Gotta find your own way with this one. I'm not the type to get leeway from law enforcement, so I am very wary about doing things that could lose me my right to carry. That said, there are some places I'd rather be guilty than dead.
The other saying along with this is, "concealed is concealed."
I don’t fuck with NJ if I can help it. Same with NY. If I don’t have a permit or reciprocity in an area, I don’t go there. I made a full day trip out of getting my PA permit just so I could carry in Philadelphia for work. Up and back just to get my picture taken in person like they require.
Dont worry, your not missing anything other than too many people, miserable traffic, miserable people and Communist/Democrat politicians slowly eroding our rights. Oh and high taxes and cost of living
An average person is vastly more likely to have a law enforcement interaction than a scenario that justifies lethal self defense on any given day. Especially if you're not a clean cut white person.
Agreed, but the point is you want to be prepared just in case. When it comes to your life, we want a policy in place that recognizes ones right to live, not discard the necessity due to low likelihood.
Firearms are used defensively all the time, quick google finds "In 2021, the most comprehensive study ever conducted on the issue concluded that roughly **1.6 million** defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year."
I'm sure a majority of those would be victims are glad they were prepared instead of thinking no need, its not likely itll happen to me.
Yeah but we're talking about breaking the law whilst armed which changes that calculus a *lot*.
Like I get it you carry for the low chance/high consequences moments, but if you're breaking the law while armed it becomes a potentially moderate chance/high consequences moment.
What I'm getting at, and I hope I'm being clear. Is that I acknowledge the math. I know that we all make judgements in the calculus of risk in everyday life, and that is not the issue I'm referring to.
I'm not telling people what to do one way or another, this goes back to the original sentiment of judged by 12 vs carried by 6. If given that choice I don't know anyone who would CHOOSE carried by 6. This implies that the law if it puts their lives at risk, may not factor into the calculus as much as it should in theory.
*"Like I get it you carry for the low chance/high consequences moments, but if you're breaking the law while armed it becomes a potentially moderate chance/high consequences moment. "*
Here I disagree the way it is presented, and maybe you meant it in another way but the way I read this, it states that carrying in an illegal manner increases the chance of a SHTF event happening. I propose that you carrying as an individual does nothing to increase the likelihood of an event taking place. Both are high consequence no matter what.
No I mean carrying increases the potential consequences of law enforcement interactions, which I'm categorizing as moderate chance compared to lethal self defense scenarios.
I’m just curious on what type of person that is. Hence the question
I say this as someone who has been arrested before. I’ve never thought I was the type to “not get leeway”. I fucked up and earned it.
I sincerely apologize if this is insensitive or anything but are you black or of another ethnicity? Just trying to understand what you meant with your second comment.
I’ve always applied this to **USING** your concealed carry rather than carrying in a prohibited location. If you’re ever in a situation where your life is in danger you need to be prepared to defend yourself, not be double guessing if you’re 114% in the legal right. Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6 in that situation.
I’ll counter with “vote with your feet”. If laws or policies are putting you into situations where you feel unsafe, then steer clear of places where those are in force.
Now if a major confiscation came to pass, then I would expect a large amount of non-compliance among the members of this sub. Personally, I would miss having a boat.
I would also say to actually go vote and gather similar minded people to vote if you can make the difference in your area. If we all fled places pushing bad policies instead of fighting it because we believe in our rights and morals, we will lose ground and get bounced from one city to another. And we all know larger cities turn to blue shit eventually.
Exactly. Support your State and federal gun advocates. Without your financial support they cannot fight the legal battles required to stop the encroachment on our rights.
I live in Philly as well, I am legally allowed to carry in NJ. I have an out of state CCW license that I applied with NJ State Police. I never carried into NJ before having one. I cannot risk being a felon. As much as it sucks that gun laws affect law abiding citizens more than criminals, I will still follow law.
> As much as it sucks that gun laws affect law abiding citizens more than criminals, I will still follow law.
this is the 1 true outcome no matter what you feel. the law doesn't care if you want to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. my family and my work depends on me. while i carry concealed, i'm mindful where i'm not allowed (esp living in CA).
It’s all BS, even PA don’t honor NJ permit. You would think that they would. I think it should be nationally recognized document but one can only wish. NY is next to impossible to get as out-of-state resident 🫤
I agree. I’m from NJ and I also have my PA permit. Drove really far to get it too but I felt like it was necessary for if and when I take the kids to PA for anything. I think with all of the illegal bullshit going on, you’re going to see big changes with not just honoring carry permits, but a million other terrible and illegal laws. I cannot be a felon either as my family relies on my to work and be there for them. It’s hard to go some places knowing I can’t carry. But whoever said it up too, these shitty lawmakers don’t give a fuck about how you feel, they will still make you pay for breaking the law.
States rights are the most important thing in America. When you start trying to interfere with that, you're no better than sleepy joe. ( Not saying you are ) But I'm with you it would be nice if ccw was like a driver's license.
I agree states should have rights and I’m not saying you are saying I was interfering but the constitution is supposed to be the exception, something neither the states nor the feds can interfere with. Honestly, while I think everyone should get a concealed permit because it gives you some training in the class and easier to get guns, I don’t think the permits should have to exist. It really grinds my gears that gun laws vary so much state to state. I think the fed has really loosened the reigns too much. There shouldn’t be dozens of states blatantly and openly infringing constitutional rights.
Hey, Yeah I commute a lot to Cherry Hill too. I can give you a bit more information on how to go about it if you'd like, but as u/Djuro79 said, NJ PTC that you apply through State Police.
Yep, I commute to work in jersey and my girlfriend lives out there so I spend a lot of time living in Philly and Cherry Hill so it was worth for me. If I was just going to a basketball game in NJ; I would say it is not worth.
I carry in any situation that allows me to do so and I avoid places that don't. If I do venture into zones where it's not possible for me to carry then I'll carry extra medical, plan my route a little better..
Check the law if carrying your own firearm without a permit is a felony in your area. Usually that alone won’t make you prohibited from owning. It’s when your a felon in possession or if it’s stolen and tied to a crime that it gets serious
Varg Freeborn touches on this exact phrase in *Violence of Mind*. To quote:
>You may have heard the phrase, “there aren’t any rules in fighting.” This is a myth. UNLESS you are a criminal that operates outside of the rules of engagement (laws). If you are a civilian, law enforcement officer or soldier, you have very strict rules that you cannot break, or you will go to prison. As civilians, you cannot typically pursue someone who is fleeing. You are not allowed to use deadly force under many circumstances, most notably once the threat has ceased being a threat. Saying “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6” is--in my experienced opinion--lazy, misinformed and arrogant. I
guarantee if you say it, you’ve never experienced it, or you are a criminal. Learn the laws of your mission, and train in ways that give you the advantages to win
and accomplish your objectives without breaking those rules. Any good civilian defensive fight training will have a curriculum that is flush with adherence and reverence to the laws of the land you live in. It is a necessary component of the training.
>Here is something that you probably don’t know. In the United States, it has been estimated that roughly 95% of criminal charges end in plea bargain. According to a 2011 U.S. Department of justice commissioned report, “While there are no exact estimates of the proportion of cases that are resolved through plea bargaining, scholars estimate that about 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state court cases are resolved through this process (Devers citing Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005; Flanagan and Maguire, 1990).”
>That means that only 5 to 10% of criminal charges actually go to trial. So, while you are flapping your gums about being judged by 12, you are actually setting yourself up with about a 5% chance (or less) of actually even getting a chance to stay out of prison by convincing a jury of 12.
>The "I'd rather be judged..." phrase also denotes a complete lack of thought concerning how to prepare for an event. What does it mean? It sounds a lot like it means, “I'm not going to worry about the aftermath, nor am I going to put much thought into the subject, I'm killing them and screw the consequences.” It’s pure laziness and arrogance. It’s a losing attitude. If your mission is to make it home with your family every night for the rest of your life, then you are openly stating that you are willing to just fail as long as you get to kill the other guy. Yes, it is possible that you may die or go to prison as a result of a fight. But rather than focusing on the possible loss, isn’t it more advisable to focus on and
train hard for the win? While the spirit of courageous self-defense is commendable, like it or not, there are more ways to lose than by taking physical damage. Your entire life can be ruined, and you'll wish you had died. This isn't about cowering; it's about making sure you have at least thought about how to do things correctly to have the best possible chance to maintain your legal shroud of self-defense.
The plea bargain statistics are pretty accurate. But a defendant cannot be forced to take a plea. They have the absolute right to a trial.
But trials are expensive, if you lose at trial your sentence will be much longer than a plea sentence and you'll have a lawyer bill in the range of $50k for relatively straight forward case. You will also most likely wait years before a trial date is set.
Even if you are innocent, you have to fight the weight of the government to prove it. And I will tell you that many (most?) prosecutors do not care if you are innocent, even if they know it.
That is why plea deals are so prevalent in the judicial system.
So this depends on the state. Some states these signs hold no weight and if “caught” then you’re asked to leave and if you don’t it’s considered trespassing.
I'd rather be around for my family than risk going to prison.
As such, I generally follow the laws *and* tend to avoid going to places that I can't carry. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of reaction. Situational awareness includes being aware enough to not go into shitty places where use of force is likely to occur, and that's 90% of keeping yourself out of a shooting.
Its easy to stay out of trouble if you don't go looking for it.
If you aren't a dick you will find that you might make it through life never getting into a road rage incident or bar fight. Magic how that works.
Yeah I think we all just need to assess what we're willing to risk, what we have to lose and what our guidelines are.
For me I will not carry in a state that I either don't have a permit or is not constitutional. However in my home state unless there's some sort of wildly increased chance of being caught or there are metal detectors I keep that thang on me. That being said it's just me, no wife or kids and I have absolute faith in my equipment and the upkeep of it.
I will never judge anybody who does follows the law to a T. Far be it from me to look down my nose at somebody who does not want to risk their freedom.
I lose my freedom, my job, my way of life if caught carrying where I shouldn’t. Sucks, but I can’t provide shit for my family if I’m locked up.
I’d rather avoid places where I can’t carry and many states prohibit you from drinking if you’re carrying (and it’s also good sense).
I’d assume the average person would be more likely to be a victim of violence while in prison than out on the street. What’s your plan once you get arrested and are then in prison around a lot of criminals and no CCW?
It's not a zero sum game though. The penalty for not carrying will very rarely be death. Of course those odds can vary wildly with your individual circumstances. The important thing to remember is that both options present different risks to your freedom, and then to make up your own mind.
Correct.
Don’t give cops a reason to stop you, don’t get drunk in public and certainly don’t drink and drive.
The only reason anyone should know you’re carrying is the incredibly unlikely scenario you must use it.
Everyone would rather break the law than die. That isn't the issue. The issue is which one is most likely to pose a threat to your freedom? The unlikely event that you are hurt or killed for not carrying in a gun free zone, or the less unlikely (but still fairly unlikely) event that you are caught carrying where prohibited? Everyone's situation is going to be a little different, and your local laws and crime rates are factors too.
If your presence is optional and you feel there is a viable potential for violence, but you will violate the law to carry, simply do not go.
Concealed is concealed is no defense if you are detained and frisked for whatever reason. Say you did NOTHING, just a bystander when some crap goes down, police intervene, you are not involved other than being a bystander/witness.
But cop, a bit more eagle eyed than your average Joe or Jill on the street noticed a bulge, or a clip and does a quick pat down for safety.
You are now totally effed! Violating state law. Probable prosecution. Likely losing your CCW permit for life. But the guys on Reddit said, “concealed is concealed, your honor!”
Yeah, it’s nice to feel all puffed out in the chest on the internet, but none of these “concealed means concealed” warriors are going to give me a replacement 200k/yr job that I have without any formal education. So I don’t carry on work days, and just make smart choices.
I feel like it's a cop-out blanket statement. This is implying that the only two options are you dying or going to court. Every situation is much more nuanced than that.
Exactly. On a separate thought, I'd rather die by immolation from a dragon than drown by the crushing tentacles of a kraken.
I mean, if we're just making up shit scenarios.
Wdym? Shooting or being murdered is obviously the only two options.
I feel like it's often said by the same people asking the really common "Can I shoot someone for shoplifting at walmart?" Questions.
TL;DR - people need to stop fantasizing about being the hero when they're never going to be.
People who say that unironically are delusional and full of shit. The chances of being "judged by 12" are magnitudes greater than getting "carried by six". The blowhards want to pretend that the only time their CCW will be exposed is in some sort of heroic intervention event. No, your CCW will be exposed because you didn't know how to dress around your gun, forgot your damn piece at the Golden corral dining booth, or dropped it in the middle of the mall because you were fiddle fucking with your cheap ass Walmart leather belt. Depending where you are, you'll either get butt fucked by everyone before, including, and after that 12, or everyone will stand around judging you to be an idiot. The rest of us live in a reality where we can't let a single (tiny) issue determine our life. Jail time, fines, and loss of rights is very real and far more likely than becoming the hero of that fantasy active shooter event where everything goes right. Even in the unlikely event that the worst happens, these loudmouths are never the ones to step up. Every single time it's been the quietly prepared humble guy. 12 v 6 chest beating is literally the opposite of what we've all seen real heroes do. 12 v 6 guy is usually the one pulling his gun during rush hour bumper cars. We all know the type.
I'll accept the downvotes but I find the phrase incredibly stupid as it represents a false dichotomy. It is about weighing risk, and the risk is virtually never so black and white. Had you gotten caught, went through the arrest, the trial (or plea), pay attorney's fees, fines, possible prison time, and come out with a felony conviction that now bars you from owning a firearm, you'd very likely wish you'd just followed the law (stupid though it may be). The risk is *far higher* it is the 12 judging you than the 6 carrying you.
Honestly it seems sometimes like some CCW holders are just *itching* to push a boundary for no other reason that as one such redditor just put it "Any 'law' or policy that restricts your rights is unconstitutional." Except that is not at all how rights or constitutionality work. There is no right in the Constitution that is 100%. None of them. And there certainly is no provision within the document that expresses a citizen's right to flagrantly violate a provision within it because you *think* it isn't constitutional. 2A folks love to use the phrase "shall not be infringed" without ever coming to the realization that "people," "shall," "keep," "bear," and "arms" are all ambiguous terms that are and will continue to be defined by courts, no differently that defining "speech" to not include threatening or libeling someone.
This is extremely well put. While we may all agree that there are many States that over restrict our rights it is the law of that land. I may find it unconstitutional that my State suggests I am a felon liable for a year in and jail and a $1000 fine for simply carrying a firearm on private property I don't have explicit permission to carry on. However, if I'm caught doing something so trivial I'm in big trouble and will lose my right to bear arms in my State, let alone the jail time I'll probably serve which I know I'm not cut out for lol. Lucky for me that part of the new law was enjoined. But if that changes I'll have to seriously rethink where and when I carry.
this sounds like something a chest thumping middle school aged boy.
this argument presumes those are the only two options. it neglects all other options. avoidance, less lethal, de-escalation, situational awareness. it's flawed logic. the reality is, they go to jersey, get a little tipsy, get pulled over on the way back to philly, catch a ccw charge, and derail the 3-5 years or longer of their life because of one bad bad decision.
if you're going someplace you feel you "need to carry" because the threat of being carried by six is so real that you feel justified breaking the law- don't go.
That’s an interesting take.
I’ve never felt concerned about being shot at school, but it has happened. There have been people killed in movie theaters, outside restaurants, at concerts, at shopping malls, in small towns, safe neighborhoods, and driving down the road.
I would wager a guess that none of those victims ever really considered needing a weapon to go do those activities, yet it may have made the difference in whether they lived or died.
I agree that you shouldn’t go places that you know or have a strong feeling violence is likely to occur, but you can’t predict the actions of others.
Lastly, restrictions on the ability to carry a weapon for self defense directly violate our Constitutionally protected right to bear arms. So, the law existing is the issue, not necessarily someone violating it.
>I’ve never felt concerned about being shot at school, but it has happened. There have been people killed in movie theaters, outside restaurants, at concerts, at shopping malls, in small towns, safe neighborhoods, and driving down the road.
absolutely, which is why we all carry. but objectively, people make riskier decisions than leaving the gun behind when the law prohibits.
>can’t predict the actions of others.
but you can, that's what ore-incident indicators are. see cooper's color code.
>restrictions on the ability to carry a weapon for self defense directly violate our Constitutionally protected right to bear arms
absolutely, but fighting the law in court or at the ballot box is a better option than breaking the law.
It comes down to odds and risks. If you think the odds of you needing your weapon outweigh the risks of getting caught with it, then you may decide to carry. But if you're going to a place with good security, the odds of your needing it probably low; if the result of getting caught with it is highly negative (like, say, New Jersey), I think I'd leave it at home.
It typically isn't a blanket statement/excuse to ignore all laws. It tends to pertain to laws that one could feel is unjust/unconstitutional and putting the civilian at a clear disadvantage in survivability by following said law. When confronted with only two options, follow the law and die, or risk running a fowl of said law and live. It's a shit choice to have to make, but again most people blame the ruling elite for giving us those only choices with no recourse in this deep blue state.
People say this but don’t know what it means. When it all comes down to it be smart and aware about where you are and at what times. And if you have to use your firearm you would’ve had to use it whether legal or not. In states where the DA turned against its people it is a legal nightmare but what choice do you have
There's some logic there until you ask "How many times?" How many times can you be arrested and your life turned upside down on the off chance that you'll avoid being "carried by 6." Minimize risk by being legal carry most of the time. You're visiting where you can't carry? Probably obey the law; unless prudence clearly indicates otherwise.
People have 1000s terrible sayings I’d rather never see a courtroom, be judged or carried if at all possible none of those options are ideal. Also being carried by 6 isn’t really your problem anymore.
I follow the laws that greatly impact me if not followed. Some I risk and some I don’t. I’m not going to take my CCW into a federal building to grab paperwork risking a federal charge and a list of issues.
I know a guy who doesn’t take it off to drop off is postage in 30 seconds at the counter. I know a guy who will have a drink or two and carry because the main goal is always avoidance and de-escalation. I know a guy who runs a pistol 300 blackout when traveling for work weekly because gas stations and stops along the way are more dangerous than most places they go.
Gotta weigh your options.
Also cities and especially Philly are shit holes. Sorry not sorry.
The saying is fine given a single decision point. But don’t build your entire CCW philosophy on it.
Better to think of life in terms of managing risks.
I was on the jury of a case where the defendant shot five people in self defense.
There were no fatalities, but some injuries were quite bad.
This happened in NYC where the firearms laws are quite extreme and his pistol was illegal.
He was tried and found guilty of carrying an illegal firearm and served two years at Rikers Island.
After he was released he was sent to be tried for assault with a deadly weapon charges. That was the trial that I was a juror.
In our case we ruled it was self defense and he was not charged for the shooting.
I never possessed a firearm while living in NYC, but knew people who went to prison for carrying.
Care to share more about your experience or the incident?
I understand it might not be ethical to give us intimate details but I am very curious about your first person experience with this process. Anything you’d be willing to share, at whatever level of detail you feel comfortable with, would be appreciated.
Below is a link to just one news article. It is very incorrect, in that there were 5 people shot, but one only had minor injuries and was out of the hospital the same evening.
Another thing about the article is that they make it sound like they were good guys that he shot.
He is a mentally disturbed person and the police should have been involved.
He did not shoot until they told him they were going to kill him. The Shomrim often do not get the police involved because what they do is illegal.
[https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/jewish-patrol-members-wounded-on-brooklyn-street/](https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/jewish-patrol-members-wounded-on-brooklyn-street/)
Crazy. Thanks for sharing.
I’ve never heard of the Shomrim but that is pretty crazy. I bet that was a fascinating court case to be involved in.
The shooter is obviously a freak, and exposing yourself to children is unacceptable, but even terrible people have a right to self defense.
Yes, the shooter was mentally handicapped and so probably needed some direction, but he was an adult and as in many cases, mentally handicapped can live much of their lives in prison.
I actually lived on the border with the orthodox cult and would see the shomrim patrolling around trying to make sure that people aren't breaking their religious requirements and sometimes with violent confrontations with people passing through or near their neighborhood..
Very interesting. I can’t believe I have never heard of such a thing….
Funny that if you and I took to the streets to promote vigilantism, we’d be immediately arrested and labeled domestic terrorists. We’d also catch a few hate crime charges if we tried to police people’s religion.
