defensive handgun bad guy

Why Carry Concealed?

Hey folks I wanted to give you a heads up that I have posted another video on my Youtube Channel. Please head on over, watch the video and share it with those that you think might be interested.

Why do you carry concealed? This is an important question to answer and many people only give it a passing thought. Do you carry to feel safer? To support the Second Amendment? Or, do you carry for some other reason? Take a minute to watch this quick video and then leave your comments below and then consider sharing this video with others who carry concealed.

Why do you Carry Concealed?

Get out there and get some training. Keep it simple and please stay safe!

Connect with Safety Solutions Academy:

wwwFacebookTwitterYoutube – Instagram: Paul_SSA


 

 

4 replies
  1. Mick Wood
    Mick Wood says:

    Illinois resident here; can’t legally carry off of private property, but do so when/where legal. I consider it part of my responsibility to my family, myself, and society to have someone at “the tip of the spear” in the event a firearm is necessary to stop someone or something such as a rabid dog… not much difference, really, if the someone has intent to harm. I have had a home self-defense episode where my revolver was very good assistance in stopping someone who had broken in; no shots fired, thankfully. I believe as well that God has a purpose for each of us, and those close to me would be unable to carry His message if dead.

    Reply
  2. Weary Traveler
    Weary Traveler says:

    I carry daily – for multiple reasons… 2A – feral cats – But primarily for the same reason I always wear a seat belt – I hope never to need it but it’s there just in case.

    Reply
  3. Tactical Operator
    Tactical Operator says:

    I had my CCW for over a year before I carried on a consistent basis. Once I found the propper, comfortable ( after it was broken in ) IWB holster, I then carried almost 70% of the time. I found myself not carrying when I was, “just running down the street to get a soda” , or, “hopping over to the grocery store to grab some milk”. That’s when bad things can go down and now myself and my family ( or other innocent bystanders) are at the mercy of the bad guy. I now carry about 95% of the time. To the criminals that prey on good, hardworking, GOD fearing members of society, “We are prepared. We are educated. We are responsible. When that time comes, we will be ready. You won’t know what hit you”.

    Thanks for the site Paul, it’s great and informative.

    Reply
  4. Dr. Stephen Spies
    Dr. Stephen Spies says:

    Carrying concealed can become second nature. After retiring from a Special Agent with an U.S. Gov’t Agency, and then several years as a Chief of Police, I have, as a requirement of the job carried concealed for more than forty ) years. I was always amazed when another Chief would comment about “Civilians” carrying a concealed weapon, I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer as to why 95% of all retired sworn officers have any more need (if an Agent or Officer was involved in a case, or cases involving Organized Crime, Terrorist or Hate Groups, etc. that are known for their long memories in retaliation it would be self-evident, but for that other 95% the threat level is not much increase over any other citizen) “need” to be able to carry a firearm. My response has been either we all need to be able to carry a concealed firearm nor none of us do, after retirement it is a matter of Constitutional Rights, not employment theory. I can agree that there is a need for basic training for individuals who have not attended a Police, or other similar academy, but much of this training is also applicable to retired officers who move to a different jurisdiction after retirement as each of the fifty (50) states, and the District of Columbia have differing standards and requirements for the use of deadly force. I have come to wonder why people such as the infamous Mayor Bloomberg, and my colleagues from the “Top ” cities where they are Police Chiefs are so opposed to citizens carrying a firearm. Due to my location in a rural area my “network news” comes from CBS & NBC affiliates in New York City, and Los Angeles, and I cannot remember a single week when I have not heard about at least one victim of a Sexual Assault, and another citizen having been the victim of a Robbery on the street. It would not take every citizen carrying a concealed weapon to affect this crime rate, as soon as it became evident that citizens were arming themselves and would resist victimization with the use of “Deadly Force”, the criminals trade book instructions would change, as it is difficult to know which elderly lady carrying the proceeds of her monthly Social(ist) Security Check will deliver several 9mm rounds in lieu of money when accosted, and which young college student might administer the removal of genitalia with they same type of response rather than submit to sexual degradation. It is the “threat of the unknown” that will deter, and defend one against crime, not the police. As I have often said in addressing citizens, “My police officers can rarely protect you, there are too few of them, with too much area, and too many responses to be proactive. In reality, what we can do is take a report, summon an ambulance, collect evidence and testify in court. Every citizen has a moral obligation to protect themselves, as it is by doing so, they assist us (at the time I was referring to agency personnel) in crime prevention by ensuring that the violator is still at the scene after the ~5min. to ~ 20 min. that it will take us to respond to the call”. In addition to that which was being said, there was the inference that while in the best case, the responding officer will meet with a complainant holding the violator at gunpoint, but unfortunately, law enforcement officers rarely deal with the “best case”, and in the alternative, if only one party is either seriously injured or deceased, in the interests of the conduct of the investigation, crime scene preservation, officer safety, etc., it is universally preferable that the injured or deceased party be the offender, and the surviving party be the intended victim who, through the use of the minimum force required, but deadly force if necessary, has mitigated the threat and can now assist the responding officer, and subsequently the investigating officers in ascertaining exactly what has transpired.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *