It's an unavoidable topic in American conversations. In the photography world, it seems to pop up on the forums and Facebook groups often enough to warrant further consideration: guns. Not necessarily in the heated, political debate sense, but to ask this question: In a world where carrying a concealed weapon has become more normalized and photographers spend more time in remote and urban locations, do firearms have a place in your business?
Kellie Saunders, a wedding photographer in Birmingham, Michigan, knows a thing or two about gun safety and operating on the streets. Before becoming a full-time photographer, Saunders spent six years as a police officer in Detroit.
“Originally, I studied journalism and worked with commercial photographers and publishers prior to becoming a Detroit police officer," Saunders said. “When I decided to get married and start a family, I wanted a job that was flexible and offered stable hours. I couldn't find that in the private sector, so starting a business with my camera was a natural and easy transition.”
Saunders still does most of her work in Detroit as a photographer. But unlike her time spent in a squad car, she mostly leaves the gun at home these days.
“I am a firearms lover. Let's get that out of the way right now," she said. "I am all for private citizens having the right to carry firearms if they so desire. With that said, with a firearm comes great responsibility."
So, carrying a gun while she's out making portraits isn't in her plans.
“How can I photograph clients and be in a creative headspace while at the same time be legitimately prepared for a battle with a criminal?" Saunders asked. "If someone were to jump out of the bushes, let's say, their weapon is already out and ready. Time is of the essence, so think about it. By the time I can put my camera down and draw my weapon, either I or my clients could be hurt or killed.”
Saunders said that most Concealed Pistol License holders aren’t tactically trained, so drawing a weapon when out on an engagement session or other job might do more harm than good.
“Not everyone understands how a real life firefight could go down. I do, and that's why I choose to keep my weapon at home when I'm with clients," she said.
On the opposite side of the spectrum is a 12-year licensed concealed pistol carrier and active auxiliary police officer who is also an established wedding and event photographer in a major metropolitan area. He was granted anonymity for the sake of his business, as it might be affected by this article.
“There are lunatics everywhere. Who says giving up your stuff will protect you? That may work sometimes but not always. Sometimes, lunatics are into random violence, not just robbery,” said the photographer, who disclosed that carrying is a personal choice for him and that he doesn’t disclose it to clients.
“Responsible gun owners don't tell people they are carrying. One, many people aren't comfortable with it, so there's no point. Two, it isn't something to brag about. It is for protection against bad people,” he added.
The photographer said he began carrying on the job out of general concern for his safety while hauling gear around jobs in the city.
“I think I've been carrying around 10-12 years, not sure precisely," he said. "I was worried about crime and thought it was a good idea."
When asked for comment, National Rifle Association Spokesperson Lars Dalseide said: “Whether at home, on the job, or in the field, the NRA supports every law-abiding gun owner’s choice to safely and responsibly exercise their Second Amendment rights." He elaborated: "The right to carry was only available in a handful of states in 1991 while violent crime was at an all-time high. By 2015, more than 40 states had adopted right-to-carry laws, and the violent crime rate had dropped 51 percent. Should all the credit go to the new right-to-carry laws? No, not all. But criminals are less likely to attack targets who might be armed."
New stories of photographers being robbed or mugged aren’t unheard of, so it's no surprise that many people consider a concealed weapon as a precaution. On the other hand, statistics tend to find that guns are used far more often for killing than self-defense. But if guns aren't for you - for whatever reason - Saunders says vigilance and some streets smarts are most likely enough to keep you safe.
“I photograph in Detroit almost every week, and I love my city. I've never had a problem,” she said. “My advice is to always be aware of your surroundings. Know the areas you are working in. Don't trespass. Don't take your clients to abandoned buildings. Work in well-lit, well-traveled areas. If you see someone down the street approaching you on an 85-degree day with his hands in his pockets, wearing a thick jacket, and looking around, get in your car and leave.”
It should be noted that in many states, concealed weapons are not permitted inside of churches or synagogues, nor are they allowed in places of gathering that exceed set capacities. If you're a wedding or lifestyle photographer who carries or is considering carrying a gun, make sure to check the regulations of the state you work in first.
Where do you stand? Is having a concealed weapon with you on a shoot something you’d consider? Do you already carry? Should your clients know about it? Let us know in the comments.