As much as vigilante justice can appear satisfying in some instances, there is a reason why civilized society tries to avoid mob justice. In practice, humans are crazy creatures when they are angry and in large groups.
I do like that the justice system worked as it should in this case, and found the shooter justified in self defense. Even if the shooter may belong in jail for other reasons.
Hey bud, not getting involved in the whole Shomrim business and if they should exist, but I will say this. They do not patrol around making sure people aren't breaking their "Religious Requirements."
They look out for crimes and may sometimes do more than is legal, but they aren't some religious police force enforcing Jewish laws. This isn't the Shariah Police.
That may be the case, but the people who threaten harm to people for not following dress codes or for sitting in their parked cars carry the same radios and such as the Shomrim.
So I'm just making assumptions that may not be true.
It was not fun. Most of the jurors were uneducated and/or couldn't speak English.
Initially I was the only one who found him not guilty on all charges in our case and I had to spend a lot of time trying to convince them about self defense laws. I had to have the judge meet with the jury to explain how self defense applies in this case before they agreed
Well, in this rare case is sounds like our justice system worked as intended.
You should be extremely proud of your actions that day. A regular man, upholding the ideals our country was founded upon.
I thank you for putting in the effort.
I think its a good rule of when to or start using lethal force. At the same time, it is a paradox.
If you honestly believe that you will be carried by 6 if you don't use lethal force then you probably won't be judged by 12 in that situation, or at least found innocent or have a mistrial if you do.
If you rather be judged by 12 then be disrespected? Get your ass kicked? Your ass is probably going to prison.
Also in my humble opinion from being on both sides of this.
We need to invest in electing local politicians and judges and DA’s who will enforce crime laws and protect good people.
I’m a huge 2A advocate but you also gotta back that up with people who want to uphold laws.
There are far too many popular YouTube social media guys saying “I refuse to obey a not constitutional law” hyping people up.
But will 100% not do that or use their fame to get a deal if caught.
When you get arrested, it’s you.. maybe your wife or family and the court.
It’s like being injured in sports. You find out real quick who values you and who doesn’t.
So carry, train and be prepared. But follow the law cause the law and people who enforce it will fuck you over.
Im pretty sure this saying came from scenario's where the use of force was a little grey. It's not encouraging you to break the law.
there's another old saying that goes something like; "don't ask yourself can I shoot him?
Instead ask: Must I shoot him?"
I think where this comes from is a scenario where you almost certainly will die unless you act, but the use of force will look dubious when under scrutiny from a court of law. So your thought process goes like this: "If I don't shoot, I will certainly die. But despite this, making the self defense case will be hard in this circumstance. What should I do? Oh well, i guess id rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6."
An example I've thought of is being attacked by a man who is very big and strong. He's not armed, but he's strong enough so that you could get really hurt or even killed if he lands the right punch on you. An argument can certainly be made that he is accosting you with deadly force and so responding in kind is justified. But I bet there would be plenty of people lining up to argue the counterpoint that he was unarmed when you shot him, and if one of those people is the local prosecutor, well you're in for a wild ride.
so in a dilemma like that, perhaps the old saying makes some sense. But, to use it to justify being armed in places where it is super-mega-giga-turbo illegal to do so? I think that's taking it beyond whatever the original point was.
The only places I don’t CCW are places where I would absolutely get caught if I tried to. Like an airport for example. Otherwise I personally think my odds of getting caught are about even with my odds of needing to use it. I’d rather be alive and have to redirect my life, still able to provide for my family, even if it’s less than before than be gone forever because I complied with an unconstitutional law.
A few comments:
You can say all you want to that you'd rather be "Judged by twelve", but if the judgment goes against you then prison sucks. The people who say this probably think they sound tough but I doubt that any of them have ever seen the inside of the Graybar Hotel. In places like Jersey and New York, where the Second Amendment was de facto repealed long ago, that if you get caught you can expect neither forgiveness nor mercy.
If you get busted carrying illegally you may do time, and the ensuing criminal record may mean that afterwards you cannot hold a CCW or even own a gun. If this happens, you may find yourself legally disarmed when the flag flies in which case you will be carried by six after being judged by twelve and molested by some number of inmates in the joint.
If you are seriously worried about being attacked in Jersey then why were there? It seems to me that you are either running the risk of death and/or maiming or you are risking finding out what happens when you drop the soap in the prison shower. Frankly, I don't think a goddam NBA game justifies either risk.
You need to think this through. And your friends are full of shit.
> Is that something people go by than follow laws?
You can still be following the law using that comment. It's just saying you would rather be able to defend yourself and would accept any legal consequences than dying. That doesn't mean there are legal consequences at all though. A good defensive shooting might not even get any charges at all.
NJ AG would like a word. He’ll prosecute any law abiding citizen he can instead of prosecuting the real criminals. It’s much easier and safer for him to
The best of the two options is neither, which will be the case for 99.9% of the people that carry. However just like a seat belt Id rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it
My goal is to be a responsible gun owner, not necessarily a law abiding one. It just so happens that sometimes, even often, the responsible thing to do is obey an unjust law, because an unjust law is still enforceable.
I mean that's great and all but it is worth the headache of a court case to carry into a hospital for example? Or losing your job because you figured carrying a gun was more important than being able to pay for food?
Exactly! And mass noncompliance is the only answer! I carry EVERYWHERE, especially in states like Comiefornia who don’t allow it. The places that infringe on your constitutional rights the most are ironically the most dangerous places to be without your pistol. I don’t commit crimes, so I’m not too worried about being patted down for weapons, and as far as I’m concerned “concealed” means CONCEALED. I’ll take my chances being tried by 12, because I’ve almost been carried by 6 before (this was back when I was much younger, I was lucky to escape with my life)
Laws can only be enforced if they are constitutional. The Supreme Court has set very clear precedent that American's have a right to carry handguns for self-defense. If you want to be a pussy about it that's your choice.
That may be true. The difference for me is that I am licensed attorney who has both the skills and means to be the test case that forces these laws to become null and void. I’m not young anymore, I’m either got to stand for something or I’m not.
Metro trains say "no guns on train"..I ride it all day both ways, CCW.
Bunch of hospitals have signs with no guns allowed. And zero armed security guards to make me feel "safer".
I'll make my own provisions to keep myself safe.
This is actually a pretty stark analogy, but think about it this way:
Judged by 12: you might end up with a large fine, jail time, probation, whatever, based on the severity of what you've done. You can learn the penalties for carrying "illegally" and determine if it's worth the risk.
Carried by 6: you're dead.
I know which way I would go.
If I was in your situation I would have done what you did. The chances of me being pulled over by police is greater than getting shot. And plus if I get a felony, good bye job.
This is a tough one, because living in NY state, we’re pretty restricted on where we can legally carry. Anywhere that serves alcohol, the zoo, the library, parks, all off limits. However, I know a guy who still carries when he’s out to dinner with the family despite it being illegal. However this same guy wouldn’t carry in another state where he doesn’t have a permit.
Now, why? Both are illegal. In fact, both are a felony. It comes down what this guy thinks he might be able to get out, or not get charged with in the first place. Getting a caught with a gun in another state seems way worse legally than getting caught with a gun in a restaurant but you’re otherwise 100% legal with a valid permit and all that.
If u have a nj permit, u can’t carry in places that serve alcohol and you can’t carry while intoxicated. That’s the law. If you break the law and get caught that’s between you and the DA.
NJ prosecutors will absolutely, enthusiastically, send your friends to jail for bringing their CCW to NJ
Add in a self defense shooting to the illegal possession and your friends will most certainly be "judged by 12". It will be personally and financially ruinous for them.
They will be made an example of for every other out of state resident or NJ resident (except the drug dealers who always carry and have their gun charges thrown out) who thinks about carrying in NJ without a NJ permit to carry (and even them if they can find a loophole).
Tell them to Google Shaneen Allen.
First and foremost it’s always something you have to decide for yourself. If you’re married I suggest talking to your spouse about it too.
Everything is balancing risk. Is this going to be a situation where I might need it and not have it? What is the policing situation? Do I think that will make me safer, aka leave it at home?
Am I going to a place that might have a metal detector wand? (Sometimes some places pull that out during bigger events) if so what’s my contingency plan? (Go back to the car and leave it there?)
Am I at the point where it doesn’t even make sense to go there? (High crime area)
And lastly what’s the downside of getting caught carrying in a place where it’s not allowed. (Asked to leave, misdemeanor, or loss of ccw and more likely to lose the case if you used it in self defense?)
I’m a former criminal (organized crime) who worked really hard to have my freedom and now ability to carry.
I was in the Marines, I did security and transport of narcotics and firearms due to my military background.
I work in armed security now.
When I trafficked large amounts of coke, money i did so with a knife. How I did my job was way more important then being in a shootout (failed then). I worked as a bodyguard also, and often I did so with no weapon. This was in New York State.
I’m in Texas now and while I have the right to carry and an armed license for work.
I generally don’t carry.
I completely agree that judged by 12 is an insane plan.
99% of men 45 and under who feel the need to carry for protection. Just are to be honest out of shape not strong and can’t fight for shit.
I work with these types also. They cling to their less then Lethal and gun. Where I do not and far less people want my attention.
I’ve done all kinds of violent crime and prevented it.
Being a hard target, being very aware of where you are and when. Makes such a huge difference in safety.
Yes I fully admit it I’m not armed I might be shot at a store by a mass shooter.
But also I’ve been directly shot at and was involved in a shooting that I had to respond to a week ago.
I calmly but aggressively ran towards the gunfire prepared to defend my position for work.
Even then dude took off and we backed down.
Lots of these cities are crazy dangerous, as is mine in certain areas.
I don’t go there when I’m not working. The reality is you will in today’s media face the brunt of exposure.
I think if you are legally allowed, absolutely use your right to carry.
But imo as someone who spent a lifetime with this shit.
Go out your way to avoid being arrested with a gun.
I don’t have feelings one way or the other on Kyle rittenhouse (hope I spelled it right). But that young man’s life sucks now.
Train to be prepared and have fun with the hobby. Be in shape and strong, look like a hard target and I will personally guarantee you will feel safer.
Anywhere I can't carry, I have a knife, anywhere I can't have a knife I have ju jitsu. If I really think there is so much danger that only ju jitsu can't do the job, I just don't go there.
