Question for gun folks...

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

Maybe you’d feel safer in Chicago?

This right here.

I am actually shocked at many of the replies in here. How do you know this "old" guy isnt a master marksman? Maybe he spent his life training others in CCW classes and has his draw down to the T? Just because he "looks" "old" all of the sudden its irresponsible?

Jesus.

 

[glockman]

I know A LOT of old dudes that look the way you have described this gentleman. Many of them can still shoot pretty damned well. My dad is 70 and can outshoot 95% of the people in this state. You can't always judge a book. Google Jerry Miculek for a prime example.

My thought is that it's a privilege to carry in public similar to a privilege to operate a vehicle. Maybe the system should change to allow for open and concealed carry with license, and that license needs to be renewed at regular intervals and that i

You do have to renew your CCW permit in Utah. Just checked mine, it expires every 5 years.

That's fair, and maybe you're right. I don't trust that person to responsibly handle his weapon and that makes me uncomfortable.

What if you were having breakfast and some 18 y/o kid wearing red with his pants hanging off his ass came in open carrying 2 pistols and 2 extra clips. What's your opinion of that? Does that make you uncomfortable? Is he canceled?

I personally find that kid more predictable than the elderly guy just looking for a reason to out America someone.

I would not feel any more threatened from that kid than a guy in a grunt style or "lions, not sheep" T-shirt. I notice someone carrying a gun concealed multiple times a week. It's just situational awareness. None of them bother me, I just take note. If the shit hits the fan, I know where to look first to assess if they are a target or a resource to stop a threat.

This type of stuff is all the monster under your bed. Like DAA said, how many times has this been an issue? How many times does an old farmer pack a gun in the US? I'm guessing the incident rate is fractions of one hundredth of a percent, mostly because I know the gun violence stats by heart.

 

[jeeper]

First of all, I am a believer in stereotypes. They exist because of historical data.
Is it true for 100% of the people? No.. but for a majority, yes.
Would my safety radar be on more alert for a thug looking guy in the city with a gun than it would for an old man cowboy in a small city diner? Heck yes. Same as it does when I am around a pitbull more than a labradoodle. Life experience tells me they are different and should be treated as such.
An old man rancher/cowboy has nothing to prove and would have no desire to ‘start something’ at breakfast…
.. Unless this is an episode of Yellowstone and there is a land dispute going on.

I’d like to flip the script though.. I’m your typical mormon boy. Never had a drink in my life. I am much more uncomfortable with the number of drunks on the road. I have a greater chance of being in an accident with a drunk coming out of a local bar or specialty brewery shop than I will ever have of being shot.
All my siblings drink. The majority of my friends drink. But I still have an extremely limited understanding of it. I don’t know if it’s 1 drink or 12 that causes impairment. I don’t know if they should be driving after a beer with dinner or not. I don’t know if I am allowed to question their level of alcohol or not. But does my lack of comfort mean that they should not be allowed to drink? Does my fear of their intoxication give me a right to call them out before any real signs of an issue? I don’t think so. I support their right to drink. I learned just a month or two ago that my buddy couldn’t take his opened beer out of the diner to walk the streets with me. That seems silly.
I would not vote to or want suppress a persons ability to drink, especially based on the actions of others.
You, being much more familiar with alcohol, would probably think I am irrational I’m my fears…
But I have no issue with old man and his gun.

 

[Cody]

This right here.

I am actually shocked at many of the replies in here. How do you know this "old" guy isnt a master marksman? Maybe he spent his life training others in CCW classes and has his draw down to the T? Just because he "looks" "old" all of the sudden its irresponsible?

Jesus.

Jesus! How unbelievable for me to assume a man that could barely walk and who's hands were shaking so bad he struggled to get his glasses off of his head so he could read the menu, wouldn't be able to handle his firearm in the event of an attack. What an outrageous assumption! I'm obviously stupid.

You guys are right, I don't know his story and it's entirely possible he is a skilled marksman despite the outward appearance of extreme physical limitations. It's also very likely an entirely uncommon situation, which is why I've never seen something like that before. But it just made me think about it in a way that begged the question between rights and privileges. Is it unreasonable to ask why a concealed carry must be renewed every 5 years, but there is no limit or restrictions on open carry?

@jeeper no I don't think it's irrational to "fear" something you don't really understand. I actually respect your perspective of not trying to enforce your personal views onto those who choose differently. I sincerely wish the legislature would have a similar view instead of passing weird legislation to govern alcohol without anyone that understands it at the table. It would be like a room full of anti-gun advocates who've never owned or shot a gun, being solely responsible for drafting all legislation relating to guns.

