Better to have it and not need it...

I'm a firm believer in being prepared, rather than getting caught with my pants down.
I made many enemies during my career, and retiring does not automatically make them
go away.

I see many who believe they can make it unarmed in our society, and I pray they are
correct. Myself, I would rather be prepared and unafraid.

Kind of like a condom?

a reply to: retiredTxn
Aren't you constantly afraid to have that perception? Does having a gun promote that fear, or reduce the illusion of fear? The fact that you feel less afraid having again doesn't reduce the threat does it? It only provides a false sense of security of being able to defend yourself when suprise attacked. (For some reason)

I guess you never know until the time comes when you actually need a gun.


I find talking about guns and whether gun control is good or not, so difficult to converse about.

I live in the UK. And guns are not the norm here. If someone has a basic 9mm pistol then it's national news. The vat between those who live with guns and those who don't is so vast that it is hard to make judgement on those who live in a society where guns are normal.

IF I lived in the states. I don't think I would own a gun. Mainly because I don't like guns to be honest with you. And what I mean by that, is like how someone may not have any interest in cars, so when a new Ferrari comes out or whatever, they take no interest. Well it's like that for me with guns. I have respect for guns and their power. But when it comes to actually owning one... I doubt I would own it.

But this takes me back to my original point... I wouldn't own a gun... But what if I was being attacked by a bear... Then what?

Yes, I would rather have one and not need it. I have car insurance, but haven't had a wreck it almost 30 years. I've never had a house fire, but I have fire insurance and extinguishers. I never get the flu, but I have health insurance. I honestly don't even listen to the anti gun crowd anymore. Their pipe dream of no guns is just that, a pipe dream. Even if they banned guns today, criminals would still have them and still use them the same way they do now. The only ones effected would be the law abiding gun owner who turned their's in and those are the people you don't have to worry about anyway. Do anti gunners honestly think that making something illegal and sending people to jail for it deters crime? Really?

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: retiredTxn
Aren't you constantly afraid to have that perception? Does having a gun promote that fear, or reduce the illusion of fear? The fact that you feel less afraid having again doesn't reduce the threat does it? It only provides a false sense of security of being able to defend yourself when suprise attacked. (For some reason)

I'm not AFRAID, I am the opposite, UNAFRAID. Having a gun alone does not give me a false sense of security, or make the threat go away. The gun is just one of the tools in an arsenal used to make me prepared for any and all circumstances I may or may not encounter.

The perception some have that owning a gun is because gun owners are constantly afraid, is silly. Does having a 5yr 50,000 mile warranty on a new car, or a spare tire, give me a false sense of security that the new car is covered under all foreseen circumstances? Would it be reasonable to buy a new car without them? No.

Why is it unreasonable for someone who worked in a violent profession, and has made many enemies, to not be prepared? It's not fear, it's called being prepared.

a reply to: retiredTxn
Fair point. I would say that your justification for it is fear based, rather than right/amendment based. Most justifications are criminals may have one or some crazy guy might shoot you family is fear based, regardless if people change the wording to prepared. No point preparing for something you don't fear is a possibility. Just semantics I suppose

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: retiredTxn
Fair point. I would say that your justification for it is fear based, rather than right/amendment based. Most justifications are criminals may have one or some crazy guy might shoot you family is fear based, regardless if people change the wording to prepared. No point preparing for something you don't fear is a possibility. Just semantics I suppose

It's not fear based, it's based on facts. Within 3 months of retirement, I had run across 2 situations that were directly related
to my career. You can call it what you want, but it is prudent to be prepared for any and all situations.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: retiredTxn
Fair point. I would say that your justification for it is fear based, rather than right/amendment based. Most justifications are criminals may have one or some crazy guy might shoot you family is fear based, regardless if people change the wording to prepared. No point preparing for something you don't fear is a possibility. Just semantics I suppose

Please give me a good reason that a civilian shouldn't own a gun that isn't based on fear.

Statistically, there's a very high probability that I'll never need to own a fire extinguisher. Would I rather own one just in case I needed it?

