[Reasonable Rant] It's a rational choice to carry. It's also a rational choice not to carry. Treat others with respect.

So I saw this post today "My carrying is suddenly an issue with my wife," and it's prompted me to post something that's been on my mind for a while:You all know the arguments in favor of carrying, they go something like this:When seconds count, the police are minutes awayIt's my choice and my responsibility to protect me and my familyFirearms are a great equalizer that allow me to protect myself from great bodily harm or deathAs much as I'd like to believe that deescalation or submitting to the threat of force will always work, there are situations where the only thing that will protect my life is my ability and willingness to counter with force. Bad guys don't play by the rules.Ultimately the time/money/risk of accident investment in carrying a firearm is worth the investment in case I should ever need to use one.Perhaps this statement rings true: "I'd like to live in a world where it would never be necessary to defend oneself and though I want to believe that any situation is able to be resolved without force, I know that world is a fantasy. I refuse to be a victim, and I am willing to pay the price of training and practice so that I am prepared in the extremely unlikely event that I find myself in a situation where violence is unavoidable."It's also a rational choice not to carry. The arguments go something like this: * Having a firearm in the house increases the risk that an accident will happen. * Successfully wielding a firearm requires proficiency. This proficiency requires ongoing training and practice, which is an investment in time and money. * The risk of needing a firearm is extremely low. Alternate methods of handling the threat of great bodily harm or death (deescalation, complying, or fighting back physically) are good enough for me. * Overall, the time/money/risk of accident investment in carrying a firearm outweighs the risk of needing to use one. * Perhaps this statement rings true: "I'd like to live in a world where it would never be necessary to defend oneself and any situation has the potential to be deescalated. If I don't act as though that's possible, it never will be. Living as though it's possible is worth the price of death or great bodily harm should I ever find myself in the extremely unlikely situation where violence is unavoidable." rings true.BOTH of these perspectives are reasonable and rational. The problem is when you turn them around and attack people that don't carry for being "naive" or you feel attacked for being "paranoid". Facts can be dug up to support either argument.I think that most carriers would say that the minimum investment to be proficient with a firearm looks something like $500 up front for a firearm and holster, 2 hours and $100/month for practice, and probably $300/year for training to learn and/or refresh skills. CCW permits also vary wildly. Is spending that 24+ hours, and $1,500 - $2,000 a year worth what you're insuring against? (Side note: who has enough fire extinguishers and has tested their smoke detectors lately?)Most carriers would say something like: "You only get one life and it's priceless. (Plus guns are fun!)"People that have spent any time thinking about it made the choice to not carry might say something like: "What makes life priceless is what you do with it, and I'm choosing to use my time and money to do other things that are more important to me." via /r/CCW http://ift.tt/2a39566