# To pack or not to pack?



## Strabo40 (Oct 12, 2007)

I have a question and being a new member to this forum, you all seem to have some very valid points when it comes to CCW and when to carry.

Here is my question: So many of the CCW permits have various technicalities or laws about where you can lawfully carry, and there are those places where it is illegal to carry period. When does a person decide upon himself/herself that they are no longer going to be a victim or potential victim and carry concealed no matter what the law says? My point is that if you are truly carrying concealed, then no one should know that you are packing so what would make a person not carry in one place and in another?


----------



## Lucky13 (Sep 1, 2007)

Strabo40 said:


> .....so what would make a person not carry in one place and in another?


For me personally, it's knowing that I am not breaking the law, whether or not I agree with it.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I am pretty sure no one on this board will advocate intentionally breaking the law, no matter how silly said law may be...so lets not have this discussion go in that direction. That being said, concealed means concealed.


----------



## Strabo40 (Oct 12, 2007)

I agree about not intentionally breaking any law. I don't need that kind of burden on my mind.


----------



## Lucky13 (Sep 1, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> I am pretty sure no one on this board will advocate intentionally breaking the law, no matter how silly said law may be...so lets not have this discussion go in that direction. That being said, concealed means concealed.


Agreed. I understood his question to mean, for example, packing in a restaurant that serves alchohol, because no one actually knows you are packing. At what point and why would someone decide to comply or not comply? I've thought about it, but, never have. And the thought has crossed my mind, "How would anyone know?".


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

If you are caught carrying in the wrong place you may lose your right to own much less carry.

You would be totaly defensless then. :smt076

:smt1099


----------



## hideit (Oct 3, 2007)

my close friend took the ccw course and then decided not to get the permit
too many technicallities
if you take the course or get on line and understand your state laws - then you can decide
don't carry just becasue it is concealed - way too many negatives on the oppositie side


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

My Aunt asked me why I carry last weekend... We were talking abnout my Dad's guns.

I stole an answer from this forum:

"Because cops are too heavy to carry."

I love Mike's answer... I echo his.

Jeff


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

We (CCW holders), are attacked by the left all the time and to give them ammo by ignoring the law as it pertains to us with the privlege to carry is to help hem did the hole for our coffin.


----------



## propellerhead (May 19, 2006)

To me it's not so much a question of carrying in places where I'm not allowed to carry. It's more of a question of going to these places or not. I very seldom have to go to Post Office. When I do, I unholster, do my business, then leave. Other places like bars and government buildings, I avoid. You can do so much online now I haven't really been to a place that doesn't allow me to carry. Before I got my CHL, my thought was there were so many restricted places. Now that I have it, I realize I never really went to these restricted places.



TOF said:


> If you are caught carrying in the wrong place you may lose your right to own much less carry.
> 
> You would be totaly defensless then. :smt076
> 
> :smt1099


+1


----------



## stormbringerr (May 22, 2007)

you could accidentally expose your weapon,and if some sheep sees it they arent going to report that,....i think i saw a holster on that person,they are going to report to someone ( theres a guy running around with a GUN in here!!!) you know what happens next?..:smt022


----------



## JimmySays (Jun 8, 2007)

Obey the law, carry when you can and when you can't (laws vary state to state) leave your weapon in your vehicle or just don't go where you can't carry.
Luckily in Texas you can carry in a restaurant that serves alcohol as long as 51% of the money does not come from alcohol sales. If it does, then they have to post such per state law.
I personally don't break the law, I am defined by my actions, so I talk the talk and walk the walk.


----------



## kansas_plainsman (May 9, 2006)

Practically speaking - concealed means unnoticed by the general public. I always assume that police and security people can *see* that I'm carrying "concealed"... because they're trained to see the tells.


----------



## Strabo40 (Oct 12, 2007)

You all have reinforced the answer that I agree with and that is to always obey the law. It also goes to show that those with CCW are very responsible and not some loose canons walking around. These are things that the liberals in our country do not understand or even take the time to try to understand the reasoning for CCW. With the attacks on the 2nd Amendment we all have to take the responsibility for this freedom and not do things that give our enemies the chance to win this fight.