Dave, to answer your question, I personally am discomforted by the vulnerability without my weapon, but it doesn't stop me from traveling; however I exercise added caution and am more particular when choosing destinations. There are other tactics like not opening my mouth and announcing I'm American. Thanks to Obama we now have a measureable price on our heads.
I suppose you could say that I do the same things at home, but without 'second thought'.
I am terribly sorry to correct you ;-) but the days Americans have a price on their head in specific regions started with the Reagan and after that the first Bush administration. American hate campaigns starte in the Arabic world in 1988, when the USS Vincennes accidentally shot down Iran Air Flight 655 killing 290 passengers. Bush said that he would "never apologize for the United States of America. Ever. I don't care what the facts are." and that launched a whole series of conflicts. Off course having sustained Israel in every possible way does not help at all in that region, especially it has failed to persuade it to give the Palestinians a fair deal.
Personally as a photographer I felt unsafe in some middle and southern American countries, Jamaica, south Africa, Nigeria, US (St. Louis, Detroit, Baltimore and Atlanta) and strange enough: Bahamas.
Mario, when I said 'price' I was refering to an actual monetary amount.....as defined by the word 'price', you must not have seen this http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/obamas-ugly-prisoner-exchange-with-iran/
I suppose you pointed out an undefined price, well congratulations Mario. We are all so very proud of you. Did you color inside the lines as well?
I hope the childish schoolyard tone that I am reading from you is do to a language barrier. A lot of "nanny nanny boo boo, i got you first, he he he"
That's a fair response Jordan. I can't say I can relate to feeling the need to carry a gun in any situation but I do of course understand taking precautions when in risky situations. I suppose its just the scale of the precaution which is the main thing anyone here disagrees on. It's also good to hear its not an issue preventing you from travelling to other parts of the word where carrying a gun isn't an option. Its a fair point also about Americans being an increased target while abroad. I think that was likely the case far before Obama though, but that's another conversation that doesn't need to be discussed on a photography website.
agreed
This was a silly polarising article to carry in Fstoppers and it has nothing whatsoever to do with our artform.
I carry mine all the time, but no one should until they totally understand the responsibility that comes with it. Once you pull it out and fire your in a whole different world. My girls both have their CC and I have trained them extensively on how to handle a weapon. But I still have not cut them loose with caring on their own yet. I have thirty years on the force and carrying is not for everyone.
This is a genuine question because I would love to understand this: Alot of us in the UK and Europe just dont 'get this'.... I've worked 10+ years as a photographer walking around London with thousands of £s worth of gear on my back (and large parts of the World) and never ever felt the need to carry a gun on the job... it is baffling to me and us. I would love to understand why so many in States feel the need to? Do you really fear others that much? Not mocking, I would really love to understand this.
No I'm not, but I'm not Chinese either and yet I like to educate myself about their culture and tradition too. Its called being educated. I was hoping for a decent dialogue but no, you had to be a jackass about it. Bravo.
Firstly I have no anti-Americanism in me at all, I have relatives in America, I love the country and the people there. I have visited many many times and lived and worked there, so you presumed straight off the bat that I would resort to anti-American, interrogation, condemnation and insults because I might take a different stance on gun ownership. I get that can be the case but not here my friend.
Your reply to almost everyone on the thread has been aggressive/insulting, essentially "you are not American, go away" or that we are all somehow Anti-america, you might not think it reads like that but it does, Many of us outside of America would like to know or understand because while its not part of our culture American culture actually touches on and influences alot of our culture. I could resort to stereotype and be "oh look stupid American and their gun love" but I dont, I asked the question because I wanted to understand from someone who carries a weapon with them quite why they do so. We have crime but we dont carry guns, typically the UK has a knife problem but even with that many of us dont carry knives....
Yep, theres a lot of dialog on here, but there's a lot of interrogation, condemnation and insults too like you said, so I asked the question hoping a nice person from out there might be able to say directly without sarcasm or being flippant . So you carry a gun because there's crime, ok, thanks. Thats all I wanted to know I guess. Thanks for your time.
You are hilarious, youve managed to turn everything rational into an something Anti-american when it isnt. That says alot. Go troll someone else. Have a great day.
I think I get it now.
If we do not agree on something, something Peter is in favor of, we are either anti-American or wannebe American. That is because deep down we all want to be Americans and adopt American culture. If not, we are anti-American. A discussion with an opposite opinion on something is ok, but… then you must definitely be anti-American and in disrespect for America's sovereignty and democracy.
I wonder how Peter thinks of our Dutch culture on matters like: soft drugs, abortion, free healthcare, homosexuality, same gender marriages, strict gun control, guaranteed income for the weak and so on.
He must be very positive on all of that, because if not, he disrespects our Netherlands sovereignty and democracy.
Which is a ultimately a "no-go" because any different opinion on such matters from Peter means disregard for the sovereignty and democracy or other sovereign and democratic nations.
;-)
I gave up on Peter in discussion mode, as he does not believe in any normal adult discussions.
Since my first post here I am (according to Peter): a non-American (obvious, that is correct), anti-American, taught and conditioned to have an irrational fear of guns, emotionally irrational, a fascist, arrogant, disrespectful, obsessive, a Nazi, “interrogate, condemn and insult Americans”, having lack of knowledge on my own country status in Europe, silly and I missed a few I guess as well.
That is besides other people being called the same or different as well as unconstitutional enemies of the state.
He is not bashing other people (he states), we are simply having lack of common sense and logic in our ignorance and denial on the case. So my guess is, this is an endless no-go discussion with him.
Yeah, me too now. Its pointless. Ha, its actually hilarious. I might forward my so called Anti American tirade to my Uncle and cousins in NYC so they know exactly who I am...
I came on Fstoppers because most folk on here seem to be rational compared to Petapixel, perhaps I was wrong.
much in the same way me asking "why do you carry a gun with your cameras" doesnt logically prove i'm anti-american
James,
Thank you for prefacing your inquiry with a 'non-mocking' disclaimer; very appropriate in the warm and cozy climate of this thread. Allow me to preface my response; I am solely addressing your original question, and have not read any following commentary.
"[Why do so many Americans] feel the need to [carry]? Do you really fear others that much?"
Short answer: Because we can, and no.
My father loves to ask people why dogs lick their own bollocks; his answer: because they can. —It is hard to convince you of the satisfaction of licking your own bollocks if you do not possess the ability to lick your own bollocks.— Guns were, at a time, more prominent in the UK; however, as I believe, your nation has never treated gun ownership as a right, and, furthermore, never allowing civilians to legally defend themselves with firearms. Correct me if I am wrong, but a UK gun owner would essentially be justified using a firearm only when the assailant also has a firearm; equal force laws. Considering the absent threat of gun violence in the UK, a gun for you has the personal defense value of a paperweight; you're better off punching the robber, or face jail time.
America is quite different with the right to gun ownership awarded to all citizens at birth by God. Our founding documents merely echo the basic human rights that all are born with —"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." — I know the idea of a deity is unpopular in your culture, but 'Creator' can be a broad term. Beyond the right of possession, is the uniquely American right to defend your life with a firearm; for that matter you can use a car, plane, tank, sword, hammer, bunny rabbit, balloon animal; as long as you remain to be in reasonable fear of your life; simply being in the confines of a tank would remove most reasonable fears. That said, a firearm is more valuable than a paperweight in America; not just for hunting, marksmanship, recreation, nor just a force-equalizer, but it can be a force-multiplyer; ultimately a powerful and versatile tool.
Squaring in on your first question, the need is best compared to the need of a seatbelt; homicides, removed from gang crime, is 0.002% of the population, so the likelihood of legitimately needing one is almost nought. Car fatalities are much more common, but you and I may survive our entire lives without experiencing a single incident; however, you and I certainly dawn our seatbelt each time we go for a drive; acting otherwise would be considered unsafe. Firearms for many Americans, including myself, are just that; a safety precaution we choose to have, but may never require.
