Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

https://wtkr.com/2018/07/10/child-shot- ... ay-police/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Preliminary investigations revealed that around 9 a.m., a 28-year-old Portsmouth resident was driving her 5-year-old son to a doctor’s appointment when the child unbuckled himself from his child seat and got hold of his mother’s purse, which contained a handgun, VSP said.

The mother told police she was on the phone and did not realize what her son was doing.

VSP said she heard a loud bang and later discovered her son had shot himself in the wrist. The mother drove to a Patient First Center in Newport News to have her son treated.

Once at Patient First, the child was examined and then was transported to Norfolk CHKD. He is currently in stable condition.

In another topic I posted - seriously - that CHL classes should spend time on Using the Restroom While Armed. It's an important consideration that isn't baked into most pre-existing gun classes (which is what most CHL classes are based from) and isn't something that people who've owned guns but not carried them outside the home will have had to consider.

The Perils of Purse Carry really ought to be another topic. Preferably using that name too. I know some (most) of those who purse carry won't like that, but the reality is that purse carry is one of the easiest ways to carry a gun ... and one of the hardest ways to carry a gun safely and effectively. And the consequences of purse carry gone wrong have the potential for often being much worse than most other sorts of 'bad carry' stories. At the low end a purse thief gets a bonus gun. At the far end, situations like this or worse where a child gets the gun and shoots themself, a sibling or parent.

How to Carry Concealed In a Purse (If You Must)
Should I Carry in my Purse?
Purse Carry is the Worst Carry
3 Reasons You Should Never, Ever Use a Concealed Carry Purse

^ It really should be any type of "off body" carry.

I know a lot of men who conceal in either their "man purse" (aka "EDC bag"), backpack, or waist/fanny-pack. This should extend to them, too.

Agreed that the same info applies to all off-body, but it's more of an issue with purses because so many women have carried a purse for years (even decades) before getting a CHL. They've got literally thousands of days of repeated behavior in handling their purse. It shouldn't be underestimated how difficult it is to overcome those kind of deeply established patterns. Yes the issues and rules would apply to men (and women) using other off-body methods too, but the difficulty difference in scale IMO is significant.

I'm not saying this to demean women or purse carry. I'm saying it because I think it's part of what makes the problem so very significant and difficult.

Yeah! And we need training for all the other Constitutionally guaranteed rights too, like first amendment training for things said both out loud and in print!

BEAR! wrote:Yeah! And we need training for all the other Constitutionally guaranteed rights too, like first amendment training for things said both out loud and in print!

Where/how to store our laptops and pens.
Get licenses for the same.

One of the things I always told my kids was that they were always free to look at any of my guns. My goal was to eliminate the consequences of a child's curiosity. Notice that I said I wanted to eliminate the consequences. I don't want to put down a child's curiosity. That's how we get great inventors, scientists, doctors, explorers and innovative gun designers.

Anyway, I told them that they could look at a gun any time they wanted to. There were only two conditions. First, they had to ask me for permission. Secondly, they had to wait for me to get the gun, ensure it was unloaded then they could look at it as long as they wished and I was present.

This approach never caused any problems. I drilled this policy into them when they were toddlers. By the time they were five, a gun was just another accessory that Daddy put on whenever he got dressed. Their curiosity was always satisfied and they never abused the privilege.

BTW, I hate purse/bag carry.

bignflnut wrote:

BEAR! wrote:Yeah! And we need training for all the other Constitutionally guaranteed rights too, like first amendment training for things said both out loud and in print!

Where/how to store our laptops and pens.
Get licenses for the same.

1st - No one said anything about mandatory training. You're conflating the existence of training with the fact that some training has been made mandatory. The fact that training exists isn't a bad thing, and improving training topics shouldn't be considered a bad thing either.

2nd - Exercising rights is like exercising muscles - do it wrong too often and you can hurt the whole (body) enough to make it difficult or even impossible to continue exercising (the right). Here's today's example: Father kills 6-year-old daughter while cleaning loaded gun: police

DontTreadOnMe wrote:2nd - Exercising rights is like exercising muscles - do it wrong too often and you can hurt the whole (body) enough to make it difficult or even impossible to continue exercising (the right). Here's today's example: Father kills 6-year-old daughter while cleaning loaded gun: police

(Not directed @ DTOM, no quarrel with him, simply agreeing with/taking his point and running it over the goal line...)

And that's the brilliance of Negative Rights, do it wrong and there are naturally occurring consequences that serve to inform the population on how not to exercise said Rights --without the State using taxpayer money to bring forth consequences (eliminating the opportunity for State corruption)!! Then people will humbly seek training (whether formal or informal) for their own self-preservation.

Training does not need to be mandatory and expensive. The State then dictates what the standard outcome should be, and everyone teaches to the test instead of giving people knowledge and making certain that they have retained the information (not simply the ability to regurgitate it on command). The burden then falls on the "law-abiding citizen" to spend time and capital, regardless of how quickly they can grasp the content, to overcome the barriers the State places in front of their free exercise of said Rights.

Everyone is FOR education, training, competency and safety. The devil in the details is, as always, "By what standard?" and who is empowered to set forth the standard. Will we encourage citizens to self-sufficiency or State-dependency?

People irresponsibly using their Negative Natural Rights does NOT permit the State to abdicate its proper role of preserving the same Liberties that were misused by someone. Of course tyrants and usurpers will make the argument that "public safety" is served by creating "Prohibited Persons" or limiting Liberty in wide swaths, as a dog naturally returns to eat its vomit.