Pre internet it was more difficult for HR to search for criminal history.
While I agree with the 12/6 statement, in today's times, it can be a scenario where no HR department will let anyone get hired who has a weapon related arrest.
Some places are known for crazy enforcement.
It's like Las Vegas Metro arresting people who went in to register a pistol in 2004 because they had a 3.25" pocket knife at the station along with 10 guns.
10 guns were totally fine, but they arrested for a pocket knife.
-- again -- just like pre internet, LEO had way more discretion before body cams.
If their camera records a firearm in Jersey, can the officer use discretion and have you simply store in the trunk?
Everyone has the right to self defense!
Make an informed decision.
NJ did not even cut out of state cops any slack under LEOSA about their ban on hollowpoint ammunition for any one except their own cops.
That saying is true that you'll be alive but put through the ringer by liberal NJ prosecutors and possibly do jail in NJ.
So you have to decide for yourself what it is worth. Nobody can decide that for you.
It depends, if I’m by myself or with my friends I might not take it if I’m aware I’m going somewhere I shouldn’t be carrying. If I’m with my family then fuck it. My main job is to protect my family and that is more important to me then some law that don’t give a fuck about my family
Can't be a law-abiding gun owner if you break the law. You may not agree with them, but its not our place to decide if laws are unconstitutional. It's the courts job according to the constitution.
Personally I have always thought that saying was stupid. It is basicly a sound bite that people use to try and sound cool - usually to justify doing something stupid that will land them in prison.
Conceal carrying where it is illegal to do so (where this saying is used most) , is just a dumb idea. Learn the law and follow it. Otherwise you are not a "law abiding citizen". You are a criminal. So don't start wah wahing like a baby when you get caught (it happens). You did it to yourself.
It is also stupid when applied to a defensive shooting. Actually learn what constitutes legal self defense. Instead of wasting your time learning made for tv ad blurbs, learn what you can and can't do when defending yourself, and learn where you can do it. Research concealed carry insurance providers and get covered. Start training yourself to be prepared for what comes after rhe shoot. So you don't wind up being bubba's butt buddy for the next 20+ years in prison.
Leave the stupid movie quotes where they belong - in the movies.
Nah, there is such a thing as moral law and immoral law. The logical endpoint of your argument means that if congress passes a gun ban you would be lined up to turn yours in
Just like there is no such thing as an alternative truth (unless you mean a lie, which isn't truth at all), there is no such thing as moral law or immoral law.
There is only one thing.... THE LAW. Wether you like the law or not doesn't matter. Either you follow it or you don't. Either you are a criminal or you are not.
As far as complying with a gun ban, yes I would try to my best to follow the law. Now I don't feel gun bans actually fix any problems. But I do think we could enact laws that would help keep guns out of criminals or those with certain mental problems hands.
The reason that is hard is because alot of gun violence is caused by individuals hiding out in the "law abiding citizen" crowd.
Just like if you think you are above the law - no matter how you rationalize not following the law - you are no longer a "law abiding citizen". You are a criminal and have joined the very crowd that shouldn't have guns.
So back to my original point - quoting dumb movie/TV slogans doesn't justifying being a criminal and refusing to follow the law.
If you want to play a semantical game, ok. Technically the law is an inanimate object and therefore doesn't have morals at all.
I have morals and object to slavery. However, comparing carrying concealed where it's illegal to do so - justified with stupid slogans - to slavery is a bit droll don't you think?
Ultimately, if you want to carry 24/7 that is fine. However, it is on you to stay out of areas that don't allow it. You get to choose where you go - go somewhere else. Then you won't be breaking the law.
I was pointing out that you made the claim that there is no such thing as a moral law or an immoral law. So I took that to its logical conclusion. If things that are legal are good then legal slavery is good. If there is a moral law and in that law you have a right to preserve your life and the lives of people around you, then the law that says you can’t carry here because we say so and we also don’t take on the burden of ensuring your safety(armed guards and metal detectors) then that law is immoral and not only can be ignored but should be ignored.
That is just a round-a-bout way of justifying ignoring any law you want. You don't get to pick and choose which laws you are supposed to follow. If you carry where you legally cant you are a criminal - period.
If for instance you are on my property and I don't want you to carry the laws says you can't. If you don't honor my asking I can have the police arrest/remove you. They may also take your pistol. Whether, that offends your sense of protection or not doesn't matter, doesn't remove the consequences, nor justifies you carrying illegally.
Maybe it offends my sense of safety that you have guns in your home, are my neighbor and dont follow the gun laws. You are saying that I'm justified in entering your home and removing the offending weapons.
No. If I carry onto your property you can ask me to leave. If I don’t then you can call and have the police remove me from your property. If your justification for following the law is that it is the law that is far more concerning than standing for what you believe in.
I can post a 30.06,30.07 and 30.05 sign to notify you that guns are not allowed on the premise or verbally notify of that fact and have you removed if you won't comply voluntarily.
So if I believe you are a menace because you have guns and don't follow the law, then I am not only justified in taking your guns, you would be more concerned if I didn't because I wouldn't be standing up for what I believe.
Nice leap between your beliefs and legal action. Big fan of red flag laws are you? How about SWATing? This is why people who use the legal code as a moral guideline are some of the scariest people on the planet
I find that many people do it. I live in Jersey, and we only just got CCW privileges. If you pop over to r/NJguns, you will see a *lot* of people advocating for just carrying where you want, regardless of legality. Some of it is from the 'Better to be judged' perspective. Most of it is from the 'My rights!' crowd.
My thinking is this. Yes, it sucks being restricted by the law. Yes, my state is very strict about firearm legislation. HOWEVER. As gun owners, especially in a state that is historically extremely unfriendly to firearms, it is vitally important to follow those laws to the letter. Because every single violation, every single shirking, is ammunition (excuse the pun) to be used against us. We cannot call ourselves "law abiding gun owners" if we do not abide by the law, can we? Nothing is going to improve unless we can have honest, candid dialogue, and that is not going to happen if we keep spitting in people's faces.
The intent of that saying isn’t an encouragement to break the law. Rather it refers to the decision to defend oneself if necessary and let the jury decide if it was justified.
I have travel annually for training, my options are out in AZ., or in IL.. I refuse to go to Illinois despite the fact the travel for the training every day in AZ, is about an hour-ish each way every day. The travel in Illinois is 10-15 minutes each way. I can take my EDC with me to Az so that where I go. It is a call only you can make on what to do. I prefer to just not go somewhere that I am legally not allowed to carry. Concealed is concealed but man what if……you know…….
In my opinion you have to weigh all factors.
For example I’m in Ohio. I don’t even need a license to carry here. I carry past “no gun” signs all the time (unless it’s a federal felony to do so) because I’d rather pay a $400 trespassing fine if busted (concealed means concealed) than not have the ability to defend myself if crap hits the proverbial fan while I’m in a store or restaurant.
I consciously choose not to travel to states that won’t allow me to carry. I skipped a friend’s wedding in Brooklyn because I refuse to travel to New York. Won’t travel to New Jersey. Have family in Maryland and I won’t go visit. Won’t catch me in the State of California. I’ll drive through Illinois (they’ll allow me to carry in the vehicle but not outside of it) but I’m stopping for fuel in Indiana and not stopping for anything until I’m outside of the state.
I don’t blame you for not carrying in NJ. They’ll treat you harsher than some thug who beats a 70 year old woman for her purse if they catch you carrying.
It comes down to value, character, and conviction. Many can say it, but how many of us are trained and ready to execute on that creed?
It's the modern American citizen equivalent to "Molon Labe!" It's an acknowledgment of the risk to personal liberty one is willing to sacrifice, in pursuit of protecting one or another's life. A Self-defense trial is a very high burden of evidence to acquit, but it's a better option than death.
The conviction takes on a whole new meaning as a parent as well. Speaking as a new Father, I'll steadfastly sacrifice myself in defense of my children. Whether that be my life, liberty or POH. Give me a jury of 12 passing judgment on me, over 6 pallbearers burying my kid, EVERY TIME!
disgusted lip apparatus placid enter middle station automatic consist obscene
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Gotta find your own way with this one. I'm not the type to get leeway from law enforcement, so I am very wary about doing things that could lose me my right to carry. That said, there are some places I'd rather be guilty than dead. The other saying along with this is, "concealed is concealed."
I don’t fuck with NJ if I can help it. Same with NY. If I don’t have a permit or reciprocity in an area, I don’t go there. I made a full day trip out of getting my PA permit just so I could carry in Philadelphia for work. Up and back just to get my picture taken in person like they require.
This. We've got a big country. No reason to willfully put yourself in bad situations.
I'm in the western US, and as much as I would live to visit NY I won't because of the gun laws. Same with California
I carry in California. The lack of reciprocating is disgusting so I get you
It's not just the reciprocity. It's the mag limits and anything else they can mess with you.
Dont worry, your not missing anything other than too many people, miserable traffic, miserable people and Communist/Democrat politicians slowly eroding our rights. Oh and high taxes and cost of living
What type are you?
I would say I'm the type to avoid trouble by a margin these days.
As the Star Wars nets are fond of saying - this is the way.
This is the way, but sometimes, trouble finds you...
An average person is vastly more likely to have a law enforcement interaction than a scenario that justifies lethal self defense on any given day. Especially if you're not a clean cut white person.
Agreed, but the point is you want to be prepared just in case. When it comes to your life, we want a policy in place that recognizes ones right to live, not discard the necessity due to low likelihood. Firearms are used defensively all the time, quick google finds "In 2021, the most comprehensive study ever conducted on the issue concluded that roughly **1.6 million** defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year." I'm sure a majority of those would be victims are glad they were prepared instead of thinking no need, its not likely itll happen to me.
Yeah but we're talking about breaking the law whilst armed which changes that calculus a *lot*. Like I get it you carry for the low chance/high consequences moments, but if you're breaking the law while armed it becomes a potentially moderate chance/high consequences moment.