Your second question of our percieved fear of everyone. No, we do not fear others 'that' much. As my statistic and metaphor illustrate [*edit* metaphor was misplaced; see: 'cellphone' below.], there is neither the presence of a substantial threat to fear, nor is there an irrational fear within the individual. However a threat still exists nonetheless. What's ironic is the perception of a quivering fearful gun-toter, when the threat is minūte and his gun stands as precaution for said threat; ironic in there being no space remaining for fear by the end of the equation. I also point to the shock factor a firearm has to those who are not familiar with them. You wouldn't know it unless you could walk in my shoes; a firearm is just one of the things I put on when I leave my house; keys, wallet, knife, gun. There's no stop to awe, "aaahh man, it's a bloody gun, holy s*it, this is a big f***ing deal," every morning; no, I strap it to my belt or toss it in a bag, and I'm out the door and won't think of it again until I undress for the evening...even still, it follows me around in my PJ's. I'd lend it the same necessity in my day as your cellphone; you realize you forgot it at home as you head to work; you may feel like turning back to retrieve it, or you may just press on and forget about it.
You may be thinking: "Ok, so there's no real chance you will need it and you can live without it; why bother?" Duly, with a minūte need, there is no justification in disarming the entire country; also trivial why this topic is the slightest bit mentioned, this leaves only leftist political reasons; the embodiment of true irrational fear and tyrannical agenda. Most anti-gunners are totally clueless about guns; they know they're bad...and scary looking; I'll leave it there. The tyrannical threat may be as mythical as a unicorn to you and many, but in retrospect is a mere 3 lifetimes from today for America; and far less for those living survivors of the Holocaust; the threat is real and to dismiss it for simply not witnessing it in your lifetime is naiveness defined. We have the most powerful military in the world (I say that as un-arrogantly as possible), and the ability to project power and keep the threat at bay over 'there'; however, the more likely threat is domestic; the government can take any turn it would like (presently heading towards socialism), but the people retain the ability to reclaim power by force. I don't advocate that, but I will prepare for it. (If you would like to know how some rednecks with AR's stand a chance against the most powerful military on the world, then please inquire and I will gladly indulge.)
There are gun owners like me, but others with a more intense level of vigilance, yet some with stockpiles of weaponry and not a holster to carry a single one. I believe all share something in common; from the pioneering spirit of our nation's founders, there is an attitude of self-reliance. Enjoying this time of peace with unfathomable conveniences and general safety, but not succumbing to complacency; standing firm and praying not for a time when hell breaks loose and there's no one to count on, but yourself; could be an invasion, civil war, or trip to the petrol station gone wrong; it is a mindset of preparedness that may never be needed, but passed down and protecting a nation for generations to come.
The only argument remaining is usually one from a irrational humanitarian perspective of 'a life is a life', and, no matter if it's justified, killing is bad. The solution is incredibly simple: don't violate the rights of another. That's the distinction of American conservative thought; values not dictated by emotions; one violating the rights of another has effectively discarded his own, and will be met with cold vengeance. I do not speak of stealing bread to feed a family; I speak of heinous acts of violent and deranged men. A life of crime should be one without reward; try it in America and face deadly consequences. I give the metaphor of being the captain on a sinking ship; save the boat and most of the crew, or open a hatch to save a few; dooming all. No one wants to make that decision and 'send' someone to meet their maker, but it's necessary to the survival of the team.
I'll quickly add the last common misconception I encounter is a false perception of our laws. I will provide a synopsis of gun laws as brief as I can without going too deep into each State's diffent ins and outs. The basic rule: You may use deadly force to defend yourself IF for a fact life or limb is being threatened, out of no fault or instigation of your own; and you are not reasonably able to flee; your legal right ceses once the threat is 'stopped'.
Some explanations:
'Life & Limb': you cannot shoot someone for stealing your camera, but demanding your camera with an overwhelming threat presented justifies deadly force; 'overwhelming' can be any weapon, someone bigger than you, someone more capable than you, or multiple people. A threatened position resulting from an escalated verbal argument, that you initiated or could have avoided, will not justify deadly force. 'Castle Doctrine', existing some States, for the most part, if someone enters your home unwelcomed it is pretty much open season on evil-doers; without the doctrine a victim must attempt to seek refuge within his home. 'Stand Your Ground' merely dismisses the obligation to flee. 'Shoot to Stop', you are legally limited to shooting to 'stop' a threat; there is no shoot to kill; if one shot stops the man in his tracks and he drops his weapon, then the threat is eliminated; successive shots would constitute murder; however firing 17 shots in rapid succession out of panic or distress may be justified. I list 17 only because it's my largest handgun magazine (actually 30, but I wouldn't in likelihood be carrying that little gal), though a threat could still exist beyond that requiring reloading and firing 17 additional...justifiedly.
Thank you for approaching in a genuine sense of curiousity as few do. In a similar sense I long to understand the general perception of American culture from the other side of the pond, as I encounter many outspoken individuals. I believe most of it is out of misconception as well as cultural differences; some anger, and envy is in the mix at times. I invite you to come to the States and experience it for yourself. Some flee America out of disagreement, while others are clamoring to assimilate into our culture.
Hey Jordan... a massive thank you for taking time to write that, and also understanding why I would like to know. I have been in the States many many times, worked there for several months, have friends and relatives there too-however they are not American (but hold Green Cards) so when I ask them, quite often they are a bit perplexed by it too. And honestly, the only time I have ever felt a "whooooah" moment was when I was in SF and a bloke walked towards me with a machette!! Which I think adds to my curiosty (shall we say) to try and understand.
To us, I guess we see all the killings (esp on the Schools) over there and hear soundbites like "if XYZ had a gun, they wouldnt be dead because they could defend themselves" coming from gun owners and we all shout: "well, hold on!! If no one had a gun...." you get where i'm going with that. From our point of view it seems very aggressive stand point to have something "just in case", almost like, "I dont trust anyone until they prove safe to trust", I think thats kind of how it feels... it is very alien to us over here to consider owning a gun at all, even our standard Police dont walk around with them, and when you do see the armed Police it (to me anyway) has a pretty strong impact.
You are right, It has never been a "right" in this country to be able to own one. When we had a large number of knife crime, it was stamped on pretty hard with Police action, while it hasnt all gone its been nulled quite drastically. And I honestly dont really fear being attacked at any stage... well, lets not BS here, i've had my cameras robbed from me twice, once from a car and once from my home while I was asleep in another room, that couldve ended very differently but I've still never felt the need to arm myself-I expect you might be reading that and thinking "holy crap, Home invasion... i'd want to protect me/my family" and you could be right, but the likelyhood of that guy who broke in holding a gun is very slim here because getting a gun isnt as easy as going and buying one in a shop (i get its not that easy!! lol)
I've been very lucky and have seen/travelled around and through alot of America and only ever had really wonderful experiances, obviously I've never lived there for anything over 4 months so i've seen/experianced It different I guess. Its very easy for me (us) to be here and make sweeping judgements but I really wanted someone who has one to explain it, which you have to an extent (might need to read it a few times to take it all in), and you didnt have to but I appreciate that alot. Far nicer than getting abuse like I did from another poster for asking a simple enough question :-)
Many thanks my friend.
.
In Kellie Saunders' scenario of a lunatic coming out of the bushes, her carrying a concealed firearm may be the difference in the lunatic killing one person, or all of them. Sure, criminals always have the upper hand, but that doesn't mean she couldn't mitigate the damage done by returning fire to stop OTHERS from getting hurt. I find it interesting that in that scenario, a police vet would just throw her hands up as if to say, "Oh well. Criminals have the upper hand. Nothing I can do about it." Not saying I disapprove of her not carrying, just don't agree with her logic. I believe people who conceal carry should seek out good training. It is definitely a huge responsibility not to be taken lightly. Not only that, but try to shoot on a regular basis. I conceal carry and try to every time I walk out of the house. It may not always be suitable for me to carry on a photography job though. Situation dictates.
The statement of in this thread: "being irrational afraid of guns", just dont add up, only an american could get an idea that stupid !
I just wonder how you can explain that the crime in European countries are less than in the US, even though we are not allowed to carry firearms?
And in Norway where I live, we have less crime per Citizen than the US and not even the Police are armed in a normal matter ... only on special instructs, as these days because of the raised threat for terror ...
Why is it that female homicide victims in USA are rated nearly 100 times higher than in other western countries and that over 50% of those homicides are with firearms?
I have no irrational fear of firearms or that its allowed to carry them, but when the statistics are as high as for the USA, I do understand that the easy access to firearms are the reason for the high rate of lethal domestic violence.
Feel free to carry as you like, but dont tell those of us that see a little longer than our own garden that a free access of firearms will make the community safer ...
Thats being IRRATIONAL
Talk about an article for the US midwest. Rest of the world need not apply....
;-) Fstoppers US section only haha
Never noticed that the internet is a global network?
