General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo, what are those guns for, really?
Missouri is a conceal carry state, and my conservative, right wing brother says he always carries at least two guns everywhere he goes. He actually told me once that he's glad he's on his psych meds because they're the only thing that has kept him from shooting me when we've argued about politics. So, I guess he wins. No way will I argue with him about politics now. I have known him all my life and we both used to enjoy debating with each other. No more. The older he's gotten, the crazier and more dangerous. Maybe this has helped form my opinions about guns. He hasn't yet had to fight off a bad guy with those guns, but he sure is ready to shoot family members. Thank goodness for those meds!
dkf
(37,305 posts)You know what they say about that. Guns and gold.
Jim Warren
(2,736 posts)nt
AldoLeopold
(617 posts)Do you think it might be prudent to file a police report? At least they will have it in their records.
rhiannon55
(2,671 posts)Since I see him about twice a year at family gatherings, I simply don't mention politics to him. Actually, I barely talk to him at all; we have nothing to say to each other anymore.
AldoLeopold
(617 posts)People on psych meds probably shouldn't own firearms - but I would let his local police department know about your experiences. My son is on psych meds, so I'm not biased here.
Historically, psych meds + firearms just hasn't worked out well. Ask President Reagan. Well, you can't, but...
iemitsu
(3,888 posts)but I would stop debating politics with him too. In fact I might stop being in his presence, ever. Someone who would say that to a sibling is scary.
Does Missouri's concealed weapons law allow people on psych meds to arm themselves without restriction?
If so, its a good enough reason for me to avoid going to that state
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Seems to work. You have not threatened to kill him, and he has not needed to defend himself from you.
What are you saying here?
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)What Rhiannon said, well, not so much. I am pretty sure that what I said was not what she meant even though that is what she wrote.
white_wolf
(6,238 posts)But for home self defense you really don't need anything more than a shotgun. It's much better than a pistol for that. There is less of a risk of the shells going through walls or hurting someone and plus since they are harder to shoot there is less of a chance of an accident. I don't see the need for handguns they are very risky. Really though these people who carry handguns with them wherever they go are just pathetic. If you are that paranoid you need to see a doctor. I wouldn't care a bit if the government banned handgun ownership along with all semi-automatic rifles.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)If you are proficient with a pistol you will be much safer and better prepared. Its better than nothing, but much less effective that a handgun in an altercation.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)authorities.
The way it stands now, IF he were ever to shoot someone, ANYONE, the blood would be on your hands. I'm assuming you could live with that. I know I couldn't.
rhiannon55
(2,671 posts)Since he surrounds himself with other right wing Mormons like him, I have assumed that he doesn't get that angry very often, especially now that he's medicated.
Kingofalldems
(38,459 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Pointing out those individuals even remotely likely to lash out at others with guns might just be a first step in curbing these inconceivable tragedies.