RVer Safety: Guns and nuts, Part 2

96

By Mike Sherman
Last week’s topic ignited a strong response with strong opinions. I believe many Americans are asking what can be done about mass shootings. Having read all of the comments, and several articles over the past few years, I’ve come to some conclusions as to the cause and potential solutions. If you have the time, continue on with your own analysis based on our findings, then offer all of us your suggestions and conclusions.

THE CAUSE: Latchkey kids, Internet games of violence, and voluntary solitary confinement. Throw in the fact that God has been thrown out … removed from the forefront of our social structure. If you think divorce is not a factor, think again. Kids are like a ship at sea, without a rudder. Abortion makes kids wonder just what value do we place on human life? What influences their thoughts? The single parent is too busy and the grandparents live on the other side of America.

I could continue on and on but I think you get my drift. The cause is complicated, convoluted and difficult to fully grasp because of the sheer volume of reasons for mass killings. Factor in the shock value that accompanies the horrors played out on national television and it is no wonder many experts cannot agree when talking about the cause. The bottom line? We are no longer the United States of America.

POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS: Go camping – you’ll be safe! Statistically, that is – or so it would seem.

There are things we can do to help avoid the mass killings. Background checks are a good start. There is one untapped source of vital information being overlooked in the background process. They check FBI and DOJ data bases for convictions that would prohibit gun ownership, but we all know the bad guys don’t buy their weapons from gun dealerships. Some claim the effort is worthless.

However, a great source of information for law enforcement are the local authorities – your county sheriff and local police department. Local law enforcement agencies have computer files on just about anyone they come into contact with. Not every contact results in an arrest (and records subsequently sent to the FBI and DOJ). If someone is questioned about loitering, for example, and the officer determines the person has a legitimate reason for being where they are at, there is no record of the event other than their local data base. They are called “Incident Reports” or “Field Interrogations”– records that describe a short “who, what, when, where, why” episode. They contribute to a local database that contains good background information, and some of it might be useful to a background check regarding a gun purchase, but the DOJ and FBI will not know about it.

For example, little Johnny gets caught killing a cat. The police are called. They take a report, but there is no arrest or other legal action that sends the information to anyone other than the local department’s computer. Five years later, little Johnny has grown up and applies to purchase a weapon. The inquiry goes out to the FBI and DOJ but that’s it. Johnny gets his gun.

However, if the inquiry also included a local check they would get information that can be useful. Granted, no cause for denial of the purchase but certainly worthy of a visit from the local sheriff and perhaps a mental health worker to do an assessment. A simple knock on the door with a “Can we talk?” inquiry. No rights have been violated. Johnny can slam the door, but more likely enjoys the attention and invites them in. They talk. Other local history on him might raise more red flags worthy of consideration.

Granted, there would have to be laws on the books stopping the sale based on “local” information; but, honestly, how many times have we read about a killing suspect’s past coming to light after the fact? “Approval should have never been granted based on this information”… Ever heard that before?

In other words, if we are going to do a background, then do a real background. And we need to get real regarding “assault” rifles. They have been labeled “assault” because some look like an M-16. It’s still just a rifle. Turn it into an automatic rifle and add high capacity clips and then, yes, we have a serious problem: It is no longer a rifle used for just self-defense or target practice. So we should focus on the “mass killing capability” that is the core problem. While restricting high capacity magazines is not a solution, it does offer a level of prevention. Many assailants have been tackled while reloading.

But the bottom line is these killings will continue. It used to be someone “going postal” – a government employee walking into work with a pistol and killing a few co-workers. That was a trend that has changed. Enter “road rage.” For a while it seemed like it was happening daily. That too has subsided.

But these mass killings – they seem to be increasing, in both the number of victims and number of mass assaults taking place across America on an annual basis. The killers are using weapons that I used in Vietnam. Factor in some of their reasons for murdering innocent strangers and it becomes impossible to wrap our mind around the entire event. The Las Vegas concert killings remain “unsolved” – no clear reasoning for such carnage.

As adults, we strive to understand the world we live in; we want to understand why something happens. Motive becomes important in a murder trial, and understanding motive in our nightly news segments becomes important. It enables us to cope. But some of the nuts out there today – It boggles the mind to grasp “What were they thinking?” In some cases, we will never know.

