View Full Version : People, in general, really are oblivious to their surroundings.
First off, this is not a concealed carry versus an open carry thread. It's an observation about how people really don't take stock of their surroundings the way they should. Also, it's a good example of how people that fret over printing while carrying concealed really are worrying about something for nothing (in most cases, I know there are exceptions to everything).
Today, my wife, myself, and our two girls went with another couple to eat and then to see a movie. I've been carrying concealed for almost four years now and I would challenge anyone that didn't specifically know that I'm carrying to pick up on it. I've tailored my dress and carry method for almost any situation so that something would have to go terribly wrong for someone to see my pistol. I assumed that the husband of the couple we were out with was also carrying so I was very surprised to see him take off his jacket in the restaurant with only a tucked-in t-shirt underneath. Sure enough, there was his 5" 1911 right on his hip in plain sight for all to see.
Now Colorado is an open-carry legal state so he was well within his rights, I just always have been more comfortable not having everyone around knowing I'm armed. I grinned at him and said, "Not worried about anyone seeing that?" He answered, "Nope. I'm hot and it's legal anyway." Again this isn't a concealed versus open carry thread. What was amazing to me is that we were sitting in the center of the room with probably 30 people around us (including multiple wait staff) and I carefully observed them throughout the meal. Not one person ever took notice of the full-sized 1911 in plain view for at least 45 minutes. At the end of the meal he stood up, put on his jacket and we all walked out without anyone ever having noticed his weapon. He repeated this show in the movie theater without anyone noticing again.
Open carry isn't for me, I'm not looking for someone to call in a "Man with a Gun" report to the police on me and screw up a nice day until it gets sorted out. But after today it is just painfully obvious how blindly most people go through their day.
People may have noticed bit said and did nothing because they have seen it before and there was no point... On the other hand, if this was N.Y.C. the result may very well have been different.
The last time I saw someone doing or saying anything about a person printing, it was an officer approaching another person and that other person turned out to be off-duty LE.
While I respect others' right to open carry, I'm with you, jaydoc1. Would much rather keep my own sidearm concealed.
Most people go through their day in Condition White...Perhaps a bit off topic...but I found this video humbling...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNF9QNEQLA
It's easy to miss something you're not looking for.
In Texas, if someone can't see your gun, they ask you why you aren't carrying one.
Belmont31R
12-19-10, 19:26
In Texas, if someone can't see your gun, they ask you why you aren't carrying one.
OC is illegal in TX.
NoveskeFan
12-19-10, 19:29
I was shopping with my wife a few months ago. I had to put a case of water under the cart. I was wearing a button up shirt, untucked, and a crappy Fobus holster with my duty gun. When I stood up, my wife gave me the big eye look and motioned with her eyes to my side. My firearm became plainly uncovered. I quickly fixed my shirt and looked around the crowded area, expecting to see some unwanted attention. I dont think one person noticed. The fobus has been retired.
RogerinTPA
12-19-10, 19:35
I remember when going through the MI advanced course at FT Huachuca, AZ back in the day, I was at a Chinese Buffet in Sierra Vista, when a group of bikers rode up. It was a bit startling to see 10 biker guys walk in with guns on their hips, but no one said a word. Later I found out that AZ had an OC law and I was then completely cool with it.
AngeredKabar
12-19-10, 20:17
I'm thinking that when people finally notice someone with a handgun who's not dressed like rap star, they assume that person is supposed to have a gun.
tracker722
12-19-10, 20:26
****************************
I'm thinking that when people finally notice someone with a handgun who's not dressed like rap star, they assume that person is supposed to have a gun.
This could have a lot to do with it.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-20-10, 00:11
When Im in CO I OC if Im dressed nicely and the setting permits, if not Ill CC. Most assume Im a police officer....
I'm thinking that when people finally notice someone with a handgun who's not dressed like rap star, they assume that person is supposed to have a gun.
I agree with this.
I was shopping with my wife a few months ago. I had to put a case of water under the cart. I was wearing a button up shirt, untucked, and a crappy Fobus holster with my duty gun. When I stood up, my wife gave me the big eye look and motioned with her eyes to my side. My firearm became plainly uncovered. I quickly fixed my shirt and looked around the crowded area, expecting to see some unwanted attention. I dont think one person noticed. The fobus has been retired.