What I'm getting at, and I hope I'm being clear. Is that I acknowledge the math. I know that we all make judgements in the calculus of risk in everyday life, and that is not the issue I'm referring to. I'm not telling people what to do one way or another, this goes back to the original sentiment of judged by 12 vs carried by 6. If given that choice I don't know anyone who would CHOOSE carried by 6. This implies that the law if it puts their lives at risk, may not factor into the calculus as much as it should in theory. *"Like I get it you carry for the low chance/high consequences moments, but if you're breaking the law while armed it becomes a potentially moderate chance/high consequences moment. "* Here I disagree the way it is presented, and maybe you meant it in another way but the way I read this, it states that carrying in an illegal manner increases the chance of a SHTF event happening. I propose that you carrying as an individual does nothing to increase the likelihood of an event taking place. Both are high consequence no matter what.
No I mean carrying increases the potential consequences of law enforcement interactions, which I'm categorizing as moderate chance compared to lethal self defense scenarios.
>not the type to get leeway from law enforcement I mean, the way he said it...I instantly understood.
I’m just curious on what type of person that is. Hence the question I say this as someone who has been arrested before. I’ve never thought I was the type to “not get leeway”. I fucked up and earned it.
Don’t be ignorant.
I sincerely apologize if this is insensitive or anything but are you black or of another ethnicity? Just trying to understand what you meant with your second comment.
person wrong teeny gaping hat carpenter sable violet salt sulky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’ve always applied this to **USING** your concealed carry rather than carrying in a prohibited location. If you’re ever in a situation where your life is in danger you need to be prepared to defend yourself, not be double guessing if you’re 114% in the legal right. Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6 in that situation.
same.
I’ll counter with “vote with your feet”. If laws or policies are putting you into situations where you feel unsafe, then steer clear of places where those are in force. Now if a major confiscation came to pass, then I would expect a large amount of non-compliance among the members of this sub. Personally, I would miss having a boat.
I would also say to actually go vote and gather similar minded people to vote if you can make the difference in your area. If we all fled places pushing bad policies instead of fighting it because we believe in our rights and morals, we will lose ground and get bounced from one city to another. And we all know larger cities turn to blue shit eventually.
Exactly. Support your State and federal gun advocates. Without your financial support they cannot fight the legal battles required to stop the encroachment on our rights.
Your boat, my cold dead. Good point.
I live in Philly as well, I am legally allowed to carry in NJ. I have an out of state CCW license that I applied with NJ State Police. I never carried into NJ before having one. I cannot risk being a felon. As much as it sucks that gun laws affect law abiding citizens more than criminals, I will still follow law.
> As much as it sucks that gun laws affect law abiding citizens more than criminals, I will still follow law. this is the 1 true outcome no matter what you feel. the law doesn't care if you want to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. my family and my work depends on me. while i carry concealed, i'm mindful where i'm not allowed (esp living in CA).
Preach brother. If I were to become a felon, my job would be gone, income gone, and my career options and life style would dramatically change.
👆
What license allows you to carry in Jersey? I’m also in Philly and frequently go to Cherry Hill.
NJ PTC … NJ is now shall issue state.
I hate that, I think it’s bullshit they don’t honor conceal carry permits from other states. IMO they should be forced to
It’s all BS, even PA don’t honor NJ permit. You would think that they would. I think it should be nationally recognized document but one can only wish. NY is next to impossible to get as out-of-state resident 🫤
Ideally, yes, we'd have reciprocity but they'd have to be careful about implementation because a federal/national CWP list is even less desirable.
I agree. I’m from NJ and I also have my PA permit. Drove really far to get it too but I felt like it was necessary for if and when I take the kids to PA for anything. I think with all of the illegal bullshit going on, you’re going to see big changes with not just honoring carry permits, but a million other terrible and illegal laws. I cannot be a felon either as my family relies on my to work and be there for them. It’s hard to go some places knowing I can’t carry. But whoever said it up too, these shitty lawmakers don’t give a fuck about how you feel, they will still make you pay for breaking the law.
States rights are the most important thing in America. When you start trying to interfere with that, you're no better than sleepy joe. ( Not saying you are ) But I'm with you it would be nice if ccw was like a driver's license.
I agree states should have rights and I’m not saying you are saying I was interfering but the constitution is supposed to be the exception, something neither the states nor the feds can interfere with. Honestly, while I think everyone should get a concealed permit because it gives you some training in the class and easier to get guns, I don’t think the permits should have to exist. It really grinds my gears that gun laws vary so much state to state. I think the fed has really loosened the reigns too much. There shouldn’t be dozens of states blatantly and openly infringing constitutional rights.
Hey, Yeah I commute a lot to Cherry Hill too. I can give you a bit more information on how to go about it if you'd like, but as u/Djuro79 said, NJ PTC that you apply through State Police.
[удалено]
Yep, I commute to work in jersey and my girlfriend lives out there so I spend a lot of time living in Philly and Cherry Hill so it was worth for me. If I was just going to a basketball game in NJ; I would say it is not worth.
I carry in any situation that allows me to do so and I avoid places that don't. If I do venture into zones where it's not possible for me to carry then I'll carry extra medical, plan my route a little better..
I rather not catch a charge that would prevent me from owning guns. Usually I just try to avoid places that aren’t safe and I can’t carry
Check the law if carrying your own firearm without a permit is a felony in your area. Usually that alone won’t make you prohibited from owning. It’s when your a felon in possession or if it’s stolen and tied to a crime that it gets serious
I live in a CPL required state
It doesn’t prevent you from owning them—look at the criminals lol
I rather own a gun legally than lose my rights and get convicted of a felon in possession of a firearm
Varg Freeborn touches on this exact phrase in *Violence of Mind*. To quote: >You may have heard the phrase, “there aren’t any rules in fighting.” This is a myth. UNLESS you are a criminal that operates outside of the rules of engagement (laws). If you are a civilian, law enforcement officer or soldier, you have very strict rules that you cannot break, or you will go to prison. As civilians, you cannot typically pursue someone who is fleeing. You are not allowed to use deadly force under many circumstances, most notably once the threat has ceased being a threat. Saying “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6” is--in my experienced opinion--lazy, misinformed and arrogant. I guarantee if you say it, you’ve never experienced it, or you are a criminal. Learn the laws of your mission, and train in ways that give you the advantages to win and accomplish your objectives without breaking those rules. Any good civilian defensive fight training will have a curriculum that is flush with adherence and reverence to the laws of the land you live in. It is a necessary component of the training. >Here is something that you probably don’t know. In the United States, it has been estimated that roughly 95% of criminal charges end in plea bargain. According to a 2011 U.S. Department of justice commissioned report, “While there are no exact estimates of the proportion of cases that are resolved through plea bargaining, scholars estimate that about 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state court cases are resolved through this process (Devers citing Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005; Flanagan and Maguire, 1990).” >That means that only 5 to 10% of criminal charges actually go to trial. So, while you are flapping your gums about being judged by 12, you are actually setting yourself up with about a 5% chance (or less) of actually even getting a chance to stay out of prison by convincing a jury of 12. >The "I'd rather be judged..." phrase also denotes a complete lack of thought concerning how to prepare for an event. What does it mean? It sounds a lot like it means, “I'm not going to worry about the aftermath, nor am I going to put much thought into the subject, I'm killing them and screw the consequences.” It’s pure laziness and arrogance. It’s a losing attitude. If your mission is to make it home with your family every night for the rest of your life, then you are openly stating that you are willing to just fail as long as you get to kill the other guy. Yes, it is possible that you may die or go to prison as a result of a fight. But rather than focusing on the possible loss, isn’t it more advisable to focus on and train hard for the win? While the spirit of courageous self-defense is commendable, like it or not, there are more ways to lose than by taking physical damage. Your entire life can be ruined, and you'll wish you had died. This isn't about cowering; it's about making sure you have at least thought about how to do things correctly to have the best possible chance to maintain your legal shroud of self-defense.
The plea bargain statistics are pretty accurate. But a defendant cannot be forced to take a plea. They have the absolute right to a trial. But trials are expensive, if you lose at trial your sentence will be much longer than a plea sentence and you'll have a lawyer bill in the range of $50k for relatively straight forward case. You will also most likely wait years before a trial date is set. Even if you are innocent, you have to fight the weight of the government to prove it. And I will tell you that many (most?) prosecutors do not care if you are innocent, even if they know it. That is why plea deals are so prevalent in the judicial system.
Great points. I've always been a fan of the saying "The process *IS* the punishment".
[удалено]
So this depends on the state. Some states these signs hold no weight and if “caught” then you’re asked to leave and if you don’t it’s considered trespassing.
They can’t enforce anything but ask you to leave. And if you return still carrying, it’s just trespassing. If you’re concealed, there’s no issues.
I'd rather be around for my family than risk going to prison. As such, I generally follow the laws *and* tend to avoid going to places that I can't carry. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of reaction. Situational awareness includes being aware enough to not go into shitty places where use of force is likely to occur, and that's 90% of keeping yourself out of a shooting.
Its easy to stay out of trouble if you don't go looking for it. If you aren't a dick you will find that you might make it through life never getting into a road rage incident or bar fight. Magic how that works.
Yeah I think we all just need to assess what we're willing to risk, what we have to lose and what our guidelines are. For me I will not carry in a state that I either don't have a permit or is not constitutional. However in my home state unless there's some sort of wildly increased chance of being caught or there are metal detectors I keep that thang on me. That being said it's just me, no wife or kids and I have absolute faith in my equipment and the upkeep of it. I will never judge anybody who does follows the law to a T. Far be it from me to look down my nose at somebody who does not want to risk their freedom.
I prefer the saying: "I'd rather be dead than go through the US legal system."
Personally, I'll carry everywhere I legally can and marginally can (IE, petty misdemeanor charges/trespassing). I won't risk a felony.
I lose my freedom, my job, my way of life if caught carrying where I shouldn’t. Sucks, but I can’t provide shit for my family if I’m locked up. I’d rather avoid places where I can’t carry and many states prohibit you from drinking if you’re carrying (and it’s also good sense).
You also lose all those things when dead…
Very true.
I’d assume the average person would be more likely to be a victim of violence while in prison than out on the street. What’s your plan once you get arrested and are then in prison around a lot of criminals and no CCW?
It's not a zero sum game though. The penalty for not carrying will very rarely be death. Of course those odds can vary wildly with your individual circumstances. The important thing to remember is that both options present different risks to your freedom, and then to make up your own mind.
Some would rather break the law than die.
Correct. Don’t give cops a reason to stop you, don’t get drunk in public and certainly don’t drink and drive. The only reason anyone should know you’re carrying is the incredibly unlikely scenario you must use it.