It has become obvious that another solution is to saturate public venues with armed officers AND citizens. One shooter was stopped within 30 seconds because the police were nearby. Another was stopped early enough to prevent dozens and dozens of additional victims. An off-duty fireman with a concealed gun permit comes to mind also, drawing down last week on a nut before he could fire a single shot, at a Walmart no less.

You won’t believe this, perhaps, but many murders are prevented by citizens who happen to be in the right area at the right time, armed with a license to carry a concealed weapon. The mainstream media refuses to highlight such incidents – it goes against a liberal media’s agenda.

You want to see an increase in mass killings? Keep offering up “gun-free zones,” and make it more and more difficult for good, honest citizens to obtain a concealed weapons permit. Personally, I like the idea that 10%+ of the guys in my church service are packing heat. If I am in a theater, I am comforted by the fact that there might be a few armed citizens. If something goes wrong, I could finish my popcorn before the cops arrive … depending on the location. I am thankful for school teachers that go through training to arm themselves in school districts that are smart enough to allow it. And let us not forget airline pilots. Can’t call 911 up there!

So, now I have offered up enough dust to overrun the comments section with ample responses. Please, try to keep them civil.

Until next week, be alert, be safe, and if you see something, say something.

Note: We know what we discuss in this column may be controversial. While we invite your polite, constructive comments, inflammatory remarks will be immediately deleted.

Mike Sherman is a retired street cop and investigator with 30+ years of RV experience as a traveler, camp host and all-around advocate for the joys of living on the road. His articles are for general discussion purposes only – you should always consult your local authorities or legal counsel for specific answers if necessary. Write him at MikeShermanPI@gmail.com if you have questions, or leave a comment below. 

Read more RVer Safety articles here.

##RVT910

Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

96 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

John Koenig
4 months ago

MANY millions of tax dollars have been spent in an effort to solve the problem of improper use of dangerous items (firearms being high on the list). PEOPLE are the true weapons. ANYTHING they choose to use is simply a TOOL. I was born in the early 1950’s. Back then (and into the mid-1960’s), PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY was the norm. That “personal responsibility” is NO LONGER the norm. Somehow, it’s always somebody’s else’s fault (remember the “Twinkee” defense). Until that changes back to being held responsible for one’s own actions, this situation will NOT change for the better (and in fact will keep getting worse). This change needs to start in TWO places. In the home and also in all levels of government. Since I doubt that such change will occur, society will continue to decline. The best thing an individual can do is to be vigilant (called “Condition Yellow” in training classes) so that you will not be surprised and caught off guard. The one responsible for YOUR safety is YOU. Wake up to that simple truth and, you will be on your way to a higher level of safety.

Dan B.
1 year ago

Assault rifles are for sale here. You have to purchase a government stamp for $200.00 and wait about a year to take possession because of the time for the background check. They are very expensive. I’ve never seen an assualt rifle on TV except in the hands of the police.

Tom Ewing
1 year ago

Same observations I have had.
– Gun Free Zones are killing zones.
– More citizens taking up the duty with concealed carry, including willing teachers at schools. I’m often amazed how even here in Texas we can get a church massacre and NOBODY had their guns on them to stop the guy?! How is that possible? Promote and encourage civic duty, and carry. When the bad guys don’t know or can even ‘expect’ someone around is armed… game changer.
– Erosion of faith, family values, Pledge of Allegiance, patriotism, all things must be secular… erosion of ‘serve others’ mentality to now ‘me me me’ mentality, so kids stew and hate the world for all the things they don’t have or get that they perceive others do, and hate becomes norm. This can only be changed by national soul searching. Good luck with that.
– Just about every time, there were red flags, sometimes HUGE red flags. Law enforcement and schools must be held accountable to act, and have the support they need to be able to act legally.
– National gun haters need to step back and look at the realities above, and act against their ignorance to make the right social and legislative changes that will actually make a difference.

Cece
1 year ago

I agree with most of your comments Mike with the possible exception of the local reporting accessible to all background checks. I know that research has shown that most serial killers have a history of animal abuse as a child but I haven’t seen evidence that the trait carries over to mass murderers (as being discussed here – anyone who thinks a serial killer isn’t a mass murderer has their head under a rock). No argument is going to convince an anti-gun person to become a pro-gun person. But I have one thing I ask people to consider. Americans have ALWAYS owned guns. The fact of gun ownership has not changed, mass shootings have. So what changed? It isn’t the guns – they’ve always been there. If it you can’t blame the guns, what do we need to change? That’s the question we should be answering.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Cece

I know one thing that’s changed: communication.

Social media has made it so easy for psychopaths of all shapes and sizes to commiserate and support each other, even become radicalized. I have no idea what to do about it, but it’s a huge factor.

Ed D.
1 year ago

“However, if the inquiry also included a local check they would get information that can be useful. Granted, no cause for denial of the purchase but certainly worthy of a visit from the local sheriff and perhaps a mental health worker to do an assessment.”

So let me get this straight. Because someone (as a child) did something that wasn’t acceptable, they should get a knock on their door as an adult and have a Sheriff, along with a shrink, want to talk with him to determine if he is mentally fit to own a gun? I do not buy that logic (or illogic) for a second. All “red flag laws” will do is undermine our rights under the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Can you guarantee me that a neighbor that doesn’t like someone’s kid won’t call the cops and say the father is unstable and should not own a gun? Of course, you can’t. Also, what if an ex-girlfriend, or ex-spouse, calls and reports you as being abusive, as a way to get even for a bad breakup? Red Flag Laws are not the way to go and seriously violate our rights under the Constitution. You gave your “opinion”, now I will offer mine: How about when it is reported to the Authorities (and backed by the individuals Social Media) that an individual is boasting about shooting up a school, that the Authorities actually do something about this! There has been more than one occurrence that a particular individual left a trail of his intentions on Social Media that he was going to do something and did just what he said he was going to do. The Authorities knew he was talking about it, reported it to the FBI and they did nothing either. How about Law Enforcement do a better job of prevention when the evidence is on Social Media. That is where I believe many of these shootings can be prevented. Not by infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens!

Mike Sherman
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed D.

Ed, I understand your point. It can be intrusive, no doubt about it. You almost made my point when you asked why nothing is done when someone is reported to the authorities. When you purchase a gun and they do a background, the denial is based on convictions I believe, not incident reports. If someone has a lot of local history with the local authorities and a background check includes local data bases, and discovers potential problems (but no convictions), then a visit by someone might help prevent an idiot from completing the purchase. You are 100% correct about the potential abuse of Red Flag laws. Obviously the home visit would be a simple knock on the door. If the personal contact actually resulted in a denial, there should be an appeal process allowing the applicant to plead his case. I believe the home visits would in fact “help law enforcement do a better job of prevention when the evidence is on social media”. Evidence can be found in local law enforcement records also. We need more pro-active, prevention methods. It is not hard to determine that someone is perhaps not dealing with a full deck and should not have a gun. I do appreciate your comments.

JAMES A. DUBOIS
1 year ago

I have learned one thing that I know for sure and that’s the only thing that stops a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, PERIOD! USAF veteran 1972-1975, Fire Chief 1981- 1983 Overseas we called them defence weapons not asault weapons, S. Korea remote tour on the kun with country wide Marshall Law. KEEP OUR GUNS

Darrel
1 year ago

Martial Law. Marshall Plan.

Jerry Jordan
1 year ago

I don’t have the numbers, but I suspect that more people are killed by drunk drivers than guns. Alcohol causes much suffering to users, family members, and the public. Let’s ban alcohol first.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Jerry Jordan

Yes, as long as people die by other means, we are excused from doing anything about carnage in the streets. I see your point.

Ed D.
1 year ago

So, using your logic, we should ban cars too?

Rod D
1 year ago

You only got a Semi-Auto Rifle in Viet-Nam?

jane shure
1 year ago
Reply to  Rod D

You saw that too. All of the guns I saw in viet nam was capable of full auto fire. I.E M16, M14, M60, 50 cal. About the only guns I know of that most likely were not full auto was the 12ga. shotgun. In jungle areas it was usually more effective than an m16. There may have been some sniper rifles that were bolt action but I was not part of that operation.

