Sacramento, CA � A bill is up for debate at the California state capitol that
would mandate gun owners purchase liability insurance.

It would cover the damages that occur from the accidental or negligent use of
firearms. The bill is authored by Democratic Senator Nancy Skinner, who says it
models a new law approved this year by the City of San Jose. She says it is the
same idea as purchasing insurance for a vehicle. Lawmakers in the state of New
York are considering a similar law.

It is opposed by gun rights groups, like the Gun Owners of California. The
organization argues that no insurance companies will cover the misuse of
firearms and that it also infringes on Constitutional rights.

A second gun-related bill, authored by Democrat Marc Levine, would place a new
tax on firearm purchases, totaling around 10-percent. It would raise an
estimated $118-million that would be allocated for gun violence prevention
programs.

.... If a sloth were to clap, it will always sound sarcastic.
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
� Synchronet � -=The Wastelands BBS=- -=Since 1990=-

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Thumper to All on Fri Jun 17 2022 09:59 am

> Sacramento, CA ¡ A bill is up for debate at the California state capitol
> that would mandate gun owners purchase liability insurance.

Okay. If this goes through, will this then permit any gun owner to use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and/or purchase firearms that support magazines that hold more than 10?

I doubt it.

Brian Klauss <-> Ford Prefect
42bytes a Synchronet BBS =========> 42bytes.net

---
■ Synchronet ■ 42bytes - 42bytes.net - Don't Panic!

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Thumper to All on Fri Jun 17 2022 09:59 am

> Sacramento, CA ¡ A bill is up for debate at the California state capitol tha
> would mandate gun owners purchase liability insurance.
>
> It would cover the damages that occur from the accidental or negligent use o
> firearms. The bill is authored by Democratic Senator Nancy Skinner, who says
> models a new law approved this year by the City of San Jose. She says it is
> same idea as purchasing insurance for a vehicle. Lawmakers in the state of N
> York are considering a similar law.
>
> It is opposed by gun rights groups, like the Gun Owners of California. The
> organization argues that no insurance companies will cover the misuse of
> firearms and that it also infringes on Constitutional rights.
>
> A second gun-related bill, authored by Democrat Marc Levine, would place a n
> tax on firearm purchases, totaling around 10-percent. It would raise an
> estimated $118-million that would be allocated for gun violence prevention
> programs.
>
>
> ... If a sloth were to clap, it will always sound sarcastic.

Sounds like two new schemes to move the prices of firearms further from the
hands of regular citizens. Th einsurance policy is a punitive law, since not
having insurance would allow someone to sue your pants off, or raise your
rates until you legally cannot own a firearm.

Makes me wonder if a registry is also required in order to set rates based on
what you own? Who all has access to the registry?

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Ford Prefect to Thumper on Fri Jun 17 2022 01:26 pm

> Re: Re: Gun Insurance
> By: Thumper to All on Fri Jun 17 2022 09:59 am
>
> > Sacramento, CA ¡ A bill is up for debate at the California state capitol
> > that would mandate gun owners purchase liability insurance.
>
> Okay. If this goes through, will this then permit any gun owner to use maga
>
> I doubt it.
>
> Brian Klauss <-> Ford Prefect
> 42bytes a Synchronet BBS =========> 42bytes.net
>

If it did allow magazines over 10 rounds, there may be a registry to
determine whether they are common to that model, or higher rates if they do
not fit flush or are considered "standard" for the firearm. Larger magazines
depending on the firearm. You may have to cover each mag under it's own polic
y. Imagine what a 3-gun or multi-gun competitor who uses 60 round
Shur-fire mags and owns several then several mags for their pistols and an
extended tube on their shotgun would have to pay?

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

-=> Thumper wrote to All <=-

Th> Sacramento, CA ¡ A bill is up for debate at the California state
Th> capitol that would mandate gun owners purchase liability insurance.

Sounds like mandatory gun registration to me. (Most places only require that
you register hand guns. Long guns are usually exempt.)

That's the first step toward gun confiscation.

.... ALL bikini clad women, proceed to move to California.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

-=> Moondog wrote to Thumper <=-

Mo> Sounds like two new schemes to move the prices of firearms further from
Mo> the hands of regular citizens.

