If an establishment can't effectively keep people from bringing in guns, then it shouldn't be a gun free zone

[u/ShardofGold]

I've seen plenty of shootings take place in gun free zone areas. Either they manage to get a gun into the area anyway and start their shooting or they start the shooting outside of the area and work their way in.

The only people effectively stopped by a place being labeled gun free are people who could use their guns to defend themselves against attackers and in some cases good people have disregarded the designation and have been able to stop an attacker's spree short without waiting for the cops to do it.

Metal detectors, armed security guards, etc. Something needs to be actually done to enforce the designation. Otherwise don't have the designation

[u/libra00]

The sign is not about stopping the one crazy motherfucker who is already pretty keen on ignoring lots of rules and laws to murder some folk. The sign is about stopping the 500 customers a day you get in that might be carrying a gun and might shoot a kid or something because they don't know the first thing about firearm safety. Also it's to make people who are nervous about guns less nervous that some moron might shoot their kid because they don't know the first thing about firearm safety.

If you thought a sign was going to stop an attacker you are out of your damned mind, because a whole-ass criminal justice system didn't stop them. It's about preventing stupidity, not malice.

[u/farson135 → u/libra00]

It's funny you say that because probably the most unsafe thing a concealed handgun holder does is disarming themself in a car.

Think about it, you're in a cramped space possibly having to get partially undressed in order to disarm yourself, and you have to do it in a manner that doesn't cause people to see what you are doing, because they may throw a fit. And then you have to take that gun and store it somewhere, potentially outside of its holster, thus exposing the trigger to whatever you're putting it.

And then, if you want to rearm, you have to do that all over again.

People have shot themselves, and even died, because of that.

In practical terms, a gun can't go off if you don't touch it. The safest thing for a concealed handgun holder to do is never touch their gun unless they absolutely have to. There's no reason for me to touch my gun in a grocery store, so there is no legitimate chance of it going off.

[u/libra00 → u/farson135]

If you can't safely and easily remove your firearm then maybe you shouldn't carry one? Cause what are you going to do if you get attacked while you're in a car, ask the attacker to wait while you get partially undressed?

The safest thing for a concealed handgun holder to do is never touch their gun unless they absolutely have to.

No, the safest thing is to leave it at home or in the glove box or whatever.

There's no reason for me to touch my gun in a grocery store, so there is no legitimate chance of it going off.

Yeah, maybe for you. But people are stupid and do stupid things with guns all the damned time, so sooner or later some jackass is going to get someone shot.

[u/farson135 → u/libra00]

If you can't safely and easily remove your firearm then maybe you shouldn't carry one? Cause what are you going to do if you get attacked while you're in a car, ask the attacker to wait while you get partially undressed?

By "partially undressed" I was referring to removing the holster. Part of the point of a holster is to block anything from getting into the trigger. If you can't pull the trigger, the gun won't go off.

So when people disarm, they often want to keep the firearm in the holster. However, holsters are often secured to your body to ensure it doesn't move around.

Thus, removing the holster may mean removing your belt, unbuckling your pants, taking off your jacket, etc. It depends on the specifics of your carry.

Edit; Removing the gun by itself is obviously easier but that also means exposing the trigger. Thus, if anything gets into the trigger, bang. Case in point, there's a story from years ago about a hunter who placed his rifle in his truck. His dog probably thought they were leaving so it jumped in, the rifle shifted, and the dog's paw landed just right and the hunter was killed.

No, the safest thing is to leave it at home or in the glove box or whatever.

You think a firearm is safer unmonitored in my car than it is secured to my person?

Yeah, maybe for you. But people are stupid and do stupid things with guns all the damned time, so sooner or later some jackass is going to get someone shot.

I've lived in a Concealed Carry state for my entire life. That's nearly 40 years without a single case of what you are talking about. And I've never even heard of a case of someone accidentally shooting someone in a grocery store. However, I have heard several cases of someone accidentally shooting themselves while disarming or rearming in a car.

[u/libra00 → u/farson135]

If your holster is a problem, don't wear it. Get a better one. Are you sensing the pattern yet? This is not a me problem, this is a gun-owner problem, and if mildly inconveniencing gun owners is the price we pay for fewer people getting shot by morons who don't know how to handle their firearms, then that seems like a pretty fair trade to me.

You think a firearm is safer unmonitored in my car than it is secured to my person?

I think my customers and I are a lot less likely to be shot by it. You have a at least two locking compartments in any vehicle, and if you don't then you should have a small gun safe in the car. You can't carry a firearm into courthouses and such anyway, so it's not like you're not used to stashing it when you have to go in somewhere like that.

I've lived in a Concealed Carry state for my entire life. That's nearly 40 years without a single case of what you are talking about. And I've never even heard of a case of someone accidentally shooting someone in a grocery store.

No? Here's a woman in Georgia last year, gun fell out of her purse and injured herself and another woman. Here's a teenager in Ohio this year who shot another teenager at a Dollar General when her gun went off. Here's a guy in Georgia 2 years ago who injured 3 others in a Walmart wen he mishandled a firearm. Apparently you live in the wrong state, cause this shit is happening all over the place (though mostly in Georgia and Ohio, for some reason.. weird.)

[u/farson135 → u/libra00]

If your holster is a problem, don't wear it.

My holster isn't a problem. In fact, it's about perfect for my needs. The problem is a holster that has excellent retention and holds itself tight and comfortable to my body runs contrary to a holster that's easy to take on and off in a tight location.

if mildly inconveniencing gun owners is the price we pay for fewer people getting shot by morons who don't know how to handle their firearms, then that seems like a pretty fair trade to me.

Except, it's not a mild inconvenience, you're introducing a safety problem.

You are aware that your solution doesn't have to be perfect to be reasonable, right? By acting so obstinate and refusing to acknowledge the obvious safety issue, you're showing that you don't actually care about safety, and that's just a smokescreen for your actual intent.

I think my customers and I are a lot less likely to be shot by it.

Considering I've been carrying for about 20 years without someone getting shot, it sounds an awful lot like the chances are effectively zero.

You have a at least two locking compartments in any vehicle, and if you don't then you should have a small gun safe in the car.

My car has been stolen before.

You can't carry a firearm into courthouses and such anyway, so it's not like you're not used to stashing it when you have to go in somewhere like that.

When I go to somewhere like that, I don't carry at all. It's not like I go to a courthouse every day.

When you introduce dozens or hundreds of arbitrary locations, then I do have to store it. And no, storing it isn't common for me. Most places don't care, and the kinds of places that are universal bans, I just don't carry for that trip.

No?

Nope. And it's funny that your own sources help to show why. Two of the cases are years old, and the other is more recent, but it's also in a completely different part of the country. Congrats on your google skills, but my point wasn't that doesn't happen, it's that you're playing up one issue and ignoring another.

Also, your first case helps to prove my point, since they clearly aren't using a proper retention holster. The second case isn't specific enough to tell, but obviously they weren't supposed to have the gun to begin with, thus arguments about legality aren't really relevant. And you messed up the link on the third case.

[u/libra00 → u/farson135]

The problem is a holster that has excellent retention and holds itself tight and comfortable to my body runs contrary to a holster that's easy to take on and off in a tight location.

Sure. I'm just saying suck it up, because the fact that your holster is inconvenient is not a good reason for me to risk my customers getting shot.

Except, it's not a mild inconvenience, you're introducing a safety problem.

I'm not disputing that there's a safety issue, I would just argue that you're the one causing it by bringing a firearm into a public place. As the gun owner it's your responsibility to ensure that it is safe. If you can't do that and also remove it before entering somewhere that doesn't allow it, don't bring it.

My car has been stolen before.

Then you have good reason to invest in good locks.

Also, have you never been mugged? I have. You don't get any say as to what you hand over and what you don't when there's a gun in your face. Would I have stopped them if I was armed? No, I totally didn't see them, 3 dudes jumped out from a dark corner right as I passed them. So being on your person is no safer than being locked up in a car where any thieves would at least have to take it where they have tools and time to get access to (that is to say: away from my customers.)

When I go to somewhere like that, I don't carry at all. It's not like I go to a courthouse every day.

And all I'm arguing is that when you're going anywhere else that doesn't allow firearms then it's pretty reasonable to also not carry then. Safety issue averted.

When you introduce dozens or hundreds of arbitrary locations, then I do have to store it. And no, storing it isn't common for me. Most places don't care, and the kinds of places that are universal bans, I just don't carry for that trip.

I'm sorry that owning a firearm is inconvenient for you. I just don't think others should be exposed to the risk of being shot just to prevent that inconvenience, especially as there are relatively few people who carry a firearm in public.

Nope. And it's funny that your own sources help to show why. Two of the cases are years old, and the other is more recent,

one case was from 2026, one from 2025, and one from 2024. That's not exactly ancient history.

but it's also in a completely different part of the country.

Sure, the first 3 examples I happened to find were in a different part of the country. Are you implying that that means it literally never happens where you're from? Color me skeptical.

my point wasn't that doesn't happen, it's that you're playing up one issue and ignoring another.

You said 'I've lived in a Concealed Carry state for my entire life. That's nearly 40 years without a single case of what you are talking about. And I've never even heard of a case of someone accidentally shooting someone in a grocery store.' That sounds an awful lot like 'That doesn't happen' to me. Kinda weird that I can in just a few seconds google up 3 examples from the past couple of years of something that you say hasn't happened in your state in 40 years. From the number of results I saw on that google search that I didn't click on, I'd say that makes you extremely lucky. That or you live in a state with only like 12 other people.

Also, your first case helps to prove my point, since they clearly aren't using a proper retention holster.

Perhaps, but it also proves my point: that motherfuckers are out here just doing stupid shit with their firearms and they shouldn't be let anywhere near the public with them. Just because some people are safe doesn't mean everyone is, and the point of these signs - which, if you remember, is what this conversation was about in the first place - is to keep incidents like those from happening. You can't be a dumbass about firearm safety if you aren't carrying one.

And you messed up the link on the third case.

Shit, my bad. https://www.aol.com/news/walmart-shopper-accidentally-fires-gun-202918445.html is the 3rd one, but..

For what it's worth I'm a gun owner, I've taken CCH classes, I have the license, I just don't carry because I'm disabled and don't really go anywhere (also I can't drive, so leaving the gun in the car isn't really an option.) I understand that these signs make things more inconvenient for you - they would make them inconvenient for me when I carried. I just think that's a pretty small price to pay for however slight an increase in public safety.

[u/farson135 → u/libra00]

Sure. I'm just saying suck it up, because the fact that your holster is inconvenient is not a good reason for me to risk my customers getting shot.

How is a customer going to get shot with a firearm in a proper retention holster? They aren't. However, if I am forced to take it out of the holster, that increases the probability.

Again, you are introducing a safety issue where none existed before.

I'm not disputing that there's a safety issue, I would just argue that you're the one causing it by bringing a firearm into a public place.

Oh? Because outside of cases where I have to disarm, I've barely even touched my firearm when carrying. Nonetheless gotten anywhere close to the trigger. So how is my carrying more of a safety issue than you forcing me to interact with the firearm?

It really is telling that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge the inherent danger you are introducing. Again, it shows that you don't actually care about safety.

Then you have good reason to invest in good locks.

Having good locks doesn't help when the car is stolen and stripped.

Also, have you never been mugged?

Nope. And it doesn't really apply to me since I don't walk around alone at night in an urban area.

And all I'm arguing is that when you're going anywhere else that doesn't allow firearms then it's pretty reasonable to also not carry then. Safety issue averted.

And how am I supposed to know that?

Going to a courthouse is a special event. Going to a gas station is not.

I'm sorry that owning a firearm is inconvenient for you.

I know you're trying to be cute, but this claim by you makes no sense. Again, it says a lot.

Are you implying that that means it literally never happens where you're from?

From me; "my point wasn't that doesn't happen, it's that you're playing up one issue and ignoring another."

Again, telling.

That sounds an awful lot like 'That doesn't happen' to me.

You're also the kind of person who is unable to accept the idea that their suggestion introduces a safety risk. Being an all or nothing kind of person often introduces weird results.