WMSCV
1 year ago

Thanks for the article it definitely strikes a nerve it a lot of people. I’m a Vietnam Veteran, retired LEO and a strong supporter of the Constitution and all amendments as written by our founders. I have no trouble looking in a mirror. I have a problem with people giving the government unfettered power to control every aspect of our lives. Enjoy what freedoms we have left because once there gone you won’t get them back.

Karen K Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  WMSCV

I believe the 2nd amendment was primarily to keep the government from “unfettered power”.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Karen K Willis

200 years ago, yes.

Bill Mousseau
1 year ago

Yes that’s when it started but it still in effect the same way today remember for the people by the people we control the rights not the government

Ed D.
1 year ago

Today as well. Especially when we have those that would turn this country into a Socialist country.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed D.

“Today as well. Especially when we have those that would turn this country into a Socialist country.”

What do you mean by this?

Ed D.
1 year ago

Today as well. Especially when we have those that would seek to change this country to something it was never intended to be!

John S
1 year ago

The English didn’t change in 200 years.

Ed D.
1 year ago
Reply to  Karen K Willis

You are 100% correct!

Dustin Robert Yetman
1 year ago

Lol

Ed D.
1 year ago
Reply to  RV Staff

Diane, this is Ed D. I am wondering why my comment is under moderation. Here is my comment:
“Today as well. Especially when we have those that would turn this country into a Socialist country.”
But on the same token, Chris P. Hemstead said the following:
“There seems to be a lot of ‘unfettered’ power in the White House right now, including the power to do virtually nothing about white supremacist street carnage.”
And yet his comment is not under moderation. What gives? Conservative censorship?

Ed D.
1 year ago
Reply to  RV Staff

Thank you Diane. You have a good day as well.

Darrel
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed D.

Yes. By orders of Chuck no doubt.

Linda Mudge
1 year ago
Reply to  Darrel

Wow, Darrel. You are a really negative person aren’t you?

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed D.

“Today as well. Especially when we have those that would turn this country into a Socialist country.”

What do you mean by that?

Jeff Andrews
1 year ago

How many medical malpractice deaths are in the US per year? How many alcohol related traffic accidents in the US per year? These numbers are really sad. “They” don’t believe I have a right or need to own a AR style rifle. Well to me it’s quite the fun to hit a steel target at 1000 yards. Target, not people. My firearm collection is for my enjoyment. Take them away because some nut job uses one to harm innocent people. I think not. Next you will want to take my beer away even as I have never drove after even one beer?

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Andrews

Let’s see… as long as people die by other methods let’s just let the carnage in the streets continue. What about those damn video games? Millions of innocent people like those.

Darrel
1 year ago

Which amendment in the bill of rights says video games shall not be infringed?

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Darrel

The 1st.

Drew Mueller
1 year ago

Look at the Firearms regulations/laws in Canada. I guarantee this would have a positive effect on our violent gun-related statistics here if we worked to duplicate their system of enforcement and diligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Canada

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Drew Mueller

It would, if you could ever convince a gun-owner to be reasonable instead of the ‘slippery slope’ argument.

Wolfe
1 year ago

I instantly know a hoplophobe with disingenuous interest in solving the problem by inserting the word “reasonable” into their agenda. By definition, if I disagree, you have already decided I’m automatically not reasonable.

Lets look at REASONABLE pro-safety laws called “shall issue” — after any training and background checks you can muster, a court MUST issue a permit if they don’t have a credible specific reason to deny. Anti-freedom folks hate REASONABLE because anything less than capricious bans are not acceptable to their outlook.

I don’t really want a bazooka myself, but there’s no reason to deny someone IF they are sane and like safely blowing up rocks in the desert (apparently some do?)

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Wolfe

Too much anger here.

