Right2Carry wrote:NcongruNt wrote:Right2Carry wrote:NcongruNt wrote:Right2Carry wrote:TheYoungGuy wrote:Right2Carry wrote:Actually l just got finished playing 21 holes at Pecan Trails at midlotihan. I don't carry when I golf, but then again I don't feel the need to carry on a golf course. I have 14 clubs to choose from along with a bad ass driver. I also don't play golf in the bad part of town.
1. Why 21 holes?
2. 14 clubs
along with a driver? There's a 14 club limit, you know.
3. I don't live, shop, socialize, etc. in a bad part of town either, but I still carry.
4. Please remember that this is an all-ages forum when you elaborate on how "great" your driver is.
You only have a 14 club limit if your playing on the PGA tour. Those of us who are out just practicing and relaxing really don't care what the limit is.
I have already explained the 21 holes, please read the entire thread. I apologize if using the word A-- offended anyone on here. I may have violated the ten year old rule, but really in todays age, I am not sure that the word used really violates the 10 year old rule.
Once again there is a differance between carrying while shopping and carrying while golfing IMHO. I don't feel the need to carry while golfing, I leave it in the truck. Just like I don't feel the need to carry while playing softball, baseball, football, soccer, basketball, or while swimming. I could get robbed or shot playing any of those sports, yet I think it would be purely foolish for someone to carry while playing any of those.
I'd consider those quite different sports that golf. Those require continuous motions and exertion to play the game, and complete immersion in water in one case. The majority of exertion in golf is... walking. I would compare it more closely to bowling, billiards, fishing or hunting than I would any of the sports you mentioned. In golf you are much more solitary, generally playing in groups of a few people on a large course geographically separated from other people. You're much more likely to get robbed playing golf than playing soccer simply because of the fact that you're more likely to be carrying a wallet.
Please provide specific statistics that point out you are more likely to get robbed golfing than in any other sport. You seem to forget that you exert torgue and have considerable motion while swinging a golf club. Golf is just not about walking its about swinging a golf club.
Sishing and hunting is different than golf you can be isolated and miles from anyone. On a golf course you are surronded by other groups. Sorry that I just don't buy into the fact that a golf course is a high risk area where robberies occur with such frequency that I need to carry on a golf course. Some people carry and I reserve the right to not carry if I so choose.
Please pay attention and note that my statement was that most of the
exertion involved in playing a golf game is walking. You certainly expend much more energy walking from one side of a golf course to another than you do swinging your club. My point was that sports like soccer and golf don't compare in activity levels. Concealing is much more practical in standard golf attire, given the activity levels involved. Making a comparison to swimming seems quite simply ludicrous - and especially impossible in this case. My comparison to hunting and fishing was merely for similarities in the relative activity levels of the sports.
Also, I'm not telling you to carry. Do what you want. My response was regarding the flaws I perceived in your logic when comparing a sport like swimming to a sport like golf when it comes to concealed carry.
If you're carrying based on whether a given situation is dangerous enough to merit doing so, I hope you guess right. For me, the point of carrying isn't for an active defense. If I only carried in situations where I felt it was dangerous enough, shouldn't I simply not go to those places? I carry, rather, for a prepared defense. I don't know when or if I will ever need my firearm to defend myself. That's why it's with me every moment I am able to carry.
I respect your right to carry all the time, for me some situations just doesn't warrant it. I am not the only one who responded that said he didn't carry on the golf course. I noticed that you didn't attack anyone else for thier opinions. Do you have a personal beef with me or are you just selective in who you feel the need to attack?
How did I attack you? See, opinions happen on both sides. I expressed my opinion. I don't see anywhere in my statement where I made an attack. It is my opinion that comparing golf to swimming when it comes to concealed carry is ridiculous. I don't see how that's an attack, and you're certainly welcome to enlighten me if you think I am mistaken. It was my opinion that your comparison of high-activity sports to golf is flawed, and I expressed that opinion. Again, if you think I'm mistaken, please point out how. If you feel I'm singling you out, I'm sorry you feel that way. My response addressed your comparisons, and as such was directed to you. No one else made those comparisons, which is why I replied in response to your post. My opinion stands whether I'm talking to you or anyone else - this is, after all, a public forum and you're not the only one to read my responses. As far as your choice to not carry on the course, I see no point in my post where I derided you. Let's break it down:
If you're carrying based on whether a given situation is dangerous enough to merit doing so, I hope you guess right.
Here I'm expressing that given your choices, I hope things go OK for you. I certainly wouldn't want to see you get killed.
For me, the point of carrying isn't for an active defense. If I only carried in situations where I felt it was dangerous enough, shouldn't I simply not go to those places? I carry, rather, for a prepared defense. I don't know when or if I will ever need my firearm to defend myself. That's why it's with me every moment I am able to carry.
I am expressing my personal philosophy on concealed carry, any why I hold those beliefs.
This entire segment was intended as an adult discussion of two differing opinions. I gave my opinion as a contrast to yours. This was a discussion, not an attack. For clarity, let's look at the definition of attack:
at·tack /əˈtæk/ [uh-tak]
–verb (used with object)
1. to set upon in a forceful, violent, hostile, or aggressive way, with or without a weapon; begin fighting with: He attacked him with his bare hands.
2. to begin hostilities against; start an offensive against: to attack the enemy.
3. to blame or abuse violently or bitterly.
4. to direct unfavorable criticism against; criticize severely; argue with strongly: He attacked his opponent's statement.
5. to try to destroy, esp. with verbal abuse: to attack the mayor's reputation.
The word implies hostility, violence, or forcefulness. I do not believe my words qualify as such.
I am hoping to clarify here what my intentions were in my response, so you can better understand my viewpoint rather than simply dismissing it as an attack. I do respect your opinions, which is why we are having this discussion. If I didn't, I wouldn't have taken the time to respond in the first place.
