Thread: Do you really have the right to carry a gun in public?

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

But Neighborhood watch is a volunteer position. I'd be all for getting the National Guard or the Army to patrol our streets at night, that'd make us safe.

Then that should be up to the community to "hire" a guard. I'm all for having an armed person watching the streets if it's needed, but not a civilian with no training outside of their concealed carry training. At that point, that person isn't just watching the streets they're expecting something to happen and are going to be ready when it does. That to me screams vigilantism.

Most communities don't have the money to hire a guard, or already employ people called the "Police."

This is just crap veiled as security.
Either Up taxes to pay for more Cops, or deal with the Crime another way, like volunteer unarmed watches.....

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Most communities don't have the money to hire a guard, or already employ people called the "Police."

This is just crap veiled as security.
Either Up taxes to pay for more Cops, or deal with the Crime another way, like volunteer unarmed watches.....

Yes, because heaven forbid we do something that might actually harm criminals. I mean we wouldn't want one of them to accidentally get shot as they robbed the homes of innocent people.

Exactly, if they don't have the money(or if the neighborhood doesn't want to pool the money) then they need to find another way, but putting armed neighborhood watch isn't it.

We have break-ins here just about every couple of weeks or so. Most of it is kids getting money and shit from unlocked cars, the occasional house break-in when no ones home, and rarely a stolen car. However, I'd be less comfortable(and/or safe) with anyone of the people that live here walking the streets with a gun hoping to deter crime than I am with the punks that steal shit.

I would much rather hold a thief at gun point until the cops arrive than continue having the things that I worked hard for stolen.

Originally Posted by Nuckle

I would much rather hold a thief at gun point until the cops arrive than continue having the things that I worked hard for stolen.

There's a difference between you protecting your self and your property, and you walking the streets doing the same. That's why you own a gun, for that type of defense, but I wouldn't want you anywhere near my home with that gun trying to protect me and my stuff. Cause who knows what you are witnessing, the chances of someone to misinterpret the situation and someone getting shot that shouldn't goes way up when it's not your property.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Yes, because heaven forbid we do something that might actually harm criminals. I mean we wouldn't want one of them to accidentally get shot as they robbed the homes of innocent people.

But who are to judge these "Criminals".

Does one have a right to shoot a would be criminal if they run from you holding them at gunpoint?

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

But who are to judge these "Criminals".

Does one have a right to shoot a would be criminal if they run from you holding them at gunpoint?

I will if they break into my home.

Originally Posted by Nuckle

I will if they break into my home.

So by your definition, they break into your house, you catch them, they surrender, do you proceed with lethal action?
How does one live with themselves after that?

Originally Posted by Nuckle

I will if they break into my home.

Me too. Break into my house while I am home, you most likely won't leave alive. Their mere presence is threat enough for me to empty every round available.