Similarly, I suppose it's hard for me to fully relate here because I've literally never felt the need to carry. I've never thought to myself "man, I wish I had a gun on me right now", which probable has something to do with my comfort level with guns. I own a few and enjoy shooting, but I'm nowhere near as experienced or trained with them as many of you. I fully support the right to own guns, but I personally think there needs to be some baseline of training and background insight for people to carry in public. It might be my right to open carry, but it also feels irresponsible for someone with my comfort level to have a gun on me in public. Probably the same sort of training and licensure for open carry as there is for concealed. It sounds like there might be some states that are set up that way?

 

[jeeper]

I sincerely wish the legislature would have a similar view instead of passing weird legislation to govern alcohol without anyone that understands it at the table.

Agreed.

It would be like a room full of anti-gun advocates who've never owned or shot a gun, being solely responsible for drafting all legislation relating to guns.

Which is EXACLTY who passes gun legislation.

 

[Cody]

Agreed.


Which is EXACLTY who passes gun legislation.

Now just imagine if the Biden admin annexed in 3 million Los Angeles voters to "balance" Utahs districts lol. That's basically what we've got going on here.

 

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

Jesus! How unbelievable for me to assume a man that could barely walk and who's hands were shaking so bad he struggled to get his glasses off of his head so he could read the menu, wouldn't be able to handle his firearm in the event of an attack. What an outrageous assumption! I'm obviously stupid.

You guys are right, I don't know his story and it's entirely possible he is a skilled marksman despite the outward appearance of extreme physical limitations. It's also very likely an entirely uncommon situation, which is why I've never seen something like that before. But it just made me think about it in a way that begged the question between rights and privileges. Is it unreasonable to ask why a concealed carry must be renewed every 5 years, but there is no limit or restrictions on open carry?

@jeeper no I don't think it's irrational to "fear" something you don't really understand. I actually respect your perspective of not trying to enforce your personal views onto those who choose differently. I sincerely wish the legislature would have a similar view instead of passing weird legislation to govern alcohol without anyone that understands it at the table. It would be like a room full of anti-gun advocates who've never owned or shot a gun, being solely responsible for drafting all legislation relating to guns.

Similarly, I suppose it's hard for me to fully relate here because I've literally never felt the need to carry. I've never thought to myself "man, I wish I had a gun on me right now", which probable has something to do with my comfort level with guns. I own a few and enjoy shooting, but I'm nowhere near as experienced or trained with them as many of you. I fully support the right to own guns, but I personally think there needs to be some baseline of training and background insight for people to carry in public. It might be my right to open carry, but it also feels irresponsible for someone with my comfort level to have a gun on me in public. Probably the same sort of training and licensure for open carry as there is for concealed. It sounds like there might be some states that are set up that way?

Why does other people's freedom scare you?

 

[Cody]

Why does other people's freedom scare you?

Lol, what a strawman. I don't think me thinking a severely physically compromised elderly man not needinf to carry multiple weapons with him to breakfast, means other people's freedom's scare me. Objectively can't we all agree that it's probably not a good idea?

I think there are plenty of personal and constitutional freedoms that the conservative side feels threatened by too. So the freedom drum seems like the wrong instrument to play.

I think the point of this discussion is at which point does gun ownership just get a universal pass, and at what point do certain aspects of gun ownership need to be restricted to people that can prove they are physically and emotionally capable, and technically qualified to safely carry and use a gun ?

 

[85CUCVKRAWLER]

Lol, what a strawman. I don't think me thinking a severely physically compromised elderly man not needinf to carry multiple weapons with him to breakfast, means other people's freedom's scare me. Objectively can't we all agree that it's probably not a good idea?

I think there are plenty of personal and constitutional freedoms that the conservative side feels threatened by too. So the freedom drum seems like the wrong instrument to play.

I think the point of this discussion is at which point does gun ownership just get a universal pass, and at what point do certain aspects of gun ownership need to be restricted to people that can prove they are physically and emotionally capable, and technically qualified to safely carry and use a gun ?

Where do you get the authority to decide the limit of other people's constitutional rights?

 

[Cody]

Where do you get the authority to decide the limit of other people's constitutional rights?

Where did I claim to?

 

[N-Smooth]

When my dad gets old enough to not be safe behind the wheel I will have that discussion with him. If he carried I would have the same discussion. I don’t think it’s a freedom thing,
it’s a responsibility thing.

 

[DAA]

I remember when my grandpa who had some eyesight but was legally blind got a new drivers license in the mail. Back when the DMV was at the fairgrounds. Gramps had me drive him down there so he could give his new license back and chew their ass in person. Always remember him telling the nice lady that no she couldn't help him, he needed to speak to the head man, lol! Finally got whoever was in charge in front of him and then just unloaded on the poor guy.

Made that guy very uncomfortable. You can't get away with that anymore.

- DAA

 

[Herzog]

FWIW Utah is now a constitutional carry state. No permit required to conceal for over a year now.

 

[DAA]

Couple actual thoughts here... On the premise, that we are proposing new laws to deal with the problem of old people being allowed to carry guns.

