# Carrying



## qpoint (Apr 5, 2009)

In NYS, the pistol permitt/license allows you to carry as well as long as the licensed has his/or license on them. I know some carry for self defense but this seems much more risky then having a weapon at home for "self-defense" (say for example in an intruder situation). There are already things one must be aware of even in a legitimate self-defense situation in ones own home; how does the situation change outside the home?


----------



## Guest (May 25, 2009)

There is no easy answer to this question.

If someone comes into your home uninvited, then anything is fair game and may god have mercy on their soul.

Out in public is quite another story. The implications of using your gun outside of your home are far too complex to be addressed in a simple forum posting. You are not a law enforcement officer and it is not your job to uphold the law or to be a hero. You should only use your gun if you believe that your life or someone else's is in imminent danger unless you intervene.

The main thing to keep in mind is that once you place a bullet into another human being, your life will change forever. There are legal issues, social issues and moral issues. 

The Chief of Police will not pat you on the back and thank you for taking another low life scum bag off the street. The mayor will not give you a medal of honor. John Walsh will not come to your home and interview you for a segment on AMW. It is also likely that you may be haunted by nightmares for a very long time reliving that scene where you take another person's life. Putting a bullet into another human being can be a very bloody, nasty, messy business. Please consider your options carefully.

Scott


----------



## qpoint (Apr 5, 2009)

I appreciate your thoughts Scott. However, there are "no options" for me to consider as this is not a personal concern of mine. I just wondered where such a choice (as made by others everyday to carry outside the home) and the right to carry outside the home fell cicrcumstantially with respect to the law. I appreciate your comments. They are true and not limited to the circumstances I described, but are true in any discharge situation.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

I guess I don't understand the question or the point you're trying to make because I thought Scott answered it pretty well. :smt017


----------



## SaltyDog (Jan 1, 2009)

qpoint said:


> In NYS, the pistol permitt/license allows you to carry as well as long as the licensed has his/or license on them. *I know some carry for self defense but this seems much more risky then having a weapon at home for "self-defense" (say for example in an intruder situation).* There are already things one must be aware of even in a legitimate self-defense situation in ones own home; how does the situation change outside the home?


Heck I'm still trying to figure out the first question.

Why qpoint do you feel that it is much more RISKY to carry a concealed weapon than to just leave that weapon at home for self defense?

Does this mean we are going to be on the news?:smt033


----------



## Supermanwoot (May 16, 2009)

just when its in your place of residence thats your house and if someone comes in for whatever reason you can be confident that you are doing the right thing in shooting them.

Concealed carry is RISKY because you can make a bad choice and shoot the wrong person and like scott said, you aren't a police officer, the weapon is only for defense of yourself or if they are threatening someone's life close to you that would only be saved if you intervene. 

It gets risky because if you do in fact kill someone or even shoot them, they (or their family) will sue you and you will be under investigation for it and its almost MORE TROUBLE THAN ITS WORTH, except if they are ABSOULTELY threating your life or someone close to you, in which case you saved your life or another person's. 

for example it wouldnt be abnormal for someone to shoot and kill a robber who had a knife and the shooter does jail time for manslaughter if the robber never actually attacked anyone or was a safe distance away. Shooting should be the absolute last resort. Gah, like Scott said you just cant explain it easily as there are so many different things to discuss but I hope this helped a little more.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

What you just said, absolute last resort. You shoot when you know if you don't, you or someone with you Will be dead!


----------



## qpoint (Apr 5, 2009)

Todd said:


> I guess I don't understand the question or the point you're trying to make because I thought Scott answered it pretty well. :smt017





SaltyDog said:


> Heck I'm still trying to figure out the first question.
> 
> Why qpoint do you feel that it is much more RISKY to carry a concealed weapon than to just leave that weapon at home for self defense?
> 
> Does this mean we are going to be on the news?:smt033


Hey guys--- all questions posed by our posters (at least me) I'm sure are not regarding "themsevles" directly. After all, this IS a forum; and I'd be careful not to "assume" all post made by somone is regarding themselves. It's nice sometimes to just hold nice converstations about things we are thinking about; have questions concerning; or find interesting.

