How Many Have Fired Their Weapon?

[Randy]

I understand the desire for protection for our family and ourselves, but how many people on this forum have fired their weapon while camping at a campground?

I am not talking about at work as a LEO or at a gun range. I' m talking sitting around your CG having a beer and a pickup full of bad guys showed up and threatened you with bodily harm. Or had someone break into your RV while they were sleeping.

It just seems like a lot of paranoia.

Please respond with your name and give a very short description of the incident.

With enough reports from our thousand members, you might educate us to how dangerous it is out there.


ahttps://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152804974575489&id=100001839223439


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I never think that it is dangerous out there. If I had that thought I would never venture out of my house. You will not get a reply on this thread
about a person firing a weapon in a campground. I am thinking that you have the paranoia. If you are looking for incidents to find out how
dangerous it is to enjoy our leisure time activities then don't go.
Randy, Santha and the Poodles

 

[ucwinters]

I never think that it is dangerous out there. If I had that thought I would never venture out of my house. You will not get a reply on this thread
about a person firing a weapon in a campground. I am thinking that you have the paranoia. If you are looking for incidents to find out how
dangerous it is to enjoy our leisure time activities then don't go.
Randy, Santha and the Poodles

+1 on your response. I find the OP's post to be irritating.

 

[Lynn1130]

I don't know about irritating. Perhaps looking for something that I doubt is really there. Crime rates are really pretty low unless you happen to live in the inner city and hang around gangs. We have a sheriff in this state (and my county) that keeps his job each election by talking at civic clubs and organizations in retirement communities and scaring the bejeebers out of old retired people. Crime rates in those locations is lower that the rest of the metro area but not because of him. More because old retired people just don't rob and pillage. Because they are afraid of becoming victims and think that they really need more deputies patrolling that some of the really high crime areas in the county. And yes it is Sheriff Joe.

One thing to keep in mind when you decide to carry. Police protective vests are designed to stop bullets, especially those fired by the officer's own weapon. There is a reason for that. Many times officer's are shot with their own guns. You might just provide a gun to someone who did not have one when they started the theft/robbery.

 

[cyclist0920]

Do you:
Carry automobile, home, and life insurance?
Perform preventative maintenance on your car, and home?
Get anual physicals?
God and the Boy Scouts teach us to be prepared.
i would rather have a gun and never shoot it at anything other than paper targets, than not have one and need it!

 

[jmgratz]

The paranoia seems to be the anti-gunners contention that any CPL holder is a gun-toting maniac, ready to unleash a hail of bullets at the slightest provocation. While I have the utmost respect for police officers and the job they do, they don't prevent crimes, they respond and investigate them after they occur or are in progress. Either case, it's usually too late for the victims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would have to disagree about LEO preventing crimes. I have prevented many crimes during my LE career. I know because when interviewing suspicious persons they have told me they were about to commit a crime until they say my patrol car. Likewise I firmly believe there is a deterrent when criminals know a person is carrying a weapon. Which would a criminal want to chose as a victim, someone carrying a weapon or someone who is known to be unarmed?

 

[danemayer]

Debates like this are implicitly about risk assessment.

The standard practice in assessing risk is to multiply the probability of occurrence by the consequences of damage were the risk event to occur.

On one side of the debate are those who observe correctly that the probability is very low that one would actually experience a risk event calling for armed self-defense.

The other side of the debate recognizes that the since the consequences of damage could be loss of life, any non-zero probability is unacceptable.

There are various ways of dealing with risk.

One method is to accept the risk. People who rely on the low probability to keep them safe are adopting this method.

Another method is to avoid the risk - perhaps by not traveling.

Another method is to assign the risk to someone else - perhaps the police. But since you can't predict on police being present to deal with the threat, that might not work.

Then there's mitigation - reduce the risk of the event having a bad outcome by being prepared to defend yourself.

We all get to evaluate the risks we face and how we want to deal with them. And as we see in this thread, one answer doesn't fit everyone.

 

[JohnDar]

debates like this are implicitly about risk assessment.

The standard practice in assessing risk is to multiply the probability of occurrence by the consequences of damage were the risk event to occur.

On one side of the debate are those who observe correctly that the probability is very low that one would actually experience a risk event calling for armed self-defense.

The other side of the debate recognizes that the since the consequences of damage could be loss of life, any non-zero probability is unacceptable.

There are various ways of dealing with risk.

One method is to accept the risk. People who rely on the low probability to keep them safe are adopting this method.

Another method is to avoid the risk - perhaps by not traveling.

Another method is to assign the risk to someone else - perhaps the police. But since you can't predict on police being present to deal with the thread, that might not work.

Then there's mitigation - reduce the risk of the event having a bad outcome by being prepared to defend yourself.

We all get to evaluate the risks we face and how we want to deal with them. And as we see in this thread, one answer doesn't fit everyone.

Bravo!!

 

[donr827]

Well said Dan. Good statement and no one gets upset.
Don

 

[Hastey]

No, thankfully I have never had to fire a weapon under the circumstances you have described.

Thankfully, I have never had to use a fire extinguisher in my rig either. Trace

This is a very good point. I'm reading this thread and it's the best discussion I've seen yet on this subject, on this forum. Ironically at the same time I'm reading this there is a Fergeson MO debate going on. The question came up about why the officer didn't shoot for the leg and simply disable him. This always makes me yell at the television.

