HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » 5 Carry Mistakes: Respons...

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 12:43 PM

5 Carry Mistakes: Responsible Carrying

Last edited Fri Feb 19, 2016, 07:15 PM - Edit history (1)

This really got me thinking.

https://www.sofmag.com/carry-life-5-carry-mistakes/

Any fair-minded analysis reveals that the roughly 13.5 million concealed-carry permit holders in the United States make astonishingly few mistakes with their firearms. Serious mistakes, where actual injuries occur, are rarer still.

...

1. Abandonment; The necessity of a firearm for which you are responsible leaving your control...
2. One Firearm; We appreciate that it’s a serious and potentially expensive business to select that perfect carry arm, only to have us assert there’s no such thing. We do so nevertheless. There are many, many reasons why this can be so, so we’ll pick just one, and generalize...wardrobe...
3. One Carry Method; To an extent, we understand that our number two implies this: A second defensive firearm will almost certainly call for a second carry method...
4. Abandonment, Part II; Have you considered that your carry firearm is “abandoned” at home, too, at least in the sense we previously reviewed?...
5. “My Skill Is Better Than Your Skill”; The key here is an out-of-fashion character trait—humility—and the surest cure is to get it through your head that nobody with any real sense is ever done learning. And especially not about something as consequential as armed self-defense...


ETA: The gracious alert and learned jury votes are much appreciated. Thanks one and all.

16 replies, 3738 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 16 replies Author Time Post
Reply 5 Carry Mistakes: Responsible Carrying (Original post)
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 OP
SecularMotion Feb 2016 #1
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #2
SecularMotion Feb 2016 #3
ileus Feb 2016 #4
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #6
ileus Feb 2016 #8
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #10
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #5
sarisataka Feb 2016 #7
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #9
Purveyor Feb 2016 #11
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #12
DonP Feb 2016 #13
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #14
sarisataka Feb 2016 #15
discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #16

Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Original post)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 01:10 PM

1. Soldier of Fortune is a magazine for contract killers

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #1)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 01:20 PM

2. I don't think I've ever been called that before



I recommend setting the time to 8 minutes and 47 seconds.

I strenuously object to anyone alerting SMs post. I really want this to remain visible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:02 PM

3. Guns for Hire

 

During the late 1980s, Soldier of Fortune was sued in civil court several times, for having published classified advertisements of services by (private) mercenaries. In 1987, Norman Norwood, of Arkansas, sued SOF magazine, because of injuries he suffered during a murder attempt by two men hired via a "Gun for Hire" advert in the magazine.


In February 1985 John Wayne Hearn, a Vietnam veteran, shot and killed Sandra Black for a $10,000 payment from her husband, Robert Black. Black communicated with Hearn through a classified advertisement published in Soldier of Fortune, wherein Hearn solicited "high-risk assignments. U.S. or overseas".


In 1989, four men were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder in the 1985 contract killing of Richard Braun, of Atlanta, Georgia. The killers were hired through a classified services advertisement published in Soldier of Fortune magazine that read: "GUN FOR HIRE". Braun's sons filed a civil lawsuit against the magazine and a jury found in their favor, awarding them $12.37 million in damages, which the judge later reduced to $4.37 million.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_of_Fortune_(magazine)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:20 PM

4. That's supposed to have something to do with CC how?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:23 PM

6. Are you trying to thread-jack this thread-jack? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #6)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:31 PM

8. No just wondering what a magazine from the 80's has to do with legal CC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #8)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 03:11 PM

10. So.... Are you really "wondering" or is that an expression? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:22 PM

5. Well there's an eye opener

Anything from any recent times like within 10 years?
Folks tell me things change over time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #5)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:29 PM

7. Well there is the one

Little details that SecMo cut out of the last quote-
One consequence of the lost lawsuits was the magazine's suspension of publication of classified advertisements for mercenary work either in the U.S. or overseas.
(in 1992)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #7)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 02:51 PM

9. Once evil always evil and...

...if you have a gun and you're not evil, you might become evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Original post)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 06:57 PM

11. Courtesy Report: Results of your Jury Service

 

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Fri Feb 19, 2016, 05:41 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

5 Carry Mistakes: Responsible Carrying
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172187657

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Is Soldier of Fortune now an acceptable source here on DU?

Please hide.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 19, 2016, 05:56 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: the reporter should give reasons that it is an unacceptable source instead of asking us
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Whatever, it's the gun forum.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #11)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 07:12 PM

12. A warm thank you for the information

Have great night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #12)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 07:55 PM

13. Who could have possibly alerted on the OP?

 

Maybe someone that thinks they are the Host here as well as everywhere else?

Someone that resents any OPs that they don't cut and paste?

Possibly another self appointed Zampolit trying to keep all of DU "pure"?

Meh, they failed so who cares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #13)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 08:23 PM

14. Regardless of the accuracy of the information...

...the source needs to be "approved". Maybe we need some book burnings, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #11)

Fri Feb 19, 2016, 10:58 PM

15. Somebody's alert didn't go as planned

so is seeking meta-solace in GD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #15)

Sat Feb 20, 2016, 09:22 AM

16. Even if it's just an empty pathetic gesture....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread