A Hearty THANK YOU for Carrying!

[since9]

This just happened to a friend of mine this morning:

"Just when I'm ready to give up on humanity,,,,,,,took Shelly out for breakfast this morning to one of our favorite restaurants, Frisch's.(Big Boy). I happened to be open carrying my RIA 1911, 10MM. Place was fairly crowded and when this guy walks up to our table and looks at my 1911 I think "oh boy here we go". I never in my life expected what he said. He apologized for disturbing our meal but he felt that he had to say thank you to me for being prepared to protect him and his family. BLEW my mind, I was totally blown away. I have been thanked for my service but never for carrying to protect someone else. Could it possibly be that folks are actually waking up to the threats that roam our nation?? I pray this is a start of something good. Here goes nothing, For all of you who carry concealed or open, THANK YOU for being willing to protect me and my family!!!!!"​

In answer to his question, yes, the tide is changing. The general public has most certainly swung from fairly ambivalent to openly supportive of 2A rights over the last seven years. Case in point, this poll, on a libtard anti-gun news site, no less.

 

[Citizen]

Great story! Thanks for posting it.



Some years ago an old friend, opposed to self-defense rights, criticized me. I had related that only a very few strangers had ever commented negatively on my OCed defensive sidearm. The friend commented that probably many more objected, but didn't comment. I wasn't fast enough. It was only later I realized that fair is fair. If I have to count the unstated objections, I can also count the unstated compliments. After nearly eight years of OC, I can still count the objections on one hand; but I quit counting compliments somewhere above 25. Thus, the unstated compliments would far-and-away outpace the unstated objections.

Plain and simple, more people support self-defense rights than not.

 

[skidmark]

I'm glad that the guy seems to recognize that a gun provides better protection than a stern look.

But just where do these folks come off thinking I, or any other OCer, is out there ready to protect them and theirs if things go all sideways all of a sudden?

TPTB collect taxes to pay for cops, and private enterprises raise their prices to cover the expense of private security - both of which it turns out do not have a duty to protect any specific individual. Knowing that, I have taken on the responsibility of providing the means of protecting myself and my family, plus possibly some others who are with me at that moment.

If he wants someone to protect his family he can go hire a private personal security agent (AKA bodyguard).

Yes, I know that some BG might see me OCing and decide to be nefarious elsewhere. That's just a collateral effect.

I try to be socially appropriate when situations like this happen, but I stress that I am there to protect myself and my family, and that the individual needs to take up the responsibility for protecting himself and his own family. (The cold hard truth is that in an active shooter situation I'm going to focus on getting me and mine away to safety. I'm not going to leave my family to engage the shooter. And the very cold hard truth is that if getting my family away means he and his family get shot, it's just another sad story on the 11 o'clock news.)

Twice I've shared the stuff in parentheses with someone who thanked me for protecting them and their family. Both times it was after a short and pleasant discussion about the word "self" in self protection. And both times it was said to someone who stated they would never own a firearm. The changes in facial expression as those concepts began to sink in was absolutely priceless.

We need to stress that we are not sheepdogs (unless referring to our small and personal flock) out there waiting to run to the sound of the guns and save the world. We are not cops. We are not Homeland Security. We are not some citizen militia - organized or otherwise.

I truly believe that every time someone tries to stick us in that pigeonhole it hurts the way people see folks exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

stay safe.

 

[Wstar425]

I'm glad that the guy seems to recognize that a gun provides better protection than a stern look.

But just where do these folks come off thinking I, or any other OCer, is out there ready to protect them and theirs if things go all sideways all of a sudden?

TPTB collect taxes to pay for cops, and private enterprises raise their prices to cover the expense of private security - both of which it turns out do not have a duty to protect any specific individual. Knowing that, I have taken on the responsibility of providing the means of protecting myself and my family, plus possibly some others who are with me at that moment.

If he wants someone to protect his family he can go hire a private personal security agent (AKA bodyguard).

Yes, I know that some BG might see me OCing and decide to be nefarious elsewhere. That's just a collateral effect.

I try to be socially appropriate when situations like this happen, but I stress that I am there to protect myself and my family, and that the individual needs to take up the responsibility for protecting himself and his own family. (The cold hard truth is that in an active shooter situation I'm going to focus on getting me and mine away to safety. I'm not going to leave my family to engage the shooter. And the very cold hard truth is that if getting my family away means he and his family get shot, it's just another sad story on the 11 o'clock news.)

Twice I've shared the stuff in parentheses with someone who thanked me for protecting them and their family. Both times it was after a short and pleasant discussion about the word "self" in self protection. And both times it was said to someone who stated they would never own a firearm. The changes in facial expression as those concepts began to sink in was absolutely priceless.

We need to stress that we are not sheepdogs (unless referring to our small and personal flock) out there waiting to run to the sound of the guns and save the world. We are not cops. We are not Homeland Security. We are not some citizen militia - organized or otherwise.

I truly believe that every time someone tries to stick us in that pigeonhole it hurts the way people see folks exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

stay safe.

I think along the same lines. I have gotten similar, altho probably not quite as strongly worded comments.

I have started making my first response to "why do you carry a gun?" Be "because I am responsible for MY own safety". If the conversation doesn't start that way, I do my best to work it in asap. Rarely left unsaid is, YOU are responsible for your own safety. You can see the light come on, if that was their original line of reasoning.

I hate the term "sheepdog". It is not me. I'm gonna look something more like an armed retreat to cover. After that, I may choose to get involved but I certainly see no requirement for me to do so.

Oh yeah, our news is on at 10 pm here!

 

[RockyMtnScotsman]

OP, the timing of your event really caught my attention. You see I had a nearly identical encounter on Saturday at Lowes on N. Nevada here in the Springs from one of their employees.

Sometimes I think I'm better prepared for the sneer than the gratitude ...and that's truly sad.

 

[solus]

snipp...

I truly believe that every time someone tries to stick us in that pigeonhole it hurts the way people see folks exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

stay safe.

whole thing well said...

last paragraph thumbs up

that is and has always been my contention, much to some member's consternation, since i have been OC'g then posting about it.

the last time i heard these types of comments i flat out told the bloke, sorry i'm seeking and taking cover with whom i hold dear and discerning exit strategies all the while trying to stay out of harms way...unfortunately they left in a huff!!

ipse

 

[MAC702]

Plan A is to haul ass and leave the defenseless people to their own preparations.
If they are lucky, my Plan B might help them in the course of saving my own ass.

Now that said, the more politically correct way to put it is that I'm not a cop, and surely these unarmed people would much rather wait for a cop, as evidenced by their being unarmed.

Besides, I assume everyone is armed. Therefore, I'm assuming I'm not leaving anyone defenseless.

 

[solus]

MAC, et al., i liken it to those who drive w/o their seat-belt...you hit or get hit you suffer the consequences. If you wish, for whatever rational, real or perceived, reason not to provide for you and your's own protection by OC/CC'g, (don't care just be trained to carry something) then you suffer the consequences.

ipse

 

[Wolfgang1952]

Here in Louisiana. If you put on a gun and go out in public you fall under the same law as people that know CPR and don’t stop and try to help a person having a heart attack. That is our good samaritan law. You can be sued and held reliable for not helping. It is also your responsibility to backup the police to.

And btw I have been thanked by more Sheriff Deputies than anybody else for OCing. And have also been told they wished everyone would OC.

Wolf

 

[skidmark]

Here in Louisiana. If you put on a gun and go out in public you fall under the same law as people that know CPR and don’t stop and try to help a person having a heart attack. That is our good samaritan law. You can be sued and held reliable for not helping. It is also your responsibility to backup the police to.

Wolf

Would you please provide a citation/link to that law.

stay safe.

 

[Wolfgang1952]

Would you please provide a citation/link to that law.

stay safe.

LaRS 9:2793 We as CC and OC fall under this.

