TexasCHLforum.com

Carrying a firearm as a licensed carrier simply allows me a force option I would not otherwise have to protect me and mine. IF the exercise of this option stops an evil-doer before harming others, so be it, but my primary responsibility is to my family. Until in the midst of a situation, I can't say what I might do in that situation, though.

The argument of the anti-gun folks regarding errant rounds has merit on its face but is a bit disingenuous if considered further. It is true that many errant rounds occur in engagements of gunfire -- I understand that around 4 out of 5 rounds fired by police do not find their intended target -- so their argument is that citizens should not have this force option. The argument falls apart, though, when they argue that law enforcement should be armed and presumably there always to protect them as it would seem that more officers with guns would introduce the same potential for a greater number of errant rounds that denying citizens the right to be armed would be meant to avoid.

If your duty or your choice is to carry a sidearm, training to the degree that you have means is essential to effectively placing shots where they can be effective. Training to perform under stress is part of this. Hitting targets on a static range with few time constraints is no analog to the situations you might face defending yourself, yet you remain accountable for every round you send.