It's not rocket science. It's simple. I've seen and know some carry for sd outside of their homes; just as a thought wondered what others thought about this and how different (and/or more complex) the legal ramifications get in an "out-of-the-home" sd situation.

That's all. It's not a deep post or question; it's not about me. It's a forum.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Well, I'm no rocket surgeon, but it seems to me that you're asking what people on a _gun forum_ think of carrying a gun. Considering the vast majority of people here have, want, or would like to but are restricted by local laws, their CCW, the question seems about as useless as asking guys on a car forum what they think about putting tires on a car. But, it's your thread and whatever floats your boat.

Y'all have fun with thread. My brain hurts, so I'll just go to lurking mod mode.


----------



## qpoint (Apr 5, 2009)

Todd said:


> Well, I'm no rocket surgeon, but it seems to me that you're asking what people on a _gun forum_ think of carrying a gun. Considering the vast majority of people here have, want, or would like to but are restricted by local laws, their CCW, the question seems about as useless as asking guys on a car forum what they think about putting tires on a car. But, it's your thread and whatever floats your boat.
> 
> Y'all have fun with thread. My brain hurts, so I'll just go to lurking mod mode.


"There's always 'one' in the class."


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

qpoint said:


> "There's always 'one' in the class."


Yup, and in this case, it's the principal.


----------



## SaltyDog (Jan 1, 2009)

:smt116



Supermanwoot said:


> just when its in your place of residence thats your house and if someone comes in for whatever reason you can be confident that you are doing the right thing in shooting them.


Really - what if he doesn't have a weapon would you still feel that it was RIGHT? Also that may not be true in the State you live in.



> Concealed carry is RISKY because you can make a bad choice and shoot the wrong person and like scott said, you aren't a police officer, the weapon is only for defense of yourself or if they are threatening someone's life close to you that would only be saved if you intervene.


No I agree with what Scott said and that CCW is for self defense but being risky because I may shoot the wrong person - I don't think so - you think I'm going to start blasting into a crowd to try and kill a BG and not think about where that bullet is going?



> It gets risky because if you do in fact kill someone or even shoot them, they (or their family) will sue you and you will be under investigation for it and its almost MORE TROUBLE THAN ITS WORTH, except if they are ABSOULTELY threating your life or someone close to you, in which case you saved your life or another person's.


Now we are back to the first scenario - if you do not think that you may face civil charges if someone breaks into your house and you shoot them then you are living in a dream world. Criminals have Rights too don't ya know. Especially if you have deep pockets. I wouldn't draw my weapon if I was not protecting myself or my loved one's inside or outside the house.



> for example it wouldnt be abnormal for someone to shoot and kill a robber who had a knife and the shooter does jail time for manslaughter if the robber never actually attacked anyone or was a safe distance away. Shooting should be the absolute last resort. Gah, like Scott said you just cant explain it easily as there are so many different things to discuss but I hope this helped a little more.


Not going down the "what if" road.

Hey I just asked qpoint to explain exactly what she was asking ? Her question was quite vague to me.


----------



## SaltyDog (Jan 1, 2009)

qpoint said:


> It's not rocket science. It's simple. I've seen and know some carry for sd outside of their homes; just as a thought wondered what others thought about this and how different (and/or more complex) the legal ramifications get in an "out-of-the-home" sd situation.
> 
> That's all. It's not a deep post or question; it's not about me. It's a forum.


What's your side on this qpoint - as I asked before what makes it more risky carrying a concealed weapon than leaving that weapon at home IYO?