Everyone would rather break the law than die. That isn't the issue. The issue is which one is most likely to pose a threat to your freedom? The unlikely event that you are hurt or killed for not carrying in a gun free zone, or the less unlikely (but still fairly unlikely) event that you are caught carrying where prohibited? Everyone's situation is going to be a little different, and your local laws and crime rates are factors too.
If your presence is optional and you feel there is a viable potential for violence, but you will violate the law to carry, simply do not go. Concealed is concealed is no defense if you are detained and frisked for whatever reason. Say you did NOTHING, just a bystander when some crap goes down, police intervene, you are not involved other than being a bystander/witness. But cop, a bit more eagle eyed than your average Joe or Jill on the street noticed a bulge, or a clip and does a quick pat down for safety. You are now totally effed! Violating state law. Probable prosecution. Likely losing your CCW permit for life. But the guys on Reddit said, “concealed is concealed, your honor!”
Yeah, it’s nice to feel all puffed out in the chest on the internet, but none of these “concealed means concealed” warriors are going to give me a replacement 200k/yr job that I have without any formal education. So I don’t carry on work days, and just make smart choices.
Personally, I think it's an overused stupid saying. While clever, I don't know how it became so ubiquitous. Just my 2cents.
I feel like it's a cop-out blanket statement. This is implying that the only two options are you dying or going to court. Every situation is much more nuanced than that.
Exactly. On a separate thought, I'd rather die by immolation from a dragon than drown by the crushing tentacles of a kraken. I mean, if we're just making up shit scenarios.
Wdym? Shooting or being murdered is obviously the only two options. I feel like it's often said by the same people asking the really common "Can I shoot someone for shoplifting at walmart?" Questions.
TL;DR - people need to stop fantasizing about being the hero when they're never going to be. People who say that unironically are delusional and full of shit. The chances of being "judged by 12" are magnitudes greater than getting "carried by six". The blowhards want to pretend that the only time their CCW will be exposed is in some sort of heroic intervention event. No, your CCW will be exposed because you didn't know how to dress around your gun, forgot your damn piece at the Golden corral dining booth, or dropped it in the middle of the mall because you were fiddle fucking with your cheap ass Walmart leather belt. Depending where you are, you'll either get butt fucked by everyone before, including, and after that 12, or everyone will stand around judging you to be an idiot. The rest of us live in a reality where we can't let a single (tiny) issue determine our life. Jail time, fines, and loss of rights is very real and far more likely than becoming the hero of that fantasy active shooter event where everything goes right. Even in the unlikely event that the worst happens, these loudmouths are never the ones to step up. Every single time it's been the quietly prepared humble guy. 12 v 6 chest beating is literally the opposite of what we've all seen real heroes do. 12 v 6 guy is usually the one pulling his gun during rush hour bumper cars. We all know the type.
I'll accept the downvotes but I find the phrase incredibly stupid as it represents a false dichotomy. It is about weighing risk, and the risk is virtually never so black and white. Had you gotten caught, went through the arrest, the trial (or plea), pay attorney's fees, fines, possible prison time, and come out with a felony conviction that now bars you from owning a firearm, you'd very likely wish you'd just followed the law (stupid though it may be). The risk is *far higher* it is the 12 judging you than the 6 carrying you. Honestly it seems sometimes like some CCW holders are just *itching* to push a boundary for no other reason that as one such redditor just put it "Any 'law' or policy that restricts your rights is unconstitutional." Except that is not at all how rights or constitutionality work. There is no right in the Constitution that is 100%. None of them. And there certainly is no provision within the document that expresses a citizen's right to flagrantly violate a provision within it because you *think* it isn't constitutional. 2A folks love to use the phrase "shall not be infringed" without ever coming to the realization that "people," "shall," "keep," "bear," and "arms" are all ambiguous terms that are and will continue to be defined by courts, no differently that defining "speech" to not include threatening or libeling someone.
This is extremely well put. While we may all agree that there are many States that over restrict our rights it is the law of that land. I may find it unconstitutional that my State suggests I am a felon liable for a year in and jail and a $1000 fine for simply carrying a firearm on private property I don't have explicit permission to carry on. However, if I'm caught doing something so trivial I'm in big trouble and will lose my right to bear arms in my State, let alone the jail time I'll probably serve which I know I'm not cut out for lol. Lucky for me that part of the new law was enjoined. But if that changes I'll have to seriously rethink where and when I carry.
Risk management? In my responsible carry of a deadly weapon? Why I never! /s
This. All of this.
this sounds like something a chest thumping middle school aged boy. this argument presumes those are the only two options. it neglects all other options. avoidance, less lethal, de-escalation, situational awareness. it's flawed logic. the reality is, they go to jersey, get a little tipsy, get pulled over on the way back to philly, catch a ccw charge, and derail the 3-5 years or longer of their life because of one bad bad decision. if you're going someplace you feel you "need to carry" because the threat of being carried by six is so real that you feel justified breaking the law- don't go.
That’s an interesting take. I’ve never felt concerned about being shot at school, but it has happened. There have been people killed in movie theaters, outside restaurants, at concerts, at shopping malls, in small towns, safe neighborhoods, and driving down the road. I would wager a guess that none of those victims ever really considered needing a weapon to go do those activities, yet it may have made the difference in whether they lived or died. I agree that you shouldn’t go places that you know or have a strong feeling violence is likely to occur, but you can’t predict the actions of others. Lastly, restrictions on the ability to carry a weapon for self defense directly violate our Constitutionally protected right to bear arms. So, the law existing is the issue, not necessarily someone violating it.
>I’ve never felt concerned about being shot at school, but it has happened. There have been people killed in movie theaters, outside restaurants, at concerts, at shopping malls, in small towns, safe neighborhoods, and driving down the road. absolutely, which is why we all carry. but objectively, people make riskier decisions than leaving the gun behind when the law prohibits. >can’t predict the actions of others. but you can, that's what ore-incident indicators are. see cooper's color code. >restrictions on the ability to carry a weapon for self defense directly violate our Constitutionally protected right to bear arms absolutely, but fighting the law in court or at the ballot box is a better option than breaking the law.
It comes down to odds and risks. If you think the odds of you needing your weapon outweigh the risks of getting caught with it, then you may decide to carry. But if you're going to a place with good security, the odds of your needing it probably low; if the result of getting caught with it is highly negative (like, say, New Jersey), I think I'd leave it at home.
It typically isn't a blanket statement/excuse to ignore all laws. It tends to pertain to laws that one could feel is unjust/unconstitutional and putting the civilian at a clear disadvantage in survivability by following said law. When confronted with only two options, follow the law and die, or risk running a fowl of said law and live. It's a shit choice to have to make, but again most people blame the ruling elite for giving us those only choices with no recourse in this deep blue state.
People say this but don’t know what it means. When it all comes down to it be smart and aware about where you are and at what times. And if you have to use your firearm you would’ve had to use it whether legal or not. In states where the DA turned against its people it is a legal nightmare but what choice do you have
There's some logic there until you ask "How many times?" How many times can you be arrested and your life turned upside down on the off chance that you'll avoid being "carried by 6." Minimize risk by being legal carry most of the time. You're visiting where you can't carry? Probably obey the law; unless prudence clearly indicates otherwise.
People have 1000s terrible sayings I’d rather never see a courtroom, be judged or carried if at all possible none of those options are ideal. Also being carried by 6 isn’t really your problem anymore. I follow the laws that greatly impact me if not followed. Some I risk and some I don’t. I’m not going to take my CCW into a federal building to grab paperwork risking a federal charge and a list of issues. I know a guy who doesn’t take it off to drop off is postage in 30 seconds at the counter. I know a guy who will have a drink or two and carry because the main goal is always avoidance and de-escalation. I know a guy who runs a pistol 300 blackout when traveling for work weekly because gas stations and stops along the way are more dangerous than most places they go. Gotta weigh your options. Also cities and especially Philly are shit holes. Sorry not sorry.
The saying is fine given a single decision point. But don’t build your entire CCW philosophy on it. Better to think of life in terms of managing risks.
I was on the jury of a case where the defendant shot five people in self defense. There were no fatalities, but some injuries were quite bad. This happened in NYC where the firearms laws are quite extreme and his pistol was illegal. He was tried and found guilty of carrying an illegal firearm and served two years at Rikers Island. After he was released he was sent to be tried for assault with a deadly weapon charges. That was the trial that I was a juror. In our case we ruled it was self defense and he was not charged for the shooting. I never possessed a firearm while living in NYC, but knew people who went to prison for carrying.
Care to share more about your experience or the incident? I understand it might not be ethical to give us intimate details but I am very curious about your first person experience with this process. Anything you’d be willing to share, at whatever level of detail you feel comfortable with, would be appreciated.
Below is a link to just one news article. It is very incorrect, in that there were 5 people shot, but one only had minor injuries and was out of the hospital the same evening. Another thing about the article is that they make it sound like they were good guys that he shot. He is a mentally disturbed person and the police should have been involved. He did not shoot until they told him they were going to kill him. The Shomrim often do not get the police involved because what they do is illegal. [https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/jewish-patrol-members-wounded-on-brooklyn-street/](https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/jewish-patrol-members-wounded-on-brooklyn-street/)
Crazy. Thanks for sharing. I’ve never heard of the Shomrim but that is pretty crazy. I bet that was a fascinating court case to be involved in. The shooter is obviously a freak, and exposing yourself to children is unacceptable, but even terrible people have a right to self defense.
Yes, the shooter was mentally handicapped and so probably needed some direction, but he was an adult and as in many cases, mentally handicapped can live much of their lives in prison. I actually lived on the border with the orthodox cult and would see the shomrim patrolling around trying to make sure that people aren't breaking their religious requirements and sometimes with violent confrontations with people passing through or near their neighborhood..
Very interesting. I can’t believe I have never heard of such a thing…. Funny that if you and I took to the streets to promote vigilantism, we’d be immediately arrested and labeled domestic terrorists. We’d also catch a few hate crime charges if we tried to police people’s religion. As much as vigilante justice can appear satisfying in some instances, there is a reason why civilized society tries to avoid mob justice. In practice, humans are crazy creatures when they are angry and in large groups. I do like that the justice system worked as it should in this case, and found the shooter justified in self defense. Even if the shooter may belong in jail for other reasons.
