Originally Posted by RichieLion

You never know when you need personal protection. If the need for a defensive weapon could be definitely predicted, that would be a very useful thing.

I have a friend who must carry nitroglycerin pills because of a heart condition. He's never needed to take one for all the years he's carried them

But he must "carry" just in case, because "what if".

I have a feeling you'll reject my analogy, but the point is made.

Your friend must have a previous heart problem so he carries the pills in case another heart problem presents itself. He did not start carrying the pills when he was completely healthy.

The Villages is like your very healthy heart. There is no problem with it. So like the nitro pills that are not needed to carry for a healthy heart, there is no reason to carry a pistol in The Villages.

Like your friend with the heart issue, IF The Villages had a pre-existing condition with hold-ups of Villagers in parking lots or routine sexual assaults of women behind buildings or other violent criminal behavior that made it unsafe to be on the streets - carrying a concealed weapon might be a pretty good idea to prevent it from happening.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Your friend must have a previous heart problem so he carries the pills in case another heart problem presents itself. He did not start carrying the pills when he was completely healthy.

The Villages is like your very healthy heart. There is no problem with it. So like the nitro pills that are not needed to carry for a healthy heart, there is no reason to carry a pistol in The Villages.

Like your friend with the heart issue, IF The Villages had a pre-existing condition with hold-ups of Villagers in parking lots or routine sexual assaults of women behind buildings or other violent criminal behavior that made it unsafe to be on the streets - carrying a concealed weapon might be a pretty good idea to prevent it from happening.

You mean violence would have to be routine before you carry personal protection?

I hope you don't mind if I would rather not be one of the early victims of violence in your nonsensical analogy.

Originally Posted by buggyone

No agrument with a police officer carrying a concealed weapon when off-duty.

Buggyone, here is some interesting facts for you.

Myth: Only police should have guns

Fact: “...most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police.”

Fact: 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person.

Fact: Police have trouble keeping their own guns. Hundreds of firearms are missing from the FBI and 449 of them have been involved in crimes.

Fact: People who saw the helplessness of the L.A. Police Department during the 1992 King Riots or the looting and violence in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina know that citizens need guns to defend themselves.

Google Gun Facts Version 6.0, you will find that it is interesting reading. You might even learn something.

Me, with the above facts, I would be more trusting of the armed citizen than I would of the armed off duty police officer.

Your opinion is fine with me, Figgy. No problem at all.
Yours, too, Richie.