Playing Golf with Someone Carrying a Weapon

[Silent]

It's interesting to see how important it is for a lot of people in USA that they actually have the right to own (and carry) a gun. A complete mind**** for me and most people in the Netherlands and other countries nearby. And by some the believe that it makes them saver; maybe in a specific situation it can, but the society in total is obviously not a saver place if everybody is allowed to carry a gun (meaning that buying a gun is also easier,). If I would be a criminal and I know that my potential victims will probably have a gun, will I stop targetting them? Or will I also get my hands on a gun or even get more violent from the start to contain potential danger? I'm sure innocent lives will be saved in some examples because people carry, but criminals will more likely join the party carrying heavy or more violently as well which costs lives. Because of the gun laws it's also more easy for them to own and get one, and there are just a lot of guns 'on the market'. Anyway, not too much off topic I hope. Not judging, is just an interesting observation: our cultures are alike, yet so different (this is one example).

[Jeremie Boop]

No I didn't.  I said that if a guy playing golf with me was carrying a gun, I said I would think he is probably a crazy person.  Probably.  Not definitely.  I'm open minded.

I guess that's totally different and completely OK.

[14ledo81]

[QUOTE name="dsc123" url="/t/81903/playing-golf-with-someone-carrying-a-weapon/54#post_1140850"]   [QUOTE name="David in FL" url="/t/81903/playing-golf-with-someone-carrying-a-weapon/54#post_1140838"] Not at all. The hypocrisy lies in that he clearly believes in his right to legally carry and decide for himself [SIZE=14px] where and when [/SIZE] it's appropriate to do so. . He does not that exact same courtesy/right to others.[/QUOTE] He didn't say others don't have the right to legally carry on the golf course. He just said that people who do that are the "scaredy types" and that he probably wouldn't enjoy their company.  [QUOTE name="Jeremie Boop" url="/t/81903/playing-golf-with-someone-carrying-a-weapon/54#post_1140839"]   He said the person is "crazy" because of the gun. How is that even a fair or accurate assumption? I will concede I should not have used "never" because that's not a good word to use. I would argue that frequently is probably a stretch though, depending on where you live. If you [SIZE=14px] live in a bad area you [/SIZE] may need to make snap judgments a lot more. [/QUOTE] No I didn't.  I said that if a guy playing golf with me was carrying a gun, I said I would think he is probably a crazy person.  Probably.  Not definitely.  I'm open minded.  [/QUOTE] It really depends where you are playing. There are regions in the world where it's pretty normal to carry a weapon, and the people who do so are perfectly likeable non-crazy folks. They are not necessarily just protecting themselves against other humans, too.

I think this does play a big part.

[iacas]

It's interesting to see how important it is for a lot of people in USA that they actually have the right to own (and carry) a gun. A complete mind**** for me and most people in the Netherlands and other countries nearby. And by some the believe that it makes them saver; maybe in a specific situation it can, but the society in total is obviously not a saver place if everybody is allowed to carry a gun (meaning that buying a gun is also easier,). If I would be a criminal and I know that my potential victims will probably have a gun, will I stop targetting them? Or will I also get my hands on a gun or even get more violent from the start to contain potential danger? I'm sure innocent lives will be saved in some examples because people carry, but criminals will more likely join the party carrying heavy or more violently as well which costs lives. Because of the gun laws it's also more easy for them to own and get one, and there are just a lot of guns 'on the market'.

There are plenty of actual studies and stuff to answer these questions.

Generally speaking, though, you're thinking about it backward.

My dad had a bumper sticker on his gun case when I was a kid. It said "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

[Lihu]

It's interesting to see how important it is for a lot of people in USA that they actually have the right to own (and carry) a gun. A complete mind**** for me and most people in the Netherlands and other countries nearby. And by some the believe that it makes them saver; maybe in a specific situation it can, but the society in total is obviously not a saver place if everybody is allowed to carry a gun (meaning that buying a gun is also easier,). If I would be a criminal and I know that my potential victims will probably have a gun, will I stop targetting them? Or will I also get my hands on a gun or even get more violent from the start to contain potential danger? I'm sure innocent lives will be saved in some examples because people carry, but criminals will more likely join the party carrying heavy or more violently as well which costs lives. Because of the gun laws it's also more easy for them to own and get one, and there are just a lot of guns 'on the market'.