Thanks again all for your answers.


----------



## tgrogan (Sep 4, 2007)

My reasons for not crossing the line are the same as TOFs. I don't want to lose my ability to carry for the rest of my life. When you think about the reason we all carry, it's because we don't know what's going to happen.

Abiding by that premise means that you never know what's going to happen while you are in one of those places where you're not suppose to carry.


----------



## wild cat mccane (Aug 19, 2007)

"We (CCW holders), are attacked by the left"

Blah blah blah.

Jesus h crimany.

Flaming liberal college student here, but i must not enjoy the rights in the constitution. :buttkick:


----------



## Snowman (Jan 2, 2007)

wild cat mccane said:


> "We (CCW holders), are attacked by the left"
> 
> Blah blah blah.
> 
> ...


I knew something was wrong with you! :mrgreen:

What rights do you you feel you aren't enjoying?


----------



## FallGuy (Mar 7, 2007)

:watching:


----------



## wild cat mccane (Aug 19, 2007)

look i am not meaning to be a jerk. Though, yes, that was sounding like a fight was brewing.

my point is the issue is bad people have guns.

Conservatives and liberal deal with this issue politically in different ways. But the overall goal of both sides is the same goal, to stop bad things happening to good people.

Just because one side has recently picked unpopular was to meet the goal (wrong or not) doesn't make that party stupid or un-American. A frequency distribution graph may say that liberals in general are more strict on gun laws, but that does not mean an individual liberal person doesn't like guns. or that an individual liberal agrees. or that this liberal is stupid. 

Thats just uneducated thinking. I get tired of certain talks around guns sites about liberals. Both sides have a goal of saving life's. both sides go about it differently and you disagree with one of the sides.



And as for the saying "english, learn it" well I am a native speaker and I am still learning it in the collegiate atmosphere, so **** off if i misspell something. It is hard enough knowing all the rules and exceptions to the rules without you pressuring me to have perfect grammar when I am bored and typing my opinions :mrgreen: hahaha hope everyone enjoys that :smt023

now its my turn :watching:


----------



## Snowman (Jan 2, 2007)

Doesn't the saying go like this:

"If you're conservative when you're young you have no heart; if you're liberal when you're old you have no brain."

:smt179


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

What sign? Where?

As for the places that don't need signs for CCW to be a no-no, and those that do put up "no guns" signs, they should put these up as well.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

wild cat mccane said:


> Conservatives and liberal deal with this issue politically in different ways. But the overall goal of both sides is the same goal, to stop bad things happening to good people.
> 
> Just because one side has recently picked unpopular was to meet the goal (wrong or not) doesn't make that party stupid or un-American. A frequency distribution graph may say that liberals in general are more strict on gun laws, but that does not mean an individual liberal person doesn't like guns. or that an individual liberal agrees. or that this liberal is stupid.
> 
> Thats just uneducated thinking. I get tired of certain talks around guns sites about liberals. Both sides have a goal of saving life's. both sides go about it differently and you disagree with one of the sides.


That's somewhat true for some liberals, and I know some who think the way you describe. However, many other liberals seek gun control for other reasons. The party to which virtually all liberals gravitate - the Democratic one - has _written right into its national platform_ various gun control measures that have repeatedly proven to be pointless and/or ineffective at preventing crime. The Democrats know this, yet they leave these things in their platform. This serves only to appease their base, which has a cultural (rather than practical) aversion to the type of person who wishes to own a gun. The gun control measures are not so much an attempt to reduce crime, but rather to punish the people around whom liberals are, for the most part, horribly uncomfortable.