It wouldn't be the first time they tried that.

"We aren't taking away anyone's right. But if you want to own gun-type-X, you
have to get a license from the state, which costs prohibitively high and no one
can afford."

.... I'm not a complete idiot - several parts are missing.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
� Synchronet � Diamond Mine Online BBS - bbs.dmine.net:24 - Fredericksburg, VA USA

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Dr. What to Moondog on Sun Jun 19 2022 09:58 am

> -=> Moondog wrote to Thumper <=-
>
> Mo> Sounds like two new schemes to move the prices of firearms further from
> Mo> the hands of regular citizens.
>
> It wouldn't be the first time they tried that.
>
> "We aren't taking away anyone's right. But if you want to own gun-type-X, y
> have to get a license from the state, which costs prohibitively high and no
> can afford."
>
>
> ... I'm not a complete idiot - several parts are missing.

And while they are doing it, they keep on telling people it's a state's
right, not an individual right.

Illinois already has what they call an FOID (firearms ownership ID) and you
can't even touch a gun in a gun shop, let alone buy one. Imagine having to
call your insurance company to get rates, then find out they're going to
charge extra because you're looking at a Mossberg 500 with a synthetic stock
and phosphate finish versus the model with the blued finish and wood hardare.
Your rates will be different based on "scary" features.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Thumper to All on Fri Jun 17 2022 09:59 am

> A second gun-related bill, authored by Democrat Marc Levine, would place a new
> tax on firearm purchases, totaling around 10-percent. It would raise an
> estimated $118-million that would be allocated for gun violence prevention
> programs.

So gun owners will pay a tax whose money will be used to campaign against gun owners.

Awesome. Not.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

> And while they are doing it, they keep on telling people it's a state's
> right, not an individual right.

Which it is not because it is covered in the Bill of Rights, where "state's
rights" are the ones not covered in the Constitution or its amendments, per
the 10th Amendment.

> Illinois already has what they call an FOID (firearms ownership ID) and you
> can't even touch a gun in a gun shop, let alone buy one. Imagine having to
> call your insurance company to get rates, then find out they're going to
> charge extra because you're looking at a Mossberg 500 with a synthetic stock
> and phosphate finish versus the model with the blued finish and wood hardare.
> Your rates will be different based on "scary" features.

No doubt. :(

* SLMR 2.1a * "Don't touch me...I'll wound your inner child!" - Beavis

---
� Synchronet � CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

On 6/17/22 12:20, Moondog wrote:
>
> Makes me wonder if a registry is also required in order to set
> rates based on what you own? Who all has access to the registry?

I think it would be a defacto registry even if via the insurance
companies sharing information, then sharing with data harvestors, then
the govt just buys the data from them, like the FBI and other agencies
already do.

Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
correlated data.
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
---
� Synchronet � Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Tracker1 to Moondog on Tue Jun 21 2022 01:21 pm

> On 6/17/22 12:20, Moondog wrote:
> >
> > Makes me wonder if a registry is also required in order to set
> > rates based on what you own? Who all has access to the registry?
>
> I think it would be a defacto registry even if via the insurance
> companies sharing information, then sharing with data harvestors, then
> the govt just buys the data from them, like the FBI and other agencies
> already do.
>
> Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
> correlated data.
> --
> Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
>

The worst thing about all this is the deception of why it is being done.
Michigan has a handgun registry. For several years, you had to pick up a
ppurchase permit to buy a handgun, then within ten days of purchase, take it
to your local police department (or county building if live in a township)
and have a "safety" inspection done. At this time the model and serial
number was registered as a means to track it if it was stolen. I went with a
friend when he got his Ruger Blackhawk .44 inspected, and all the police
chief did was fondle the gun, ask him why he "needed" a cannon, then offered
to buy it from him because he liked it too.

Going through the county was a crazier adventure. A buddy bought a Tec-22 in
the mid 1990's, and the "inspection clerk" knew very little about firearms.
He gave her the pistol unloaded with no magazine. he had two magazines for
it - a ten round Ruger rotary mag for a 10-22, and a Ramline 25 round magazine
.. She freaked when she saw the 25 round magazine, then called another
officer over to look at my friend's "machine pistol." The other officer
chilled her ass down and said everything was fine. The paperwork was done,
and we left with no problems.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

-=> Tracker1 wrote to Moondog <=-

Tr> Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
Tr> correlated data.