Anyway, not too much off topic I hope. Not judging, is just an interesting observation: our cultures are alike, yet so different (this is one example).

I think it's the situation more than a difference in cultures. Criminals are more likely to have guns in USA as well, just like anywhere else.

In my area, there have been numerous criminals posing as FBI (or other government) agents and robbing the families (with potential for worse acts). Many of the people who are not native to the USA have learned to use handguns and have also purchased them. Not a great idea in my mind, because they most likely would not be prepared to take a life as many criminals would, but their chance of survival is better with one than without.

These are people for whom it was unthinkable to purchase a firearm, but are now comfortable purchasing them and practicing with them. So for them it was clearly the situation. I'm sure their other views have not changed all that much.

[cipher]

No I didn't.  I said that if a guy playing golf with me was carrying a gun, I said I would think he is probably a crazy person.  Probably.  Not definitely.  I'm open minded.

Haha.

[dsc123]

I guess that's totally different and completely OK.

I'm not sure why its objectionable at all. I'm not saying I'd ask not to play with them.  I'm not saying I'd be scared stiff.  I'm not saying the person needs to be committed.  I'm just saying that in mind, I would think, "ok, this guy's tee time prep list includes putting his gun in his golf bag.  he is probably crazy," and I'd probably pay a little more attention to him.  And by the end of the round if it turns out that he is totally normal, then great.

If you were playing with someone and they told you that they had stockpiled a years worth of canned corn in their bomb shelter in anticipation of the next "big one", would you think "hmm...this here might be a crazy person"?  Its the same thing.  Someone who goes to unusual lengths to protect themselves against exceedingly unlikely threats, while not caring about the more obvious ones.  You're probably more likely to get killed by a golf ball or an overturned cart than anything a gun would save you from, but the guy in this scenario isn't wearing a helmet or putting training wheels on his cart.

It really depends where you are playing. There are regions in the world where it's pretty normal to carry a weapon, and the people who do so are perfectly likeable non-crazy folks. They are not necessarily just protecting themselves against other humans, too.

Sure, but as I understand it, all of that was written out of the question.

[Golfingdad]

It's interesting to see how important it is for a lot of people in USA that they actually have the right to own (and carry) a gun. A complete mind**** for me and most people in the Netherlands and other countries nearby. And by some the believe that it makes them saver; maybe in a specific situation it can, but the society in total is obviously not a saver place if everybody is allowed to carry a gun (meaning that buying a gun is also easier,). If I would be a criminal and I know that my potential victims will probably have a gun, will I stop targetting them? Or will I also get my hands on a gun or even get more violent from the start to contain potential danger? I'm sure innocent lives will be saved in some examples because people carry, but criminals will more likely join the party carrying heavy or more violently as well which costs lives. Because of the gun laws it's also more easy for them to own and get one, and there are just a lot of guns 'on the market'.

Anyway, not too much off topic I hope. Not judging, is just an interesting observation: our cultures are alike, yet so different (this is one example).

An awful lot of people here in the US feel the same as you, FYI.

[Huddo]

The US is a great country, one I hope to visit in the future but I can't comprehend or get my head around such a high firearm homicide rate per 100000 people.

