I may have saved my own life

This last week I was in Atlanta attending an exposition for the industry I am in. I was also a vendor and assisted in maintaining a booth. The exposition was at the Ga. World Congress Center in midtown Atlanta. I have a CCW and ALWAYS carry when I travel. Ga. has very good reciprocity with my state. I was not carrying on my person but kept my Sig 226 in the console of my SUV. It seems that each time I walked to the parking lot, I would be accosted by pan-handlers, some rather aggressive. It became a real annoyance since there was no security in the parking lot, other then the guy in the ticket booth which was some distance away.

I was walking back to the car with my arms loaded and unlocked the car remotely. I threw the boxes in the back of the car and then got in the drivers seat myself. I was checking my cell-phone for messages and the next thing I know, there was a very large person almost in my car. He opened the passenger door and was leaning with both hand on the seat. He looked into the back seat and than looked at me and said in a not so friendly voice, "I need some money". This guy was leaning in such a way that he was closer to me than a normal passenger would. I think I went into shock because I simply reached into the console, pulled my pistol out of the holster and pointed it at his fore-head. While telling him to "Get the fuck out of my car", I reached up and chambered a round.

He did not say another word and backed up and closed the door. I locked them, started the car and drove away. When I got to the Hampton, I realized I was shaking and had to just sit in the car until the fear washed through me.

I don't know if this guy would have hurt me but he was very big and I am ~155 lbs. He could have easily grabbed my throat and squeezed the life out of me without me making a peek. The fact that he had looked in the back of my car gave me pause.

Whatever the case, I saved myself some pocket change.

I mean, shit, if you don't want to use your gun, I understand of course. But surely you could have taken him out with your car. If you own an SUV, by criminy, you ought to Goddamn use your SUV, right?

this was reality. If he had lunged towards me, I am quite sure I woudl have shot him. My SIG is DAO, meaning it has no visible hammer. If I knew I was not going to shoot him, I wold not have chambered a round. (I keep it chambered now! DAO's are very safe, even when chambered).

If I had killed him, I am quite sure I would be in Atlanta today, rather then my nice cozy home in Fl. I can't say I was thinking. I felt more like I was on auto-pilot or being guided by a force other than myself. I just don't remember thinking, do this and then do that. And besides, if I shot him, it wold have really messed up the company car!

With the wording from D.E.D. it "could" have been seen as nothing more than "aggressive panhandling". With the "wrong" prosecutor D.E.D. could have wound up on murder charges. I think D.E.D. did just fine. I am very glad to hear that all turned out well.

I know having a gun and having the willingness to use are 2 different things.

In the last 2 years, I realized I would use one with no 2nd thoughts, esp. if I still lived in a city.
and I am an *old* lady, sorta.

.....you did just the right thing....scared the bejeezus out of him. I would not shoot someone for loss of money, but a threat to my life, my families, or another innocent human being surely would warrant it. I would say you should have reported it to the police, but since he was gone, the chances of him being caught were scarce.

I own 9 handguns in varying calibers, all except for a Colt .22 New Frontier were inherited from my father. He passed away 18 yrs ago, and I have not fired a single one of them. I don't have a CCW permit and I don't carry a gun. I keep them locked away in a safe, only to clean them once or twice a year. They are more memories to me than weapons.

I live in Texas and we have the Castle Law that permits a person to shoot anyone who breaks into their house without prosecution.
I like the law....I hope it deters criminals from invading other's space. I am an advocate of the death penalty. I believe if you take someone else's life with malice, you should be prepared to pay with yours. I'm not into paying for someone's rehab for the next fifty years because they need some drug or alcohol money and chooses to shoot someone. They should pay with their own life.
I know that may not be a popular view here, but it's who I am and what I believe. I hate the thought of taking someone's father away from them, but I also hate that someone lost their father due to his ignorance and lack of respect for human life.

and did it without having to kill somebody. Maybe the fucker will think twice before he tries that again. He owes you his life.

Glad you're ok and didn't have to do anything that might have gotten you into trouble. Way to be on your toes.

Long and hard. As much as you were shaking, I'm sure he was to the point of wetting himself. I had a gun put in my face years ago. Kind of makes you think. Hope you filed a police report.

I don't. Guess who the police would arrest? Guess who the police would ignore?
dc

As I was leaving the parking lot, I was thinking about telling the attendee in the booth but when I stopped to wait for the gate to open, I figured what woudl I tell him. I pulled a gun on a pan-handler? Even though he opened my passenger door, and put his upper part of his body in my car, it would probably digress into me having to prove he was going to hurt me. Then I wondered if I had committed assualt and started thinking about security cameras and such. I was pretty sure that none could have seen me.

I didn't tell anyone until I got back home. I just wanted to get back home.

You didn't have to shoot the motherfucker but fact that you were armed convinced the BG to leave you alone. The simple fact is that, no matter what the circumstances, if you had to shoot him it would have created a major disruption in your life. On the other hand, If you didn't have a gun it might have resulted in a major disruption in your life.