P.S. I am a rocket scientist. :smt033


----------



## clanger (Jan 27, 2009)

*.....regardless of where YOU pull the trigger....*



qpoint said:


> There are already things one must be aware of even in a legitimate self-defense situation in ones own home; how does the situation change outside the home?


It don't.

YOU are responsible for your downrange rounds.

YOU need to shoot smart and act accordingly.

YOU must act within the law when deadly force is bring considered, have 'just cause', show eminent threat to life and act along the lines of what a reasonable person would have done in the same circumstances.

YOU will be responsible for the outcome, and, YOU may/will also be getting a visit from the local authorites as they turn your life inside-out making sure the shoot was righteous.

If YOU, or ANYONE has to ask these questions, YOU should not be carrying.

PERIOD.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

If you live a reasonably long life you will have to make hundreds, probably thousands of critical decisions. To carry or not carry is just one more of them.

Do you swerve or hit the Deer? Do you draw and shoot or can you avoid doing so?

If you swerve and are unable to correct resulting in severe damage to a passenger or pedestrian you could be sued and lose just as much as if you shot someone. If you don't swerve the Deer could come through the windshield and kill you.

Which is the correct choice?

Decisions decisions, life is full of them. I hope you make the best ones.

tumbleweed


----------



## Stolya (May 23, 2009)

There are a lot of vagueries associated with CCW. Most of them are based on state and local laws. 

All of these can be a headache to anyone who even considers applying for a permit to carry. My three states of residence (Iowa, Texas and Florida) swing both extremes. Texas and Florida are very liberal in reference to what they will do to you if you shoot someone. Texas of course will give everyone the benefit of the doubt when it comes to a shooting. As long as you can prove to a judge that you felt threatened.

Florida is fairly close to the fine state of Texas in how it treats shootings. Though the higher crime rate tends to weigh heavily on any decision by a court of law.

Now Iowa on the other hand ......

As it is a heavy hunting community, there are a lot of guns around. But there are not a lot of CCW permits. Most of the county sheriffs are very leery of giving a citizen a handgun in everyday life because of the liability where the law is concerned. Gun crimes are very serious offenses there and are heavily punished.

On the topic of the rationale of whether to leave the weapon at home.

I believe in the right to bear arms. I also believe in a persons right to defend themselves from harm. As my current residence is in Jacksonville, Florida there is a bunch of crime. I will be getting my CCW in a couple months and cannot carry it to work but when I am around town I will be.

If a person is not comfortable carrying a weapon they shouldn't. If a person doesn't feel they can bear living with shooting/killing they shouldn't carry.

Of course these are all personal opinions but it is after all a forum

ADAA Adams
USN


----------



## Supermanwoot (May 16, 2009)

SaltyDog said:


> Now we are back to the first scenario - if you do not think that you may face civil charges if someone breaks into your house and you shoot them then you are living in a dream world. Criminals have Rights too don't ya know. Especially if you have deep pockets. I wouldn't draw my weapon if I was not protecting myself or my loved one's inside or outside the house.


I never said you wouldn't possibly face charges, I just said that if someone comes into MY home and lets say its dark, I'm not going to risk finding out if they have a weapon or not if I can help it. Obviously I'd try to ID them to make sure its not my son who happened to sneak out or something, but I just said that I could be confident that I'd be doing the right thing protecting my home.



SaltyDog said:


> No I agree with what Scott said and that CCW is for self defense but being risky because I may shoot the wrong person - I don't think so - you think I'm going to start blasting into a crowd to try and kill a BG and not think about where that bullet is going?


I don't think that you are going to have 100% control of where your bullet is headed after it hits the BG or if you miss in every situation, so its definitely something to consider. I don't care if you're a world champion marksman, if an unexpected situation arises anything could happen.

I would only carry, as I said before, as a LAST RESORT. Even if someone came in and robbed me at my job at gunpoint, I don't think I would immediately pull my gun out unless I had a VERY clear/unobstructed shot. Pulling a weapon in that kind of situation can turn things from a "take the money and run" to a big shootout and thats not always the best scenario.


