10 Commandments of Concealed Carry

[RAVI RANJAN]

1. No.
2. Yes , if your life is at threat you may use whatever means you have available to save your or a loved one’s life .
3. Yes .

Thank you for clarifying.

[HoneyBadger]

That is the sound of someone asking to go to jail. Like it or not, the laws of the land require, in 46 of the 50 states, a license to carry. In two states, there is no legal provision for the ordinary citizen to carry at all. Realize that things are not as we wish they were; things are as they are. If things were as we wish they would be, we wouldn’t need to carry guns at all.

Americans have constitutional carry in more than half the states now. Meaning, they won't be prosecuted for carrying a legal firearm without a CCW, in a self defense scenario.

Constitutional Carry States [Updated May 2023] - World Population Review

As of mid-2023, there are currently twenty-seven states that allow for Constitutional Carry. These states include:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
West Virginia
Wyoming

[timmy]

Firstly:

My own favorite online authority is Massad Ayoob. I don't always agree with him, but consider that dismissing what he says is not something to do lightly. He offers very good advice.

Naturally, what he says applies to the USA situation. But, is there any wisdom in this article that applies to India?

Carrying a gun is a serious commitment. Anyone who does not realize this has no business carrying a gun. This is true in India or the USA, or anywhere else, for that matter.

If You Carry, Always Carry I don't do this. When I go out anymore, I am usually carrying concealed, even if it's to the grocery store. If I go to a larger jurisdiction, I always do, because there are problems there that make carrying appropriate. If I cross state lines, it depends: the one place we go somewhat often has restrictive laws, and I have not carried there the last several times we went.

I don't carry in the house, as the clothing I wear inside doesn't allow this. However, at night, there's always something under my pillow. Often, but not always, I have something beside me on the couch while we are watching a movie.

We currently live in a very low crime area. But once, we lived in a place where there were a number of "home invasions," where crooks would batter down the door in broad daylight and do bad things. Were I still living there today (and thank goodness, I am not!) I would change my ways and carry in the house all the time, as Massad advises.

Don’t Carry If You Aren’t Prepared To Use It I agree wholeheartedly. Anyone who thinks that brandishing a gun or shooting in the air is an appropriate response to a threat is fooling themselves. If you don't intend to use it, you should not be unholstering it or even showing that you have a gun. A gun should be displayed only when the intent is to use it to incapacitate a threat as certainly as possible.

Don’t Let The Gun Make You Reckless This fits in with the rest of Massad's advice. As Humphrey Bogart says in the movie, "The Big Sleep," "Your the second person I've met today that thinks a gat in the hand means the world by the tail." People who think that threatening, waving a gun about, carrying on or talking in a foolish manner, as most certainly not prepared to carry a gun.

Get The License! This is a must. If you think that breaking the law, whatever it may be wherever you are, is the solution, you have just made your first very serious mistake.

Know What You’re Doing This is one major reason why we gather on IFG to talk guns, but this isn't a substitute for knowing your firearm and how to use it in every conceivable circumstance. When the chips are down, your adrenaline-hyped mind won't have the time or the ability to make the simple decisions about bringing the gun to deal with a threat. You must know what you are doing. This also fits in with being prepared to use it and not being reckless. When a threat presents itself is not the time to be figuring out how to get the thing out of your pocket (carrying the gun improperly shows a lack of knowing what you're doing) whether it is moral to shoot someone, etc. All of this needs to be dealt with ahead of time. The threat already has the jump on you. You won't have enough time then to practice, or contemplate whether you should have clipped your fingernails. You need to decide, usually with very little warning, whether it's appropriate to incapacitate a threat. Have the other stuff settled in your mind and with practice before you carry the gun.

Concealed Means Concealed Carrying openly or hinting at carrying will only tell a potential threat that a different approach is needed. They already have the advantage of making the first move. Don't throw away your advantage of surprise by revealing your capabilities.

Maximize Your Firearms Familiarity This is similar to "Know what you re doing." You need to be intimate with your gun. Will it go bang when you pull the trigger? What's the best way to carry it that keeps it concealed, yet makes it ready for near-instantaneous use? What ammunition gives me the best chances of surviving an incident, and what ammunition makes it less likely that an innocent bystander will be injured? (For instance, a 7.62 x 25mm bullet will go a long way and travel through a lot of things -- are you prepared to take responsibility for launching such a projectile in a situation?) Practice with an air gun can help a lot with part of the technique you will need, so even though it doesn't address all of your needs, it does address some and is worthy of consideration.

Understand The Fine Points Firstly, you must know the laws. You have no excuse not to. Then, I'd add to this and note that we know that there are some circumstances that need to be considered, for instance, is the area you might want to visit known for police goons, who are likely to harass you and put you in a bad situation? Should you stay away? Is it wise to visit places where a lot of drinking is going on, like a wedding or certain bars and taverns? Trouble will be more likely to happen there, and if you shoot someone there, you are exposing yourself to the possibility of a stay at "Hotel Gray Bar." Carrying a gun doesn't mean that you can bulldoze your way through life without paying attention to situations.

Carry An Adequate Firearm This is a tough one in India. Often, what's available is of antiquated design, and maybe even of questionable quality. It is certainly very expensive. Here, in all of Massad's suggestions, there is a gap between the USA scenario he addresses and the situation in India. All that can be done here is, in keeping with the other advice Massad gives, know your weapon and how to use it, and get the best choice that you can afford.

Use Common Sense What part of life does this not apply to?

Summing up Massad's advice, other than the choice of gun, everything he says applied to India, or the USA, or Greenland and anywhere else.

Next, to address this:

Americans have constitutional carry in more than half the states now. Meaning, they won't be prosecuted for carrying a legal firearm without a CCW, in a self defense scenario.

The USA is most certainly better off than India regarding the person who chooses to protect themselves and their family with a firearm. But it is not perfect in the USA, or anywhere else, for that matter.

There was a recent case where a policeman battered down the door of a suspects residence and entering, was shot by the suspect. The policeman returned fire and killed the suspect.

The fact that the suspect was probably a nasty drug dealer doesn't come into the picture, as in the USA, a person is legally presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. So, despite the fact that the suspect was an unsavory character has no bearing on what happened.

The law in this jurisdiction (one of the constitutional carry states listed in the above post, by the way, and probably the most pro-gun state in the USA) says that one can't shoot a policeman in the performance of his duties.

The policeman was on duty, but he entered the house without a warrant (which he was advised by higher authorities not to do), so, was he performing his duty? But, when fired on (attacked) by the suspect, he was legally permitted to defend himself by shooting back.

So, what becomes of the policeman?

There are two provisions of law at play in this, and they are vague and contradictory. A retired professor of law who is a state legislator said that this case is one that he would have submitted to his students for sorting out as a lesson. But he, himself, did not weigh in on the issues raised by the event.

All this is to say, even in the USA where the situation for the armed citizen are a lot more favorable, not everything is clear cut. The law is not always clear on every situation, and no matter what gun you might have or how capable you are, the outcome of a deadly encounter is never guaranteed -- never!

The odds of legitimately defending one's self successfully and staying out of jail afterwards are increased, I admit. But these same chances are also increased by considering Massad's advice and applying it to your situation in a thoughtful, intelligent, and rational way. This is true and should be done whether one is in India, the USA, or yes, even Greenland.

I think that Massad's advice is good, and also think that anyone who dismisses what he says in the quoted article with the wave of a hand (it's not applicable in India) is very reckless.

[HoneyBadger]

There was a recent case where a policeman battered down the door of a suspects residence and entering, was shot by the suspect. The policeman returned fire and killed the suspect.

The fact that the suspect was probably a nasty drug dealer doesn't come into the picture, as in the USA, a person is legally presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. So, despite the fact that the suspect was an unsavory character has no bearing on what happened.

The law in this jurisdiction (one of the constitutional carry states listed in the above post, by the way, and probably the most pro-gun state in the USA) says that one can't shoot a policeman in the performance of his duties.

The policeman was on duty, but he entered the house without a warrant (which he was advised by higher authorities not to do), so, was he performing his duty? But, when fired on (attacked) by the suspect, he was legally permitted to defend himself by shooting back.

It is indeed not known to people in a deadly situation what the outcome will be. Quoting niche cases is an age long tactic.

I'd like to present a case myself.
(breakdown by a YouTuber : Cops Shoot Man at WRONG House )
Now, in this situation, to sum it up in a few lines, policemen knock on the door of the wrong house. They don't announce themselves loud enough. Man comes out with a gun. Policemen retreat with their guns out. They shoot the man down. His wife comes out, returns fire to the police. The woman isn't charged with anything.
How about that, huh...

[eljefe]

While it’s good to have an international participation and perspective, in India, laws regarding firearms carry ,use, self defense are archaic and usually at the behest of the local Law enforcement. No standardised approach or enforcement.
Like the DM who insisted (and got away very proudly) that all handgun licence applicants undergo a vasectomy. His IAS curriculum very obviously did not include HUMAN RIGHTS.

This arbitrary and unlawful decision making cannot be usually contested by the litigant because the courts are chock a block with workload.

It’s good to note some landmark cases being filed and the judiciary supporting the gun owners.

I’ve been reading Ayoob for close on 35 years and he is indeed an authority.

But his experience is US centric when it comes to legislation and ‘what to do when the police land up after a gunfight” etc

Our movies,made by rich non gun owner types, show e.g.,the WHOLE cartridge being extracted from the wound of some one is shot! and the ‘Warning shot in the air ‘

I talk about movies because:

In the Indian scenario, they do have a great influence on people who are technically deprived of guns for atleast a generation, probably saw a 12ga with the grandfather, and would accept movie knowledge as the gospel truth.
Only recently, there has been a sea change with blank firing replicas being used in the movies and some of them, have been pioneering in having Indian SF personnel as technical advisers.

How could I forget?
The “shoot below the knee” question.

Even in the days before any man and his Samsung phone became a self righteous ‘Hum Media Hain’ there were educated journos, in the true sense of the word.
The common denominator was,and still remains a complete lack of firearms knowledge
As evident in the lack of decimals / or addition of the same when it comes to caliber designation. So .9 mm pistols and 12 inch shot guns are very common.
Heck I’ve seen cops in press conference describe a bolt action, pistol grip and docked barrel .315 IOF rifle as an assault rifle’



Hopefully, there are good things in the future for the Indian Gun owners !