Boilerplate - this isn't a gun right or a 2A post, if you're able and willing try not to turn it into one.
Was wondering how many of you all own a firearm or possess a CCW or both. Seems to be pretty even-split from what I've seen here so far, figured I'd pique community interest. If you have a CCW, would love to know what state you're in as well. For my NY bros, I'm gonna assume you all probably don't have much of 'em up there, I know it's not the easiest thing!
I have a Glock 23 Gen 4, got it back in 2014 for defense purposes. I lived in a not-so-nice part of LA, and while I never walked outside and felt directly threatened, I've always been interested in it as a whole so figured why not. Getting a CCW permit in CA was hell, I think I paid around $1200 when you added up all the fees and courses, took about 4-5 months to get approved, and the class was at least 10 hours. The rationale for getting one (directed to the state) was actually fairly simple though, I just said "I'd like to defend myself" and they took it at face value.
I didn't carry on my person for a while unless I thought I needed it. My office didn't allow firearms whatsoever, and while I produced zero print and never told a SINGLE person I was carrying (as any CCW holder should in my opinion), I opted not to carry it into the office just because I didn't want to get fired. Where to store it at work was my biggest issue, as I'm not a fan of leaving guns in the car in nearly any situation. However, we had a protected employees-only garage which was monitored 24/7 by professional security and I installed a safe in my console to put it in when I wasn't in the car and had a more easy-access holster that I'd transfer it to while I drove.
Once I moved back to VA (where I currently live) I renewed my permit and transferred it, which was a hell of a lot easier. I'd moved to much nicer neighborhoods by then, so I didn't feel the need to really carry it on my person unless I deemed it necessary. Would never carry it on me while I drank or really anywhere - the exception would be if I had to take public transport or walk home alone late at night through some less-than-ideal neighborhoods. Again, I never genuinely feared getting 'attacked' but I enjoyed shooting at the range and wanted to have that safety net... just in case. In my eight years of gun ownership, I have had to take my firearm out in a situation exactly ZERO times. Which is good. That's what you want.
Nowadays, it mostly just stays in my apartment. On the off-chance that someone breaks in and tries to kill me, then they're getting popped from my nightstand. Other than that, I don't really feel the need anymore to carry it on my person. Still try to hit the range every now and then, and have taken up clay shooting with some of my friends - I learned that I am very bad at that.
Just wanted to get some community interest. Promise I'm not the ATF. Peace!
I have owned guns before, but living in NYC there is next to no reason to be carrying. Even if there were an active shooter situation, this place is always so crowded that carrying would probably be more of a liability than not.
When I retire to the countryside? Yeah, sure, I'll get some guns again then. They're going to be range toys more than anything else though, since I don't see myself retiring to a particularly dangerous part of the country. Maybe get some big ole hand cannons in case I run into the occasional bear or feral hog.
Yeah, that's similar to my CCW rationale as well. The in-order chances of a), being in a situation of feeling life-threatened, b) unable to run away or talk yourself out of the situation, c) requiring a firearm for immediate discharge, d) having ample time to draw, aim, and fire without collateral and e) mitigating the effects afterward of having to deal with the legal mess and an inevitable investigation are so damn small that I often deduced that carrying would cause more problems than not. All five of those letters lining up chronologically would be the only primary benefit I feel to packing.
I can tell you that I had a buddy's brother get killed for being a lil' too macho with his piece. In a lot of places, a gun will technically work 95% of the time without having to discharge it whatsoever - if you have a gun and draw it, provided the other person doesn't have one, they will most certainly back down and the argument will end there. Do I support that? Absolutely fucking not, it may be the stupidest shit ever. Brandishing is a) illegal, and b) a dick-swinging contest that will get you killed in the wrong situation. This guy got into an argument outside of a bar, and decided to end it he reached for his piece with no intention of firing it, just holding it as a threatening pattern towards the other guy so he would back down - or so he thought.