Many years ago, my wife and I had an arrangement for inadvertent exposures/printing. If she spotted it, she would move in and help cover the spot, usually a hug, pat, or something similar. Worked well in the early days of carrying everywhere.
And as always, people will judge books by their covers. Look dull!
The fobus has been retired.
Fobus is Hebrew for "suck."
I'm thinking that when people finally notice someone with a handgun who's not dressed like rap star, they assume that person is supposed to have a gun.
Exactly. Appearing and acting like you belong in a situation go a long way to minimize feedback/notice/alarm. Many will figure that if someone is bold enough to do something unique, and act like it's no big deal, they probably aren't a problem.
NoveskeFan
12-20-10, 12:22
Many years ago, my wife and I had an arrangement for inadvertent exposures/printing. If she spotted it, she would move in and help cover the spot, usually a hug, pat, or something similar. Worked well in the early days of carrying everywhere.
Good advice for the wife, and I'll take it. Thanks for that.
I'm thinking that when people finally notice someone with a handgun who's not dressed like rap star, they assume that person is supposed to have a gun.
I hadn't thought of it that way before but I bet you're right.
To be honest I think most people don't pay that much to their surrounding or others. I know when I first started carrying concealed I was constantly worried, am I printing, can anyone see it, etc. Over time I've come to believe unless you're acting strangely, dress in an unusual way or draw attention to yourself most are simply not going to notice. And personally that's the way I want it.
Longhunter
12-20-10, 18:40
like where I live, Athens Ohio. Hot bed of sodomites and gun haters. They would definetly notice and call 911!
I want to change this subject just a bit if you don't mind. My thoughts on CCW permits and not noticing whats going on around you as was mentioned in the first post. I find the whole idea of concealed carry and the need to ask permission from government to carry a handgun an afront to the 2nd amendment. So is it a "Right" to bear arms or is it a "privilege" to bear arms?
I personally feel that to go through all the hoops to get a "permit" as in permission to carry a firearm is totally contrary to what the founders had in mind when they expounded on the right to bear arms. So if you have to ask permission to bear arms do you still have a right to bear arms?
In my way of thinking and what the founders thought, being the same, they believed that rights came from almighty God not almighty Government. And from where I set I see Americans that don't see what's going on around them, as in giving up their rights for a bowl of porridge, so to speak... they have given up their right (Godgiven) for a privilege to posess a firearm.
Speaking of not seeing what's going on around them!
I have a little bit of experience open carrying in Arizona. I figure that when going into stores, walking around apartments, etc, 1 in 2 notices.
i've taken my jacket off in a restaurant before.. i think of all "open carry" scenarios, this is probably the least riske. people might scowl, but i'd be crazy surprised if the police were called.
unless you look like a piece of shit.
otherwise, while not "against" open-carry, it's certainly NOT my thing.
Rattlehead
12-21-10, 00:20
I don't like relating movies to real scenarios, but a perfect example of this is in the movie Heat in the bank robbery scene when they walk out of the bank and one of the robbers has his Galil barrel sticking out from the bottom of his jacket. No one even takes a second glance at him, the bad thing is that people probably would not notice this in real life either, especially when there are so many people around.
There was a thread on here earlier this year about painted/non-black guns. There was a side discussion about how people who might notice your black gun won't see it if it's painted tan or has a OD frame. One member posted that they had a Krylon camo painted AR slung on their back in public and not a single person noticed. So if people are gonna notice guns at all, paint it so it's not big, black and scary. :sarcastic:
It amazes me daily how everyone walks around in their own little world, oblivious to everything around them. It often occurs to me that the reality most people have constructed around themselves is really just a thin veil between them and the truth about the randomness and brutality of combat and crime, and that it can happen at any time to anyone. Maybe some of them are subconsciously making themselves oblivious to avoid thinking about it. I dunno.
I think that part of the trauma that you see in people after something happens is from the veil of their reality being completely torn away. Sometimes in public, perfectly normal places, I muse about how, were something to happen, that veil, which is about as thick as the t-shirt covering my gun, will get torn to shreds as the whole world goes to hell in an instant. Reminds me of Lovecraft, really, when the way you thought or wished the world worked gets turned on its head.
Yes, I am a gigantic nerd, how did you know? :sarcastic:
thermocafe
12-21-10, 09:51
I have been wondering for some time about this trend. My assertion is at least SOME of those people were of the "they're not bothering me, so who gives a $#%?" persuasion.
The reason I wonder this is because Francis de Tocqueville wrote about this extensively, about how in the beginning of our once-great-Nation, The People had an inherent interest in the laws as they themselves a contracting member to the civil discourse. He contrasted this with the Frogs, where people would defame statues, steal, and other nefarious acts and other Frenchmen would just look the other way.
I think that's where we are as a Nation. The USA is overwhelmingly "conservative", and yet a deviant can commit treason in retaliation for DADT, and in response? We submit and repeal it. Y'all can't even say the freakin' word "Christmas" in some places without serious trouble. In England, even a Muslim MP has said this is ridiculous.
That hardly sounds like the "warrior mindset" that Dr. Roberts suggests we cultivate and nurture, thus in some ways making a lot of these "best equipment" threads meaningless.
Back in med school I did a stint in forensic pathology with Broward / Miami-Dade ME and was fortunate enough to work with an Afghan pathologist who fought the Reds before he left (there is a province there which still bears his family's name) and he told harrowing stories of using a Lee-Enfield rifle in battle. It ain't the latest/greatest, it wasn't Daniel Defense or Larry Vickers approved. But he had the stones to use what he had available.
So I think it all ties together. I think that quite a few of those people that day probably noticed your friend's weapon, but in the de Tocqueville response, they just looked the other way because he had the nerve to do it, and he wasn't bothering them. Too many laws, so who cares anymore?
Just a theory...
Powder_Burn
12-21-10, 13:55
...it is just painfully obvious how blindly most people go through their day.
My wife and I traveled to Switzerland once and were in the checkout line of a small town grocery store. The customer directly in front of us was buying some twine and happened to have a Sig 550 folded and slung on his back. Later I asked if she happened to notice the guy carrying the assault rifle in front of us in line and she didn't. That was the day I stopped over thinking handgun concealment...most people don't seem to have much awareness at all.
RogerinTPA
12-21-10, 14:28
S.A. (Situational Awareness) which has been discussed here before, is largely dependent on how you grew up and your over all life experiences (School of hard knocks), prior training, job (LEO, Military) and are more switched on than others. Avoiding situations by simply reading the terrain or situation at hand, has a large part to do with it. Some need to be taught to size up a given situation and take, or not take, an appropriate action. Some are totally oblivious to the obvious, despite life's lessons and will forever be in denial (Sheeple) and therefore not trainable. Case in point, all of the city counsel members in panama city, just siting there waiting to be shot and doing nothing to escape or protect themselves, except for the lady with the purse who made the effort. Doing ANYTHING is better than doing nothing and accepting your fate.
Hide in plain site. Most people are found out when they try to hide something because then they stray from the norm and people notice.
I even admit if i saw someone carrying and everything else was normal (the guy looks normal and is acting normal) I would probably make the assumption that he is allowed to carry or assume that he is some form of law enforcement, (as they really are the only ones that can carry here in Canada).
It's one of the reason serial killers are successful, it's because outwardly they look normal. They don't have horns, they don't look strange for the most part and can put on a facade of normal behaviour (Charles Manson was a special case, but even he fit in with his followers).
Complication
12-21-10, 21:09
This could have a lot to do with it.
It seems many people assume someone with a gun is a cop off duty.
And then, in some areas of the country, people just don't give a shit. Seeing someone with a gun is as remarkable as seeing someone wearing jeans.
I don't like relating movies to real scenarios, but a perfect example of this is in the movie Heat in the bank robbery scene when they walk out of the bank and one of the robbers has his Galil barrel sticking out from the bottom of his jacket.
1) As you said, it's a movie...
2) Let's say it's real life in Southern CA where CCW is rare. What are they going to do? Tell the guys that's illegal?
Some are totally oblivious to the obvious, despite life's lessons and will forever be in denial (Sheeple) and therefore not trainable.
Let's get rid of that term. People are trainable. They may not share your worldview but they certainly can learn to do things differently. The keys are experience and motivation. When an individual finds himself waiting forever for the police to arrive to his personal safety emergency, he tends to think of the right to bear arms in a different light. If he survives the encounter, he may even go out get training and buy a gun. There are no guarantees but when someone has been trained to believe the police will arrive in time and protect him, why are we surprised the individual believes it?