Why are (most) liberals uncomfortable around gun owners? It's pretty simple. Liberals want people to rely on government, but the gun represents self-reliance. A skilled, armed man doesn't need the police to protect him or the government to feed him. This makes him a poor constituent for the Democrats. An armed man is typically also not dainty and effete as are a great many liberals, and this too makes liberals uncomfortable around gun owners (just as they are uncomfortable around NASCAR fans).



> And as for the saying "english, learn it" well I am a native speaker and I am still learning it in the collegiate atmosphere, so **** off if i misspell something. It is hard enough knowing all the rules and exceptions to the rules without you pressuring me to have perfect grammar when I am bored and typing my opinions :mrgreen: hahaha hope everyone enjoys that :smt023


I did not enjoy that at all. Profanity, even concealed profanity, is unacceptable here when directed at a particular forum member. If you can't articulate your point without it, retrieve your dictionary and rethink what you want to say.


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> Why are (most) liberals uncomfortable around gun owners? It's pretty simple. Liberals want people to rely on government, but the gun represents self-reliance. A skilled, armed man doesn't need the police to protect him or the government to feed him. This makes him a poor constituent for the Democrats. An armed man is typically also not dainty and effete as are a great many liberals, and this too makes liberals uncomfortable around gun owners (just as they are uncomfortable around NASCAR fans).


+10

'cept for the NASCAR fans part... They make me nervous too...

JeffWard
- Darwinist Libertarian Candidate for President
"For the Survival of the Fittest, and the Legally Armed"


----------



## Lucky13 (Sep 1, 2007)

JeffWard said:


> .....'cept for the NASCAR fans part... They make me nervous too...


:anim_lol: Yeah, how can you trust anyone who doesn't turn right? :anim_lol:


----------



## wild cat mccane (Aug 19, 2007)

It wasn't directed at any member. it is nearly as offensive as the people who have that message in their sig. Real American. Consider WW2, America rounded up Japaneses from the camps, and put them in the front lines of impossible charges. Civil War same happened to the blacks. we were founded by immigrants from varying areas. What is inconvenient about having multiple languages doesn't need to be brought about as hatred towards other people. 

Anyhow you statement couldn't be any more clouded. You are grouping everyone in a particular frame of thought to one party, that has had some particular views. 

And I do believe that is exactly what I said was uneducated when thinking of it in a frequency distribution graph.

There is no reason to get hostile here. and there is no reason, other then your own misguided opinions, to assume the left, liberals, or the democratic party missions is there to be zero guns. 


And I laughed at your comment that guns and self-reliance. What kind of a blanket statement is it to say liberals are uncomfortable around guns? nearly had me a good chuckle there. I rarely run into any mother that is comfortable with guns in her child's school. But what do i know? I am only born and raised in the only state that allows guns on a university campus, Utah.

I don't hate either side, carpeting one side as evil is just plan ignorant that we differ on many solutions, but we all wish similar happiness and safety for all.


----------



## Snowman (Jan 2, 2007)

I'm sorry, but you're losing this one. Democrats (liberals) have a pretty clear record of support for gun control. Not to say that all liberals are for gun control, as I know a few that are gun owners, but it is prevalent. As far as making generalizations, don't admit to be a "flaming liberal" if you don't want to be associated with those people which are largely anti-gun. 

I mean no offense or disrespect.


----------



## astrogus (Sep 16, 2007)

i'm simply concerned about my well being, i know where not to be with or without my gun.


----------



## wild cat mccane (Aug 19, 2007)

no, please snowman, I don't take any offense! I actually had a good time sharing my story of finding a P99 with you.

it appears to me some are confusing gun control is taking away guns? I am very confused on this. 

I am actually in complete disagreement with my liberal party then. I think guns are great. 

I am wondering what solution to gun violence is offered that is so dissimilar to the liberal side? From my understanding nearly anyone can own a gun anyways, but doesn't...so? (yes I know we are the most heavily armed country, this doesn't mean everyone owns one)


----------



## SemoShooter (Jul 5, 2007)

But back to the original post in this thread. Carrying where it is not legal to do so is just asking for trouble. As others have stated if you are caught doing it you will lose your CCW and likely your right to own handguns or maybe any firearms. It also gives fuel to the anit-gun crowd (notice I did not say liberal as there are anti-gun folks on both sides of the political spectrum) to push for more restrictions for us LAW ABIDING gun owners.