I'm sure you can guess what happened. I don't blame the other guy at all. If I see you pulling out a firearm and I have mine on, I'm emptying my clip into you. This isn't me trying to sound like a tough guy, quite the opposite for sure. If I see a weapon being drawn on me, I'm not going to sit there and analyze well, maybe he just wants to scare me hur dur, and I'm sure that's what the situation was there. Whole point of a CCW is for it to be concealed, and I wish some more folks got the point of that.
But yeah, overall I agree with your point. Especially in NY, no reason for CCW. Thanks for your comment!
God damn that's unfortunate to hear...
Literally one of the first things they teach you, CCW or not, is "if you're drawing your firearm you better be 100% ready to discharge it"
Getting carry in NYC is impossible unless a clear reason (famous, politician, severe threats/domestic violence need etc, retired police.. ). You will not get a carry to have a carry... quick denied.
I have a resi firearm permit in NYC (cannot leave your apt beside going to a range)... even that took forever (17 months). Process was bullshit, slow, etc. All for checks, etc, but it clearly an attempt at dissuading folks (checks... legit your entire life history, references, multiple affidavits, employment detail, housing detail, in person interviews... think I went to 1 Police Plaza 5x). Also expensive, 600 to apply (pass or fail) and I think its 200 every 2 years lol. So essentially cuts lower income folks out. Timeline is just insane tho, apply and you won't hear for months and then every few months for each next step.... their online/doc upload interface also sucks (classic gov). Happy to chat on pm if anyone is trying to run through this process... honestly pretty hectic.
I have a CCW issued in multiple states and also keep weapons abroad (at home) in places where I live (they don't have a CCW or the right to bear arms in public in the EU, at least not where I live). The CCW was mostly for pocket knives, not guns and I don't drink any alcohol, so that makes it easier to carry. I live mostly in rural areas with many wild animals or the need to carry a knife as a tool. There is no way I would carry a gun in a city environment or the office. But I have been to offices where guns were allowed and some colleagues were carrying at work.
There is a gun under my drivers seat and I carry a sidearm. Under normal circumstances I don't carry a backup gun.
Before anyone comes screaming at me... no, I have never used any of my guns, never fired a shot at anyone, never killed anyone, etc this is all 100% legal.
Why would anyone scream at you? You're not violating any laws in the first place.
I'm a fairly left-wing guy but it sounds like you're just exercising one of your rights.
Because people are fucking retarded.
In the world we live in today, you have to be careful.
As an example, I have made real world friendships with people on WSO. If they read the post above, they will know I have guns in Europe. These folks are not as open minded as Americans. While this is still legal in those countries, most Europeans are not into this kind of behavior.
The sarcastic answer is that "Guns are Scary and Bad". This tends to be a common theme among those with left-leaning ideologies that dislike the 2A. Look at comments made by politicians like Beto O'Rorke and you don't have to go far to see this mindset. Even the attempt to appoint Chapman as the head of the ATF highlights the "gun grabber" mentality seen by the Democratic party. In states where there are significant NFA restrictions, much of these stem from "Guns are Scary". Instead of allowing the use of suppressors, for example, much of the Anti-2A crowd is against it because of media portrayal that makes these types of devices look like they reduce the sound of a round being fired to absolutely nothing. The problem with that portrayal diminishes the true purpose of a suppressor - to reduce the sound level of an explosion of expanding gases after a round is expelled. This isn't to say that your gun will go silent, but reducing the sound output from 120+ dB by about 20 dB provides a significant benefit to your hearing, even with proper ear protetion. There are clear cases on the right where you have it too. For example, Bump Stocks were banned in the wake of the Nevada shooting, and that was a Republican response to guns are bad. It just so happens, we see this kind of reaction much more with Democrat and left-leaning politiicans than we do Republican and right-leaning politicians.
I have a few but have cut back in recent years. My biggest issue is how to sell some to buy others. I simply do not feel comfortable doing P2P sales so I always end up taking the worst of it with sales to FFLs. So that has caused me to be more selective in my choices because I'm most likely buying it for life. My favorite is my Beretta M9 (not the 92FS, mind you, its one of the M9s that Beretta sold to the public), that one is always fun to shoot and great for introducing new shooters to the sport. My CCW was a Glock 23 which is another one that's fun. Still have the Glock but I let my permit expire. CCW is a huge responsibility and you do get tired of it after a while.