Wolf

 

[sraacke]

" He apologized for disturbing our meal but he felt that he had to say thank you to me for being prepared to protect him and his family. "
I would have ruined his whole day. I am not a sheepdog. "This is for my protection. It's your job to be prepared to protect yourself and your own family."
If it was so darn important to him that he felt the need to thank someone for it shouldn't he be doing it himself?
Then I have to wonder, what's preventing him from doing exactly what I'm doing?
Is he a felon?
Did he get charged for beating his wife?
Some other violent crime?
Was he involuntarily committed?
Is he on mind altering drugs?
Frankly, if it is anything like the above choices I don't want anything to do with him.
If it's because he simply decided to give up that right to defend himself and his family I have nothing but contempt for him and pity for his kids. My contempt includes his wife if she is with him too since she also has the same right to arm herself for the defense of herself and her family.

 

[MAC702]

People are at different points in their road toward realizing that responsibility they have for the protection of themselves and their families. Many of them have been brainwashed by their own families, and especially by the government to feel the opposite. Support them every step of the way toward recovery without shaming them for it.

 

[Bikenut]

People are at different points in their road toward realizing that responsibility they have for the protection of themselves and their families. Many of them have been brainwashed by their own families, and especially by the government to feel the opposite. Support them every step of the way toward recovery without shaming them for it.

I whole heatedly agree!

Sadly it is easier to degrade or put down instead of taking the time to educate and encourage yet encouragement gains allies while degrading makes for a negative experience for both parties.

 

[Grapeshot]

I whole heatedly agree!

Sadly it is easier to degrade or put down instead of taking the time to educate and encourage yet encouragement gains allies while degrading makes for a negative experience for both parties.

Indeed - not everyone is as well informed as we are

Everyone starts from somewhere below the line.

 

[Ken56]

Was at a chinese buffet in Alpena MI. and was thanked by a 20 something young man while heading back to my table. I said your welcome.....why arn't you? He was a bit suprised by that and didn't know how to respond so I just said "just putting some presure on you. You will when you're ready". He said thanks again and left. No other issues while there. Was also at Meijer and MC sports prior to that.

 

[JamesCanby]

LaRS 9:2793 We as CC and OC fall under this.

Wolf

Nothing in the cite you provided REQUIRES a person who is carrying concealed or openly to render assistance. What this cite says is, if you DO render assistance, you cannot be held liable, but that assistance is defined in the statute as "emergency care, first aid or rescue." Hard to believe that it would cover the use of a firearm in defending someone. I suggest that you do NOT use that statute as an excuse to be a sheepdog.

Here's the text of the cite you provided:

LaRS 9:2793

§2793. Gratuitous service at scene of emergency; limitation on liability

A. No person who in good faith gratuitously renders emergency care, first aid or rescue at the scene of an emergency, or moves a person receiving such care, first aid or rescue to a hospital or other place of medical care shall be liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission in rendering the care or services or as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for further medical treatment or care for the person involved in the said emergency; provided, however, such care or services or transportation shall not be considered gratuitous, and this Section shall not apply when rendered incidental to a business relationship, including but not limited to that of employer-employee, existing between the person rendering such care or service or transportation and the person receiving the same, or when incidental to a business relationship existing between the employer or principal of the person rendering such care, service or transportation and the employer or principal of the person receiving such care, service or transportation. This Section shall not exempt from liability those individuals who intentionally or by grossly negligent acts or omissions cause damages to another individual.

B. The immunity herein granted shall be personal to the individual rendering such care or service or furnishing such transportation and shall not inure to the benefit of any employer or other person legally responsible for the acts or omissions of such individual, nor shall it inure to the benefit of any insurer.

C. For purposes of this Section, rendering emergency care, first aid, or rescue shall include the use of an automated external defibrillator as defined by R.S. 40:1236.12.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

I'm glad that the guy seems to recognize that a gun provides better protection than a stern look.

But just where do these folks come off thinking I, or any other OCer, is out there ready to protect them and theirs if things go all sideways all of a sudden?

TPTB collect taxes to pay for cops, and private enterprises raise their prices to cover the expense of private security - both of which it turns out do not have a duty to protect any specific individual. Knowing that, I have taken on the responsibility of providing the means of protecting myself and my family, plus possibly some others who are with me at that moment.

If he wants someone to protect his family he can go hire a private personal security agent (AKA bodyguard).

