Would You Rather Be Guilty or In Need

Post by **carlson1** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:47 pm

Please be kind. This is a very touchy topic, but after reading another thread I would like to know what you think. Would it be better to violate the 30.06 sign and be armed and need it or obey the 30.06 sign and not be armed and have to have it?
Do you think the chance of being "caught" is greater than the chance of having to have a gun?
I am curious from you "law" men - what you think the charges would be if you violated the 30.06 and had to use your gun to STOP you or others from being killed maybe using robbery as a scenario.

flintknapper · Post by **flintknapper** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:04 pm

I choose to accept that there are some places I might need/want to go where I can not lawfully carry my weapon.

Being somewhat dogmatic about following the law....I would be "caught" without. This might be easier for me to do... than for others, as I do not carry "everywhere/all the time" anyway.

I expect this will be a most interesting subject.

Mithras61 · Post by **Mithras61** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:06 pm

Truth is, my primary weapon is one I never leave home without (that being the grey matter between my ears), so even though not having a firearm when I need one is a problem, I'd find a way to do SOMETHING to stop the goblins.

CWOOD · Post by **CWOOD** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:23 pm

I will not violate a VALID 30.06. In fact I had occasion to honor one today, a rare thing. I had to go the ERCOT here in Austin, and it is properly posted, at least twice. I had some family business to attend to.

My thinking is that since I will abide by the 30.06 prohibition, the decision has been made. If something were to arise, I would not have my weapon. In the great scheme of things the odds of one of us NEEDING the firearm are extremely low in our lifetime. The odds of our NEEDING it at any particular time would certainly approach zero, so I do not feel particularly threatened given the very few valid 30.06 signs there are in the state.

I would rather disarm for a few minutes a couple of times a year (my experience has shown the frequency to be much less than that) than risk having to disarm indefinately by losing my CHL.

I do pretty much carry all the time I can legally do so (and still keep my job) but recognise that there are a few places I cannot. Some of those places I can avoid, and try to do so, and some I cannot avoid. Such is life...not without risk.

As to the question about whether or not one might be charged if one were to carry in a 30.06 zone and were forced to save a life, my guess would be probably not. In fact, if while I was in ERCOT today something tragic would have occured, I would hope that I would have tried to fetch the weapon from the car and protect my family member (or others) without worring about it much.

JLaw · Post by **JLaw** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:23 pm

Giving an exact answer to the question, I'd rather be in violation of 30.06 in order to protect my family. However...

Like flintknapper I'm particular about following the law. I disarm if I need to enter posted property. The likelyhood of being caught or needing a firearm are both small, but the situation to the question above (in real life) would play out like this...

I'd be legally unarmed and in danger. No matter how much I disagree with the 30.06 posting, it is the law.

JLaw

longtooth · Post by **longtooth** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:29 pm

I too will obey the law. I am seldom completely unarmed. I will always have my knife & most of the time my cane. Yall know how cripple I am.
I will honor the request of those in authority over the places I choose to go or must go. It is their right & I will obey the law. That is #1 reason I will not carry there.

After #1 reason, I also believe you are more apt to get caught in violation of the law than to need your gun. If I think I am more likely to need it than get caught, then I probably dont need to go there. No carry reason #2.
Vast majority of assaults are at the contact distance. Gun is not always the best option.

If it is a place that I dont have to go, I dont.

Right2Carry · Post by **Right2Carry** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:43 pm

I think we are missing a third choice here, not going in at all. I have a choice of where I do my business, and If I feel I need to be armed then I will do my business where I am allowed to carry.

If it is a place that I HAVE to do business then I must abide by the posting. I think the odds of needing my firearm at a place that I will frequent as little as possible (only when I have to) is so small, that it is an acceptable risk to abide by the 30.06 posting, and it is the law.

HighVelocity · Post by **HighVelocity** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:40 pm

If I have a choice to "not go" to a posted property then I'll choose not to go. Sometimes though, that choice is not available and I obey the law.

ScubaSigGuy · Post by **ScubaSigGuy** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:50 pm

I would choose to follow the law. If I chose otherwise, what would make me that much different than those I would need to protect myself from? I say this not judging anyone else, just myself.

Edited to correct poor typing.

KBCraig · Post by **KBCraig** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:00 pm

The question as asked implies that we can't avoid going. So strictly on an "as asked" basis, I'd rather violate 30.06.

AV8R · Post by **AV8R** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 11:41 pm

longtooth wrote:I too will obey the law. I am seldom completely unarmed. I will always have my knife & most of the time my cane. Yall know how cripple I am.
I will honor the request of those in authority over the places I choose to go or must go. It is their right & I will obey the law. That is #1 reason I will not carry there.

After #1 reason, I also believe you are more apt to get caught in violation of the law than to need your gun. If I think I am more likely to need it than get caught, then I probably dont need to go there. No carry reason #2.
Vast majority of assaults are at the contact distance. Gun is not always the best option.

If it is a place that I dont have to go, I dont.

+1

Post by **carlson1** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:04 am

carlson1 wrote:I am curious from you "law" men - what you think the charges would be if you violated the 30.06 and had to use your gun to STOP you or others from being killed maybe using robbery as a scenario.

AEA · Post by **AEA** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 1:53 am

You should add another option to your poll.

I will Not go into any posted 30.06 or 30.05 location at all, neither armed or unarmed. I simply will go somewhere else or go home.

longtooth · Post by **longtooth** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:38 am

Houston hospitals are the prime example of the place some of us cannot "not go" into.
Others include Federal Buildings. Go apply for Social Security or take a disabled friend or relative. No choice.
There are others for many people

If we ar talking business to buy, eat,...yes, & I just dont go.

JRG · Post by **JRG** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:11 am

Well, I didn't violate a 30.06 sign, but I did violate a "No Weapons" sign, accidentally. We rode the train to Ft. Worth the other day and then caught a bus to the Sundance Square area to eat and attend a movie. I had my new 642 S&W in my pocket. After riding the train to Ft. Worth and getting on the bus, the wife pointed out to me the "No Weapons" sign on the bus. Well, we were an hour and a half away from our house and car. We had no where to offload the 642. I chose to just be as unobtrusive as possible and not get caught. Having ridden public transportation before, this was the first time I had noticed anything about no weapons allowed.

I shall not be taking public transportation again.

Joe

TexasCHLforum.com

Would You Rather Be Guilty or In Need

Would you rather be found guilty of violating a 30.06 sign or being in a situation of having to have a firearm and not have one?

Would You Rather Be Guilty or In Need

Re: Would You Rather Be Guilty or In Need