I'm of the opinion that, as the economy continues to collapse and people get more desperate, we are going to see many more instances like this.

.
.
.

We got our rifles and shotguns for hunting and target shooting,

but hardly ANYONE "carries"

General population don't have handguns, unless under strict permits and storage regulations

We don't "carry"

yet

we survive!

hmmm , , , :freak:

America and Canada are so demographically different comparisons are irrelevant. America is filled with giant metropolitan areas, compared to Canada barely having any. The things in Windsor can't always relate to Detroit. All the people from all of the top three major cities in Canada could move to one area and then it can be compared to one American city

You can survive, I'll thrive

.
.
.

speaks volumes

Not much wonder the paranoid USA has it's armed forces all over the world

I guess if ya keep pissing everyone off you either have to behave,

or arm yourselves to the teeth

USAmericans

go figure

You can't even compare to America, because your metropolitan areas can't even compare to America's. Jam all the people from your top three cities into one area and you have an American metropolitan area. Strange how a place with roughly ten times as many people jammed into roughly the same size space would be in a different situation. I would have thought that two places that are radically different in every way would be exactly the same when it comes to gun laws and gun crime.


Maybe if Canada doesn't like what America is doing internationally they can do something about it. Too bad they couldn't if they wanted to. I guess if you don't arm yourself, all you can do is just get pissed off and behave.

You can't even compare to America, because your metropolitan areas can't even compare to America's. Jam all the people from your top three cities into one area and you have an American metropolitan area.

Yes, Canada's three largest cities have a combined population of, what, a million or two?

:rofl:

You really don't have a clue, do you?

But hey, don't let that stop you from putting finger to keyboard. We up here in our villages and hamlets find you amusing.

Talking to Americans


Maybe if Canada doesn't like what America is doing internationally they can do something about it. Too bad they couldn't if they wanted to. I guess if you don't arm yourself, all you can do is just get pissed off and behave.

Bzzt. Time to wake up. The Bush administration is dead.

Do feel free to join the Obama era of international relations. Bullying is a bad idea, if only for practical reasons. Bully boys have no friends, but they do have enemies, and having a planet full of enemies isn't generally wise.

have roughly 6 million people combined. NYC has roughly 8 million people, and there are 4 metropolitan areas with over 6 million. Face it Canada has very few large cities. America has 5 times as many cities with over 100,000 people and 3 times as many with over one million. Don't let reality stop you from putting finger to keyboard.


It doesn't matter what administration we have, thank god its finally Obama. Don't act like Canada is a big player on the international scene. It is fairly obvious America is and Canada's opinion on it is irrelevant. Now that we have Obama we have a voice of international reason. If you don't like it now, all you are going to do still is get pissed off and behave.

Think of all the poor yanks who don't carry. There really are quite a lot of them. Doomed to violent death or dismemberment, all of 'em.

Btw, fewer than hardly any up here "carry", legally. You'd be pretty close to correct if you said "none".

.
.
.

I live in Mattawa - northern Ontario - and bush pilots still can get a carry permit -

and the local cops sorta overlook it if they happen to be doing it on the street

I'm sure it's looser even in smaller communities further north

but it sure ain't legal

and I think we both kow that even in our beloved Canada,

that the police, be it local, Provincial or Federal

have their favorites . .

One of those large metropolitan agglomerations of ours, that if you put 'em together wouldn't equal, oh, Moline, Illinois. ;)

Interesting about bush pilots. Don't know how they qualify under the actual rules, unless maybe they're transporting large amounts of cash or negotiable instruments ...

.
.
.

and the bush pilot thing - it's supposed to be for survival if they go down

but it requires a very special permit

but that's just verbal from locals here

AND - that was many years ago -

so it might not be valid anymore

but as you well know,

Us Canuks do NOT carry, nor do most of us feel the need to

"All the people from all of the top three major cities in Canada could move to one area and then it can be compared to one American city"

Yes indeed, there are many cities in the US with populations of 10 million plus ...

:rofl:

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-550/p13-eng.cfm

In 2006, more than two-thirds (68%) of the population lived in one of the 33 census metropolitan areas. That represents 21.5 million Canadians. Of these, 14.1 million lived in one of the six metropolitan areas with a population of more than 1 million: Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Ottawa - Gatineau and, for the first time, Calgary and Edmonton.

The smallest three have pops of 1 million or under, leaving 11 million plus for the top three combined. Cities with pops of 11 million plus are not exactly representative of US cities.

Maybe Taitertots would like to congratulate Canada on preserving our national igloo. ;)

America's Metropolitan areas
Canada's cities

Metropolitan Areas
Cities

It helps to read the stuff you are trying to claim. As far as metropolitan areas go America's metropolitan areas still vastly out populate anything in Canada. Compare greater Toronto to the greater New York and greater Los Angeles Areas and it becomes obvious. Then compare the city of Toronto with the City of New York.
1.Toronto City-2.5 Million
2.Montreal-1.6 Million
3.Calgary-1 Million
4.Ottawa-800,000
5.Edmonton-800,000
New York City-8 Million

Toronto Metropolitan Area-6 million
New York Metropolitan Area-18 Million

America and Canada are so demographically different comparisons are irrelevant. America is filled with giant metropolitan areas, compared to Canada barely having any. The things in Windsor can't always relate to Detroit. All the people from all of the top three major cities in Canada could move to one area and then it can be compared to one American city

Q. What has Windsor got to do with Detroit?

A. Fuck all.

The fact that they are geographically proximate has nothing to do with anything here.


As far as metropolitan areas go America's metropolitan areas still vastly out populate anything in Canada. Compare greater Toronto to the greater New York and greater Los Angeles Areas and it becomes obvious. Then compare the city of Toronto with the City of New York.

Q. What has Toronto got to do with New York?

A. Fuck all.

The fact that Toronto is Canada's largest urban agglomeration and NYC is the US's largest urban agglomeration has nothing to do with anything here.


Now you can try saying something relevant, if you like.

Compare Toronto to a city in the US of comparable size, and you'll have a start.



And while we're here:

Don't act like Canada is a big player on the international scene. It is fairly obvious America is and Canada's opinion on it is irrelevant. Now that we have Obama we have a voice of international reason. If you don't like it now, all you are going to do still is get pissed off and behave.

Like I was saying: Bzzt. Bush is gone. Pissy talk like that isn't in style anymore. Get with the program.

And fyi, your opinion of Canada's opinion is even more irrelevant. Particularly since you are so obviously so tremendously ignorant of anything about Canada, whether it be demographics or play on the international scene.

But you g'head and act like a stereotype if you like.



typo fixed.

A.Nothing

You can't compare Toronto to an American city of the same size because the American city is still going to be surrounded by more cities. There are a great deal more people in America. America having around ten times the population density.

Looks good on you.

Actually, it doesn't, but if you think it does, keep it up.

You can't compare Toronto to an American city of the same size because the American city is still going to be surrounded by more cities. There are a great deal more people in America. America having around ten times the population density.

You really just don't have a clue, do you?

You could look up, or calculate, the population density of southwestern Ontario / the Golden Horseshoe and get a clue, but that would shatter your entire understanding of the universe, I'm sure.

Canada's largest metropolitan area would barely makes the top ten in America. The second largest wouldn't even make the list. Canada is vastly underpopulated compared to America. The whole Golden Horseshoe has as many people as New York City alone. As far as its population density go, I calculated it around 250 per km squared. The Greater New York area has over 600 per km squared. The detroit metro area has over 400 per km squared and its not even in the top ten most populace metro areas. You know you could have looked them up yourself and saved yourself the embarrassment.

I guess just saying you don't have a clue is easier than producing numbers. I guess trying to support your assertions would just shatter your whole universe, I'm sure

Toronto has historically had some of the most densely populated areas on earth -- at one time, it had THE most densely populated area, a housing project called St James Town.

The whole Golden Horseshoe has as many people as New York City alone. As far as its population density go, I calculated it around 250 per km squared. The Greater New York area has over 600 per km squared.

And the area of the two regions is ...? Which one is the apple, and which the orange?


Canada's largest metropolitan area would barely makes the top ten in America. The second largest wouldn't even make the list.

SO THE FUCK WHAT???

There are six urban agglomerations in Canada with populations over 1 million.

Three of them -- BC lower mainland, the GTA / Golden Horseshoe, the Montreal region -- have populations in the multiple millions.

What exactly is it about those areas that is not comparable, demographically, to regions of the US that DO have similar populations / population densities?

Yukon may have a population density of 0.11/mi2. So we could compare Yukon and Alaska.

Meanwhile, why not compare, oh, Detroit and Toronto?


Canada is vastly underpopulated compared to America.

Canada has VAST UNPOPULATED AREAS compared to the US. The fact that the political entity "Canada" includes huge tracts of the continent where no one lives really just is not relevant to this discussion. As you know. Unless you really do think that Canada consists of 33 million or so people evenly scattered over some 10 million km2 of land.



http://www.canadainfolink.ca/chartten.htm

The population of Canada is slightly more urban than the population of the US, in point of fact.

But here. Chew well before swallowing.

http://www.demographia.com/db-uauscan.htm

Urban Areas over 250,000 in Canada &
United States Ranked by Population Density

United States Los Angeles--Long Beach--Santa Ana, CA
Canada Toronto, ON
United States San Francisco--Oakland, CA
United States San Jose, CA
United States New York--Newark, NY--NJ--CT
United States New Orleans, LA
Canada Montreal, QC
United States Honolulu, HI
United States Las Vegas, NV
United States Oxnard, CA
Canada Hamilton, ON
United States Miami, FL
Canada Ottawa - Hull, ON-QC
Canada Vancouver, BC
United States Stockton, CA
Canada Windsor, ON
Canada London, ON
United States Fresno, CA
United States Denver--Aurora, CO
United States Chicago, IL--IN

Seven of the 20 most densely populated urban areas in North America are in Canada. The second most densely populated area in North America is in Canada.

And your point still eludes me, or I'd claim victory in some battle.

Your list of population density list is intentionally misleading. Why don't you say that out of the top 10 Canada only has two? Why don't you say that out of the entire 141 listed there were only 15 from Canada on the list? Canada has at least the third largest population density in North America, can't forget Mexico is part of North America. Your list also compares places like London and Windsor with places like Chicago and Denver. Why not say population densities in populations over 1,000,000, there would be three from Canada and well over 30 from America? Or areas with over 2 million, US has 19, Canada has 2?

The St. James housing project, a group of apartment buildings. What does a group of apartment buildings matter? It is only the most populated area if you exclude all the other apartment buildings. You can make arbitrary divisions and get any area to have an artificially high population density.



The point is that you can't compare federal level laws in two countries that are too dissimilar. Canada is not America, and what Canadians feel is irrelevant to American policy. America is a network of giant urban areas, Canada has a couple spread thin across vast areas.

How could you claim victory, all you have done is say my statistics don't matter? Then the numbers you present and the link you present all support my claim that Canada has a great deal fewer large, dense, urban areas. To win you would have to show that Canada has a great deal of large, dense, urban areas.

First principles.

You claimed -- post 17:

America and Canada are so demographically different comparisons are irrelevant. America is filled with giant metropolitan areas, compared to Canada barely having any. The things in Windsor can't always relate to Detroit. All the people from all of the top three major cities in Canada could move to one area and then it can be compared to one American city

Your claim was nonsense when you made it and continues to be.

HOW MANY "giant metropolitan areas" a country has is IRRELEVANT, if the issue is what goes on in giant metropolitan areas. Be there one or one thousand of them, a giant metropolitan area is a giant metropolitan area. Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are giant metropolitan areas by ANY standard.

Your insinuation that ANYONE was comparing Windsor and Detroit was false.

Your claim that the populations of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver could be combined to create ONE city in the US is false in that there are only two cities in the US that are greater than or equal to the combined populations of those three cities. The three cities combined would be larger than EVERY other US city but those two. Toronto is the sixth largest city in NA; there are five cities in the US larger than Toronto. Those five US cities are also larger than ALL OTHER CITIES in the US. Toronto is larger than ALL CITIES IN THE US but five.

So unless whatever point you think you are making relates ONLY to the TWO LARGEST CITIES in the US, or even the five largest cities in the US, you still have no point.


Your list of population density list is intentionally misleading.

Go tell the organization that prepared it, and do something entertaining with your filthy allegations.


America is a network of giant urban areas, Canada has a couple spread thin across vast areas.

Yesss. Utah and Montana and Arizona and Idaho and even, oh, Ohio (drive through Ohio much? I have) are "a network of giant urban areas". Yeesh. The US has MORE giant urban areas, but there is little difference, population-density wise, between whatever part of the northeast Atlantic US coast you might pick and the Oshawa-Hamilton Lake Ontario coast (blending pretty seamlessly into Buffalo NY and beyond). I'll bet you've never driven through there.

You simply and obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

Find Oakville, Ontario, at google maps. Zoom so that you can still see Toronto to the northeast of it and Niagara falls to the southeast of it, and put it on satellite view. Observe all the vast open spaces ...

The US is a network of giant urban areas OVER A VASTLY LARGER LAND AREA than the area in which Canada's population is (because of terrain and climate) concentrated. The huge unpopulated areas of Canada are completely and utterly IRRELEVANT for this purpose. They are UNPOPULATED, for the love of fuck.


Then the numbers you present and the link you present all support my claim that Canada has a great deal fewer large, dense, urban areas. To win you would have to show that Canada has a great deal of large, dense, urban areas.

To "win"? I couldn't care less who you think has "won". You're spouting ignorant nonsense, I know what I'm talking about.

The fact is that a majority of residents of Canada live in densely populated urban areas, just as a majority of residents of the US do. There is very little difference in population patterns between the two countries in this regard, except that the Canadian population is slightly more urbanized (and about twice as high a proportion of the Canadian population is foreign-born, of course).

Hey, maybe you could compare China and the US now. China has bigger cities, and more of 'em. And they're pretty dense.

http://www.citypopulation.de/China-UA.html#Stadt_gross

1 Shanghai SH 14,230,992
2 Beijing BJ 10,300,723
3 Guangzhou GD 7,547,467
4 Tianjin TJ 6,839,008
5 Wuhan HB 6,787,482
6 Shenzhen GD 6,480,340
7 Chongqing CQ 5,087,197
8 Shenyang LN 4,596,785
9 Chengdu SC 4,273,218
10 Foshan GD 4,006,681
11 Xi'an SN 3,870,504
12 Dongguan GD 3,870,036
13 Nanjing JS 3,783,907
14 Harbin HL 3,627,082



The point is that you can't compare federal level laws in two countries that are too dissimilar.

That was your point? I don't think so. Really. It wasn't. Ever.

You initially responded to a post that didn't say a word about laws, and your response was not in any way related to laws. You alleged that situations in Canada and the US were not comparable because of demographics. The allegation is as baseless now as it was then.

The issue was, and still is, that Canadians (and, as I added, the VAST BULK of the US population) do not carry firearms, and are not being killed off in droves.

And that includes Canadians who do live in some of the most densely populated areas on earth. Just like it includes US residents who do.

The way you are presenting the data on you link is misleading. You don't care to address any of the issues and different interpretations of the data I have presented. All of them can be linked to that data except #3.

1.out of the top 10 Canada only has two
2.out of the entire 141 listed there were only 15 from Canada on the list
3.Canada has at least the third largest population density urban area in North America, can't forget Mexico is part of North America.
4.Your list also compares places like London and Windsor with places like Chicago and Denver.
5.If you count the number with over 1 million people Canada has 3, America has 30
6.Canada only has two on the list with over 2 million Canada has 2, and America has over 10
Directly from your link
http://www.demographia.com/db-uauscan.htm

I don't want to quibble if the significantly larger populated areas constitutes a network or not. I don't care, you are right it is not a network. There are areas not densely inhabited in America.

There are two cities in the US that are as big as the top three Canadian cities combined. You even admit that. Those two cities are at the center of urban areas which again are bigger than the top three Canadian combined. Those two American urban areas are both very close to other large urban areas. Canada has a handful of densely populated areas smaller in total populations and geographically isolated. America has a great deal of densely populated areas that are very large and in some cases close to other such areas.
That explains why what Canada does is not analogous to what America does. Which was my original idea in response to a comparison of Canada and America


No Canadians carry handguns. The bulk of Americans do not carry handguns. The bulk of people won't be victims of violent crime. The bulk of people who carry handguns will never use them in self defense. No Canadians will use them in self defense.

1.out of the top 10 Canada only has two

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.

2.out of the entire 141 listed there were only 15 from Canada on the list

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.

3.Canada has at least the third largest population density urban area in North America, can't forget Mexico is part of North America.

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.

4.Your list also compares places like London and Windsor with places like Chicago and Denver.

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.

5.If you count the number with over 1 million people Canada has 3, America has 30

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.

6.Canada only has two on the list with over 2 million Canada has 2, and America has over 10

The incident this thread is about occurred in Atlanta. 12th largest urban area in Canada/the US (i.e. smaller than Toronto, very slightly larger than Montreal). 116th densest (i.e. way behind Toronto and Montreal in density). Not part of any network of urban agglomerations. The individual who started the thread appears to reside in a small town in Florida.



You will perhaps see why I have all along completely failed to take your point.

5.If you count the number with over 1 million people Canada has 3, America has 30

The United States has 30 such metropoles OVER A HUGELY LARGER LAND AREA.

The POPULATED / habitable land area of Canada is a FRACTION of the populated / habitable land area of the US.

Never mind China. Pick a country in western Europe. Germany. France. England.

Far, far denser population than the US, in terms of total population / total land area, large cities, networks of urban agglomerations in close proximity, etc. etc.

Nobody wanders around with firearms on their person.

People are not getting killed in droves.


Maybe you could just try starting over again, and stating your point.

has between little and nothing to do with the OP and everything to do with the post it was a direct response to, comparing Canada and America. What about that you can't seem to understand is beyond me. Canada and America are very different and not analogous.


Canada has very few geographically isolated dense regions. America has a great deal of them with many in very close proximity. What about a series of large dense urban areas in close proximity and two large dense urban areas surrounded by uninhabited areas being very different is hard for you to grasp.


You don't care to respond to why the data you presented proves my point based on the examples from your link.

If you want to compare America and Europe than do it, but that has nothing to do with why Canada is not analogous to America. If you want to discuss that start a thread or new sub thread and discuss it. Don't obfuscate the discussion here about comparing Canada and America with unrelated bits about Europe or China.

People are not getting killed in droves here either.

Canada has very few geographically isolated dense regions. America has a great deal of them with many in very close proximity. What about a series of large dense urban areas in close proximity and two large dense urban areas surrounded by uninhabited areas being very different is hard for you to grasp.

The relevance ... to anything ...?

Yeah. That will be it.


The Toronto-Golden Horseshoe region, btw, is not "surrounded by uninhabited areas", any more than Los Angeles is. Your ignorance continues to astonish me.


. Don't obfuscate the discussion here about comparing Canada and America with unrelated bits about Europe or China.

Har. De Har. De har har har. That's a good one.


People are not getting killed in droves here either.

Yes, I do believe I said that very thing quite some time ago, and repeatedly since.

That is -- the vast bulk of the US population DOES NOT go about the streets armed to the teeth with firepower. Or even with little bitty pistols in their pants.

If your "point" about population density were a point, well, it would be a point. Even if what you were yammering on about were in any way accurate, it is obviously not RELEVANT.

without question surrounded by significantly lower populations, your data shows it, your map shows it. The data you presented Shows LA right next to San Francisco,Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento, Riverside, San Bernardino. LA is surrounded by Multiple million person metro areas with like 20 million people combined, in a state with roughly the same population as all of Canada. The north east coast has New York--Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Buffalo, Providence, Pittsburgh, Albany, and Bridgeport--Stamford with a total population larger than all Canada.

How many multiple million person urban areas are near the Toronto area? Based on your data none.
How many multiple million person urban areas are near the LA area? Based on your data there are four.
I'm not surprised by your ignorance.


The post I responded to said "It makes you wonder how us Canucks survive without carrying firearms". I responded to that by stating that Canada doesn't matter because it is too vastly different. You refuse to counter any of the reasons I have given. You refuse to site any examples counter to what I am saying. You refuse to site how my examples are numerically wrong. Canada is very different to America and not analogous

The post I responded to said "It makes you wonder how us Canucks survive without carrying firearms". I responded to that by stating that Canada doesn't matter because it is too vastly different.

There are differences between Canada and the US. Some of them are striking.

Population density is simply not one of them. And your ignorance notwithstanding, the population in Ontario southeast and soutwest of Toronto is far denser than in any comparable-size area of the US in a large majority of the land area of the United States, and virtually anywhere in the US once you get away from the coasts; the loss of excellent farmland to urban sprawl is one of the most significant public policy issues in Ontario.

Why on earth you would fixate on the fact that there are other large urban agglomerations near Los Angeles is simply beyond me. The individual who started this thread was not in Los Angeles. He totes a firearm with him everywhere in a small town in Florida. He was in a parking lot in Georgia at the time of the alleged incident. The various gun tales told in this forum seldom involve a large urban agglomeration surrounded by others. Population density IS NOT A FACTOR in most of the gun-toting that goes on in the US. PERIOD.


It remains entirely reasonable to respond to the tale told in the opening post by wondering how Canadians -- and THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THE U.S., who DO NOT carry firearms everywhere they go -- manage to survive.

"the population in Ontario southeast and soutwest of Toronto is far denser than in any comparable-size area of the US in a large majority of the land area of the United States"
Which is exactly why no valid comparison can be made between it and American cities. Our regions of equal density are vastly larger in population. Our areas or equal population are vastly larger in size and thus less densely populated. Two very different not analogous conditions.


The OP's story doesn't matter. A few anecdotes don't matter. What matters is if Canada and America are similar enough to compare. If you want to discuss the OP, China, or Europe we can start a new sub thread and discuss those things. If you care to site some of my conclusions based on the data as wrong, or site my numbers as being off, or provide new numbers and conclusions that would be great.

"Population density IS NOT A FACTOR in most of the gun-toting that goes on in the US."
I would be interested in how who know the motivations of a significant enough percentage of gun totters to make that claim.

How do the vast majority of people in America survive without guns?
Same as the gun owners, expect the tiny fraction that are victims of crime have no chance to defend themselves.

is stop paying attention to white noise.


the population in Ontario southeast and soutwest of Toronto is far denser than in any comparable-size area of the US in a large majority of the land area of the United States
Which is exactly why no valid comparison can be made between it and American cities. Our regions of equal density are vastly larger in population. Our areas or equal population are vastly larger in size and thus less densely populated. Two very different not analogous conditions.

You just make less and less sense as you go along.

It isn't gun laws or population density that makes Canada safer than the US. Its the simple fact that its too fucking cold to shoot each other. Show me how you can get a mittened finger through a trigger guard and we'll see an increase in Canadian homicides.

Hell, now that I think about, how about outfitting all felons convicted of violent crime with mandatory mittens?

and no, not like this:



Like this:

one arm, and they smack themselves in the face with the other.

You're comparing apples to oranges, demographically speaking.

Take black-perpetrator crime out of the statistics and US's crime rate will compare favorably to Canada's.

Before the PC hammer comes down on me, I'm only stating facts. Do the statistical checking yourself.

You're comparing apples to oranges, demographically speaking.

Take black-perpetrator crime out of the statistics and US's crime rate will compare favorably to Canada's.

I think it has much more to do with economics than race. Black have been disadvantaged for hundreds of years and only recently have begun to have those hindrances removed legally, and society lags even further behind the law. It's not surprising that a class of citizens who have had sub-optimal access to educational and employment opportunities thus resort to crime out of desperation.

There are more whites than blacks living in poverty in the US by a wide margin. Yet, poor blacks commit more crimes of all kinds than poor whites.

It's cultural, but a culture that's prevalent in the black population, especially urban populations.

Poverty:

Non-Hispanic Whites: 17.7 million
All Whites: 22.6 million
Blacks 8.9 million

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/STTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_S1701&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_


Murder by offender race:

White offenders: 5,278
Black offenders: 6,463

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_03.html

The next (and last) time you would see it is tagged as evidence in court.

No one ever gets them back in a case like that.

It served the best purpose you could have ever hoped for.

What you did is the most effective use and will never get counted or acknowledged

Millions! millions!!!