Yessir, Glock 23! I love the .40 S&W personally, they can get slightly more expensive but that was ultimately what made me decide for the 23 vs the 19. I didn't want a compact (too small) or a full-size (too big) so the subcompact was perfect, just had to choose between the 19 & 23. I fired both at the test range, and while it's a very small difference I could feel the kick a little bit more with the bigger .40 S&W caliber. My slight complaint is that since I have big hands, the grip is kind of small and stubby but I practiced some dry fire and figured out how to hold it to make it more comfortable. Overall it's a great piece.
Yeah, the 40 cal for me is "just right". The 9mm just doesnt feel like it's enough for carry and 45 ACP is where "hand cannon" category starts and there's no such thing as a lightweight 45 ACP gun, right? So 40 cal checks so many boxes and the Glock 23 is a great example of it.
Have a sig P226 and a Benelli M2. Love both of them. Looking to grab an H&K 762A1 at some point. Always take the view that performance matters when it comes to firearms and don't mind spending extra to ensure that.
I have a CCW permit but don't carry generally, but I am in the market for something at home.
I'm kind of a Glock fanboy, so for at-home defense, I'd definitely recommend something compact or subcompact. Subs definitely make it easier to carry on your person and not feel like you have a hunk of metal pressed into your pelvis, but if you've got bigger hands they could definitely slip in and out. If you go with a G19, can literally never go wrong - run-of-the-mill piece for any carry or HD situation, IMO. Gen4 is the best in my opinion, but the newer Gen5 is definitely sharp. I have the G23, so exact same chassis and dimensions but just with a 40 cal set up in lieu of a 9mm.
Another great option is the Sig365 XL, great piece. I think the 'XL' in the name makes people think it's a full-size, but the difference between the standard and XL is about a half-inch on the grip, maybe a couple of oz give or take. Both of them are pretty small, IIRC P365XL is around 6.5in while G19 is pushing a tad over 7. Can't go wrong with either of those two.
Maybe NudnikShpilkes or Lyle Lanley could shed some insight into the Sig, however. I've only owned Glocks so I can't comment two deep, however, I've shot plenty of Sigs in my tenure.
The 365XL also has a half inch longer barrel than the standard 365/365X, The 365X is a good middle ground for those with big hands because you get the slightly larger grip that is standard for the XL but get the slightly shorter barrel that comes on the standard 365 model. I was torn between the Glock G43x and the Sig 365x but decided to go with the Sig and I'm really glad I did. I went to the range one day with a friend of mine that is a police officer and die hard Glock guy who carries a G19 for duty and a G43x while off duty, which he bought around the same time I got my 365x. He ended up shooting my 365x and was pretty upset afterward because of how much better it was compared to his G43x. He said he was able to get on target faster, the weight distribution was better and the fit in his hand was perfect. Not to say there is anything wrong with Glocks, I have a few myself but Sig has really stepped up their game the past few years. The best recommendation I can give to anyone when buying firearms is to go to a range and try them out first to see what works best for you personally.
I've been trained on a couple firearms, but don't have one.
Stack em high and stack em deep. I'm a collector, try to hit the indoor range 1-2 times/week and the long range 1-2 times/month schedule permitting. My next deal check is going towards either a Barrett M107A1 or a GM6 Lynx in case I'm attacked by a building. I do not have a CCW.
Curious to know what you do for the long-range gear. I'm building a 1k/yd setup, but the ability to actually shoot that is more important than any umpteenth setup.
Agreed your ability to shoot will be a vastly bigger factor than your setup. My favorite long range toy is an LMT .308 DMR w/ a Nightforce SHV 5-20x56. Someday I want to own a property with a range out to 2000m because I've only been able to take this one out to 750m at the ranges near me sadly.
