TexasCHLforum.com

G26ster wrote:

Shoot_First wrote:Why have a smoke alarm or fire extinguisher if your house is not going to catch fire? Why have jumper cables if your car will always start?

Actually, I had to compromise but not wearing my gun in the bed. You may laugh, but we were staying with a friends in Indiana and he wore his 1911 OWB all the time. We both got up at about the same time to go the bathroom in the middle of the night and he was wearing his pistol while in pajamas.

My wife is actually ok with my having a pistol in both her car and my truck, by my side end table in the family room, and pistols on both bedside nightstands along with a Mossberg 500 12 gauge tactical in the closet as well as me strapping on my 1911 every time I leave the house. No kids to worry about though.

I'm not posting this in disagreement, but simply as an observation. That said, I'll put my flame suit on anyway

Everyone on this planet has a different view of what they are willing to do to keep safe. Just because someone does not have the desire to carry 24/7 does not mean they are fundamentally different than those that do. People do what falls within their personal level of what is enough. One may carry 24/7 to "keep me and my family safe" from human and animal attackers because they are "comfortable" with doing so. In fact, to some it seems, a CHL is almost a "hobby." Those same folks however still allow their family to drive, fly, go boating, swim in lakes and oceans, ski, motor bike, climb mountains or rock faces, etc. and participate in all sorts of activities that have dangers involved. Not that they don't take precautions, but to really keep them and their families safe they shouldn't/wouldn't do it at all if they truly want to be out of danger. But not participating in the activities they enjoy is not an acceptable level of risk prevention in their personal opinion, so they choose to do so. It is the same for those not willing to carry 24/7, and/or constantly be in a mode of assessing "threat levels" or otherwise always looking over their shoulder or being on the alert for 30.06 signs, or constantly arming and disarming if they work or have to visit prohibited places frequently. There are passive modes of prevention (fire extinguisher on hand, smoke detectors, jumper cables as mentioned) and active modes of prevention (carrying 24/7, constantly assessing alert levels, arming and disarming several times daily, etc.) Each person makes the personal decision on what has an acceptable level of participation that fits within their comfort zone. Carrying 24/7 only addresses one area of threat/danger to one's life and the lives of their family, but those same people may be quite unwilling to give up certain activities they enjoy, or perceive a need to participate in, in order to keep them and their families safe. No different than someone unwilling to carry 24/7 if they find it interferes with their lifestyle IMHO.

Shoot_First wrote:

G26ster wrote:

Shoot_First wrote:Why have a smoke alarm or fire extinguisher if your house is not going to catch fire? Why have jumper cables if your car will always start?

Actually, I had to compromise but not wearing my gun in the bed. You may laugh, but we were staying with a friends in Indiana and he wore his 1911 OWB all the time. We both got up at about the same time to go the bathroom in the middle of the night and he was wearing his pistol while in pajamas.

My wife is actually ok with my having a pistol in both her car and my truck, by my side end table in the family room, and pistols on both bedside nightstands along with a Mossberg 500 12 gauge tactical in the closet as well as me strapping on my 1911 every time I leave the house. No kids to worry about though.

I'm not posting this in disagreement, but simply as an observation. That said, I'll put my flame suit on anyway

Everyone on this planet has a different view of what they are willing to do to keep safe. Just because someone does not have the desire to carry 24/7 does not mean they are fundamentally different than those that do. People do what falls within their personal level of what is enough. One may carry 24/7 to "keep me and my family safe" from human and animal attackers because they are "comfortable" with doing so. In fact, to some it seems, a CHL is almost a "hobby." Those same folks however still allow their family to drive, fly, go boating, swim in lakes and oceans, ski, motor bike, climb mountains or rock faces, etc. and participate in all sorts of activities that have dangers involved. Not that they don't take precautions, but to really keep them and their families safe they shouldn't/wouldn't do it at all if they truly want to be out of danger. But not participating in the activities they enjoy is not an acceptable level of risk prevention in their personal opinion, so they choose to do so. It is the same for those not willing to carry 24/7, and/or constantly be in a mode of assessing "threat levels" or otherwise always looking over their shoulder or being on the alert for 30.06 signs, or constantly arming and disarming if they work or have to visit prohibited places frequently. There are passive modes of prevention (fire extinguisher on hand, smoke detectors, jumper cables as mentioned) and active modes of prevention (carrying 24/7, constantly assessing alert levels, arming and disarming several times daily, etc.) Each person makes the personal decision on what has an acceptable level of participation that fits within their comfort zone. Carrying 24/7 only addresses one area of threat/danger to one's life and the lives of their family, but those same people may be quite unwilling to give up certain activities they enjoy, or perceive a need to participate in, in order to keep them and their families safe. No different than someone unwilling to carry 24/7 if they find it interferes with their lifestyle IMHO.

Since your observation was based on my post, no disagreement with your point of view since I totally agree with it, but I do wonder what I said to prompt it. Help me out please. By carrying 24/7, I must assume that you mean carrying while sleeping... would that be IWB or OWB or some other means to keep your piece on your person?

Jumping Frog wrote:The first 3-4 years I carried, I just quietly went about my business. My wife had no clue that I carried all the time. I wasn't trying to lie about it or hide it, I just simply concealed that firearm and carried it.

Gradually, we would have situations like a dark parking lot at night where she would ask if I was armed. "Of course." Over time it dawned on her that I always carried. It just became the new normal.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Cshuff21 wrote:Good points, thank you.

I plan to carry when I can, just don't want her snickering behing my back. I think once I carry for a couple of months she will forget about it and get used to it. She is all for me getting it don't get me wrong but don't think she understands the reason behind it.

Spouses who laugh at their spouse behind their backs have a long way to go in learning about respect and how to show love. I don't always agree with the way my wife chooses to do a thing, but I don't laugh at her about it, and I NEVER laugh at her behind her back. I have far too much respect for her.

Show her some of the stories on this very forum where men are married to women who disagreed with or mocked their desire to carry a firearm; and then later at a Walmart or something, the wife suddenly realizes that they are in some immediately impending danger and quickly asks the husband, "do you have your gun with you?" That usually puts paid to the mocking.

But seriously....... my ex-wife AND her mother used to make fun of me for various stupid reasons. The one I remember the most is mocking me for the way I walked. I have no idea why. Friends on this forum who know me will tell you that I have a perfectly normal walk, but my wife and MIL used to mock me for it. Note, I said EX-wife. My current wife of 25 years is a far better person than that.

bayouhazard wrote:

JALLEN wrote:Don't forget to let her watch the testimony of Susan Gratia Hupp describing how she watched her parents murdered in Luby's while her pistol was in the glove box of her car where it was then required to be kept, while Senator Schumer looked like something he had for breakfast disagreed with him.

Technically, it may have also been illegal in the car back then.

The Annoyed Man wrote:G26ster, no flames from me either. I understand that not everyone is going to carry all the time, or even carry at all. And certainly, one can be married to someone who is against it. I just don't think that spouses mocking one another disrespectfully is a recipe for a sound marriage, that's all.

The Annoyed Man wrote:G26ster, no flames from me either. I understand that not everyone is going to carry all the time, or even carry at all. And certainly, one can be married to someone who is against it. I just don't think that spouses mocking one another disrespectfully is a recipe for a sound marriage, that's all.

Carrying a gun can be a scary reminder that we live in a potentially violent world and some folks just don't want to admit it.