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2009)

SaltyDog said:


> Now we are back to the first scenario - if you do not think that you may face civil charges if someone breaks into your house and you shoot them then you are living in a dream world. Criminals have Rights too don't ya know.


In some states that have "castle laws", if the homeowner is cleared of criminal charges, then the "victim" can not pursue civil charges against the homeowner... in theory!

Scott


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Supermanwoot said:


> Pulling a weapon in that kind of situation can turn things from a "take the money and run" to a big shootout and thats not always the best scenario.


Unfortunately, those days seem to be gone. I think you stand just as good of a chance of being shot if you comply. There seems to be no value of life any more and a dead witness tells no tales.


----------



## SaltyDog (Jan 1, 2009)

scottaschultz said:


> In some states that have "castle laws", if the homeowner is cleared of criminal charges, then the "victim" can not pursue civil charges against the homeowner... in theory!
> 
> Scott


True but some States don't and even if there is a Castle Law not all will protect you from civil suits. You need to know the laws in your State or the State where you are carrying.

States with no known Castle Law
Iowa (Law does not require retreat from home, but may require retreat within the home) 
New Hampshire[26] 
New Mexico 
Virginia 
District of Columbia

States with weak Castle Law
The duty to retreat is not removed, but deadly force may be used to end invasion of home without presence of immediate lethal threat.

Idaho (Homicide is justified if defending a home from "tumultuous" entry; duty to retreat not specifically removed) 
Illinois (Use of deadly force is justified if defending a home from "a violent, riotous, or tumultuous" entry or "to prevent the commission of a felony"; duty to retreat not specifically removed) 
Minnesota (Homicide justified to prevent the commission of a felony in the home) 
Montana (Deadly force justified to prevent felony in the home) 
New York (Deadly force justified to prevent burglary or arson of the home) 
Pennsylvania 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 505 on the defense of self says there is no obligation to retreat from the home or workplace unless the actor was the initial aggressor or, in the latter case, set upon by a co-worker; however, "surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto" and "complying with a demand that [one] abstain from any action which [one] has no duty to take" are listed in addition to retreating as avenues which, if open to the actor but not taken, invalidate justification for the use of deadly force. Deadly force itself is not justifiable unless "the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat." 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 507 allows the use of deadly force if the actor believes there has been an unlawful entry into his or her dwelling and believes that nothing less than deadly force will end the incursion; if the person on the receiving end of the deadly force is "attempting to dispossess [the actor] of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession;" or if deadly force is the only thing that will prevent a felony from being committed in the dwelling. In any of those cases, the property owner must first ask the interloper to desist - unless the owner believes that doing so would be "useless," "dangerous," or would result in the property being defended coming to substantial harm before the request to desist could be effectively communicated.


----------



## SaltyDog (Jan 1, 2009)

Supermanwoot said:


> I would only carry, as I said before, as a LAST RESORT. Even if someone came in and robbed me at my job at gunpoint, I don't think I would immediately pull my gun out unless I had a VERY clear/unobstructed shot. Pulling a weapon in that kind of situation can turn things from a "take the money and run" to a big shootout and thats not always the best scenario.


That's fine Superman but I guess it is all a personal choice.

Myself I am not going to become a victim nor are my family members.
I train for different situations in the home and outside. I have flashlights available, loaded weapons and I am confident that when the time comes I will perform in a correct manner.

As clanger stated



> YOU are responsible for your downrange rounds.
> 
> YOU need to shoot smart and act accordingly.
> 
> ...


Just to add to that I would ask - no - insist that if a person does not have enough dedication to train properly to carry a concealed weapon then leave it at home.


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

You should not have a concealed weapon license if you have no intention of ever using it. I have one and hope I never have to use the weapon, but I have it to use if the situation arises. In regards to home invasion, there is no doubt that I will use any means to end it.


----------