Wolfe
1 year ago

Interesting… I don’t think I expressed any anger. As another also caught, I did point out a misleading linguistic “trick” employed. If you agree we can “reasonably” arm 95% of the populace (who are not criminals), “reasonably” standardize interstate CCW, and “sanely” make firearm training mandatory in schools, etc — I’ll retract my objection. I understand that other people have other opinions (which I believe mistaken, of course), but I don’t inherently declare only my views are “reasonable.”

Ed D.
1 year ago

Your definition of “reasonable” is to deny us our rights under the Constitution. For some strange reason, I can never agree with people that want to do that. We have a Constitution and it has to be followed to maintain our free society. I do not own any guns but having said that, if someone wants to buy an AR-15, that is the persons prerogative under the law! End of discussion. You can be as sick as you want to be but the law always prevails!

Darrel
1 year ago
Reply to  Drew Mueller

Bill Of Rights.

Ed D.
1 year ago
Reply to  Drew Mueller

You mean gun confiscation, don’t you? Canada doesn’t have a Bill of rights! We do. Maybe you should move to Canada.

Joe
1 year ago

Mike, I agree with most of your statements. The local events should be seen by all agences. I think that there should be a national cc. I have one that is good for 36 states but when traveling it is a problem.

Jim Conway
1 year ago

Mike
Your facts are mostly right, but there are a few more that deserve mentioning.
While Active Shooter events seem to be seen to be increasing, they are not.
What is increasing is the number of such events that are stopped by armed citizens and occasionally by armed officers
The USA does not have the most events yearly.

For the past few months all we hear on the media is how bad theses events are. What we must keep in prospective is that these active shooter events are only a tiny percentage of the firearm deaths. The leading causes are youth gang violence and suicides

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim Conway

The USA has more gun deaths, by far, than any other civilized nation. And we are truly in a class by ourselves when it comes to mass shootings.

Karen K Willis
1 year ago

We have a higher population than most nations. Can you speak to percentages, please?

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Karen K Willis

It’s easy to look up.

John S
1 year ago
Reply to  Karen K Willis

Per capita its higher.

J. Marcotte
1 year ago

Mr Sherman: First of all, I am Canadian. We, in Canada, do not have the same relationship to guns as you have in the US. Probably caused by a slightly different history. Second Amendment: I really have no opinion on that one. But I do find that it is being interpreted every which way from here to sundown, depending which side one wants to defend. But every time I see news of a mass shooting, in the US or even Canada, I ask two questions: 1) while I agree that people, not guns, kill people, if the ”people” that kills other ”people” had a knife instead of a gun, surely the body count would be much less; and 2) why would anyone want a semi or fully automatic weapon? I have no problem with ‘normal’ rifles used for hunting, and yes they also could be used for killing people, but ‘military ‘ style, automatic or easy to convert to automatic have but one use: kill many people.

While I don’t agree with you on the religion, or lack of, impact on that problem, I fully agree with you on the influence of today’s world: lack of parenting, violent videogames, too many people on the street that should not, etc. But, to only target that as the ultimate cause, I think does miss the very important contribution that the quantity of easily available guns has.

Anyway, that’s my opinion.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  J. Marcotte

Agree. The obvious fact that gets pushed aside is the availability of weapons of war. I doubt the 2nd amendment intended that, but as you say, it’s being interpreted every way possible to justify them. The 2nd was written when a ‘well regulated militia’ to protect ourselves from the gov’t was real. Only Nazi’s and skinheads still believe that.

All this country has to do is look at Australia or Switzerland or any number of countries who have solved this problem darn near overnight by gun buybacks and confiscations. That works. Unfortunately, when you have the NRA and “the liberals are coming for all your guns” mentality, and a president such as we have now, that’s a very tall order.

The USA is in a category all by itself when it comes to mass shootings, all in the name of gun rights. It makes me sick.