I proceed based on that premise, because that is the conclusion I jump to reading your thoughts Cody. Correctly or not, that's where my thought process goes.

So, laws to protect us from people too old to responsibly carry anymore...

My first, biggest blocker here, is responsibility. Right now, it's the responsibility of the old person and the people around him to make decisions and take actions for the good of the old person and the community he's a part of.

Pass a law and now, it's no longer the responsibility of the individual, nope. We've transferred that responsibility to the gov't. Just on general principle, across a wide spectrum of issues, my gut reaction to that is always - No Thank You.

But so, now we have a law. By definition, that means, pretty much, the decision to continue carrying, or not, is not voluntary. It's the law. Which means, somebody else, not the individual, not the people around him, somebody else with no connection to the situation, gets to make that decision. Effing Do Gooders... Take away the responsibility and take away the freedom to decide. Again, I say No Thanks.

Then, there is the perceived threat, of such a law, of how it is actually written and selectively enforced and the unpleasant potential consequences. That's what makes ME uncomfortable. That's my Me problem.

But, but, but! The problem I have to this whole conversation, is that it's based around the assumption that there may be a problem here that we ought to do something about. People too old and feeble to be carrying guns anymore, being a public safety concern. I just don't believe that. Show me the data - if this is actually something anyone should be willing to give a couple craps about, there ought to be some data showing the dire consequences of failing to take action? Truly, I just, don't see it. At all.

Tangent... One of the things I hate about watching the news, any flavor. Stories are always put in a context that assumes a flavored bias. For instance, I can easily imagine a CNN or NPR report segue "Our reporter Do Gooder has a report tonight on the national problem of old people with guns". Not, "we are reporting on whether old people with guns are actually a problem or not". It's never presented that evenly.

- DAA

 

[glockman]

The government always finds restrictive solutions to problems that don't exist. Then the solution creates a beau acracy which creates even more problems in dealing with the solution to the problem that never existed in the first place. Self perpetuation is the main purpose of government.

 

[Houndoc]

That's fair, and maybe you're right. I don't trust that person to responsibly handle his weapon and that makes me uncomfortable.

What if you were having breakfast and some 18 y/o kid wearing red with his pants hanging off his ass came in open carrying 2 pistols and 2 extra clips. What's your opinion of that? Does that make you uncomfortable? Is he canceled?

I personally find that kid more predictable than the elderly guy just looking for a reason to out America someone.

As much as most will deny it, I think the majority here would be far more uncomfortable with an young, armed black or brown young man in West Valley than they are with an old white man in a small town.

Why does other people's freedom scare you?

The challenge this thread poses is what lines do we draw on other's "freedoms"?

The "good guy with a gun" argument is one I generally agree with (although we need to honestly admit they rarity of those uses in the public square)- but does the right to want to be that "good guy" apply to someone physically unable to either use that gun safely (including not harming innocent bystanders) or to keep the gun from falling into the hands of the "bad guy" should that situation arise?

I think we would all admit that there are some people out there who for the safety of others (or themselves) should not have access to guns. But to address that means taking away someone's rights/freedom.

As gun owners, we need to be more involved in addressing gun deaths (mass shootings, other violence, suicides etc) than we historically have been instead of just crying "freedom" and "Constitution" while ignoring the real harm happening around us. We may stand to loose more if we are not part of the conversation/solution.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Who gets to play God? Who gets to choose exactly when someone's mental or physical deficiencies void their constitutional rights? Does that safety-net cover voting rights? Free speech? What other liberties does this god figure get to censor?

It's a shit sandwich, I think any sane human agrees there are other humans that shouldn't have access to a firearm. But how and to whom that is applied is extremely scary.

 

[TRD270]

As much as most will deny it, I think the majority here would be far more uncomfortable with an young, armed black or brown young man in West Valley than they are with an old white man in a small town.


As gun owners, we need to be more involved in addressing gun deaths (mass shootings, other violence, suicides etc) than we historically have been instead of just crying "freedom" and "Constitution" while ignoring the real harm happening around us. We may stand to loose more if we are not part of the conversation/solution.

Boy I sure do have a problem with both of these statements, but I know i'm talking to a wall so i'm not even going to dive in.

 

[jeeper]

As much as most will deny it, I think the majority here would be far more uncomfortable with an young, armed black or brown young man in West Valley than they are with an old white man in a small town.

Statistically, they should be.

Just simply google 'west valley shooting'.. More stories than you can read. Most of gang members, most of black or brown young men.


Are you telling me that you don't lock your car doors and roll up your windows more at work in the crime filled city than you do at home in your smaller town?

 

[mesha]

The old guys son probably filled his guns with blanks anyway. My grandpas last year of hunting there weren't any bullets in his elk rifle. I had a great time sitting in the woods with him while he ate a bunch of loud candy and scared all of the elk away.