Carrying Guns

[Magpie]

If asked, he may say that I don't really know his opinion of whether people should be armed. I seriously doubt he would write anyone about such an incident. And he respects the laws of wherever he is, just the way he is.

One night we were getting ready to leave a place. Dd and I went out to her car to get something. Dh and her bf were inside. There was a guy sitting on the sidewalk playing with a very large knife. He startled Dd and she ran back to me and I told her to go get her bf. He came out and sort of stood over the guy and just talked to him. I did notice he had his hand on his gun. The guy was harmless and he could tell that pretty quick. But it could have been very different. Danger doesn't just come from people armed with guns.

Quite true. I have a friend who needed to use a cane for a time, due to a medical condition. Being a young man, and artistically inclined, he went and carved himself a sturdy one out of a branch, because he thought it looked cool. He was stopped multiple times by very polite police officers who would inquire nicely about his need for the stick. They did not put their hands on their guns, because... well, that's just not how cops talk to you in my town. Even when they chased a drug dealer into my back yard in the middle of the night, and there were five cops on our front lawn, I didn't see anyone standing around with their hand on their gun. But they were certainly alert when they talked to my friend, and despite their compliments on his cane, there was no mistaking what they were about. They were checking him out and ensuring he wasn't about to use the thing on anyone, since young men in our town have been known to use canes as weapons against each other.

I don't generally spend any time thinking, "it could have been very different". Any interaction with another human being can always be different, for better or for worse. Fortunately the vast majority of humanity does not intend to do us any harm.

The people most likely to do violence to us are our own family, friends and close acquaintances. But, naturally, we don't look at them as threats. Instead, we direct our vigilance outward, at "strangers". I do exactly the same thing.

 

[meggiebeth]

That is how I interpreted it too.
I thought he was saying that if they hadn't walked away and instead they pulled a weapon that he would be defenseless because he didn't have one.

When dh and I were dating we were sitting on a table in a small park near his apartment. This guy came walking toward us, we both felt that something was going to happen. I can't explain it but we knew something wasn't right.
Dh is pretty big guy, he is over 6 ft and at the time he was pretty muscular. He stood up and placed himself in between this guy and me, and then started walking toward him. The guy then asked if we knew what time it was, but you could just tell that was not what he was planning to do when he was approaching us. Its been 20 years and I still remember that because something was not right about it. Sometimes people just know.Maybe it was because dh and I have both been victims of violent crimes in our past, I don't know, I can't explain it.

Anyway my point is that sometimes instincts are right, and who knows if this cop did feel something and his reaction to them changed what they were going to do. Maybe they were just being friendly. Nobody knows.

Edited to say that I am not saying that people should carry guns in places that they are prohibited. I'm just explaining why I can understand why that the PO felt something was up.

In a country where very few people own guns, it just wouldn’t cross a Canadian, or, say, British person’s, mind that someone might have a gun. I think this fear is ingrained in American culture simply because so many people have guns. In the majority of other Western countries, it would very rarely cross someone’s mind. Human beings- like this man- can have a tendency to overreact, and given a gun, this could be truly devastating. The fact that he wanted to reach for his gun just because of the tone the men spoke to him seems very worrying.

 

[Magpie]

Actually this is what I said, maybe you missed the bolded.
Anyway my point is that sometimes instincts are right, and who knows if this cop did feel something and his reaction to them changed what they were going to do. Maybe they were just being friendly. Nobody knows.

Hm...

Just a passing thought, but given how much stress police officers are generally under, do we really want them making decisions based on "instinct"? Versus, say, making decisions based on detached, unemotional assessment and training?

I know we always talk about how important a cop's instincts are in his job, but I can't help but think that these "instincts" have, on multiple occasions, led to the deaths of civilians.

I remember the thread about Philando Castile, in which people were saying he should have been more careful not to alarm the cop who stopped him. Some folks I read (but maybe not on this board) went so far as to say that black men just shouldn't have guns, in this day and age. That cop was listening to his instincts when he pulled the trigger. He perceived a threat, and - in his mind - he reacted accordingly.

Meanwhile another police officer, an ex-Marine, was fired for not shooting a suspect. https://www.npr.org/2016/12/08/5047...e-slower-to-shoot-but-that-got-this-vet-fired His instincts told him the man wasn't a threat. And that, apparently, was grounds for dismissal.

I think instinct is important... but I also think maybe it shouldn't be running the show.

I don't think it's nearly reliable or accurate enough.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

In a country where very few people own guns, it just wouldn’t cross a Canadian, or, say, British person’s, mind that someone might have a gun. I think this fear is ingrained in American culture simply because so many people have guns. In the majority of other Western countries, it would very rarely cross someone’s mind. Human beings- like this man- can have a tendency to overreact, and given a gun, this could be truly devastating. The fact that he wanted to reach for his gun just because of the tone the men spoke to him seems very worrying.

Just to clarify, gun ownership in Canada is nowhere near as rare as people like to portray. Roughly 22% of Canadians report having at least one gun in their home (it's 33% for Americans, for reference). Now, for Brits, you're correct. It's much rarer.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Hm...

Just a passing thought, but given how much stress police officers are generally under, do we really want them making decisions based on "instinct"? Versus, say, making decisions based on detached, unemotional assessment and training?

I know we always talk about how important a cop's instincts are in his job, but I can't help but think that these "instincts" have, on multiple occasions, led to the deaths of civilians.

I remember the thread about Philando Castile, in which people were saying he should have been more careful not to alarm the cop who stopped him. Some folks I read (but maybe not on this board) went so far as to say that black men just shouldn't have guns, in this day and age. That cop was listening to his instincts when he pulled the trigger. He perceived a threat, and - in his mind - he reacted accordingly.

Meanwhile another police officer, an ex-Marine, was fired for not shooting a suspect. https://www.npr.org/2016/12/08/5047...e-slower-to-shoot-but-that-got-this-vet-fired His instincts told him the man wasn't a threat. And that, apparently, was grounds for dismissal.

I think instinct is important... but I also think maybe it shouldn't be running the show.

I don't think it's nearly reliable or accurate enough.

I think I recall reading that Castille's family had made that comment to him at one time. Such a sad situation.

 

[DisneyHardin]

My point was, now that I know how prevalent they are at Disney & that people don't respect Disney's policies (which has been evident in this thread's responses), I'm not going to pay $5,000 for a Disney trip where I don't feel comfortable. I'll rent a house at a quiet NC beach instead. Choices...to each his own....

My DH is a police officer, so he carries a gun most all the time. We don't take a gun to Disney because we fly and he doesn't want to deal with it on the plane, but we always take it to the beach with us since we drive.

 

[bonjing]

"Been to the stampede yet?"

Sounds like the gentlemen were asking to dish out a whoppin'. Akin to when we were young, I know a lot of the older folks will remember:

Wanna hutrz'donit or even, wanna a hawiian punch?

How many times did you fall for those before you learned your lesson?

And you're right about instinct, nobody knows. But sometimes it's better to trust your gut rather then say I should have listened to myself. Sometimes the "I should have listened to myself" lesson hurts.

 

[Magpie]

Just to clarify, gun ownership in Canada is nowhere near as rare as people like to portray. Roughly 22% of Canadians report having at least one gun in their home (it's 33% for Americans, for reference). Now, for Brits, you're correct. It's much rarer.

It's not rare, but it's very different.

Only 3% of households in Canada possess handguns, compared to almost 18% of US households (2005 stats).

Most of our guns are long guns, intended only for sport or hunting not home defense, and many (including the ones we inherited from my father-in-law) are stored at gun clubs, not at home. This is particularly true in urban areas, where the risk of having your home broken into and your guns stolen is much more alarming than the risk of simply having your home broken into.

I truly never wonder if the person I'm interacting with might be carrying a firearm, legal or not. Concealed carry is - for all practical purposes - prohibited in Canada. I never wondered if there will be guns lying around within my children's reach, when I sent them off to play at a friend's house.