[Silent]

There are plenty of actual studies and stuff to answer these questions. Generally speaking, though, you're thinking about it backward. My dad had a bumper sticker on his gun case when I was a kid. It said "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

A certain percentage of the outlaws, yes. Offcourse. But when guns are a 'general good' (is that correct English?) and there is a free market in it, a lot more people will have guns. A small time thief or wanna-be criminal in Holland will have a hard time to get his hands on a gun, if not impossible. So the crimes he will commit will simply not involve a gun. The quote you gave is a over simplification in my opinion: everybody understands that if you ban guns now, that criminals won't turn in their guns. But it's obviously more than just make a law saying 'it's illegal now', especially when already a lot of guns are already out there. Thing with the whole gun law now is that if you personally decide to pursuit a criminal path you can do so with your gun you obtained legally (you said you have two, right?) If your laws were different (in the past already) you probably couldn't do that with a gun unless you already have connections.

[iacas]

The US is a great country, one I hope to visit in the future but I can't comprehend or get my head around such a high firearm homicide rate per 100000 people.

I mean no offense by this - it'd be like me commenting on the gun situation in your country - but you're ignorant to the facts here. You haven't lived here, you haven't spent time researching the stuff here. You see a few bits and bobs in the media.

The "gun violence" issue in the U.S. is largely an economic issue, and it's also largely minorities shooting other minorities. The U.S. often includes suicides while other countries do not.

Kind of OT for this thread though.

A certain percentage of the outlaws, yes. Offcourse. But when guns are a 'general good' (is that correct English?) and there is a free market in it, a lot more people will have guns. A small time thief or wanna-be criminal in Holland will have a hard time to get his hands on a gun, if not impossible. So the crimes he will commit will simply not involve a gun. The quote you gave is a over simplification in my opinion: everybody understands that if you ban guns now, that criminals won't turn in their guns. But it's obviously more than just make a law saying 'it's illegal now', especially when already a lot of guns are already out there. Thing with the whole gun law now is that if you personally decide to pursuit a criminal path you can do so with your gun you obtained legally (you said you have two, right?) If your laws were different (in the past already) you probably couldn't do that with a gun unless you already have connections.

Again, I'd just encourage you to do some reading on the topic (if you care to know, which I can't blame you for saying you don't, as you don't live here). Guns by themselves often save lives and prevent violent crimes from occurring. Far more often than you'd think.

Let's stick to the narrowly defined topic here, though: a guy with a CCW on the golf course (without wild animal threats or something).

P.S. I play golf with a guy who carries 99% of the time. I don't feel any safer or less safe, but if trouble occurred, I'd feel safer in that moment.

[Dave2512]

I have no problem with this.

I guess the "scaredy cat" comment rubbed me the wrong way. It seemed a little judgmental. I think Erik showed (in his above posts) some very good, possible reasons a "normal" (not scaredy cat type) person would carry on a course.

I had a feeling it would generate responses I could use as examples. Golf being as social as it is tends to include a lot of small talk during the course of a round. If someone has conflicting views about this subject they likely will have conflicting views about other touchy subjects I try to avoid when golfing, like politics and religion. But for whatever reason it seems to come up often. I've had to ask people I get paired with to limit the conversation to golf more than once.

[Huddo]

I mean no offense by this - it'd be like me commenting on the gun situation in your country - but you're ignorant to the facts here. You haven't lived here, you haven't spent time researching the stuff here. You see a few bits and bobs in the media.

The "gun violence" issue in the U.S. is largely an economic issue, and it's also largely minorities shooting other minorities. The U.S. often includes suicides while other countries do not.

Kind of OT for this thread though.

Again, I'd just encourage you to do some reading on the topic (if you care to know, which I can't blame you for saying you don't, as you don't live here). Guns by themselves often save lives and prevent violent crimes from occurring. Far more often than you'd think.

Let's stick to the narrowly defined topic here, though: a guy with a CCW on the golf course (without wild animal threats or something).

P.S. I play golf with a guy who carries 99% of the time. I don't feel any safer or less safe, but if trouble occurred, I'd feel safer in that moment.

No offense taken,..........................the only consideration I would have over here would be whether to play with someone who was carrying a double sided chipper!

[rehmwa]

This statement (if it just stands alone) makes me chuckle

as for carrying while golfing:

1 - I respect that a holder would carry on himself rather than abandoning a gun in his car for 3-5 hours.