Case in point, all of the city counsel members in panama city, just siting there waiting to be shot and doing nothing to escape or protect themselves, except for the lady with the purse who made the effort. Doing ANYTHING is better than doing nothing and accepting your fate.
Ginger Littleton was the lady with the purse at that thing. Her heart was in the right place but her act was dumb. She also happened to be lucky, very lucky.
Any fool can act out and bump themselves to the head of the list of those to be shot. If she had thought it through she might have tried something that was more effective. Doing something stupid can be worse than doing nothing. Pushing a bad position can a get a person killed. I've seen it happen. -If you're going to act, try to do something that is likely to produce the desired result not something that allows the reporter to check the brave but dumb box.
But after today it is just painfully obvious how blindly most people go through their day.
Nothing new there! I have been concealed carrying for 18 years and there is only one time I am aware of that anyone ever noticed my gun, but I am quite sure my gun was exposed many times. It is bound to happen even if you are careful.
Two days before Thanksgiving I went to a local wal mart with my 2 boys age 5 and 10. The 5 year old carried his Frodo sword in sheath on belt, and my 10 year old carried a 1909 Argentine bayonet in sheath in leather frog on belt. Like any boys they like swords as well as all other weapons. When we were leaving the house my 5 year old asked if he could carry his sword, I said yes, so my 10 y.o. wanted to carry his 1909 bayo. Although in sheaths both were open for all to see and Wal Mart was quite busy. No one could tell from looking at them in their sheaths, but both blades are sharp and ready for use. We walked around, filled a cart, paid and went to the car. I did not see anyone even bat an eye at the open carry swords, for what it is worth. The wal mart was in a decent neighborhood, not a ghetto (are there wal marts in ghettoes?).
Of course probably some people noticed the swords and just did not react. But I am convinced that most people did not notice the swords at all.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4034/4543344714_63e7de60b4_m.jpg
http://www.old-smithy.info/bayonets/fullsize/argentina/argentina%201909%20argentinian%20made.jpg
Here's the big question what reaction do you expect or think would have been appropriate? Two little kids with swords on, any normal person would think they were toys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RogerinTPA
12-22-10, 09:37
Let's get rid of that term. People are trainable. They may not share your worldview but they certainly can learn to do things differently. The keys are experience and motivation. When an individual finds himself waiting forever for the police to arrive to his personal safety emergency, he tends to think of the right to bear arms in a different light. If he survives the encounter, he may even go out get training and buy a gun. There are no guarantees but when someone has been trained to believe the police will arrive in time and protect him, why are we surprised the individual believes it?
Ginger Littleton was the lady with the purse at that thing. Her heart was in the right place but her act was dumb. She also happened to be lucky, very lucky.
Any fool can act out and bump themselves to the head of the list of those to be shot. If she had thought it through she might have tried something that was more effective. Doing something stupid can be worse than doing nothing. Pushing a bad position can a get a person killed. I've seen it happen. -If you're going to act, try to do something that is likely to produce the desired result not something that allows the reporter to check the brave but dumb box.
I'm not advocating that her action was the correct one or promoting pushing a bad position, but sometimes when the shooting starts, you have no choice. I simply applauded her for her courage to do something.
AlphaKoncepts
12-22-10, 09:45
I've said for awhile now, you're only doing something wrong if you LOOK like you are doing something wrong. In other words if it became exposed and you didn't freak out about it, most other people wouldn't either. If it became exposed and you jumped up, covered it, looked around, looked guilty... well people will take notice that you are guilty of something.
Now try that in Chicago :) It'd be an interesting day for you :)
BTW I prefer ankle carry... less likely to flash and if it does, I think less people are looking at my big feet than my hip. Or maybe not, but it makes me more comfortable, and that's what matters.
RogerinTPA
12-22-10, 09:49
Let's get rid of that term. People are trainable.