These are simply not realistic concerns, where I live.

Some interesting stats from https://globalnews.ca/news/1354803/...canada-have-more-guns-per-capita-than-the-us/...

The US has 89 guns per 100 residents.

Canada has 31 guns per 100 residents.

"While the U.S. does have a homicide rate nearly double that of most developed countries like Canada, it doesn’t have the world’s highest homicide rate. With 6.4 homicides per 100 thousand people, the U.S. falls behind countries in Africa, the Caribbean, Eastern Europe, and Latin America."

Yay?

 

[Magpie]

"Been to the stampede yet?"

Sounds like the gentlemen were asking to dish out a whoppin'. Akin to when we were young, I know a lot of the older folks will remember:

Wanna hutrz'donit or even, wanna a hawiian punch?

How many times did you fall for those before you learned your lesson?

And you're right about instinct, nobody knows. But sometimes it's better to trust your gut rather then say I should have listened to myself. Sometimes the "I should have listened to myself" lesson hurts.

Um... you do realize the Calgary Stampede was on, eh? It's a big deal. And it's a real thing. It's not a euphemism for anything.

Also, if they'd wanted to beat up the old man, they had every opportunity. Why would him saying "I have no need to talk with you, good-bye!" dissuade them, if they had malicious intent toward him and his wife? The fact that they stood there looking "bewildered" (according to his own account) while he stomped off, really speaks to the fact that they were simply asking a tourist if he'd been to the most exciting show in town yet.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

It's not rare, but it's very different.

Only 3% of households in Canada possess handguns, compared to almost 18% of US households (2005 stats).

Most of our guns are long guns, intended only for sport or hunting not home defense, and many (including the ones we inherited from my father-in-law) are stored at gun clubs, not at home. This is particularly true in urban areas, where the risk of having your home broken into and your guns stolen is much more alarming than the risk of simply having your home broken into.

I truly never wonder if the person I'm interacting with might be carrying a firearm, legal or not. Concealed carry is - for all practical purposes - prohibited in Canada. I never wondered if there will be guns lying around within my children's reach, when I sent them off to play at a friend's house.

These are simply not realistic concerns, where I live.

Some interesting stats from https://globalnews.ca/news/1354803/...canada-have-more-guns-per-capita-than-the-us/...

The US has 89 guns per 100 residents.

Canada has 31 guns per 100 residents.

"While the U.S. does have a homicide rate nearly double that of most developed countries like Canada, it doesn’t have the world’s highest homicide rate. With 6.4 homicides per 100 thousand people, the U.S. falls behind countries in Africa, the Caribbean, Eastern Europe, and Latin America."

Yay?

Keeping in mind I've never lived in Canada, that all seems to make sense to me. I get the distinct impression it's a different type of culture where it comes to firearms, particularly handguns (as you noted).

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I never wondered if there will be guns lying around within my children's reach, when I sent them off to play at a friend's house.

People who leave their guns where other people can easily get them especially children who may not know it's real much less that it can kill someone are not responsible no matter which way you put it. It's not gun laws that allowed that to happen; it's people not being responsible.

FWIW I hate hearing the stories of children killing their siblings or their friends, etc simply because they found daddy's gun on a chair. But it is 'daddy' who put that gun irresponsibly on that chair to begin with not the lawmakers who allowed them the ability to own the gun.

 

[bonjing]

Um... you do realize the Calgary Stampede was on, eh? It's a big deal. And it's a real thing. It's not a euphemism for anything.

Also, if they'd wanted to beat up the old man, they had every opportunity. Why would him saying "I have no need to talk with you, good-bye!" dissuade them, if they had malicious intent toward him and his wife? The fact that they stood there looking "bewildered" (according to his own account) while he stomped off, really speaks to the fact that they were simply asking a tourist if he'd been to the most exciting show in town yet.

But in the "story" he also states:

They looked bewildered, and we then walked past them. I speculate they did not have good intentions when they approached in such an aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner.

