on the posts I have been seeing (not to mention the coach) that the incidents of hostile, potentially violent scenarios is increasing apparently on this board ... to the degree that this thread was STARTED and others similar have been .... turned in that direction.

As for passage, I had the "opportunity" to be awaiting the completiion of the first Texas Senate debate in an office at the capital outside the Senate chambers with two DA's (one rural and one metroarea) who I had inadvertently met there (knew them both) who wanted to visit with the same senator as I on the floor. It was interesting to say the least. But there was little concern discussed about gunfights breaking out around the State ... there was a lot of concern about TRAINING and IDENTIFYING persons with a license.

Personally, the statistics are good based upon the DPS records for CHL carriers, but we are talking here of a factual specific situation and the question of responses to the decision with the backdrop of a coach, locally, getting shot while doing just that.

FYI: It does not take 500 hours a year and 2000 rounds + a month to get proficient and remain proficient for the purposes for which one carries a handgun. If it does, then I would suggest carrying a shotgun!

The bottom line is that the CHL cirriculum for new and renewal licenses are insufficient to adequately TRAIN somewhat to engage in an instinctive response low light close range decision making situation with potential colleral damage opportunities surrounding the scene as would be the circumstance upon which this thread is based ...

.... unless of course the person carrying the weapon cannot get or keep a hard without his "gun" strapped on!

[texasjohn1965]

I believe I misjudged your agenda. It seems to me that you, as well as the two DA's you mentioned are trying to limit the number of lawful CHL carriers by increasing the requirements/training to aquire/keep a CHL. I am vehemently apposed to further limitations, in fact, I support non licensed open carry for non-prohibited persons. I want criminals scared shitless that every single person they come into contact with, could end their nefarious career.

The coach in question made a mistake of giving his gun away.......duh!
Poor judgement can carry a stiff penalty.

Is there an epidemic of armed confrontations in the hobby world? Not really. Do people with an agenda want to blow it out of proportion? always.

FYI: 2k rounds a month was playtime. I was a lightweight compared to some of the people I competed against. I did not have sponsors buying my gear and rounds, so I was forced to limit my shooting.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

I believe I misjudged your agenda. It seems to me that you, as well as the two DA's you mentioned are trying to limit the number of lawful CHL carriers by increasing the requirements/training to aquire/keep a CHL.

Do people with an agenda want to blow it out of proportion? always.

FYI: 2k rounds a month was playtime.

I do not have an "agenda" ... and it certainly isn't limiting CHL carriers.... nor did the DA's ... other than the consequences of inadequate training and inability to readily identify carriers when approaved by LE.

In fact one senator on the floor was suggesting "lapel" buttons .... to "warn" folks he was carrying a handgun. One of the DA's commented ..

... just wear the button.

You are speaking in generalities with regard to the general population carrying weapons ... that is your agenda. I am addressing the issue raised by this thread.

"I want criminals scared shitless that every single person they come into contact with, could end their nefarious career." Your agenda.

Passing out handguns to every Tom, Dick, and Harry without adequate training doesn't get that done......it simply puts more of them on the street and in circulation. How many "criminals" have you met that were ...

..... "scared shitless" of the police? "Every single" one of them is carrying!

[texasjohn1965]

So what is your angle? Selling training?

The DA wants to readily identify all carriers? We might as well go to open carry.

Police don't scare most criminals because there are not enough police. The general populous should refuse to wait for them when forced to call 911.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

So what is your angle?

"Angle"? If I had one on this thread it would be that I want the testosterone-overloaded asshole in the next room at the hotel where I am staying to have sufficient intelligence and skills to comprehend the danger involved to me if he flies off half cocked and starts shooting up the place because some stupid pimp pulls out a pistol.....BEFORE he has the appointment!

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

The DA wants to readily identify all carriers? We might as well go to open carry. .

Did not say that. I said the senator was talking about it on the floor. FYI: I have no idea why they were there, and I was not there about the CHL. We just happened to know each other and were enjoying the circus downstairs. They (and I) expressed concerns about the quantity and quality of training (which they also had), and the procedures for officers to identify carriers ... for officer safety ... and citizen safety.

That is still a concern today.

FYI: I missed the debates on daylight savings time ... that would have been better..... from what I understand.

Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

Police don't scare most criminals because there are not enough police. The general populous should refuse to wait for them when forced to call 911.

As to the first sentence, all I can say is your pollster is wrong, and wasn't interviewing "criminals"..... as to the second sentence, .... I always recommend calling 911 if the land-line phone is safely available, but do not expect a quick response from the police. Consequently, I expect to utilize a working knowledge of the circumstances at hand in order to stop any intrusion.

[texasjohn1965]

there was a lot of concern about TRAINING and IDENTIFYING persons with a license.
One of the DA's commented ..... just wear the button.
the procedures for officers to identify carriers

Did I misread the above.....

Criminals think there is enough police? Is that what you are trying to claim? I am utterly shocked that criminals think that.....not.

It's a good thing that none of the states allow open carry, could you imagine the gun fights that would happen if every law-abiding citizen was allowed to carry. The innocents would be stacked like cord wood.