To what degree of proficiency and how much time, money and resources, or sacrifice to others time and money are you willing to invest in a person who simply doesn't get it? A few hours? 10, 100, 1000 hours to "get it"? In my aviation career, I've had to recycle, send back to training, or kick out folks when the syllabus states 10 or what ever hours to gain proficiency and the person simply doesn't have the aptitude to digest and apply the info being received in a safe manner, no matter how many hours of instruction given, for what ever reason....too timid, in over their head, low aptitude, EGOs, too stubborn or stuck in their ways to assimilate and apply new information. In the firearms training arena, you see the same set of pompous "That Guys" enroll in class after class after class, because they think it's cool, but don't realize what a hazard they are. We've all seen "That Guy" on the firing line, in our current careers, in every walk of life. Some people are simply untrainable to be a safe functioning active participant, in whatever instruction is being given.
Some people are simply untrainable to be a safe functioning active participant, in whatever instruction is being given.
The point is writing others off as "sheeple" is stupid. It's done to make people who carry guns feel better about themselves. The term comes out of the sheep / sheepdog analogy Dave Grossman pounds in his lectures. He likes to talk about sheepdogs to build up the confidence and self esteem of the guys and gals in the room who have to go into harm's way. Underlying the concept is that some people have to work to be alert guardians while others are content to graze, blissfully unaware of their surroundings. The term "sheeple" does not mean someone who has trained very hard to be proficient with a firearm so he can carry but has failed every time. -It's a terrible term. It glosses over real issues in order to build up the egos of the guys and gals in the room.
I'm not saying everyone is trainable to be a high level shooter. That's not what "sheeple" is about. I'm saying that the people who have been written off as "sheeple" are in fact trainable. They got trained to their current level of conduct. Raise people to believe that they don't need to carry a gun or that they shouldn't carry a gun, and you're likely to get people who will not train or carry. Raise people to spend their time thinking about American Idol and what they're going to buy at the mall to be cool and you're likely to get people who don't pay attention to what's going on around them. Their minds have been conditioned to believe something and behave a certain way. They are likely to follow that belief and pattern of behavior until it is challenged. If a person has a life changing experience, that can motivate the person to think and act differently on the matter.
There are plenty of people who carry and who are not proficient with firearms. Often the thing that is lacking is good training. Sometimes they don't know they need it. Sometimes they refuse to acknowledge they need it. If someone consistently refuses training, we know what the result is going to be. However, if someone is willing to train, we know the result can be positive. The problem with the term "sheeple" is that it implies a difference in species (sheep vs. sheepdog) that cannot be overcome through training when the difference really is training.
Several years ago I was walking to lunch with 3 colleagues in Philadelphia. It was a sunny day with a temperature around 80 F. A man walking towards us on the sidewalk was wearing an army-style jacket, with his left arm tightly against his side as though he was trying to hold something in place under his jacket. He was completely unnoticed by my colleagues, who also didn't notice my hand going into the pocket where my own gun was located as we approached and passed this individual.
The point is writing others off as "sheeple" is stupid. It's done to make people who carry guns feel better about themselves. The term comes out of the sheep / sheepdog analogy Dave Grossman pounds in his lectures. He likes to talk about sheepdogs to build up the confidence and self esteem of the guys and gals in the room who have to go into harm's way. Underlying the concept is that some people have to work to be alert guardians while others are content to graze, blissfully unaware of their surroundings. The term "sheeple" does not mean someone who has trained very hard to be proficient with a firearm so he can carry but has failed every time. -It's a terrible term. It glosses over real issues in order to build up the egos of the guys and gals in the room.
I'm not saying everyone is trainable to be a high level shooter. That's not what "sheeple" is about. I'm saying that the people who have been written off as "sheeple" are in fact trainable. They got trained to their current level of conduct. Raise people to believe that they don't need to carry a gun or that they shouldn't carry a gun, and you're likely to get people who will not train or carry. Raise people to spend their time thinking about American Idol and what they're going to buy at the mall to be cool and you're likely to get people who don't pay attention to what's going on around them. Their minds have been conditioned to believe something and behave a certain way. They are likely to follow that belief and pattern of behavior until it is challenged. If a person has a life changing experience, that can motivate the person to think and act differently on the matter.
There are plenty of people who carry and who are not proficient with firearms. Often the thing that is lacking is good training. Sometimes they don't know they need it. Sometimes they refuse to acknowledge they need it. If someone consistently refuses training, we know what the result is going to be. However, if someone is willing to train, we know the result can be positive. The problem with the term "sheeple" is that it implies a difference in species (sheep vs. sheepdog) that cannot be overcome through training when the difference really is training.
