Self-defense
Jeff S. writes:
In some significant degree I’ve been motivated to seek information and training in this area from reading your stuff on the subject of black-on-white violence. There are any number of websites (googling “self-defense” will get you started). A site dealing with “every day carry” discusses related issues extensively. Personally, I was influenced to take a three-day seminar (highly recommended) conducted by former SEAL Tim Larkin of Target Focus Training in part from reading some of these horror stories. It just seems like a logical extension from reporting on these stories to discussing what average people might, plausibly, be able to do to perhaps walk out of one of these nightmares alive and, for the most part, in one piece.
- end of initial entry -
Mack writes:
I’ve been to a few places in the world where pretty much everyone carries a gun—these are not the kinds of places I or anyone I know wants to live.
I completely understand Jeff’s motives for wanting to know how to protect himself—I freely admit to feeling good knowing I have a 12-gauge handy in my home, living in urban Chicago. My point is that when we see people resorting to carrying firearms for their protection outside the home, it is symptomatic of a society in a decline and should not be touted as a good idea. Everyone having to carry a gun is a terrible idea and a distressing testament to the condition of our society.
I’m also curious about where people who are worried about black on white crime/violence live? Unless you live in one of a few states in the South or in a large urban area, you don’t live very close to many black people.
LA replies:
I don’t see that Jeff was talking about a society in which everyone goes around armed in public. He was talking about the desirability of getting proper training and preparation in self-defense.
Further, most of the people in the U.S. live in urban areas.
Mike Berman writes:
In the VFR thread last month on black on white violence, “The ultimate story of a liberal who was mugged by reality,” which began with my article originally published at American Renaissance, Emily B. asked:
A question: Where are the guns? I noticed that there was not a single mention of a gun or any weapon: wishing one had one; mentioning one was owned but, it wasn’t there; thought about using it but deciding against it, etc. I don’t carry a gun, but know that I can go to my usual places and if the unexpected were to happen, there would be at least one man who was armed. In my home, I am armed.
I do not own a gun, I own as many as New York City allows. Target shooting is my hobby and my sport. Many years ago I was ranked #1 marksman in the Greater New York City Pistol League. New York, unfortunately, does not have the “can carry” laws which most locations do. When a New York resident travels to and from a gun range, he must store his firearms unloaded in a locked box with his ammo in a separate container. Any law abiding target shooter is thus left completely vulnerable if a thug approaches him with just a knife to relieve him of his property.
As for home defense, obtaining a permit for legal long guns (shotguns and rifles) is considerably cheaper, quicker, and easier than going through the ordeal of getting a pistol license. Even a pistol license can be had for target and home protection, so long as the applicant doesn’t have a mental or criminal record and is is willing to submit to the process and endure the time and expense involved.
August 22
Stewart W. writes:
It is interesting to note that both Mack and Mr. Berman clearly do not live in the Western U.S., nor in Vermont. Out here, we are neither required to carry a gun by the distressing condition of our society, nor are we required to have a permit to purchase or own any Federally-legal firearm. And yet, my city (Salt Lake City) has one of the highest per-capita rates of gun ownership, and concealed carry permits, in the nation. Similarly for Vermont, which has no laws regarding the carrying of concealed firearms.
I must say that Mack’s comment reflects a big-city (and very liberal) attitude toward self-defense and personal responsibility that is unusual in the world of traditionalists.
I wonder if Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, or Vermont count as places that for Mack are not the kinds of places he or anyone he knows wants to live.
Mack writes:
Perhaps it’s more accurate to state that most of the U.S. population resides in a conurbation associated with a larger metropolitan area. My curiosity regarding where people who expressed concerns about being the victim of black on white violence live was not based on any assumption I’m making about where those people actually reside—it’s a genuine matter of curiosity which I would be interested in learning more about.
Mike’s story is impossible to respond to—it’s a terrible litany of events, no doubt.
When issues such as these get brought up—black propensity for violence, race and intelligence, etc. I find myself at something of a loss in terms of having the slightest idea of how to solve these problems. I also find it difficult to associate myself with those that are freer with their calls for measures such as a reintroduction of institutionalized racial segregation.
As black on white violence has been the topic du jour for some time now—maybe a candid discussion of how one might propose to correct the problem?
BE writes:
Here is more information on concealed carry, should you find it of use to your readers.
This website has a map that shows the dramatic change in right-to-carry gun laws in the U.S. between 1986 and 2006. According to Wikipedia, at present, two states, Alaska and Vermont, allow non- felons to carry without a permit; 37 states have what are called “shall-issue” laws (i.e., officials may nor arbitrarily decline to issue a concealed carry permit); nine states have “may issue” laws (i.e., whether or not a permit is issued is subject to “need,” whim, and local custom); and two states, Illinois and Wisconsin, plus the District of Columbia, have no legal provision for concealed carry, though this may change in wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller.
When an individual decides he wants to carry, there are two basic factors to consider: stopping power and comfort. Stopping power refers to the gun’s ability to stop a would-be assailant; comfort refers to ease of carry and the individual’s ability to shoot the gun comfortably (and accurately). The general consensus is that the .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol) has the best stopping power. However, most pistols chambered in .45 ACP are large and therefore difficult to conceal; also, smaller people may find such guns uncomfortable or unwieldy. A good compromise between stopping power and comfort is the .38 Special +P. Although not as powerful as the .45 ACP, it still packs a wallop, and the guns chambered in .38 Special +P are smaller and therefore easier to carry.
Bullets are also important; many people who carry choose either frangible rounds or hollow points. The main advantages of this kind of round is that they do not go through what they hit. This means they transfer most of their energy to the target, and that shots that miss their intended targets will not go through walls and hit whoever might be on the other side of that wall.
In addition to these factors, those who choose to carry have to make several commitments: mental, emotional, legal, financial, and temporal. Guns and ammunition cost money; accuracy requires frequent practice at a shooting range; carrying means jumping through legal hoops. Most importantly, carrying a gun means that the bearer must be emotionally prepared to take another person’s life, and this is probably the hardest step. However, we have to remember that the Sixth Commandment, properly translated, is Thou Shalt Not Murder; personally, I find it far more moral to be willing to kill someone who means me or my family harm, than to allow myself or my family to become defenseless victims.
I urge those who are considering carrying a concealed weapon to educate themselves; there are numerous websites and books on the subject. It is a sad state of affairs that so many people feel the need to carry; most of the reasons can be laid at the feet of the harmful liberal policies of the past four decades, especially the importation of millions of unassimilable aliens, the coddling of criminals, and the abandonment of our common-sense rights to self-preservation. All of these are essentially the same thing: placing the Other ahead of ourselves—a common liberal theme.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 21, 2008 11:15 AM | Send