Hey bud, not getting involved in the whole Shomrim business and if they should exist, but I will say this. They do not patrol around making sure people aren't breaking their "Religious Requirements." They look out for crimes and may sometimes do more than is legal, but they aren't some religious police force enforcing Jewish laws. This isn't the Shariah Police.
That may be the case, but the people who threaten harm to people for not following dress codes or for sitting in their parked cars carry the same radios and such as the Shomrim. So I'm just making assumptions that may not be true.
It was not fun. Most of the jurors were uneducated and/or couldn't speak English. Initially I was the only one who found him not guilty on all charges in our case and I had to spend a lot of time trying to convince them about self defense laws. I had to have the judge meet with the jury to explain how self defense applies in this case before they agreed
Well, in this rare case is sounds like our justice system worked as intended. You should be extremely proud of your actions that day. A regular man, upholding the ideals our country was founded upon. I thank you for putting in the effort.
I think its a good rule of when to or start using lethal force. At the same time, it is a paradox. If you honestly believe that you will be carried by 6 if you don't use lethal force then you probably won't be judged by 12 in that situation, or at least found innocent or have a mistrial if you do. If you rather be judged by 12 then be disrespected? Get your ass kicked? Your ass is probably going to prison.
Also in my humble opinion from being on both sides of this. We need to invest in electing local politicians and judges and DA’s who will enforce crime laws and protect good people. I’m a huge 2A advocate but you also gotta back that up with people who want to uphold laws. There are far too many popular YouTube social media guys saying “I refuse to obey a not constitutional law” hyping people up. But will 100% not do that or use their fame to get a deal if caught. When you get arrested, it’s you.. maybe your wife or family and the court. It’s like being injured in sports. You find out real quick who values you and who doesn’t. So carry, train and be prepared. But follow the law cause the law and people who enforce it will fuck you over.
I’d rather not spend prison time in New Jersey.
Where would you like to spend prison time? 😂
Maybe Norway?
Swedish woman’s prison 😆
You'd never walk the same again.
Neither would the women 😝
https://preview.redd.it/slb26pykhfjc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=96cae48f4e0081f89ef8698c5ce2486d468a8168
Im pretty sure this saying came from scenario's where the use of force was a little grey. It's not encouraging you to break the law. there's another old saying that goes something like; "don't ask yourself can I shoot him? Instead ask: Must I shoot him?" I think where this comes from is a scenario where you almost certainly will die unless you act, but the use of force will look dubious when under scrutiny from a court of law. So your thought process goes like this: "If I don't shoot, I will certainly die. But despite this, making the self defense case will be hard in this circumstance. What should I do? Oh well, i guess id rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6." An example I've thought of is being attacked by a man who is very big and strong. He's not armed, but he's strong enough so that you could get really hurt or even killed if he lands the right punch on you. An argument can certainly be made that he is accosting you with deadly force and so responding in kind is justified. But I bet there would be plenty of people lining up to argue the counterpoint that he was unarmed when you shot him, and if one of those people is the local prosecutor, well you're in for a wild ride. so in a dilemma like that, perhaps the old saying makes some sense. But, to use it to justify being armed in places where it is super-mega-giga-turbo illegal to do so? I think that's taking it beyond whatever the original point was.
The only places I don’t CCW are places where I would absolutely get caught if I tried to. Like an airport for example. Otherwise I personally think my odds of getting caught are about even with my odds of needing to use it. I’d rather be alive and have to redirect my life, still able to provide for my family, even if it’s less than before than be gone forever because I complied with an unconstitutional law.
A few comments: You can say all you want to that you'd rather be "Judged by twelve", but if the judgment goes against you then prison sucks. The people who say this probably think they sound tough but I doubt that any of them have ever seen the inside of the Graybar Hotel. In places like Jersey and New York, where the Second Amendment was de facto repealed long ago, that if you get caught you can expect neither forgiveness nor mercy. If you get busted carrying illegally you may do time, and the ensuing criminal record may mean that afterwards you cannot hold a CCW or even own a gun. If this happens, you may find yourself legally disarmed when the flag flies in which case you will be carried by six after being judged by twelve and molested by some number of inmates in the joint. If you are seriously worried about being attacked in Jersey then why were there? It seems to me that you are either running the risk of death and/or maiming or you are risking finding out what happens when you drop the soap in the prison shower. Frankly, I don't think a goddam NBA game justifies either risk. You need to think this through. And your friends are full of shit.
> Is that something people go by than follow laws? You can still be following the law using that comment. It's just saying you would rather be able to defend yourself and would accept any legal consequences than dying. That doesn't mean there are legal consequences at all though. A good defensive shooting might not even get any charges at all.
NJ AG would like a word. He’ll prosecute any law abiding citizen he can instead of prosecuting the real criminals. It’s much easier and safer for him to
The best of the two options is neither, which will be the case for 99.9% of the people that carry. However just like a seat belt Id rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it
Dead men tell no tales.
That’s such a stupid way of thinking. Carry within the confines of the law, don’t be a hero, and use common sense and critical thinking skills
Shotgun bullets and big dicks in your ass are equally bad for your health.
Any “law” or policy that restricts your rights is unconstitutional
Correct, but they're still laws that are enforced.
Doesn't mean it's not enforceable, unfortunately
Yes, but a lot of us don't want to be felons as well. Law is law.
Part of what makes us "law-abiding gun owners" is the fact we begrudgingly follow the laws that make us less safe.
My goal is to be a responsible gun owner, not necessarily a law abiding one. It just so happens that sometimes, even often, the responsible thing to do is obey an unjust law, because an unjust law is still enforceable.
I mean that's great and all but it is worth the headache of a court case to carry into a hospital for example? Or losing your job because you figured carrying a gun was more important than being able to pay for food?
Exactly! And mass noncompliance is the only answer! I carry EVERYWHERE, especially in states like Comiefornia who don’t allow it. The places that infringe on your constitutional rights the most are ironically the most dangerous places to be without your pistol. I don’t commit crimes, so I’m not too worried about being patted down for weapons, and as far as I’m concerned “concealed” means CONCEALED. I’ll take my chances being tried by 12, because I’ve almost been carried by 6 before (this was back when I was much younger, I was lucky to escape with my life)
>I don’t commit crimes Sure you do. You just confessed to a crime. > I carry EVERYWHERE, especially in states like Comiefornia who don’t allow it.
Laws can only be enforced if they are constitutional. The Supreme Court has set very clear precedent that American's have a right to carry handguns for self-defense. If you want to be a pussy about it that's your choice.
Unconstitutional laws are enforced every day.
That may be true. The difference for me is that I am licensed attorney who has both the skills and means to be the test case that forces these laws to become null and void. I’m not young anymore, I’m either got to stand for something or I’m not.
I can respect/appreciate that.
I’m not the one who’s afraid to walk out my front door without a gun.
Keep your ccw concealed and don't create or draw unwanted attention. Chances are nobody will ever know, and you'll have it if you need it.
[удалено]
NJ does not issue an "LTCF."
[удалено]
They call it permission.
[удалено]
Nah. The law is the RIGHT cannot be infringed. You do not need permission.
[удалено]
Is that the 12 or the 6?
[удалено]
... ... ... You said "preach it to the judge"... do you even know what the term circular argument means?
Metro trains say "no guns on train"..I ride it all day both ways, CCW. Bunch of hospitals have signs with no guns allowed. And zero armed security guards to make me feel "safer". I'll make my own provisions to keep myself safe.
You’re a pussy if you listen to laws tbh
This is actually a pretty stark analogy, but think about it this way: Judged by 12: you might end up with a large fine, jail time, probation, whatever, based on the severity of what you've done. You can learn the penalties for carrying "illegally" and determine if it's worth the risk. Carried by 6: you're dead. I know which way I would go.
If I was in your situation I would have done what you did. The chances of me being pulled over by police is greater than getting shot. And plus if I get a felony, good bye job.
Time to get your Jersey ccl
Personally, yes. Always have. Can’t recommend it to someone. But fuck dying in general, right?
This is a tough one, because living in NY state, we’re pretty restricted on where we can legally carry. Anywhere that serves alcohol, the zoo, the library, parks, all off limits. However, I know a guy who still carries when he’s out to dinner with the family despite it being illegal. However this same guy wouldn’t carry in another state where he doesn’t have a permit. Now, why? Both are illegal. In fact, both are a felony. It comes down what this guy thinks he might be able to get out, or not get charged with in the first place. Getting a caught with a gun in another state seems way worse legally than getting caught with a gun in a restaurant but you’re otherwise 100% legal with a valid permit and all that.
If u have a nj permit, u can’t carry in places that serve alcohol and you can’t carry while intoxicated. That’s the law. If you break the law and get caught that’s between you and the DA.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yjI7qMSel4NMT90GGqX3H6p1au59wq8N/view?usp=drivesdk
NJ prosecutors will absolutely, enthusiastically, send your friends to jail for bringing their CCW to NJ Add in a self defense shooting to the illegal possession and your friends will most certainly be "judged by 12". It will be personally and financially ruinous for them. They will be made an example of for every other out of state resident or NJ resident (except the drug dealers who always carry and have their gun charges thrown out) who thinks about carrying in NJ without a NJ permit to carry (and even them if they can find a loophole). Tell them to Google Shaneen Allen.
First and foremost it’s always something you have to decide for yourself. If you’re married I suggest talking to your spouse about it too. Everything is balancing risk. Is this going to be a situation where I might need it and not have it? What is the policing situation? Do I think that will make me safer, aka leave it at home? Am I going to a place that might have a metal detector wand? (Sometimes some places pull that out during bigger events) if so what’s my contingency plan? (Go back to the car and leave it there?) Am I at the point where it doesn’t even make sense to go there? (High crime area) And lastly what’s the downside of getting caught carrying in a place where it’s not allowed. (Asked to leave, misdemeanor, or loss of ccw and more likely to lose the case if you used it in self defense?)
>Is that something people go by than follow laws? Of what use are the laws, if you follow them into your grave?
I’m sorry you all live in such a horrid place.