Just ask Kleck.

And his many fans hereabouts.

Just don't ask anybody with an ounce of sense or an elementary school education in arithmetic.

many incidents in which a civilian had used a firearm for self defense with actually discharging the weapon.

He replied that such incidents were not at all that uncommon and were far more frequent than the incidents in which rounds were fired.

Of course, he is an officer in Florida where firearm ownership is ubiquitous. And of course, his statement was merely another anecdote which is statistically irrelevant as such incidents do not fall into any data base to be analyzed.

But it is quite possible that thousands of such incidents occur each year. Millions of incidents would be hard to believe.

Many home robberies are stopped by dogs. A few incidents involve dog bites. Same principle. The incidents involving the bites make the news. The ones that merely result in the intruder fleeing are just interesting stories.

avoided a potential violent crime.

Since I did not report any of those incidents, they never showed up on police records as crimes thwarted by a CCW holder.

have had incidents similar to those -- surely criminals don't pick only on people with pistols in their pants!! and obviously there are many multiples more people walking around with no pistols than with pistols in every time and place -- and they are all dead now. Or recovering from their injuries.

Because if you don't got a gun, that's what happens.

...and the robber walks away?

People who don't carry firearms are never, ever confronted by aggressive panhandlers.

... Or is it that people who don't carry firearms and who are confronted by aggressive panhandlers never, ever live to tell the tale ...?

no one was hurt, and he may learned a valuable lesson.

Cuz, you know, Florida has that "I can kill him if I feel threatened" law now, donch'a know...





Your reaction is exactly how I figured I would feel in a similar situation: Ready to use it and hoping to God the guy doesn't make you have to use it. And then you get the shakes afterwards.


But carry with one in the chamber. In a double-action or safe-action handgun it's exactly the same as keeping a loaded cylinder in a revolver. As long as it's reasonably modern, it will have a firing-pin block so that even dropping the gun on it's hammer (if it has one) won't set a cartridge off.

Since he wasn't armed and retreated when you pulled out the gun you made a good decision.

You had no idea what he was gonna do so you acted correctly IMO.

If he had tried to take your gun, then by all means blow the dirt bags brain out.

You gave the bad guy a choice, and luckily he chose the right one.

Then again he may have just been a beggar who approached you wrong.

Just so you or others don't think you can rely on them to fill that role.



Congrats on staying safe and not needing to shoot anyone, through proper use of a firearm.

who will tell some future surveyer that they believe they would or probably would have ended up dead if they hadn't brandished their trusty pop-gun.

How do all the people who don't have pistols in their glove boxes manage to survive a shopping trip??? I constantly wonder ...

that there is crime in America. Those crimes happen to people who carry or not in roughly equal proportion, a small fraction of all people. The people who don't carry survive just the same, except that they are helpless victims when crimes are perpetrated against them.

As a deterrent. No shots were fired, no one was harmed, even if you were mistaken about the guy's intentions there were no negative consequences (except maybe the guy needed to change his shorts).

Of course, according to some folks around here, this sort of thing never really happens, and having the gun only made the situation worse than it might have been.

Of course, according to some folks around here, this sort of thing never really happens, and having the gun only made the situation worse than it might have been.

... you really are entirely at liberty to quote said some folks. No rule against that at all.


The very best use of a gun

I always find this concept interesting.

If I use my giant snow scoop



to clean up the cat puke in the back room, that is a use of a snow scoop.

If I use my sledgehammer



to kill a black ant crawling up my desk leg, that is a use of a sledgehammer.

If I use my toilet brush



to clean my teeth, that is a use of a toilet brush.


How could anyone ever dispute my claim that I need a snow scoop to clean my house, a sledgehammer to combat insect invasions, and a toilet brush to avoid dental decay??

I used them. They did the job. So I needed them. Q.E.D.

You don't need clothes, you could wear garbage bags with duct tape.
You don't need a car, you could walk everywhere
You don't need a toilet, you could poop in the garbage can and pee in the sink

How could anyone dispute claim that you need a car, clothes, or a toilet?

I used them. They did the job. So I needed them. Q.E.D.

Don'cha know that you're just supposed to pull your steel out, blazing, as soon as you're justified?
We've worked hard to piece together our vigilante justice model which you are crumbling with your account.
And to make matters worse, you're a Florida resident... it's open season with a CHL down there.
I figure your gun must've jammed or you had an ammo failure.
Next time just do what the media says you're going to and turn someone into swiss cheese.
:sarcasm:

Good job and I'm glad you're safe and everyone ended up OK.

I can't fault you for your actions, good defensive use in my opinion. One thing I CAN fault you for is having to chamber a round. If you carry you carry LOADED & ready to fire at all times. I carry a Kimber 1911 style handgun in .45acp. The reason I like the 1911 is that it has a manual safety as well as a back strap safety.Think about it, what if he had gotten to your throat before you could chamber a round? What if he had a knife? All you had in your hand was a hammer until you chambered the round. Not a good idea.

the only drawback to the thumb safety is that you have to remember to disengage it.