To answer the question; yes and yes. For anyone that asks, lost it all in a boating accident.
Those damn boating accidents! Always taking away our guns, eh?
Have multiple firearms and a CCW. My CCW is from Alabama but that's not where I live anymore. I still live in the Southeast though and all the states practice reciprocity so I still have my Bama one until it expires. Also don't typically carry it on me at all times, but the permit is like $15/year so why not, sometimes I bring it with me places.
I live in Chicago and carry a Sig P365x pretty much everywhere I go unless I know the place I am going does not allow firearms. Carrying all the time is typically best practice because if you carry only sometimes or times when you think you need to and something does happen where you need to use your firearm, often times even if everything you did was perfectly legal and in self defense, and the state decides to prosecute they will ask if you carry all the time and if your answer is no they will argue that you were only carrying because you were out looking for trouble try to paint you as the aggressor. Not really an issue in red states but if you're in a more liberal state and you get a prosecutor looking to move up the ranks, they'll try to prosecute even if everything you did was by the book.
You make a good point, especially from the legal standpoint. I think my greatest fears (which still trump being dead) would be a) the legal ramifications afterward, especially with a particularly hungry prosecutor as you mentioned, and b) the intrinsic factor of living with guilt. As clear-cut as it may look from the outside, there's no telling how you'll react knowing that you killed someone. If he was going to kill your wife or kids? Yeah, probably a little easier to live with that. However, the human mind is very complex and I know that it has huge potential to feel guilt or PTSD-esque waves, even when you clearly did nothing wrong - legally or morally.
As for the EDC, I just opt not to do it because I feel safe overall. May be a shitty excuse, but nothing has happened yet! Depending on when/where I move or if my mindset shifts I may change. +1 for the Sig P365, that's a great piece too.
I don't have one, but if I did I'd get a Walther PPK. I'm way more of a movie guy than a gun guy, and I'd just have to have the gun Bond uses.
Wrong answer. Any self-respecting movie guy knows that THE movie gun is the Beretta 92FS. That gun has been in more movies than Jenna Jameson.
If you want to stick to handguns only, sure the 92. But all movie firearms? MP5 hands down
those are the movie guns
I mean so have Uzi's but I'm not basing this purely on frequency. Bond's gun is almost as iconic as his car (Aston) and his watch (Omega).
Own a shotgun, keep it hidden in my home to protect family if I need to.
I live in CA and am actually really into guns. I own a Daniel Defense DDM4v7 (AR-15), an AKM, and a S&W M&P 2.0 that I’ve Gucci’d out. It has a new trigger, Apex Barrel which lets me ping metal at 75 yards with it (for a handgun I’m happy with it), Trijicon RMR, Surefire white light, and a few other accessories. The handgun is my go-to for self defense at home because it’s easiest to move around with or just hold an angle.
I haven’t gotten a CCW just because I never really decided to. I live in Irvine where it’s pretty safe here, so just haven’t had a reason to carry. I also WFH
I am not in much of a hurry to spend a big chunk of cash, but I am considering a SCAR-H with the NRCH vs a DDM5 (AR-10). The DD is objectively a better gun, but man the FN SCAR-H just brings back MW2 vibes that are cool. It’s less accurate, less reliable, heavier, and just about $1,000 more expensive but it is more cool…
Yooooo... great stack. Feel free to drop some pics of that DDM & I definitely want to see the M&P. If WSO's algorithm gets all upset by gun pics then feel free to PM 'em to me, would love to see. That's quite the collection there, glad to see you reppin' in CA! Can't say my LA experience was quite as nice as Irvine LOL... I was just some stupid young-20s kid tryna make a living. Cheers!
Fuck off federal agent.
LOL as if I'd ever work for the government
I think that this is one of those times that anonymous posting in off-topic would be a good thing.
