• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Firearms and hot tempers.

bigdaddy1

Regular Member
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
1,320
Location
Southsider der hey
The thread about road rage got me thinking. When Wisconsin got concealed carry I had some concerns about hot tempered people that barring any legal disqualifications could now carry a gun. When I first started open carrying I was nervous about how I might react in any given situation. I remember times when working in the garage and a stuborn bolt causes my wrench to slip and I get a bloody knuckle. The wrench went flying and I'm sure there were some "naughty" words being shouted. I wondered if I would "pull" at the drop of a hat. Luckily I found this site and was able to read up on a lot of legal questions and answers as well as good advise. I have not had the need to draw yet so I count myself as very lucky in that aspect also.
I find that I am more cognicent of my emotions when I am armed. I understand that arming myself is a decision that should not be taken lightly and I have to remember that my sidearm is for defense and not a power trip.
The point of my post is that there are people with anger managment issues and they probably shouln't carry a firearm. I feel that should be self regulated but when should it become other people's responsiblity? This could mean friends and relatives or in extreme cases government intervention. Your thoughts?
 

DWCook

Activist Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
432
Location
Lenexa, Kansas
I personally don't believe there be a situation where a person carrying a firearm will lose his temper bad enough to fire shots off. If the situation dealt with life threatening issues maybe, but losing your temper and shooting off a few rounds based off of anger I doubt will occur. I'm speaking for people who have common sense and logic before they make a decision as in think first before pulling it from the holster.
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
895
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
Utopia is not an option, remember. Bad things can and do happen, no matter how hard people try to prevent them. There is no such thing as a risk free world, even - or especially - under the determined efforts of some people to control other people! Just think of the police state we have now and who is most apt to harm you in any given day. It's not the foolish neighbor who happens to carry a gun. It's much more likely to be the cops who come out to attempt "controlling" him!

Think of all the nanny state "laws" that are supposedly passed to prevent people from doing bad or foolish things. Bad and foolish things continue to be done by bad and foolish people. It is not possible to legislate morality, common sense, or wisdom.

Yes, I would imagine that families and other social groups could exert some influence on the unwise, foolish person - as they do for so many other things. But, in the end, each person is responsible for their own actions and choices. They must accept and pay the consequences. Avoidance of that necessity simply breeds more irresponsible and foolish behavior.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
This could mean friends and relatives or in extreme cases government intervention. Your thoughts?
More nanny, nanny friends or nanny state infringement. If you will infringe for temper, will you infringe for stupid, for lack of self-control and too many traffic citations?
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,898
Location
SC
I look at it this way; someone with a violent temper prone to actionable rage is going to do harm whether s/he has a gun or a hammer. Restrictions aren't likely to weigh heavily in that individual's mind anyways, so why make it harder (in ANY way) for someone to defend themselves against such a person?
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,449
Location
Valhalla
If a person already has "anger management" problems that make you think they should not be carrying a firearm, I wonder why you do not think they should already be under some sort of control? Would tyou trust them to carry a kitchen knife down the street - in some sort of holder? What about baseball bat? How about a teething toddler?

If you don't trust them with those objects without supervision, surely you should not trust them with a firearm. But if you do trust them, why is a firearm so gosh-darned special? By itself it is much less dangerous than a teething toddler.

Please go wash the nanny-state propaganda out of your head.

stay safe.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I find that I am more cognicent of my emotions when I am armed.
Same, but for me, it would be more accurate for me to say I'm more aware of my behavior, specifically my politeness towards others, when I am armed.

The point of my post is that there are people with anger managment issues and they probably shouln't carry a firearm.
I know some folks who're utter hotheads, but they've never lost control. In Biblical parlance, it's "In your anger, do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger." - Eph 4:26. Anger is a normal, natural, and healthy emotion, provided you're reacting to something which can and should be addressed, such as a home invasion. Anger will always affect us. It only becomes unhealthy when we allow it to control us, specifically to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

I feel that should be self regulated but when should it become other people's responsiblity? This could mean friends and relatives or in extreme cases government intervention. Your thoughts?
It must be based on one's behavior. Anger is normal. Destruction is not. If someone storms out the door during a family argument, so be it, and no harm done -- better to have left a bad situation than remain it it, giving vent to the fire. If they slam the door on the way out hard enough to damage it, however, then a line's been crossed and should be addressed. In this case, almost certainly by the family at a later date. The more extreme the behavior, the more likely the individual might require professional help in one form or another.
 

porterhouse83

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2012
Messages
145
Location
Wheat Ridge Colorado
I have been in heated discussions and even shouting matches where I was pissed! Never ever did I feel like drawing or even think about drawing my weapon for that matter. I believe most who carry do so for protection and nothing else.
 

NoTolerance

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
292
Location
Milwaukee, WI
The point of my post is that there are people with anger managment issues and they probably shouln't carry a firearm.
I'll admit, similar thoughts have passed my mind - only to be quickly dismissed.

There's a certain "weight" when carrying a handgun that I suspect most carriers feel. I think the natural reaction to assuming that responsibility is to become a more responsible individual. Of course, there are always exceptions and there are no shortage of stories about irresponsible gun owners.

However, simplify your concerns for a moment. Take the handgun out of the equation. How many people carry some sort of pocket knife on a regular basis? I know I've been carrying knives for as long as I can remember, so I'll use myself as an example.

I've been involved in road rage incidents, bar fights, etc - any number of different situations where maybe I lost my cool for a bit. Not once, ever, did it cross my mind to pull my knife. I've never hit anyone with a pool cue, baseball bat, or tire iron, either.

I was recently involved in a road rage incident - while carrying. The less-than-sober individual literally forced me to a stop, got out of his vehicle, and was challenging me to get out of mine to "finish this". Had I not been carrying, I likely would have obliged the request. But because of the additional "weight" I feel, I remained in my vehicle and did my best to keep the situation from escalating further. I left as soon as I was afforded the opportunity. (I'll admit this much: I did have my firearm ready in case he did charge my window/door. Fortunately, he kept his distance, waiting for me to exit my vehicle. There's part of me that would like to find him sober somewhere and let him know he was about 5 feet away from being Wisconsin's next (first?) test case for Castle Doctrine and ask if some perceived affront to him while driving would be worth getting shot over.)

As with most things, there are exceptions to every rule. We're going to have certain people carrying that probably shouldn't. But that percentage will be minuscule when compared to the number of responsibly armed citizens. So minuscule as to not even be worthy of consideration.
 

MainelyGlock

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
615
Location
Portland, ME
I have been in heated discussions and even shouting matches where I was pissed! Never ever did I feel like drawing or even think about drawing my weapon for that matter. I believe most who carry do so for protection and nothing else.
+1 on that. My last "road rage" encounter left me shaking, from anger and adrenaline, but I never once thought about just shooting the guy out of anger.

If you can't trust someone with a gun because of "anger management" problems, then they should not be allowed to have anything ranging from a chef's knife to a tire iron.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,423
Location
Florida
The thread about road rage got me thinking. When Wisconsin got concealed carry I had some concerns about hot tempered people that barring any legal disqualifications could now carry a gun. When I first started open carrying I was nervous about how I might react in any given situation. I remember times when working in the garage and a stuborn bolt causes my wrench to slip and I get a bloody knuckle. The wrench went flying and I'm sure there were some "naughty" words being shouted. I wondered if I would "pull" at the drop of a hat. Luckily I found this site and was able to read up on a lot of legal questions and answers as well as good advise. I have not had the need to draw yet so I count myself as very lucky in that aspect also.
I find that I am more cognicent of my emotions when I am armed. I understand that arming myself is a decision that should not be taken lightly and I have to remember that my sidearm is for defense and not a power trip.
The point of my post is that there are people with anger managment issues and they probably shouln't carry a firearm. I feel that should be self regulated but when should it become other people's responsiblity? This could mean friends and relatives or in extreme cases government intervention. Your thoughts?
there's people with drinking problems that shouldn't drink or go to bars. there's people with bad attention span problems that shouldn't drive. there's fat people who probably shouldn't go to mcdonalds.

point is- welcome to life. welcome to the country where you make decisions and suffer the consequences (good or bad) of those decisions. once we start regulating for "anger issues" or anything else, we start treading on thin ice. there's nothing wrong with getting angry. just don't do anything stupid. remember jesus? he got angry one time...
 

hjmoosejaw

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
406
Location
N.W. Pa.
I've been known to flip the bird and holler some choice words at people that do stupid stuff on the road. While I am carrying, I make it a point to NOT do any of that. Like somebody above mentioned, you may feel like getting out of the car to engage, but instead, you may have to eat a little crow and just head on down the road.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
"Watch your thoughts, for they become words.
Watch your words, for they become actions.
Watch your actions, for they become habits.
Watch your habits, for they become character.
Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
("Frank Outlaw" in Farmer's Digest‎, Vol. 42 (1978))"
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,423
Location
Florida
So did God. He killed everyone except a man and his family on a boat. And that was just the first time. :p

But really, I agree with your points completely.
hey- he gave everyone a chance!!!! technically, we've gotten 3 chances....the garden, the ark, and the cross.
 
Top