Well, a global networks gives you global access to websites, website like this are meant to attract a global audience as photographers are also global. But perhaps hard to understand if you are locally focused.
What a dreadful article for a "photography" enthusiast BLOG!
So now that it's been established that:
a) there's huge swaths of America where there's a need to arm and train one-self and family in recon tactics;
...and...
b) that the right should be left to Americans to decide (I agree);
...I have the following question:
Why do many of you stay, live with your beloved families, and demand to photograph in these quasi "war zones"? What is it about these war zones that make them so desirable for weddings, fashion shoots, etc... let alone freely live with your family any where close to them?
Just from the comments above, I have a feeling that there's a large US population of very stubborn people just itching for a fight... with or without a gun... witness this article.
@Pete Miller
This is an American (REALITY) and this topic is relevant to American photographers... (ONLY).
I sure hope you nor any of your countrymen here are actually proud of those facts. Just as an observation, I also find it rather a shame that you can't think of anything else but to arm yourselves to the teeth to battle societal problems and inequalities.
What is dreadful is the consistently bigoted tone towards America. It's in your undertones like the fact that you chose the word 'dreadful'. There's always a negative portrayal of what we believe in, and it's never objective even though you attempted to be. (families in war zones, stubborn, itching for a fight, not proud of these facts, shame, etc.) Not proud of being American? Itching for a fight? Can you blame us when you falsely proclaim out of the gate that we live in a warzone and how dreadful it is that we force our loved ones to live in such a society?
You claim the right is to be left to Americans to decide, but then dump your negativity all over us. We're just a bunch of stubborn war-mongers who hate our families and our own country's values. By your account if we're all trained from the age of 5 to engage in battle tactics, then whose family will survive a tyrannical invasion? Even less extreme: a common home invasion. Sounds like something to be proud of; not relying on anyone for protection. There was a 14 year old boy home alone with younger siblings when an intruder began forcing his way in. He knew how to operate his father's rifle and dropped the man before getting 5 feet past the door. If that was my son I'd say he's a hero...hard to top that.
We don't arm ourselves for societal problems and inequalities. It's simple; we defend life and limb. Doesn't matter what color they are, or social status; it is one single category: bad people intending you harm. Where are you getting your ignorant perception from?
If you really believe what you say, and agree you can't grasp an American concept, then leave it alone. If you are
The best statements ever on this issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0
Like to see someone argue this.
and part II:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9UFyNy-rw4
A quick story about guns in America.....
In the 1990's, I worked as a branch manager for a bank in Kentucky. I knew a customer who owned a very successful small restaurant in the community. He had been in the same place for years, cooked up some great fried chicken, and had a loyal enough following that he didn't take credit cards. Cash only business.
Every Monday, he would come to the branch with a bag full of cash -- proceeds from the weekend. He would meet with a teller, count the money, and fill out his paperwork (side note -- one of the hardest things to do in America is put more than $10,000 cash in the bank. Your gonna be filling out forms for a while, and the black helicopters definitely know where you live......) This gentleman was well known to the staff, always friendly, a salt of the earth dude.
And, apparently, carried a gun.
One Monday I was out of the office on business. He arrived at the branch to make his deposit, and scored a coveted parking spot on the street, right in front of the door. As he approached the bank, what he didn't know - yet - was that four men were inside with guns and masks robbing the place, takeover style. They had everyone hostage. They had even taken a police officer.
As he told it, when he saw what was going on, he retreated to his car and dialed 911. Using his car as cover, he then waited for the men to leave the bank.
And opened fire.
As memory serves, he fired 11 shots, which may or may not have been the capacity of his handgun (in those days, most capped out at 11 shots.) I do recall that he hit one of the robbers in the neck, while the other 3 escaped unharmed. The robbers fled, and order was restored. Eventually, the thieves were captured and arrested. The man shot in the neck survived.
The restaurant owner was honored as a hero -- he even received a plaque from the city. All ended well.
But a few things always bugged me.
The first was "where did the bullets go". Well, it turned out that several (I recall 8) of the slugs traveled INTO the bank, where the customers, employees and police officer were huddled inside.