Better, if you need to compile a list of AR-15 owners who make between 45K
and 65K, rent an apartment and like furry porn, that is.

.... Landru! Guide us!
--- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
� Synchronet � .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

> >
> > Makes me wonder if a registry is also required in order to set
> > rates based on what you own? Who all has access to the registry?

> I think it would be a defacto registry even if via the insurance
> companies sharing information, then sharing with data harvestors, then
> the govt just buys the data from them, like the FBI and other agencies
> already do.

> Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
> correlated data.

You are right, it would all likely be shared with data harvestors. People
could use your gun ownership to draw all sorts of profiles up about you.

Someone who frequents an echo on another network would say that this is
part of the choice you have to make and, if you don't want your data known
you should not have guns. They also believe that law abiding citizens
having guns is what makes law breaking persons use them.

* SLMR 2.1a * 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely small values of 5.

---
� Synchronet � CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Dumas Walker to TRACKER1 on Thu Jun 23 2022 04:48 pm

> > >
> > > Makes me wonder if a registry is also required in order to set
> > > rates based on what you own? Who all has access to the registry?
>
> > I think it would be a defacto registry even if via the insurance
> > companies sharing information, then sharing with data harvestors, then
> > the govt just buys the data from them, like the FBI and other agencies
> > already do.
>
> > Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
> > correlated data.
>
> You are right, it would all likely be shared with data harvestors. People
> could use your gun ownership to draw all sorts of profiles up about you.
>
> Someone who frequents an echo on another network would say that this is
> part of the choice you have to make and, if you don't want your data known
> you should not have guns. They also believe that law abiding citizens
> having guns is what makes law breaking persons use them.
>
>
> * SLMR 2.1a * 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely small values of 5.
>

That's the same logic that says sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers are
installed to tempt arsonists.

Predators do not go after animals they fear.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Tracker1 on Wed Jun 22 2022 07:56 am

> -=> Tracker1 wrote to Moondog <=-
>
> Tr> Probably worse than a registry, because they also have a lot of
> Tr> correlated data.
>
> Better, if you need to compile a list of AR-15 owners who make between 45K
> and 65K, rent an apartment and like furry porn, that is.
>
>
> ... Landru! Guide us!

Having the government knowing which doors to kick down when they turn against
the people is one thing. Imagine being treated like leper or be discriminated
because you own firearms? It may not be their business what you own as long
as it's legal and safe (or an indvidual right,) but some may show their
disapproval by raisng rates or making services unavailable to you. Vote with
your wallet only goes so far with some products.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

> > Someone who frequents an echo on another network would say that this is
> > part of the choice you have to make and, if you don't want your data known
> > you should not have guns. They also believe that law abiding citizens
> > having guns is what makes law breaking persons use them.
> >

> That's the same logic that says sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers are
> installed to tempt arsonists.

> Predators do not go after animals they fear.

Exactly. I may not have worded it exactly right. I think they believe
that law abiding citizens having guns means there are more guns out there
for law breaking persons to have access to (while breaking the law). Their
belief is that we should be willing to give up our guns, or at least have
ours all registered, tracked, and restricted (as to what we can own) so
that criminals cannot get their hands on them. <rollseyes>

I do agree that most law breaking persons are not going to try anything if
they think they might get shot. Many of them are not smart, but I don't
believe that most of them have a death wish.

* SLMR 2.1a * The number you have dailed...9-1-1...has been changed...