That part is also important. Do we know this for a fact, no, but that is what is stated in this side of the story. How did the two men know they were tourists in the first place?

Sometimes approaching or acknowledging a predator throws them off their "game."

 

[Hikergirl]

Hm...

Just a passing thought, but given how much stress police officers are generally under, do we really want them making decisions based on "instinct"? Versus, say, making decisions based on detached, unemotional assessment and training?

I know we always talk about how important a cop's instincts are in his job, but I can't help but think that these "instincts" have, on multiple occasions, led to the deaths of civilians.

I remember the thread about Philando Castile, in which people were saying he should have been more careful not to alarm the cop who stopped him. Some folks I read (but maybe not on this board) went so far as to say that black men just shouldn't have guns, in this day and age. That cop was listening to his instincts when he pulled the trigger. He perceived a threat, and - in his mind - he reacted accordingly.

Meanwhile another police officer, an ex-Marine, was fired for not shooting a suspect. https://www.npr.org/2016/12/08/5047...e-slower-to-shoot-but-that-got-this-vet-fired His instincts told him the man wasn't a threat. And that, apparently, was grounds for dismissal.

I think instinct is important... but I also think maybe it shouldn't be running the show.

I don't think it's nearly reliable or accurate enough.

Again I don't disagree with you at all.
In this particular instance this man was not acting as a police officer, he wrote a letter about what he was feeling at the time.
I don't think that is enough to judge his performance or his mental capacity when he is actually on the job.

 

[Magpie]

But in the "story" he also states:

They looked bewildered, and we then walked past them. I speculate they did not have good intentions when they approached in such an aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner.

That part is also important. Do we know this for a fact, no, but that is what is stated in this side of the story. How did the two men know they were tourists in the first place?

Sometimes approaching or acknowledging a predator throws them off their "game."

Other than his speculation about them, there's indication of them acting in a "predatory" manner at all. They asked a question (which, you're right, could reasonably be asked of anyone, not just a tourist). They were rebuffed. And they stood and watched him walk away.

After all, when someone asks you a question, they expect you to acknowledge them. So that would hardly "throw them off their game" now, would it?

If he'd given some more evidence of them acting in an "aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner", beyond just, "Have you been to the stampede yet?" we'd have more to go on.

But, when contacted by media, all the guy from Kalamazoo said was that he'd be "misinterpreted" and that he'd be writing a second letter to explain his side of things. As far as I can tell, he never wrote that letter.

 

[ronandannette]

In a country where very few people own guns, it just wouldn’t cross a Canadian, or, say, British person’s, mind that someone might have a gun. I think this fear is ingrained in American culture simply because so many people have guns. In the majority of other Western countries, it would very rarely cross someone’s mind. Human beings- like this man- can have a tendency to overreact, and given a gun, this could be truly devastating. The fact that he wanted to reach for his gun just because of the tone the men spoke to him seems very worrying.

Have you ever heard the saying "When you're a hammer, everthing's a nail."? I think that applies here.

Keeping in mind I've never lived in Canada, that all seems to make sense to me. I get the distinct impression it's a different type of culture where it comes to firearms, particularly handguns (as you noted).

I actually don't know the stats on Canadian gun ownership - I'm perfectly comfortable stipulating to the ones you've quoted. I know TONS AND TONS of people who own guns; long guns that is, and it wouldn't surprise me if anybody told me they had one or more. Hunting season opened here last week and it's not totally uncommon to see a rifle rack on a pick-up, even in the heart of the city. But it is literally uncommon enough to be almost mythical to hear of anybody of carrying a concealed handgun. I would simply never, ever expect anybody to have one. And that's my mindset.

Even when I visit places in the US, Mexico or the Caribbean, it's just impossible for me to think people are carrying guns. If the tables were turned and I was walking in a park in Kalamazoo and was approached "aggressively" by two men, I might be afraid. Afraid they were going to do me bodily harm by grabbing, shoving or hitting me. But to fear they'd pull a gun and shoot me? Completely unfathomable.