The second was "how did he miss"? I have zero training in combat tactics, but his situation seemed pretty ideal. He was 20ft. from the contact point. He had the benefit of superior cover (it was a Subaru :)). He knew exactly where his enemy would appear, and that spot -- a doorway -- was the ultimate chokepoint. The day was clear, and visibility was excellent. He had a full clip -- enough bullets to incapacitate his enemy given his situation. And surprise was on his side.
But he missed. A lot. He was 1 for 11 at 20 ft, behind cover, perfect visibility, in a superior tactical position. Why? What went wrong?
Truthfully, everything. The only thing he did right that day was call the police. His tactical situation, in truth, sucked. His enemy had hostages -- if things went south, was he willing to watch them sacrificed to avoid giving himself up? While he had some advantages, they weren't anything that would be difficult for a trained group of armed men to overcome. They all got outside, where they could have quickly outflanked him, and killed him. The enemy was retreating -- they were trying to LEAVE the bank. What if shooting at them forces them back into the bank? A situation defused now becomes a situation amplified.
Here's the deal. I firmly believe that Americans have the right to own firearms. I don't need to defend that belief -- its mine. People don't have to like it, and I'm okay with that.
But carrying a handgun -- that's a huge responsibility. HUGE! When things go wrong with guns -- its final. No take backs. No do-overs. Its done. If you carry a handgun, you need to be trained in how to use it, but more importantly, be trained on WHEN to use it. You could easily argue that this shooting never needed to occur.
If you decide that carrying a gun is the right thing for you, I implore you to invest wisely in the appropriate time and training. Owning a gun and using a gun are altogether two different things.
cops often miss as well
i have a permit for mace. But now in CA i can buy pepper spray over the counter. I also have a flash light that is police style (on off button on the back metal front) I say protect yourself but do not cary a firearm.
This is one which will for sure polarize the reading population. I grew up sport shooting so have no 'irrational fear' of guns, but when I travel to the US I absolutely feel in harms way from the moment I get out of arrivals, and I've traveled to some pretty risky places over the years. For me it's simple, the more guns there are - whether in the hands of villains or civilians, the more chance you have of having a bad day if it all goes pear shaped. The statistics bear this out, but of course that, like everything else, is up for grabs in any gun debate..
I love when Guns are brought up in this blog. I photograph vintage exotic cars for a living. Sometimes I am forced to drive a million dollar car to a location, to everyones surprise, I really dont want to, but the owner does not want to pay for towing. The places they are stored are in a very not so great area. Plus, I have 20,000 in equipment in the back seat. I carry. If idiots steal the car fine, if idiots steal my equipment fine. If they try to hurt me in the process, not fine. My situation is that common sense says have the ability to be able to protect myself. if anti gunners think their charming smile will keep a theif/murder away. Good Luck.
What I find so comical about all this is in the last year on this blog, there were two post I found offensive. Not gonna say which ones. but It was two things I am strongly against. things hurtful in my mind to society. BUT, figured id keep my mouth shut. I knew if I commented, id get slammed. called every name in the book. But I figured everybody has a right to their belief and opinion. Even tho I did not agree, I stayed silent. But when the Gun debate comes on this blog, Its amazing how those who do not agree come baring fangs, and how America gets trashed. THEY have to fight tooth and nail to have their way, even tho they choose not to acknowledge facts. And you get bashed if you choose not to agree. Sounds like a double standard to me. I would love for all the anti-gunners to say, "You know what, I dont agree, but its their right to own one, and have their freedom even if I dont agree. I will respect their right." BTW, Does anybody have a bridge to sell me? or maybe ill win the lotto today... To all, America is a great, wonderful, extremely safe country. You should be so lucky to get to come here and see it. Conservitive, Liberal, Democrat and Republican, We may not agree on everything, but we do love freedom, and thats what makes America great. and btw, people on all sides here enjoy owning firearms.
I was location scouting a warehouse here in vegas and there was a male photog and a model there already and he had a gun on his hip. Thought that was a bit odd. So i asked a bunch of my female friends if they would feel comfortable being on a shoot with a photog packing heat? All of them said they would of left if they knew he had a gun. All the girls felt more uncomfortable with him having a gun moreso then getting mugged.
Why do so many americans think someone is out to get them anyways? If someone really wants to steal my gear. they are more than welcome to take it. My insurance covers everything.
Guns and art do not mix. Cue the douchebag who says they do....3....2.....1...