Seems kind of the same thing here. I'll probably never need to own a firearm to defend myself...but I'd much prefer to have that option available to me in the unlikely event, though far from impossible, that I might actually need the thing.

Regardless, I don't think its a question of 'need' anyway. You have that right in this country and its one I support. Buy whatever the hell you want for whatever reason you want. As long as those reasons involve lawful use, I couldn't care less if you own a howitzer and a tank.

a reply to: rockintitz

Their isn't one. That's my point. Other than amendment crap type arguement.

Just re read. Don't understand. Shouldn't have a gun that isn't based on fear? Without fear there would be no need...if that was your point.

I'm here at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque New Mexico. Illegals and criminals are getting shot and or arrested in record numbers here. Criminals will always be able to get a firearm illegally (they come up from Mexico and spread all over, you know, like Fast and Furious). Citizens must arm themselves or be at the mercy of the criminal.




eta: how do you tell the difference between dog poo and bear poo?
Bear poo has pieces of slingshot in it and smells like pepper spray

I carry a gun 24/7 365. Most of the time I have my Pocket gun a Sig P238. Other times I carry my Springfield XDM 3.5 .40 S&W compact. Depending on what I'm wearing that day.

Yes it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

I have carried a firearm thousands of times outside my home and in public and never needed it and nobody got hurt by it. I am just afraid the one day I forget to carry is the day some loony starts shooting up my favorite burrito place.

So I am all for it.

Plus I live in Arizona. If you're not packing heat out here you're a tourist. Ever wonder why people in AZ are so friendly? It's because everybody knows your probably packing.

"Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." is one of the motto's I live by. I absolutely support this and responsible ownership as well. Life is much too unpredictable in these times to assume one's safety without what can most times be construed as, "the proper means" to secure it. Count me in.

a reply to: rockintitz

I never leave home without a weapon. Condom theory, have and not need, need and not have.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
We don't need them in the UK but If I was in the USA I would be a walking armoury.

Don't y'all have a problem with random stabbings? Some twit attacks me with a knife I might need stitches but that knuckle head is gona need a organ transplant.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: retiredTxn
Aren't you constantly afraid to have that perception? Does having a gun promote that fear, or reduce the illusion of fear? The fact that you feel less afraid having again doesn't reduce the threat does it? It only provides a false sense of security of being able to defend yourself when suprise attacked. (For some reason)

I feel sorry for you, the day you wish you had one will come around at least once in your lifetime. I would be willing to bet if a person tried to mug me (I have a knife give me your wallet and nobody gets hurt) I can reach my pistol faster than he can cut me. (fake out as if reaching for wallet, holster is normally next to it)

originally posted by: MystiqueAgent
Personally I'm on the side that would have a gun especially once I have children I'd keep a gun to keep them safe.

Well, I'm glad I live in a country where my kids are safe by default, and I don't feel the need for a gun for protection. If people in the US feel the need for guns for protection, then that's sad.

My brother lives in the US and he says he'll use "sharp wit" if ever in a compromising situation and his wife (an American) has an intense dislike of guns. They have three kids.

A gun is the most useless thing in the world. You can't build anything with one, You can't grow anything with them. You can't even open a can with one, at least not being able to still find and use the contents of the can.
Until that one unfortunate moment in life when you absolutely need one.
Hopefully no one ever has to go through that moment.
But if you ever have to face a rabid wild animal, or a mentally deranged person or just someone intent on doing harm to your family you'll probably think of nothing else you want in your hand at the time.

I don't think any ones last dying thought was “Gee whiz, I wish I had a can of wasp spray”

a reply to: sycomix
I feel sorry for you that you feel you would be quick enough with a gun. If it happened in america the criminal would assume you had a gun, and if he was genuinely desperate enough to NEED your wallet he would stab you before you could get your gun out. This rationale often makes me laugh, too much hollywood I suppose. I assume you wear chasity pants to stop rapists also.

Why is it with examples with pro gun people they always have to have the advantage when making their point. Why doesn't the other guy have the gun? Would it make your stance irrelevant if he did? Or are you so good with a gun and will get the drop on him. No doubt in the situation the person will be blind and you will be the hero.