I've always liked the grip safety on 1911 style weapons.

Curiosity leads me to ask if if you carry your Kinber cocked and locked?

I engage the safety when carrying but due to training it isn't an issue to disengage it while drawing the weapon.

Good reason for the CCW. You handled it right. Maybe you should've called the cops but your choice. Glad you now decide carry with round chambered.

He had no right to enter your car or confront you in the way he did. Good on you for showing him the error of his ways.

I have seen very little advice (let alone doctrine) about how to use a cell-phone in a potentially dangerous area; one piece of advice I did hear was when leaving a safe place and going to another "safe" place, one should make a "safety call" so that if the call is interrupted, then the person at the other "end of the line" will report the crime. This seems foolish. Most of the times when I see folks with cell phones they are oblivious to dark alleys (traveling quite close to their entry points), unlit areas, large obstacles like other vehicles and dumpsters, even other folks and their actions.

Until some good advice is proffered concerning the use of cell-phones and other hand-helds, they remain a lethal distraction when a citizen should be on highest alert.

I was walking back to the car with my arms loaded and unlocked the car remotely. I threw the boxes in the back of the car and then got in the drivers seat myself. I was checking my cell-phone for messages and the next thing I know, there was a very large person almost in my car. He opened the passenger door and was leaning with both hand on the seat. He looked into the back seat and than looked at me and said in a not so friendly voice, "I need some money". This guy was leaning in such a way that he was closer to me than a normal passenger would.

If you're so afraid of murder and mayhem that you keep your vehicle equipped with a handgun ... why didn't you flip the door-lock switch as soon as you got into the vehicle?

One more reason to hate those nasty things that open vehicle doors at a distance, while making obnoxious noises. Use the damned key to open the door, and then only the door you are using gets opened.


typo fixed

One more reason to hate those nasty things that open vehicle doors at a distance, while making obnoxious noises. Use the damned key to open the door, and then only the door you are using gets opened.

All the key fobs I have used only unlock the driver's door with one push, and you have to push the button twice to unlock all the other doors.

I'm of the low-tech bent, and my only experience with the fob things is to want to grab them and smash them under my heel whenever I hear some self-absorbed asshole using one in my vicinity.

So there we were, sitting in a deserted parking lot, checking our cell phone messages, with the vehicle doors pointlessly and unnecessarily unlocked ...

And the first rule of personal safety is ...?

I've always heard it's something about being aware of one's surroundings. Not having a pistol in one's console.

I'm of the low-tech bent, and my only experience with the fob things is to want to grab them and smash them under my heel whenever I hear some self-absorbed asshole using one in my vicinity.

I love the scene in WALL-E where the robot is digging through mountains of trash in the distant trash-covered earth, and uncovers a key fob. He pushes the button, and somewhere, far away in all the trash, you hear, "chirp-chirp!"

My wife's car has electronic doors, but my car does not. I miss not having them. They are very convenient for unlocking your car when your hands are full or if it's raining. All of them I have ever seen are silent on unlock, some honk on lock and others only honk if you press lock twice. I'd prefer no honk as I don't want to send a message that I've locked my car and have someone wonder why I locked it. My wife's car honks.


And the first rule of personal safety is ...?

I've always heard it's something about being aware of one's surroundings. Not having a pistol in one's console.

I'd say you are right. But I'd also say that while being aware is great, being able to act on your awareness is even better.

I think I vaguely remember reading in one of my car owners manuals that you can change the behavior of the device by doing something when you turn the ignition on. I may be misremembering.

And I understand you can also make them do nothing, or flash lights, instead of chirping or honking.

People who make their cars chirp, let alone honk, thereby disturbing everybody within earshot, when they engage in the purely private-interest activity of locking and unlocking their vehicle, should indeed be shot. That would improve the gene pool mightily.

I am aware, of course, that car horn honking is more socially acceptable south of the border. I don't know about your legalities, but where I'm at it is technically illegal, the car horn being for alarm use only under the highway traffic code, and any other use falling under causing excessive noise. Not that ignoramuses don't use their horns as doorbells, but the ones who do are obvious ignoramuses.

Car honking annoys me also. I have gotten fairly used to the parking lot beep but I absolutely cannot stand people who honk while driving to say "hello" to another driver. As soon as I hear a horn while driving I immediately panic as I assume I or someone close by has fucked up majorly.

As soon as I hear a horn while driving I immediately panic as I assume I or someone close by has fucked up majorly.

That's what you're *supposed* to do!

Just like you're supposed to get agitated when you hear a baby cry, because we're supposed to feed babies, or when you hear a dog bark, because dogs are supposed to alert us to danger.

Evolution. It's a wonderful thing. ;)

People who honk their horns to say hello or announce their arrival are people who also neglect children and own perpetually barking dogs, I have no doubt. They're missing a part.

eta: thank god it doesn't chirp or beep ... i hate to advertise that i'm locking/unlocking, and it does bother other people; it annoys me when i hear other people's cars.