Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:17:26 — 26.7MB)
Subscribe: RSS
I had the pleasure of interviewing a professional pilot who also carries concealed and is a competition shooter. So I interviewed him and got his unique perspective on concealed carry. We discussed the issue of concealed carry on airplanes and whether it would be a good idea or not and also his testing of RBCD ammo. We also discussed his M&P .40c and our situational awareness when carrying in public, especially a restaurant. This episode begins with a few audio comments from listeners and my follow up answers regarding open carry and gun store clerks. Thanks for downloading and listening, Bob Mayne, HandgunWorld Show
Hey Bob, really like the show and had a great time listening (made cleaning the house a little easier).
Wanted to comment on the Federal Air Marshal stuff you mentioned. There’s an old FAM qualifier course up at http://www.thegunzone.com/fam-lawman/fam-qual.html so you can get an idea of how good those guys are. As to the ammo they use, they carry 357sig Speer Gold Dots in a special “limited penetration” loading. You could get some at Streicher’s (http://www.policehq.com/Products/CCI-357SGD) if you wanted to. That’s also a great place to pick up carry ammo of all kinds, some of the best prices I’ve seen on some hard to find ammo types.
They were using Sig 229s, but got a contract with Sig for P250s, which I heard via internet rumor did not go so well (problems with the guns), so they might still be with the 229s. That’s worth what you paid for it, though. 🙂
Hey Bob – I’ve been following your podcast for several months now, and generally find it to be enjoyable listening. However, I feel that I must take you to task for several comments.
1- You made a comment on this podcast (and on previous ones as well) regarding 2nd Amendment v personal property rights. You didn’t feel that personal property rights necessarily trumped what you felt was you right to carry anywhere. I disagree. Vehemently and completely.
Let me be clear. We’re not talking about public use property like a city street or the local playground, for example. We’re talking about private property such as someone’s home. Let’s say hypothetically that I was anti-gun (I’m not), and you came onto my property… and I, or my wife, or anyone else in my family were to ask you to leave your gun in the car… your only options are either to comply, or to leave. Period. You can question, you can protest, but you will do one or the other. You don’t get to make the rules on my private property… I do. Property rights are are strongly protected in the USA, and in the state of Texas, deadly force can legally be used to protect property. Consider also that no less than (3) out of the original (10) Amendments protected personal property rights in some respect.
The 3rd Amendment – “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”
Meaning basically that the your home won’t be turned into a free hotel for the military against your will.
The 4th Amendment – “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Meaning that your personal property is to be respected, and no one is allowed to come onto your property to take anything unless they have a damn good reason to do so, and following a predetermined process.
The 5th Amendment – “…. nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Pretty self explanatory, I think.
A common trait that all free societies share that as free men, we can own property, including land, that is ours, and ours alone. Contrast that with other countries such as China (where my family originally came from) where their citizens (subjects?) CANNOT own land, but can only lease land from the government to farm, or build on. You see, the STATE owns everything. If fact, the government of China can, and has, moved entire towns or cities for the sole purpose of using that land for building factories. That’s why I took great exception to your comment that you didn’t see any difference between being allowed to carry on public property and carry on private property. There is a difference you know… an important one.
2- You also made a comment on this podcast that you didn’t feel that anyone should take a shot in a crowded commercial aircraft because of the risk of damaging the aircraft. Maybe I miss-understood your point, but consider this…
Why would your gun be drawn in the first place? Only if your life was in imminent danger, right? There has to be a bad guy/gal with motive, means, and ability, right? Would you think that someone with a weapon on board an aircraft who was shooting/stabbing folks and trying to penetrate the pilot’s cabin might qualify? Would you think that in that situation you’d be able to ‘talk ’em down’? Of course not. There’s a time and place for talking, and that ain’t it. Do you think that the passenger’s on United Flight 93 might have wished for a gun of some kind during their moment of need? To say that it’s too dangerous to shoot in an imminent danger situation because you might hit and damage something on the aircraft seems really, well… silly. Sounds like the anti-gun arguments a fellow co-worker used to spew… “I could NEVER shoot at someone if I was being attacked on the street! What if I missed, and hit an innocent bystander?” Guess what, you’re dead for sure if you don’t. If you train hard, and train right (isn’t that what the Air Marshal’s do?), your odds for hitting your target, and not anything (or anyone) else are much greatly improved. If you’re about to become a statistic unless you fight back hard… well it seems obvious that you HAVE to fight.
Apologies if I come off harsh, as I sincerely do not have any intentions of being a troll or a ‘jerk-at-large’. What I did want to do was make several pointed observations. I’d be happy to discuss this with you at any time… via email, phone, or otherwise…. you have my email address. Peace.
Regards,
John L. from PA
No apologies necessary John, I don’t take offense at all. Very well written and thought out response. On the issue of “homeowner” property rights, I completely agree with you. Perhaps I’ve miscommunicated in my podcasts. I’m referring to “employers.” That’s where I have a problem with the property rights argument. I don’t think employers should have the right to deny law abiding citizens their 2nd amendment rights. However, if you the homeowner don’t want me in your house with a gun, I’ll respect that and not carry a gun in your home. I think these are 2 different issues.
As for shooting in a crowded airplane if my life is in danger, well said. I didn’t think of it that way. The scenario you pose, is one where I would definitely shoot and glad I had a gun with me at the time. So excellent comment. I will have to capitulate on that one and cede that point to you, because it’s a good one I didn’t think of.
Once again, thanks for your well thought out comments. I like comments like these. They are good for discussion and for reasonable thought.