Bob p
1 year ago

The Second Amendment is there to protect us from a tyrannical government, it is not there to give us the right to buy military style weapons. I would venture a guess that most people who buy the military style weapons have never served in the military, I was in Vietnam and have no desire for a military style weapon, my son served in Desert Storm, he has no desire for a M16 look a like. The people buying these weapons are just like kids watching reruns of The Lone Ranger and playing with replica 6 shooters, except the look a like M16 actually shoots. As the author rightly pointed out, kids watching violent video games see people getting killed in the video and getting up and being shot the next time the video is played. No concept of people actually dying and never getting up. And speaking of high capacity magazines, after I was grown and my children were watching cowboys I once saw Gene Autry fire his 6 shooter 11 times without reloading, so the media has a lot to do with what is happening, when I was a kid I never thought about how many times their pistol was fired. With the exception of the Las Vegas shooter all the shooters have been young people. Just a thought.

gimpy666
1 year ago

Look at Venezuela they took the peoples guns away ten years ago so they couldn’t defend themselves. All the American cities with very restrictive gun laws have a very high murder rate compared to others that don’t. So called gun free zones are stupid because they don’t work they encourage nut cases.

Karen K Willis
1 year ago
Reply to  gimpy666

Absolutely!

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  gimpy666

Then we need more guns?

Wolfe
1 year ago

Most gunowners I know would gladly give up benevolent shooting if it would cure crime. GUN CONTROL ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT WORK. 2014 had the lowest crime rate since 1963, and draconian-restricted Chicago has the most crime. School shootings STARTED right after Gun Free School Zone signs went up and kids went on pro-psychotic meds. …But media keeps pushing what are, simply put, complete gun-fact lies. When they do speak truth, it gets buried.

Canada/Australia, you say? Data analyst Leah Libresco wrote in 2017 in The Washington Post:

“I researched the strictly tightened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy should be. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun related-crime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambiguous effect on other gun-related crimes or deaths…”

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Wolfe

There are other nations that have quite restrictive laws. We need to figure out what they’re doing that we can’t seem to, because there’s one thing that guarantees more mass-killings: DOING NOTHING.

Wolfe
1 year ago

Actually no… worse than government doing nothing is government doing the *wrong* thing by disarming the good guys, advertising defense-free zones, etc. If left alone, good people would outnumber bad people.

I fully empathize with the desperate drive to “do something”… …but knee jerk reactions CAN and HAVE made it much worse. Every gun restriction has been followed by MORE assaults, so evidence says that’s the wrong response.

Don Kostyal
1 year ago

Mr Hemstead, I spent almost 30 year in uniform (active duty) supporting and defending the Constitution which gives you the right to say what ever you want, but, you are ignorant. I am not a Nazi or a Skinhead. If you are one of those who think the reasons the 2nd Amendment don’t apply today because our government or our military would not turn on its citizens is blind. You only have to look at history where it has happened (Germany, Russia, Cuba) and to current events, Venezuela or Honk Kong where the countries military is on TV beating and shooting their citizens. Why? Are we better than them in your eyes? If so, kind of racist isn’t it? Another form of name calling.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Don Kostyal

I can’t imagine any arsenal I could possess that would protect me from a tyrannical government. Yes, we are better than them.

Rosalie
1 year ago
Reply to  J. Marcotte

I as a woman am thankful for my right to protect myself.
A knife would not save my life in most cases,but the gun on my hip or the rifle by my bedside will. Yes I have a husband for protection, we protect each other.

Wolfe
1 year ago
Reply to  Rosalie

Thank you for saying this… anti-freedom folks often want to tell “us” what we need for our own safety. “Just run away! Take a punch or two! Let people rob your house, because it’s just stuff!” I’ve actually heard people say sexual assault isn’t a “deadly force” issue (it IS, IMHO).

Well, a paraplegic CAN’T run, and gets killed. An 80 lb woman can’t stop a 250 lb attacker, no matter how much karate she knows. And most of all, she shouldn’t HAVE to see how much injury she can stand before she is “allowed” to fight back against an attack she didn’t invite.

I have armed a LOT of women in my life. I pretty much demand every GF and wife know how to defend herself EFFECTIVELY, because I probably won’t be around when she needs MY sidearm unless the attacker is REALLY stupid. Counting on cops and husbands to come to the rescue is about as UNfeminist as one can get. Own yourself, and claim your right to be uninjured.

Monty Bonner
1 year ago

We require folks who want to drive a car, to study, and pass a written exam, plus they have to take and pass a driving test. Current estimates are 35-40,000 people will die on USA Roads this year. 11% of those deaths are from persons younger than 21, who are found texting while driving a car, all states I believe had laws against texting/cell phone use while driving, so much for laws.

As a requirement to own, or to be permitted to have a Concealed Weapons Permit should be TRAINING.
Regardless, the minimum training should be 24 hours classroom, it should be interspersed with 16 hours of hands on experience, stance, positioning, safe storage, safe cleaning, actual firing of the weapon is various scenarios. Qualified, state certified instructors would be required, hmmm, got lots of folks who are ex-military, who are expert in guns period, ex police officers, ex police range officers, lots of folks who can teach. One thing this would show up, by class participation is the students mental state, verbal questioning, response in class to queries on subject, “what would you do” or “How you would handle the situation” will give those instructors access to peoples mindset, and that could have a bearing on if that person is allowed to “pass the class”. Can those folks detect mental instability, my guess is, yes to a degree, they served alongside many different people, and can gauge how people are acting and thinking,
WHY, they had to trust those people with their life in stressful situations, on the streets or on the battlefield. .

Bob p
1 year ago
Reply to  Monty Bonner

Most people who kill other people do not buy their weapons in the store, do not get permits, or apply for a cc permit. The only ones who jump through the hoops are the law abiding citizens, you have a good theory but that’s all it is theoretical.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Monty Bonner

Yes, laws are stupid. Let’s ban laws.

Wolfe
1 year ago
Reply to  Monty Bonner

Interesting, Monty! All the states I have lived required training. I AM a certified instructor, and what you said is true of mindset — I failed many students who could take a test but still muzzle-flashed or were “too” casual about a deadly subject. I DONT agree that police or military make good instructors (nor even students). I sometimes have LEOs or lawyers assist my legal discussions, but their prior training is very different than civilian CCW. Duty to act, right to act, how and when a cop must act is totally different than a civvy CCW.

As for my courses, most CCW students get 10 hours of basic safety/operation/ maintenance including live target shooting to prove understanding… THEN another 10-12 hours of specifically defense-oriented training (point shooting without sights, lethal force law, and a small “shoot house” live fire, practicing cover and defensive tactics. I don’t say all this as an advertisement for myself, but because most non-shooter people have no clue how much training CCW holders generally DO have behind their permit and holster. We don’t pass out guns and set folks loose.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago

Sounds more like a MAGA rally in here.

Darrel
1 year ago

So here comes Antifa terrorists now…..

Primo Rudy's Roadhouse
1 year ago

You seem to be confused about an “Assault” rifle. As a result, I am afraid you confuse some of the people who read your article. I am referring to the inference that the rifles used in the recent mass shooting are the same that you used in Vietman. I am a few years to young to have gone to Vietnam, but my friends who did go used fully automatic weapons. They did not use the civilian AR15 or other semi automatic weapon. The public, fueled by the liberal mass media, has a similar confusion about civilian and military weapons. In your article, you asked for comments, and now you have mine.

Mike Sherman
1 year ago

Thank you for your comment Rudy. I mentioned the M-16 only because it resembles an AR, they look scary to a lot of folks. I should have mentioned the M-16 fires single rounds with the option of going fully automatic.

Jan E. Van Hoven
1 year ago
Reply to  Mike Sherman

Mike, the first rifles in Vietnam were called AR-15’s. They had a selector switch that went from safety to semi to full. People forget that the AR stands for “Armlite Rifle”, not “Assault Rifle”. I had one in Vietnam and hated it. They finally came out with the M-16 and then the M-16A1. Just a clarification.