---
� Synchronet � CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Dumas Walker to MOONDOG on Fri Jun 24 2022 05:10 pm

> > > Someone who frequents an echo on another network would say that this is
> > > part of the choice you have to make and, if you don't want your data kn
> > > you should not have guns. They also believe that law abiding citizens
> > > having guns is what makes law breaking persons use them.
> > >
>
> > That's the same logic that says sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers a
> > installed to tempt arsonists.
>
> > Predators do not go after animals they fear.
>
> Exactly. I may not have worded it exactly right. I think they believe
> that law abiding citizens having guns means there are more guns out there
> for law breaking persons to have access to (while breaking the law). Their
> belief is that we should be willing to give up our guns, or at least have
> ours all registered, tracked, and restricted (as to what we can own) so
> that criminals cannot get their hands on them. <rollseyes>
>
> I do agree that most law breaking persons are not going to try anything if
> they think they might get shot. Many of them are not smart, but I don't
> believe that most of them have a death wish.
>
>
> * SLMR 2.1a * The number you have dailed...9-1-1...has been changed...
>

It can be a mixed bag. The other day someone was buying handguns for he and
his wife. Hios wife works in a marijuana dispensary and handles large sums
of cash, and was asking if open carry might be preferable over concealed
carry, which would take longer to get a permit.

I told them a visible firearm is like a flashlight in a dark room. You can
see your enemies, but they can see you have a flashlight. While it should
discourage bad actors, it also singles you out as the biggest threat to take
out first. Concealed carry keeps everybody guessing. And polite.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Moondog to Dumas Walker on Sat Jun 25 2022 12:35 pm

> I told them a visible firearm is like a flashlight in a dark room. You can
> see your enemies, but they can see you have a flashlight. While it should
> discourage bad actors, it also singles you out as the biggest threat to take
> out first. Concealed carry keeps everybody guessing. And polite.
>

The advantage of open carry is that it normalizes having a gun. If half the population carries
a gun but they are all concealed, then the population and politicians may perceive that gun
owners are a tiny minority (after all, nobody sees them anymore, therefore they must not
exist!)

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Arelor to Moondog on Sun Jun 26 2022 10:58 am

> Re: Re: Gun Insurance
> By: Moondog to Dumas Walker on Sat Jun 25 2022 12:35 pm
>
> > I told them a visible firearm is like a flashlight in a dark room. You c
> > see your enemies, but they can see you have a flashlight. While it shoul
> > discourage bad actors, it also singles you out as the biggest threat to t
> > out first. Concealed carry keeps everybody guessing. And polite.
> >
>
> The advantage of open carry is that it normalizes having a gun. If half the
> a gun but they are all concealed, then the population and politicians may pe
> owners are a tiny minority (after all, nobody sees them anymore, therefore t
> exist!)
>
> --
> gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
>

I agree on the concept, but not the execution. If everyone open carried, the
day you're caught alone without it would be the time you become a target.
Concealed carry keeps the bad guys guessing. The was a gas station robbery a
few years ago, and one of the customers standing in line was open carrying.
The line was cramped because the entry way was constricted,and the robber
singled him out and got in line behind him and held a knife to his back. He
had a retention holster, so the robber could not pull it out easily, however
the robber threatened him and he relased the retention button. Even if the
guy didn't have a knife or other weapon, they were in such enclosed space
that pulling the gun would've been hard without special gun retention and
close in training (which he didn't have.) Some open carry folks think a gun
is a magic talisman that wards away evil. It's knowing how to safely and
efficiently let out the smoke of the talisman that does the damage.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

-=> Moondog wrote to Dumas Walker <=-

>
> Exactly. I may not have worded it exactly right. I think they believe
> that law abiding citizens having guns means there are more guns out there
> for law breaking persons to have access to (while breaking the law). Their
> belief is that we should be willing to give up our guns, or at least have
> ours all registered, tracked, and restricted (as to what we can own) so
> that criminals cannot get their hands on them. <rollseyes>
>
> I do agree that most law breaking persons are not going to try anything if
> they think they might get shot. Many of them are not smart, but I don't
> believe that most of them have a death wish.
>
>
> * SLMR 2.1a * The number you have dailed...9-1-1...has been changed...
>

Mo> It can be a mixed bag. The other day someone was buying handguns for
Mo> he and his wife. Hios wife works in a marijuana dispensary and handles
Mo> large sums of cash, and was asking if open carry might be preferable
Mo> over concealed carry, which would take longer to get a permit.

Mo> I told them a visible firearm is like a flashlight in a dark room. You
Mo> can see your enemies, but they can see you have a flashlight. While it
Mo> should discourage bad actors, it also singles you out as the biggest
Mo> threat to take out first. Concealed carry keeps everybody guessing.
Mo> And polite.