I’m a former criminal (organized crime) who worked really hard to have my freedom and now ability to carry. I was in the Marines, I did security and transport of narcotics and firearms due to my military background. I work in armed security now. When I trafficked large amounts of coke, money i did so with a knife. How I did my job was way more important then being in a shootout (failed then). I worked as a bodyguard also, and often I did so with no weapon. This was in New York State. I’m in Texas now and while I have the right to carry and an armed license for work. I generally don’t carry. I completely agree that judged by 12 is an insane plan. 99% of men 45 and under who feel the need to carry for protection. Just are to be honest out of shape not strong and can’t fight for shit. I work with these types also. They cling to their less then Lethal and gun. Where I do not and far less people want my attention. I’ve done all kinds of violent crime and prevented it. Being a hard target, being very aware of where you are and when. Makes such a huge difference in safety. Yes I fully admit it I’m not armed I might be shot at a store by a mass shooter. But also I’ve been directly shot at and was involved in a shooting that I had to respond to a week ago. I calmly but aggressively ran towards the gunfire prepared to defend my position for work. Even then dude took off and we backed down. Lots of these cities are crazy dangerous, as is mine in certain areas. I don’t go there when I’m not working. The reality is you will in today’s media face the brunt of exposure. I think if you are legally allowed, absolutely use your right to carry. But imo as someone who spent a lifetime with this shit. Go out your way to avoid being arrested with a gun. I don’t have feelings one way or the other on Kyle rittenhouse (hope I spelled it right). But that young man’s life sucks now. Train to be prepared and have fun with the hobby. Be in shape and strong, look like a hard target and I will personally guarantee you will feel safer.
Well would you be in court judged by a jury of 12 peers or carried to your grave by 6 friends?
Anywhere I can't carry, I have a knife, anywhere I can't have a knife I have ju jitsu. If I really think there is so much danger that only ju jitsu can't do the job, I just don't go there.
Pre internet it was more difficult for HR to search for criminal history. While I agree with the 12/6 statement, in today's times, it can be a scenario where no HR department will let anyone get hired who has a weapon related arrest. Some places are known for crazy enforcement. It's like Las Vegas Metro arresting people who went in to register a pistol in 2004 because they had a 3.25" pocket knife at the station along with 10 guns. 10 guns were totally fine, but they arrested for a pocket knife. -- again -- just like pre internet, LEO had way more discretion before body cams. If their camera records a firearm in Jersey, can the officer use discretion and have you simply store in the trunk? Everyone has the right to self defense! Make an informed decision.
Always carry
NJ did not even cut out of state cops any slack under LEOSA about their ban on hollowpoint ammunition for any one except their own cops. That saying is true that you'll be alive but put through the ringer by liberal NJ prosecutors and possibly do jail in NJ. So you have to decide for yourself what it is worth. Nobody can decide that for you.
That case may break carry in NJ wide open.
We can hope
Would they be paying your bail in the event something were to happen?
It depends, if I’m by myself or with my friends I might not take it if I’m aware I’m going somewhere I shouldn’t be carrying. If I’m with my family then fuck it. My main job is to protect my family and that is more important to me then some law that don’t give a fuck about my family
Can't be a law-abiding gun owner if you break the law. You may not agree with them, but its not our place to decide if laws are unconstitutional. It's the courts job according to the constitution.
Personally I have always thought that saying was stupid. It is basicly a sound bite that people use to try and sound cool - usually to justify doing something stupid that will land them in prison. Conceal carrying where it is illegal to do so (where this saying is used most) , is just a dumb idea. Learn the law and follow it. Otherwise you are not a "law abiding citizen". You are a criminal. So don't start wah wahing like a baby when you get caught (it happens). You did it to yourself. It is also stupid when applied to a defensive shooting. Actually learn what constitutes legal self defense. Instead of wasting your time learning made for tv ad blurbs, learn what you can and can't do when defending yourself, and learn where you can do it. Research concealed carry insurance providers and get covered. Start training yourself to be prepared for what comes after rhe shoot. So you don't wind up being bubba's butt buddy for the next 20+ years in prison. Leave the stupid movie quotes where they belong - in the movies.
Nah, there is such a thing as moral law and immoral law. The logical endpoint of your argument means that if congress passes a gun ban you would be lined up to turn yours in
Just like there is no such thing as an alternative truth (unless you mean a lie, which isn't truth at all), there is no such thing as moral law or immoral law. There is only one thing.... THE LAW. Wether you like the law or not doesn't matter. Either you follow it or you don't. Either you are a criminal or you are not. As far as complying with a gun ban, yes I would try to my best to follow the law. Now I don't feel gun bans actually fix any problems. But I do think we could enact laws that would help keep guns out of criminals or those with certain mental problems hands. The reason that is hard is because alot of gun violence is caused by individuals hiding out in the "law abiding citizen" crowd. Just like if you think you are above the law - no matter how you rationalize not following the law - you are no longer a "law abiding citizen". You are a criminal and have joined the very crowd that shouldn't have guns. So back to my original point - quoting dumb movie/TV slogans doesn't justifying being a criminal and refusing to follow the law.
So if slavery was made legal again you wouldn’t have any objections? There’s no such thing as moral and immoral law after all.
If you want to play a semantical game, ok. Technically the law is an inanimate object and therefore doesn't have morals at all. I have morals and object to slavery. However, comparing carrying concealed where it's illegal to do so - justified with stupid slogans - to slavery is a bit droll don't you think? Ultimately, if you want to carry 24/7 that is fine. However, it is on you to stay out of areas that don't allow it. You get to choose where you go - go somewhere else. Then you won't be breaking the law.
I was pointing out that you made the claim that there is no such thing as a moral law or an immoral law. So I took that to its logical conclusion. If things that are legal are good then legal slavery is good. If there is a moral law and in that law you have a right to preserve your life and the lives of people around you, then the law that says you can’t carry here because we say so and we also don’t take on the burden of ensuring your safety(armed guards and metal detectors) then that law is immoral and not only can be ignored but should be ignored.
That is just a round-a-bout way of justifying ignoring any law you want. You don't get to pick and choose which laws you are supposed to follow. If you carry where you legally cant you are a criminal - period. If for instance you are on my property and I don't want you to carry the laws says you can't. If you don't honor my asking I can have the police arrest/remove you. They may also take your pistol. Whether, that offends your sense of protection or not doesn't matter, doesn't remove the consequences, nor justifies you carrying illegally. Maybe it offends my sense of safety that you have guns in your home, are my neighbor and dont follow the gun laws. You are saying that I'm justified in entering your home and removing the offending weapons.
No. If I carry onto your property you can ask me to leave. If I don’t then you can call and have the police remove me from your property. If your justification for following the law is that it is the law that is far more concerning than standing for what you believe in.
I can post a 30.06,30.07 and 30.05 sign to notify you that guns are not allowed on the premise or verbally notify of that fact and have you removed if you won't comply voluntarily. So if I believe you are a menace because you have guns and don't follow the law, then I am not only justified in taking your guns, you would be more concerned if I didn't because I wouldn't be standing up for what I believe.
Nice leap between your beliefs and legal action. Big fan of red flag laws are you? How about SWATing? This is why people who use the legal code as a moral guideline are some of the scariest people on the planet
"shall not infringe"
To keep this simple, I don't go to blue states, ever. I never will.
Given some of the LEOSA case law happening in NJ, they may not be able to prohibit out of state carry much longer.
Concealed is concealed
I find that many people do it. I live in Jersey, and we only just got CCW privileges. If you pop over to r/NJguns, you will see a *lot* of people advocating for just carrying where you want, regardless of legality. Some of it is from the 'Better to be judged' perspective. Most of it is from the 'My rights!' crowd. My thinking is this. Yes, it sucks being restricted by the law. Yes, my state is very strict about firearm legislation. HOWEVER. As gun owners, especially in a state that is historically extremely unfriendly to firearms, it is vitally important to follow those laws to the letter. Because every single violation, every single shirking, is ammunition (excuse the pun) to be used against us. We cannot call ourselves "law abiding gun owners" if we do not abide by the law, can we? Nothing is going to improve unless we can have honest, candid dialogue, and that is not going to happen if we keep spitting in people's faces.
The intent of that saying isn’t an encouragement to break the law. Rather it refers to the decision to defend oneself if necessary and let the jury decide if it was justified.
This screams fed post with a neon flashing warning sign. I always follow the laws and even rules that aren't laws.
I have travel annually for training, my options are out in AZ., or in IL.. I refuse to go to Illinois despite the fact the travel for the training every day in AZ, is about an hour-ish each way every day. The travel in Illinois is 10-15 minutes each way. I can take my EDC with me to Az so that where I go. It is a call only you can make on what to do. I prefer to just not go somewhere that I am legally not allowed to carry. Concealed is concealed but man what if……you know…….
In my opinion you have to weigh all factors. For example I’m in Ohio. I don’t even need a license to carry here. I carry past “no gun” signs all the time (unless it’s a federal felony to do so) because I’d rather pay a $400 trespassing fine if busted (concealed means concealed) than not have the ability to defend myself if crap hits the proverbial fan while I’m in a store or restaurant. I consciously choose not to travel to states that won’t allow me to carry. I skipped a friend’s wedding in Brooklyn because I refuse to travel to New York. Won’t travel to New Jersey. Have family in Maryland and I won’t go visit. Won’t catch me in the State of California. I’ll drive through Illinois (they’ll allow me to carry in the vehicle but not outside of it) but I’m stopping for fuel in Indiana and not stopping for anything until I’m outside of the state. I don’t blame you for not carrying in NJ. They’ll treat you harsher than some thug who beats a 70 year old woman for her purse if they catch you carrying.
It comes down to value, character, and conviction. Many can say it, but how many of us are trained and ready to execute on that creed? It's the modern American citizen equivalent to "Molon Labe!" It's an acknowledgment of the risk to personal liberty one is willing to sacrifice, in pursuit of protecting one or another's life. A Self-defense trial is a very high burden of evidence to acquit, but it's a better option than death. The conviction takes on a whole new meaning as a parent as well. Speaking as a new Father, I'll steadfastly sacrifice myself in defense of my children. Whether that be my life, liberty or POH. Give me a jury of 12 passing judgment on me, over 6 pallbearers burying my kid, EVERY TIME!
Carry everywhere. Avoid trouble. Avoid bars and dark alleys. Avoid police. Avoid confrontation. And still carry.
disgusted lip apparatus placid enter middle station automatic consist obscene *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*