Well put, sir. I'd like to take a moment to digress on an anecdote that I feel might help make your point. There was once a 23 year old kid who sold shoes at a Thom McAn shoe store in New Jersey when Pearl Harbor was bombed. He was an ordinary guy, had never even held a gun let alone fired one. He was a skilled watercolor painter and liked to paint seascapes. Three days later, he enlisted in the Marine Corps. He was a depression era kid and he looked it. Due to poor nutrition growing up, he had little muscle mass and barely passed his physical.
He became a rifleman and one day found himself on an island combating Japanese forces in the Pacific. During a particularly savage fight he heard the machine gun nearby his hole go silent. He ran over and saw that the crew was dead or nearly so from the effects of a mortar round. He tried to aid the last survivor, but the man died. The Japanese were coming again and the machine gun was vital, so he manned the machine gun alone in his personal Alamo. He repelled two banzai charges in that sector alone. When the gun jammed, he shot with his Springfield and then with a Nambu pistol that he picked up. Then he fought with his trenching tool, his fists and his teeth. He was shot once, stabbed, hit with shrapnel and burned. He held his position for two hours and was joined by another Marine for the last half-hour before reinforcements arrived. He earned the Navy Cross.
This man was a shoe salesman who liked watercolors and spent many Saturdays walking around the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. He had no "situational awareness" and he wasn't "switched on". He was a kid from Jersey with two kids who wanted to go to art college, but put it off to raise a family. This man was my grandfather. He was one of the "sheeple", yet he was able to be trained and conditioned. He fell to the lowest level of his training in combat and then found the fortitude to climb higher.
I'd say he was a special case, but he wasn't. Millions of "sheeple" like him were called upon. Did they all succeed? No. However, the vast majority of them did.
Several years ago I was walking to lunch with 3 colleagues in Philadelphia. It was a sunny day with a temperature around 80 F. A man walking towards us on the sidewalk was wearing an army-style jacket, with his left arm tightly against his side as though he was trying to hold something in place under his jacket. He was completely unnoticed by my colleagues, who also didn't notice my hand going into the pocket where my own gun was located as we approached and passed this individual.
And what?
Were you right, was he some sort of assailant? Or did he walk by and nothing happened. If nothing happened one could say your colleagues were right.
RogerinTPA
12-22-10, 15:39
The point is writing others off as "sheeple" is stupid. It's done to make people who carry guns feel better about themselves. Your opinion... I disagree. In the context in which I used it, I believe it was an accurate discription.
The term comes out of the sheep / sheepdog analogy Dave Grossman pounds in his lectures. He likes to talk about sheepdogs to build up the confidence and self esteem of the guys and gals in the room who have to go into harm's way. Underlying the concept is that some people have to work to be alert guardians while others are content to graze, blissfully unaware of their surroundings. The term "sheeple" does not mean someone who has trained very hard to be proficient with a firearm so he can carry but has failed every time. -It's a terrible term. It glosses over real issues in order to build up the egos of the guys and gals in the room. I know what it means. You aren't the only one who read the man's books.;)
I'm not saying everyone is trainable to be a high level shooter. That's not what "sheeple" is about. I'm saying that the people who have been written off as "sheeple" are in fact trainable. Again, to what degree and expense and to who's detriment if they can't perform?
They got trained to their current level of conduct. Raise people to believe that they don't need to carry a gun or that they shouldn't carry a gun, and you're likely to get people who will not train or carry. Agree. As I said earlier, it all depends on a persons life experiences. You say anyone can be trained, but at what level of proficiency is acceptable? Being barely trained is not an acceptable level of performance in most jobs, unless of course it's working for ACORN.
Raise people to spend their time thinking about American Idol and what they're going to buy at the mall to be cool and you're likely to get people who don't pay attention to what's going on around them. Their minds have been conditioned to believe something and behave a certain way. They are likely to follow that belief and pattern of behavior until it is challenged. If a person has a life changing experience, that can motivate the person to think and act differently on the matter.
There are plenty of people who carry and who are not proficient with firearms. Often the thing that is lacking is good training. Sometimes they don't know they need it. Sometimes they refuse to acknowledge they need it. If someone consistently refuses training, we know what the result is going to be. However, if someone is willing to train, we know the result can be positive. The problem with the term "sheeple" is that it implies a difference in species (sheep vs. sheepdog) that cannot be overcome through training when the difference really is training.