Yes, I know that some BG might see me OCing and decide to be nefarious elsewhere. That's just a collateral effect.

I try to be socially appropriate when situations like this happen, but I stress that I am there to protect myself and my family, and that the individual needs to take up the responsibility for protecting himself and his own family. (The cold hard truth is that in an active shooter situation I'm going to focus on getting me and mine away to safety. I'm not going to leave my family to engage the shooter. And the very cold hard truth is that if getting my family away means he and his family get shot, it's just another sad story on the 11 o'clock news.)

Twice I've shared the stuff in parentheses with someone who thanked me for protecting them and their family. Both times it was after a short and pleasant discussion about the word "self" in self protection. And both times it was said to someone who stated they would never own a firearm. The changes in facial expression as those concepts began to sink in was absolutely priceless.

We need to stress that we are not sheepdogs (unless referring to our small and personal flock) out there waiting to run to the sound of the guns and save the world. We are not cops. We are not Homeland Security. We are not some citizen militia - organized or otherwise.

I truly believe that every time someone tries to stick us in that pigeonhole it hurts the way people see folks exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

stay safe.

You make a pretty big deal about clarifying that you carry for "your" protection and not "our" protection but then proceed to use the word "we" to speak for and describe "all" those who carry. I don't appreciate being pigeonholed by you any more than I do someone telling me thank you for the wrong reason.

You may be generally correct, but I wouldn't complain about you and your fellow carriers being pigeonholed by the public and then proceed to pigeonhole your fellow carriers just because you think your pigeonhole is more better.

In other words, and I mean to say this with all due respect, speak for yourself...

ETA: oh, and thanks for carrying.

 

[skidmark]

You make a pretty big deal about clarifying that you carry for "your" protection and not "our" protection but then proceed to use the word "we" to speak for and describe "all" those who carry. I don't appreciate being pigeonholed by you any more than I do someone telling me thank you for the wrong reason.

You may be generally correct, but I wouldn't complain about you and your fellow carriers being pigeonholed by the public and then proceed to pigeonhole your fellow carriers just because you think your pigeonhole is more better.

In other words, and I mean to say this with all due respect, speak for yourself...

ETA: oh, and thanks for carrying.

You might do better to take this up with the AP Style Book editors.

stay safe.

 

[FTG-05]

Nothing in the cite you provided REQUIRES a person who is carrying concealed or openly to render assistance. What this cite says is, if you DO render assistance, you cannot be held liable, but that assistance is defined in the statute as "emergency care, first aid or rescue." Hard to believe that it would cover the use of a firearm in defending someone. I suggest that you do NOT use that statute as an excuse to be a sheepdog.

Here's the text of the cite you provided:

LaRS 9:2793

§2793. Gratuitous service at scene of emergency; limitation on liability

A. No person who in good faith gratuitously renders emergency care, first aid or rescue at the scene of an emergency, or moves a person receiving such care, first aid or rescue to a hospital or other place of medical care shall be liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission in rendering the care or services or as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for further medical treatment or care for the person involved in the said emergency; provided, however, such care or services or transportation shall not be considered gratuitous, and this Section shall not apply when rendered incidental to a business relationship, including but not limited to that of employer-employee, existing between the person rendering such care or service or transportation and the person receiving the same, or when incidental to a business relationship existing between the employer or principal of the person rendering such care, service or transportation and the employer or principal of the person receiving such care, service or transportation. This Section shall not exempt from liability those individuals who intentionally or by grossly negligent acts or omissions cause damages to another individual.

B. The immunity herein granted shall be personal to the individual rendering such care or service or furnishing such transportation and shall not inure to the benefit of any employer or other person legally responsible for the acts or omissions of such individual, nor shall it inure to the benefit of any insurer.

C. For purposes of this Section, rendering emergency care, first aid, or rescue shall include the use of an automated external defibrillator as defined by R.S. 40:1236.12.

I agree. His statements, based on his cite, have nothing to do with each other. I see nothing that requires CC or OCers to render armed defense to anyone under that statute. And in fact, cannot fathom how anyone could possibly come to that conclusion from reading it.

This is an excellent example of why cites must be provided when someone says "it's the LAW!!!"