Mo> ---
Mo> = Synchronet = The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Criminals are cowards by nature. If they perceive even the slightest chance at
an armed repsonse, they'll back down. I open carry, mainly because concealed
carry is too slow, too uncomfortable and restricts my choice of options. I
prefer to have my SW 645, 1911 or PT-145 Pro (which I COULD carry concealed)
over any of my subcompact .380 or 9mm options any day. I carry .45 primary,
but backup with .380 or 9mm compacts. If I'm going into a place where open
carry is disallowed, I always have the backup.

Of course, I live in Wyoming. In Wyoming one must assume that at least 50% of
those around you are carrying, concealed or open. Hmmm... funny thing.. I
just realized.... I hear a lot fewer news stories regarding armed robbery here
in WY than I did when I lived in NY. Geee...... I wonder why?

.... So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
� Synchronet � The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

-=> Arelor wrote to Moondog <=-

Ar> The advantage of open carry is that it normalizes having a gun. If half
Ar> the population carries a gun but they are all concealed, then the
Ar> population and politicians may perceive that gun owners are a tiny
Ar> minority (after all, nobody sees them anymore, therefore they must not
Ar> exist!)

For me the primary benefit is ease of access and an increase in carry options.
Carrying concealed usally means you have to adjust at least one piece of
clothing to access the firearm, increasing the chance of a snag or a tangle or
some other obstruction. Also it is more difficult to comfortably carry a full
size pistol so one usually tends to resort to a compact or sub-compact.
Nothing wrong with using those for defense, but I prefer the option of using my
full size SW 645 or 1911 for defense. Hell, where I live I could openly carry
my 6" GP-100 and nobody would blink an eye except to ask how I like it!

Then again, I DO remember the day I saw a fellow carring a .454 Raging Bull in
an Uncle Mike's ballistic nylon holster. Having one of those bitches myself
and knowing what it's like to shoot, I'd have definitely opted for something
different.

.... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
� Synchronet � The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

-=> Moondog wrote to Arelor <=-
>

Mo> I agree on the concept, but not the execution. If everyone open
Mo> carried, the day you're caught alone without it would be the time you
Mo> become a target. Concealed carry keeps the bad guys guessing. The was
Mo> a gas station robbery a few years ago, and one of the customers
Mo> standing in line was open carrying. The line was cramped because the
Mo> entry way was constricted,and the robber singled him out and got in
Mo> line behind him and held a knife to his back. He had a retention
Mo> holster, so the robber could not pull it out easily, however the robber
Mo> threatened him and he relased the retention button. Even if the guy
Mo> didn't have a knife or other weapon, they were in such enclosed space
Mo> that pulling the gun would've been hard without special gun retention
Mo> and close in training (which he didn't have.) Some open carry folks
Mo> think a gun is a magic talisman that wards away evil. It's knowing how
Mo> to safely and efficiently let out the smoke of the talisman that does
Mo> the damage.

I prefer open carry, and I realize that it's not some sort of "talisamn" that
wards off evil. Believe me. When I'm in public, my head is on a swivel and I
know what everyone around me is up to, and I do not allow myself to be in a
compromised position.

As I say... Carry. I don't care how, why, or what. Just carry. If you
prefer concealed carry, that's up to you, but I sure as hell expect your backup
if I get in a bad situation because I prefer to carry in the open!

.... Got my tie caught in the fax... Suddenly I was in L.A.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
� Synchronet � The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Weatherman to Arelor on Mon Jul 04 2022 01:39 am

> -=> Arelor wrote to Moondog <=-
>
>
> Ar> The advantage of open carry is that it normalizes having a gun. If half
> Ar> the population carries a gun but they are all concealed, then the
> Ar> population and politicians may perceive that gun owners are a tiny
> Ar> minority (after all, nobody sees them anymore, therefore they must not
> Ar> exist!)
>
> For me the primary benefit is ease of access and an increase in carry option
> Carrying concealed usally means you have to adjust at least one piece of
> clothing to access the firearm, increasing the chance of a snag or a tangle
> some other obstruction. Also it is more difficult to comfortably carry a fu
> size pistol so one usually tends to resort to a compact or sub-compact.
> Nothing wrong with using those for defense, but I prefer the option of using
> full size SW 645 or 1911 for defense. Hell, where I live I could openly car
> my 6" GP-100 and nobody would blink an eye except to ask how I like it!
>
> Then again, I DO remember the day I saw a fellow carring a .454 Raging Bull
> an Uncle Mike's ballistic nylon holster. Having one of those bitches myself
> and knowing what it's like to shoot, I'd have definitely opted for something
> different.
>
> ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.