I've always found 2A and gun ownership fascinating. While not trying to get political, I think you can't escape it on a topic like this. I've had these conversations with friends who own firearms and who are on the opposite side and think guns need to be banned, confiscated, and removed from civil society. It's the only enumerated right in this country that is constantly neutered and trampled upon by states and the courts have long been left to apply whatever jurisprudence they want to on 2A cases. The number of hoops to jump through, limitations on what you can buy, the frequency of purchase, the number of firearms you can purchase, etc. are staggering in states that are highly rated by Giffords. The dichotomy strikes me unusual, as there are large swaths of the population that wants to remove civilian ownership yet favor LEO ownership of firearms despite being anti-LEO. The same holds true for terms like "Assault Weapons Ban" despite not being able to clearly articulate what an assault weapon is or requiring added undue burdens on firearm owners. However, the need for training, understanding the impact of firearm ownership, and the added standard of care are also overlooked by many on both sides.
Even within the courts, there are struggles to apply the law properly. When reading about NYSRPA v. Bruen (the NY CCW case), I found an interesting concurrent opinion written by Judge VanDyke in CA as a concurrence to his own opinion. In a nutshell, he basically highlights how CA Courts get 2A law wrong and unless the decision goes in favor of ruling against a firearm owner, any appeal to an En Banc panel will apply improper scrutiny (and shows how judges clearly do this - this is why the concurrence is fantastic to read... and it's in plain English) to overturn the decision. It speaks more to the divisiveness of the 2A laws and the willingness to skirt the strict scrutiny applied by the Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald.
That said, I believe the more interesting aspect of this isn't who owns guns but the distribution of owners by state. As was mentioned, CA, NJ, and NY (NYC moreso than NYS, but the state laws are applicable) all have restrictive 2A regimes. The irony is that many of these Anti-2A regimes do little to lower the rate of violent crimes while maintaining highly restrictive, and even "No-Issue" status (I'm looking at you NJ). I am far more intrigued by how many own a firearm in a "free state" vs a "2A restrictive state", the distribution of type/model/ammunition type/banned vs clone/etc.(the whole banned v clone thing is also interesting because there are states that will not allow certain firearms by name but are okay with clones of the firearm which are not stamped with a banned name), and how that will change pending the outcome of NYSRPA, particularly if the justifiable need component in NY and NJ law is overturned, will impact those who either have a CCW permit or get them.
I know, no politics, but I tried to keep it apolitical.
See, here's the thing...
I said 'no politics' because I often observe that the second that someone makes a politically charged comment, the internet seems to just break out into a war. It becomes less about actual discussion and policy talk, and more of "MY SIDE IS BETTER THAN YOURS FUCK YOU" type debate. I just wanted to avoid that here, with the hope that if someone didn't like guns, they wouldn't comment. If someone did like guns, they'd tell me what they had.
HOWEVER, I gotta say - fuckin' love your comment. Insightful? Check. Precedent and rationale, rather than heated opinion takes? Check. You get the point. I think that healthy political talk is essential for a well-functioning society, but the internet gives folks a screen to hide behind more often than not. It's easier to blast someone on an internet forum, rather than in real life.
In addition, I agree with everything that you just posted. I actually looked up VanDyke and read a bit about him, and he can articulate very well. I wish that 2A wouldn't be so polarizing, and there could be a common solution that our blue & red lawmakers would enjoy. If you want my personal take, I don't think that anyone's right to guns should be infringed upon, ever. Plain and simple. However, as much as I hate governmental regulation, I wouldn't mind smarter, more logical background checks. A tighter-closed system to regulate different aspects of it. While I don't have all the answers, I gotta believe that just like any other issue, 80% of Americans fall somewhere in the middle. It's just the 10% on either side that are the loudest. I'm a moderate Republican, but I don't hate Democrats because they're Democrats. I try to at least understand some points they make and wish that our government could... maybe fuckin' try to do the same. Oh well, rant over.
Anyways, big shout to you for your comment. Really enjoyed reading it.
Delectus atque et commodi deleniti ullam qui quisquam. Tenetur molestias eos praesentium ut.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Incidunt est molestiae occaecati qui et aliquam ducimus. Quis illo voluptates perferendis dolor officiis. Nihil incidunt est vero.