First, you need to re read my posts. You are making points that I initially made and reiterating those points.
Second, for the part in blue, I agree with most of that. There are positive and negative lessons to be learned throughout life and most will adapt. Others will gain a negative one. One in which a person reverts back to previous behavior and continue on like nothing has happened. I used to be an idealist too, but I have come across way too many people who simply walk around and perform their jobs and live there lives in a coma, with no thought involved. Being reactionary, instead of being proactive, in everything they do. In reality, there will be certain percentage of a given population, that will not adjust their mindset because of a traumatic event. They will be in a state of shock or paralysis for a while, even denial. Then they revert back to living there life as before.
I think we need to separate training from conditioning. I agree that when you see "that guy" in a firearms class he's likely never going to gain a high degree of proficiency because he's unwilling to admit errors or hear constructive criticism. However, this guy voluntarily signed up for a class and as long as he's not dangerous to those around him, who cares. It's his loss and it's likely a hobby. It's not like were pulling unwilling participants off the street and throwing them into a CQB course for a life and death fight at the end of the universe.
It's common sense that the unwilling do not respond well to certain training methods. Take Viet Nam for instance. Rifle training was a stimulus/response methodology. Men were trained to react a certain way to stimulus. It made no difference that many didn't want to learn. They were conditioned to respond to threats and they fired weapons accordingly. High proficiency? No. However there was a degree of it.
I trained police recruits in classes of hundreds at a time. These were people who genuinely wanted to be there and most accepted training. Many of them were complete deer in the headlights, albeit enthusiastic ones. An effective program will weed out the lost causes quickly and enable the training to move at the desired pace and on budget. There is little (but some degree of) conditioning performed in this type of scenario. Most of it is the willing acceptance of the instructor's knowledge by the students.
In a situation where people have to be placed into a training program to learn tasks for which they have no desire to perform (conscripts), conditioning is the most effective way to get them to acceptable proficiency. They will be force fed repeated actions until they become reflexive. Not ideal, but effective. This is the methodology that trained the military that won WWII.
Open carry is prevalent in AZ but on the other hand it doesn't imply we are "wild, wild west" either. Most open carry I've seen is in the rural areas more so than in the metropolitan areas. I believe it is more "convenience" driven (i.e. riding your bike, hunting, hiking or other forms of outdoor recreation) than a hard-fast rule. I've only seen open carry in Phoenix on rare occasions such as when Obama visited the city, folks were carrying to make a statement on Second Amendment or during the recent SB1070 rally's at the Capital. I believe for the most part those of us who carry weapons are cognitive that not all people share our rights and therefore out of respect we will conceal when in it is best warranted. Presently no permits are needed to CCW, so it is a simple matter to throw your tucked in shirt over the holster. :big_boss:
And what?
Were you right, was he some sort of assailant? Or did he walk by and nothing happened. If nothing happened one could say your colleagues were right.
He walked by and nothing happened.
I have no idea if we were an intended target but recognized that I was on to him, intended another target, or was simply weird enough to wear a casual jacket in 80 degree weather, holding something under his arm and hidden by the jacket. The point is, potential problems simply don't get much more obvious than this, and three people walked right by with no idea.
Apparently they weren't the only ones who would have had no idea.
The current affliction with i-phones and such doesn't help the popluation at large either.
Maybe someone could develop a conditon yellow to red app!
jmlshooter
12-23-10, 14:08
Seems to me that if you open carry, you should be prepared to be the guy who gets shot first.
SuperiorDG
12-23-10, 19:18
Not to get too personal, but I have a little experience to share on this topic. My wife is completely anti-NRA and anti-guns (other then hunting guns). Not feeling I needed to check with her I joined the NRA. Don't ask, Don't tell, right? But wouldn't lie to her, so one day she asked and I told. Long story short, she has this smart ass thing with me now. The look and commits whenever the topic is raised.
The family and I were one day eating at a McDonald's and this man sitting with his wife at he next table had an NRA hat on. So my wife says, "one of your buddies." I smiled and keep my mouth shut. The funny thing is, however, she didn't even notice the gun on his hip. Go figure.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.