 

[AnnaFloridaLover]

America: Gun Culture. Not for hunting for bragging rights. Hobbiests, collectors. Everyone who is cool owns a gun or three. No one sees a problem with that because hey, it's your constitutional right so yee haw you must partake. Mass shootings are just a part of life. Pray and move on. No where else in the world does the average person own a gun if not for hunting or police or military. Guns are for killing. Period.

 

[Hikergirl]

America: Gun Culture. Not for hunting for bragging rights. Hobbiests, collectors. Everyone who is cool owns a gun or three. No one sees a problem with that because hey, it's your constitutional right so yee haw you must partake. Mass shootings are just a part of life. Pray and move on. No where else in the world does the average person own a gun if not for hunting or police or military. Guns are for killing. Period.

Spoken by someone who doesn't own a gun and has no idea what they are actually talking about.

 

[yoopermom]

We have an acquaintance who spent many weekends out at his hunting/fishing/hanging out "camp". Like many in the area, it was largely vacant from Sunday night to Friday. One Sunday night two years ago he wasn't feeling well, so decided to delay driving home until Monday am. In the middle of the night, three local young men (early 20s) who were armed broke into his garage, then through the connecting door into his house, thinking it was vacant. He had to decide *by instinct* (he was a hunter, but not a law enforcement officer or anything "trained") to grab the gun next to his bed and start shooting after verbally warning them to leave. One was killed and two were wounded. On follow up, it came out that they were responsible for a string of B+Es in the area over the preceding weeks.

He will always have to live with the knowledge that he took someone's life, and it's not something that he takes lightly, but, after all the details came out, it seems clear that he could have been the one dead, instead. I think that the majority of responsible gun owners understand the seriousness of that decision and try their best to do so wisely.

Terri

 

[bonjing]

Other than his speculation about them, there's indication of them acting in a "predatory" manner at all. They asked a question (which, you're right, could reasonably be asked of anyone, not just a tourist). They were rebuffed. And they stood and watched him walk away.

After all, when someone asks you a question, they expect you to acknowledge them. So that would hardly "throw them off their game" now, would it?

If he'd given some more evidence of them acting in an "aggressive, disrespectful and menacing manner", beyond just, "Have you been to the stampede yet?" we'd have more to go on.

But, when contacted by media, all the guy from Kalamazoo said was that he'd be "misinterpreted" and that he'd be writing a second letter to explain his side of things. As far as I can tell, he never wrote that letter.

Agreed, there are always two sides to every story and there are truths,embellishments on both sides. Hard to really interpret what was going on. I believe in the 2nd amendment and I also respect the house rules, I just wish the bad guys followed the laws too, but then they wouldn't be the bad guys would they.

If I'm out with the wife, my only concern is her. If we're out and about and I don't look like I need help, leave us alone. If I want something I'll ask. If we're out on the street and you approach us, I'm on alert, I'm watching body language and listening to your tone.

There are a lot of things that can set off warning alarms and there are a lot of things that can say hey don't mess with me.

Working in retail, have you ever had that feeling someone was trying to steal something? Just approaching them and acknowledging them, letting them know you're around can sometimes throw them off.

I was out jogging one night, by myself, around midnight. I was nearing a few guys drinking from the back of their car, really no option to avoid them. When I passed them all I heard was one of them yell out, you better watch out! A lot of options ran through my mind and I will never know their true intentions. But I stopped and turned and said, what did you say me to me? The reply, you better watch out, we saw a bunch of raccoons go in your direction. I said thanks and jogged off. No gun, no pepper spray, just me alone. There are a lot of scenarios that could have played out that night and probably all not in my favor. 3 vs 1, me tired and no way I'm out running them. The only thing I had for me was I stopped and bluffed my way out of anything that could have gone wrong.

 

[Domo]

Don't ask me why, but to me there is some sort of ******* between the "Happiest Place on Earth" and a Glock 17...