Don Kostyal
1 year ago

I cannot believe what I am reading! So many “freak’n experts.” While you are correct about the meaning of AR not being “assault rifle” it was actually the “ARMALITE” company and they produced the AR-10 (the 10th rifle model Armalite made, and a 7.62 mm rifle). It was designed by a former Marine named Eugene Stoner. The DOD didn’t want a 7.62 because of the expense, so the AR-15 came about (the 15 rifle design in .223/5.56 NATO). Stoner and Armalite had the patent but the company was having difficulty so Colt entered the picture as a partner with Armalite. The precursor to the M16 was the Colt/Armalite AR-15 Model 601 equipped with a selector for SAFE, Single Fire and Fully Automatic fire. and was first used by USAF. Very minor changes to model 602 and then it was designated the XM16. The model 603 became the M16A1 (and yes I am a vet, USAF 1970-1998). The AR-15 which is sold today has a selector switch with 2 positions SAFE and FIRE (which is single shot) And unless you are a skilled armorer/gunsmith, converting a semi-automatic SINGLE SHOT weapon to a fully automatic rifle is not only very hard to do but it is also ILLEGAL!!!!
Incidentally, Armalite’s model 5 (Ar-5) was the 22 caliber breakdown rifle for the USAF that became thee MA-1 Survival Rifle the barrel stores in the stock.
What I suggest everyone does, go out to a shooting competition where the AR-15 is used and watch–and also listen to the people participating. First of all they are not out there hunting deer and ducks. The AR has been around over 50 years now. Before that it was the M1 Garrand (the rifle before the M16). The are still sought after and collected by many. They were also what was used for sport shooting and hunting. There is no civilian designation for the Garrand as it was not a fully automatic weapon–just single shot. I am only asking you to try and understand how many gun owners feel when people try and tell us what we need or can have. Especially when 99.999% of us are not out to harm anyone…unless they are intent on doing us harm.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago

All we have to do is look at Australia or Switzerland to learn what works, and works quickly. But we’re too bullheaded to do that.

Abortion? You lost me there.

Monty Bonner
1 year ago

Chris, current estimates are we allow 450,000 abortions each year in the USA. If we allow society to callously kill unborn humans, what kind of message does that send to young peoples mind, who are fully impressionable and have very little if any moral compass at those young ages. I am not debating the rights and wrongs of abortion, I am illustrating the message permitting the murder of those babies and how that is perceived. Because a law allows certain conduct, is it still right you display or act within that conduct. FWIW-That is the population of many mid sized American cities. That of it from that perspective.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Monty Bonner

I don’t know what it sends to young people’s minds. First I’ve heard of anyone equating abortion with gun violence. And no, it’s not video games either.

Jan E. Van Hoven
1 year ago

Chris, just a minute. Switzerland requires all males to attend a 6 month Army training and then is send home with all of his equipment including a rifle and ammunition.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago

Fine. If that works, let’s do that.

Don Kostyal
1 year ago

You better check your facts on Switzerland–they have mandatory service and training until age 55 for all males and women can volunteer. They are considering making it mandatory for women as well. Those who don’t qualify for military service can do various forms of civil service (although for longer periods of annual time). Also, the recent vote on abolishing conscription failed with only 35% of the electorate against continuing it. Oh, and for those who can afford it, they can pay a “tax” to avoid service altogether.
Maybe everyone who thinks another country has a better idea and wants what they have should go there–change what you can, your own life and stop trying to change everyone else’s to fit your version of right. I’m a Libertarian and believe less government and laws is best. Where is it going to end. You want gov’t to tell you what you can read? What you can watch on TV? What movies can be made? What video games can be made or watched. Tell your kids NO–you don’t need the government to take something away from everyone to make your job as a parent easier. Want to be told what size drinks you can buy? What kind of straws you can use? Can football be tackle? Should cars be driverless?
We tried closing the institutions that housed people that needed supervision because some thought it was a violation of their rights. We can see now it was a failure and there are many people that can’t take care of themselves. Time to reopen them and put people in care with supervision until they are cured and can return to society. Some will, but not all mental illness is going to be cured.

chris p hemstead
1 year ago
Reply to  Don Kostyal

.” Where is it going to end. You want gov’t to tell you what you can read? What you can watch on TV? What movies can be made? What video games can be made or watched. ”

That’s happening right now. Everyone’s favorite president is blaming video games. Others, violent movies.

From reading many of these comments I’m getting the idea that some of you are so adamant about your weapons of war, and your firm beliefs that you need these guns to protect yourselves from an opressive government, that you’re willing let this carnage in the streets continue unabated. No matter what is done, if anything, someone is going to suffer. That’s just the way it works.

Jim Webster
1 year ago

Mike, you sound like an ad for the NRA! PGR is right in his views.