2 - In that theme, I have issues with logistics while golfing.  I would want to keep it close and never isolated.  And, frankly, out of sight:

If you are walking, then it's concealed and not inhibiting and can be stowed in the bag.  But at the turn, if you go in for a soda and a brat, you have to pull it and carry it on your person - then it's not 'out of sight' - and if the club house forbids firearms, then you have to leave it unattended in the bag...I'm not a fan.

if you drive a cart, then again.....either it's on your person, or you frequently leave it in the bag on the cart and go for short walks....again, I'm not a fan

for me, I have to retract an earlier statement - if you carry on the course, you need to be willing to carry it on your person at least some portion of the time and risk scaring some uniformed and inexperienced, never been raised with firearms, city liberal.  Or, gasp, a european that's never even shot a firearm that'll judge the whole country if they see a spent bullet in a movie.

(my father was a gunsmith and dealer - I was raised with the things and taught to use, handle, clean, store, transport guns.  we in the US are way past the time when dads taught kids proper firearm care - I hate to say it, but some proficiency in the above areas is a good idea for being able to obtain a 'permit to own'.  But once that's done, I'd be happy with private individuals owning as many and any kind of firearm as they wish without needless licensing, fees, or registrations.  Of course, violent felons would lose that right.  But ordinary citizens should have the right to own property without a bunch of interference.

I own guns because they are neat - they are full of history, amazing pieces of engineering, and great memories of growing up.  I don't carry, I'm not scared more or less if I'm armed or not, and they don't reflect my anatomy I hope.  The pieces I own are very much collectors items and quite an investment.

Anti-gunners have no clue - but I suspect a good portion of them mean well if a bit uninformed.  However, the pro-gunners argue self protection almost exclusively - I don't think that argument helps the cause. It just lets the other side have a topic to poke at.

I, personally, don't own for self protection.  I own because I have the right to own private property - it is no one's business WHY I choose to own any property including guns.  I am not a convicted violent felon - so it's really not anyone's business at all.  So don't ask me why I own guns - it's not your business.  The only argument I'll put forth is my right to own private property without interference from others or the goverment.  If I use it for sport, or as an investment, or protection, or if I were to fill the barrel with dirt and use it as a flower planter, or as a way to teach responsibility to kids, etc etc etc - It's no one else's business.)

[Golfingdad]

I had a feeling it would generate responses I could use as examples. Golf being as social as it is tends to include a lot of small talk during the course of a round. If someone has conflicting views about this subject they likely will have conflicting views about other touchy subjects I try to avoid when golfing, like politics and religion. But for whatever reason it seems to come up often. I've had to ask people I get paired with to limit the conversation to golf more than once.

I've always found, whenever somebody is talking about something I don't like, whether it be politics, or racist jokes, or whatever, that a non-response is the best way to get them off that subject.  Most people take that hint.  It's also possible I've just been lucky so far.

[rkim291968]

I voted no (2nd one).   My 1st impressions of people have failed me before.

[Dave2512]

I've always found, whenever somebody is talking about something I don't like, whether it be politics, or racist jokes, or whatever, that a non-response is the best way to get them off that subject.  Most people take that hint.  It's also possible I've just been lucky so far.

More than being offended as someone that lives and owns a business in the area I simply don't want to share that much sensitive info. The what to do you think about touchy subject X type of things usually come after the who are you and what do you do conversation. I am a big city transplant in a small town. It amazes me what the locals talk about. Last stranger I played with told me about his kids in the Navy, when he retired and his opinions about the POTUS before we got to the 4th hole. He seemed convinced his views were universal.

[mvmac]

For the most part I think I would be comfortable with it. It would be a little weird at first because they felt the need to tell me and it would be the first round where I knowingly played with a guy that was carrying. Gun owners tend to take the responsibility seriously so I have no reason to doubt the guy unless he's acting crazy. If someone wants to hurt me on the golf course they have 14 metal sticks they can try to hit me with.