----------



## wild cat mccane (Aug 19, 2007)

now thats a fine opinion in my opinion.

Sorry to detract from the thread. We can all get along and wish everyone well :smt023

Probably never a good idea to carry where you are not allowed to.


----------



## spacedoggy (May 11, 2006)

SemoShooter said:


> But back to the original post in this thread. Carrying where it is not legal to do so is just asking for trouble. As others have stated if you are caught doing it you will lose your CCW and likely your right to own handguns or maybe any firearms. It also gives fuel to the anit-gun crowd (notice I did not say liberal as there are anti-gun folks on both sides of the political spectrum) to push for more restrictions for us LAW ABIDING gun owners.


In Texas you get a trespass ticket. You pay a fine then your third time you say bye bye to CWP


----------



## FallGuy (Mar 7, 2007)

SemoShooter said:


> But back to the original post in this thread. Carrying where it is not legal to do so is just asking for trouble. As others have stated if you are caught doing it you will lose your CCW and likely your right to own handguns or maybe any firearms. It also gives fuel to the anit-gun crowd (notice I did not say liberal as there are anti-gun folks on both sides of the political spectrum) to push for more restrictions for us LAW ABIDING gun owners.


If you are truly "Carrying Concealed" how will anyone know? I don't think they would. The only way would be if a gunman comes in and starts killing innocent people. At that point you would then be found out. Will it matter by then to you or the other peoples lives you just saved? Sure you may get a fine and lose your CCW, but what is worth more to you? Your life and the life of the pregnant Mother of two in line at the post office or your CCW?

I don't condone breaking the law. I have spent several years of my life upholding it and obviously follow the letter of the law or I would not have my CCW. But as Mike B said "Concealed is concealed". When I carry on my body no one will know unless I go through a metal detector. Don't go looking for trouble and always use common sense. I have a slight advantage over Joe citizen because of training, but I still would ask myself before I did anything that will involve the legal system; "Would a jury of my peers agree with what I am about to do?" How you answer that question should determine how you react.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

wild cat mccane said:


> You are grouping everyone in a particular frame of thought to one party, that has had some particular views.


So...you're saying that liberals don't gravitate to the Democrat Party? Can you possibly be serious?



> And I do believe that is exactly what I said was uneducated when thinking of it in a frequency distribution graph.
> 
> There is no reason to get hostile here. and there is no reason, other then your own misguided opinions, to assume the left, liberals, or the democratic party missions is there to be zero guns.


Well, most of us here can produce various quotes from the Democrat leadership about banning various guns, from "assault weapons" to "pocket rockets." There's no question that the Democrat Party is far less friendly to gun owners than the GOP. If you think otherwise, you simply haven't researched it enough. Allow me to assist you with your research. Read page 18 of the 2004 Democratic Party platform, found here: http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/09/the_2004_democr.php.



> And I laughed at your comment that guns and self-reliance. What kind of a blanket statement is it to say liberals are uncomfortable around guns? nearly had me a good chuckle there.


Happy to amuse you. But you are in denial of reality if you don't recognize that liberals are far more in favor of a nanny state than are conservatives. That's the basic difference between liberals and conservatives. It's one of the things that make a liberal a liberal - reliance on government versus reliance on self/family/church/etc.



> I don't hate either side, carpeting one side as evil is just plan ignorant that we differ on many solutions, but we all wish similar happiness and safety for all.


I am one of the less conservative people on this board, but I do recognize the substantial differences between liberals and conservatives, and Democrats and the GOP. If you can't see the differences, perhaps you need some more time in the "collegiate environment."


----------



## stormbringerr (May 22, 2007)

i must confess. i am a liber....................................................tine. :smt083


----------