You can't overpower and kill a person with your bare hands by accident.
Cameron, you talk of Americans in third person, so I'm assuming you're not American and the ladies you surveyed were also not American. That is definitely going to impact the answers. Secondly, had you rephrased the question with the photographer being their favorite male celebrity, then the answers also would have been completely different. What does your point or any of this prove? Nothing! HA HAHA HA
On a serious note I believe it would be unwise for a photographer with his hands full to open carry on his hip; that leaves you vulnerable to your weapon being targeted. Alternately you can simply conceal the weapon under your shirt and you won't spook the ladies.
What's odd about carrying a gun while scouting a warehouse? For a liberal you would think that would be an appropriate occasion. That's whatever, there is no appropriate time; if you're going to carry then you carry all the time. Cannot predict when you'll be attacked.
There's no one out to get us...there are simply bad people in the world who will kill you AFTER you give them your camera.
It should be noted that study's show no correlation between carry laws and violent crimes. I bring this up because I feel the author could have at least fact checked the NRA source to give some context to their claim. For that I find this article pretty useless from a journalism perspective, and no more than a bar room argument to which the comments proven it has become.
https://www.texastribune.org/2015/09/24/study-says-concealed-carry-permi...
It's not rockets science, and in fact it's not any science at all. You are irrationally defending yourself and your position to no end. You scare me.
Simplistic viewpoint and ad hominem argument. Calling someone delusional or insane does not turn your opinions into facts. If you accidentally shoot the wrong person or yourself, you are not defending yourself better. Very few untrained folks could hit the broad side of a barn when panicked, much less respond appropriately within seconds under extreme stress.
Ad hominem: directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
Calling a person delusional or insane is an attack on a person, not a substantive counterargument to their position.
I don't have an irrational fear of encountering violence, and my life is worth far more than a few thousand dollars of gear, so I see no reason to carry a lethal weapon that is more likely to get me in trouble or be used against me or be stolen and used for evil than to be of any actual use to me. I've walked alone at night all over the world and live in a NYC neighborhood known for its high crime rate, and never faced a serious threat. Awareness and smarts are the best defense. I don't trust myself to handle a firearm appropriately and competently under pressure, and I sure don't trust most other people to do likewise. Much happier not having guns around. If someone is ready to threaten my life with a weapon for my cameras, they can have them. That's what equipment insurance is for. If they don't have a weapon, they'll get a kick in the balls.
Oh, also this:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/wedding-guest-fired-shot-w...
If it were the photographer and not a guest, career over.
It's not luck, it's situational awareness and risk management.
Situational awareness involves paying attention to what's going on around me and anticipating problems. Risk management involves minimizing vulnerability and avoiding problems. Do I really have to explain this? If you don't understand these basic aspects of safety, you're probably going to feel compelled to use that gun. Let's hope you're really good at assessing targets in an instant in the dark, or there's going to be a group of boisterous drunks bleeding on the street 'cause they looked at you funny.
"my life is worth far more than a few thousand dollars of gear" this rationale would make sense as to why you would WANT to carry. Everyone thinks this about simply defending gear...you can hope that your peace offering is enough to send them away, but there are plenty of times the victims are killed/mutilated AFTER giving up their valuables.
The man in the article had the gun in his pocket. If you want to base your decision on another's negligence to properly handle a weapon, then live forever in defenseless fear. I admire your ability to admit that you simply are not capable of safely handling a firearm, because they scare you; however please don't force that weak point of view upon the rest of us through voting.
You value your career over your life.
Firearms don't scare me. I was a very good shot on my school's target team and with my air rifle. I am perfectly capable of safely handling a firearm, under normal circumstances. Panicky untrained people with the ability to instantaneously and mistakenly deal death are what scare me. Just the other day, a guy mistakenly shot two firefighters at his door who were trying to save him, killing one and seriously injuring the other. Mistakes happen, especially when folks are scared, and I have the self-awareness to recognize that this includes me. I don't want to be the one who shoots an unarmed teenager in the dark when he's just reaching for his phone.
"By the time I can put my camera down and draw my weapon, either I or my clients could be hurt or killed.”
Non sequitur. That sentence admits the possibility of injury or death regardless of your actions.
The question is, are you safer with one or without one?
No brainer.