I've seen shirts and coats that were designed to be concealed carry friendly.
The shirts would have snaps that would allow you to push through a slot in
the garment to reach a firearm, and the jackets were designed the same way.

Concealed carry requires learning technique and gaining muscle memory to draw
smoothly.

I couldn't imagine carrying a Raging Bull for anything other than intimidation.
Too much barrel if you end up on the ground in a fight, and have to pull the
gun and stuff it in someone's side to get them off you. With a standard or
compact pistol, that type of action would be much easier to pull off, like
jamming a fist in their side. A person can cover 21 feet in less than 3
seconds. If a person's body language doesn't telegraph any danger, chances
are you may have to draw while wrestling a person.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Weatherman to Moondog on Mon Jul 04 2022 01:45 am

> -=> Moondog wrote to Arelor <=-
> >
>
> Mo> I agree on the concept, but not the execution. If everyone open
> Mo> carried, the day you're caught alone without it would be the time you
> Mo> become a target. Concealed carry keeps the bad guys guessing. The was
> Mo> a gas station robbery a few years ago, and one of the customers
> Mo> standing in line was open carrying. The line was cramped because the
> Mo> entry way was constricted,and the robber singled him out and got in
> Mo> line behind him and held a knife to his back. He had a retention
> Mo> holster, so the robber could not pull it out easily, however the robber
> Mo> threatened him and he relased the retention button. Even if the guy
> Mo> didn't have a knife or other weapon, they were in such enclosed space
> Mo> that pulling the gun would've been hard without special gun retention
> Mo> and close in training (which he didn't have.) Some open carry folks
> Mo> think a gun is a magic talisman that wards away evil. It's knowing how
> Mo> to safely and efficiently let out the smoke of the talisman that does
> Mo> the damage.
>
>
> I prefer open carry, and I realize that it's not some sort of "talisamn" tha
> wards off evil. Believe me. When I'm in public, my head is on a swivel an
> know what everyone around me is up to, and I do not allow myself to be in a
> compromised position.
>
> As I say... Carry. I don't care how, why, or what. Just carry. If you
> prefer concealed carry, that's up to you, but I sure as hell expect your bac
> if I get in a bad situation because I prefer to carry in the open!
>
> ... Got my tie caught in the fax... Suddenly I was in L.A.

I emphasize training before any form of carrying. As mentioned, if you carry
a gun as a talisman and cannot keep a hold on it, you might as well give it
to the bad guy. i agree about sitautional awareness. Do not set yourself up
to fail and find yourself being funneled into a crowd of people or tight
space where it may be hard to draw or fight back.

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net

Re: Re: Gun Insurance
By: Weatherman to Moondog on Mon Jul 04 2022 01:32 am

We> Of course, I live in Wyoming. In Wyoming one must assume that at least 50%
We> of those around you are carrying, concealed or open. Hmmm... funny thing..
We> I just realized.... I hear a lot fewer news stories regarding armed
We> robbery here in WY than I did when I lived in NY. Geee...... I wonder why?

Because there are far fewer people?
Because the average income has gone up quickly in WY over the last 10 years, and cost of living has stayed quite low?
Because Wyoming has a very low poverty rate compared to NY? so people don't have to resort to extreme measures to try and feed themselves or their families?

I'm not saying all armed robbery cases are due to poverty, but the statistics show that a disproportionately large number of people who commit these crimes are often in terrible financial situations.

For what it's worth, in 2017 Wyoming had the 8th highest number of gun deaths per capita, while New York was 49th. Illinois was 30th. These numbers, of course, include suicide, which is why Hawaii probably has the lowest number of gun deaths, as apparently everyone there is happy as fuck.

Correlation does not imply causation.

DaiTengu

.... Extinction is the ultimate fate of all species.

---
■ Synchronet ■ War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com