Ask any soldier or police officers and they will tell you that they don't train to shoot at legs. I've never seen a 10 ring on a kneecap of a siloette. We train to shoot at center mass. This brings me to my point.

Im retired and now do Industrial Safety Training. One subject is fire prevention and evacuation. We teach this at several locations and we teach that this must be practiced so it will be second nature and everyone knows what to do in an emergency.

Firearms are no different. Trained police officers and soldiers fall back on their training when the times are intense. There is so much going on you don't have time to think about how to use your weapon, point of aim, breath control, trigger control, etc, etc. now throw collateral damage assessment on top of that and, oh yea can't forget the "am I shooting the right guy". Anyway you will always fall back on your training.

Too many people get a CCL and a firearm and never train. Find you a range and practice. Your natural point of aim should be second nature. If you have to look at your weapon to do any function then you need to train. find a gun club and don't be to proud to get professional instruction.

JMO

 

[SilverRhino]

Firearms are no different. Trained police officers and soldiers fall back on their training when the times are intense. There is so much going on you don't have time to think about how to use your weapon, point of aim, breath control, trigger control, etc, etc. now throw collateral damage assessment on top of that and, oh yea can't forget the "am I shooting the right guy". Anyway you will always fall back on your training.

Too many people get a CCL and a firearm and never train. Find you a range and practice. Your natural point of aim should be second nature. If you have to look at your weapon to do any function then you need to train. find a gun club and don't be to proud to get professional instruction.

JMO

Excellant advice! You can never train enough when it comes to fire arms.

 

[Lynn1130]

I am going to say this and hope it does not start a firestorm but over half of the people that I see at CC classes scare the H--- out of me. The thought that these people are carrying a gun is frightening and that thought was always running through my mind when responding to calls. Which one will shoot me the perp or the "victim"? Now I have no doubt that is not the case with most all here but it is a fact that should be considered.

 

[chiefaret]

Danemayer is right on the mark. One of the most cogent responses to this thread. Some just ignore that there are bad people out there. The couple in New Mexico that ran into the Arizona prison escapees paid the ultimate price by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe the outcome would have been different if he had been armed and proficient. Just saying. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/2...ce-charged-murder-oklahoma-couple-new-mexico/

 

[danemayer]

I am going to say this and hope it does not start a firestorm but over half of the people that I see at CC classes scare the H--- out of me. The thought that these people are carrying a gun is frightening and that thought was always running through my mind when responding to calls. Which one will shoot me the perp or the "victim"? Now I have no doubt that is not the case with most all here but it is a fact that should be considered.

Lynn,

Did you ever go to a reunion and find yourself thinking how everyone looks so old. Well, they were looking at you thinking the same.

So, what do you think those CC class people were thinking about you?

 

[comanchecarpenter]

We regularly practice with our side arms (Mrs=Springfield xds .45acp, Mr.=Springfield 1911 .45acp). We do so because we know there are bad people out there. I am retired law enforcement and two tour survivor of Vietnam. If you have them folks practice with them. When the stuff hits the fan your training is what you will fall back on.

 

[cookie]

I just had to share something that happened to me today.
Some might argue that the chances of needing a weapon are slim to none. Why have one.
What are the chances of a tree branch breaking off and dropping on your truck while you are driving?
Slim to none?
Today I fell in that slim zone. Clunk!
Never say never. Never.

Peace
Dave

 

[Lynn1130]

Dan, I am not to worried about what they were thinking of me since I am/was the "expert" doing the training I hope they were trying to learn something. I can only try to point them in the right direction but "common sense" is not so common and it shows in some. In the end they had to please me to get the permit. Some did not.

I stopped teaching those classes because I began to wonder if I could get enough insurance to cover what I was afraid might happen with some of those people carrying guns.

 

[lwmcguir]

I am going to say this and hope it does not start a firestorm but over half of the people that I see at CC classes scare the H--- out of me. The thought that these people are carrying a gun is frightening and that thought was always running through my mind when responding to calls. Which one will shoot me the perp or the "victim"? Now I have no doubt that is not the case with most all here but it is a fact that should be considered.

I certainly understand what you are saying however I am way more concerned about the folks that carry and don't have good intentions. With your experience you know that number far outweighs the legal CC crowd.

 

[Lynn1130]

oh, I agree and no one should get the idea that I am against carrying by anyone who wished to do so and goes through the proper training AND, as I said it another post, has the proper mindset that is necessary with using deadly force. That part is more important that most everything else, trust me. But too many think that they can stick a gun under their shirt and wander off to the shopping mall and they are ready to do battle with a perp bent on doing bad things to anyone who gets in his/her way. We value life. Most of them do not.

If someone is going to do you harm, do what is necessary to protect yourself and your loved ones and keep doing it until the threat is over.

 

[JohnDar]

When threatened, you have to be ready to meet violence with greater violence. Even if it's hand to hand. Your objective is to inflict as much injury on the attacker as you can. Rules do NOT apply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jimnkarens]

Cnsidering what is occuring in this country right now, we all better be prepared to exact lethal force. The chances of meeting the bad guys are increasing exponentially.