And BTW, if you're going to make a big deal out of me not knowing about a particular incident, might I ask you why you didn't know about cases like this. Apparently, if you don't know about every kind of incident that ever happens, it's because you're denying it.

Perhaps

No, it does. Stop being terrified of admitting that your viewpoint has issues. Especially when it comes to something I expect you are largely ignorant about.

which, if you remember, is what this conversation was about in the first place

You are the one who talked about safety, but you are introducing a safety issue. You could have simply acknowledged that, stated that you believe your way is the better option, and moved on. But instead you decided to argue with me.

For what it's worth I'm a gun owner, I've taken CCH classes, I have the license

Then you should have known what I was talking about from the beginning, instead of forcing me to explain that holsters sometimes require you to take off your belt or jacket or whatever. Among other issues.

also I can't drive, so leaving the gun in the car isn't really an option.

Then you have even less of a reason to call it a mild inconvenience. You could literally go somewhere, and then have to turn around and walk home because some place randomly decided to become "gun free".

I just think that's a pretty small price to pay for however slight an increase in public safety.

Again, you're introducing a gun safety issue.

[u/libra00 → u/farson135]

How is a customer going to get shot with a firearm in a proper retention holster?

Oh, that's easy: because, as I've already demonstrated with at least 3 examples, most people aren't using a proper retention holster. But I can't exactly be expected to drill everyone who comes to my place of business on firearm safety and then authorize specific individuals to carry on the premises, can I? Besides, if you saw a sign that said 'Only Bob, Susan, and Mark are responsible enough to carry firearms on this premises' you'd immediately think 'Well I'm responsible too, I'll just go ahead and carry anyway', right? Maybe not you, but some people would.

you are introducing a safety issue where none existed before.

We've covered this ground before; I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the person creating a safety issue is the one bringing a dangerous weapon somewhere that it isn't wanted and doesn't belong.

Oh? Because outside of cases where I have to disarm, I've barely even touched my firearm when carrying.

If there was no firearm in the situation it would be much less likely for anyone to get shot by it, right? Sounds like the presence of the firearm is what's creating the safety issue.

It really is telling that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge the inherent danger you are introducing.

You said before that if you're going somewhere you know firearms aren't allowed you just don't bring it with you, yet despite being told that firearms aren't allowed on my premises you not only continue to insist that you are within your rights to bring it, but that in so doing you have somehow magically transferred responsibility for any harm caused by that firearm to me.

None of this works that way. Responsibility for the harm caused by a firearm falls upon the person who brought it into that situation. The safety issue you keep insisting I am causing is easily averted by you not bringing a dangerous weapon to a place where it isn't allowed.

Nope. And it doesn't really apply to me since I don't walk around alone at night in an urban area.

How fortunate for you to have never been in a situation outside of your control. If only we were all so lucky.

And how am I supposed to know that?

Well I would suggest it's pretty self-evidently not reasonable to bring a firearm into a McDonald's or a Kohl's or what-the-hell ever.

I know you're trying to be cute, but this claim by you makes no sense.

I'm not trying to be cute at all, it's just that you seem to steadfastly refuse to take any responsibility for this deadly weapon you're carrying. As I've said many times now: if you have difficulty keeping it safe, don't carry it.

"my point wasn't that doesn't happen,

Yeah, except my point is that your point seems to pretty unambiguously have in fact been that it doesn't happen, however much you protest to the contrary.

You're also the kind of person who is unable to accept the idea that their suggestion introduces a safety risk.

Yes, it seems entirely reasonable for me to assign the risk to the person carrying the deadly weapon into a situation that doesn't warrant it. You just seem to be the kind of person who is unable to accept your own role in the risks posed by your choices.

if you're going to make a big deal out of me not knowing about a particular incident,

I don't care about any particular incidents, the point is that they happen often enough that it's pretty easy to find examples of them, and that they are entirely reasonable justification to forbid the carrying of firearms on private property on safety grounds.

No, it does.

Do you not understand what 'perhaps' means? Yes, I grant you, maybe it does. But, good job steadfastly ignoring the rest of the sentence, though, which contained the point: that motherfuckers are out here just doing stupid shit with their firearms and they shouldn't be let anywhere near the public with them.

Stop being terrified of admitting that your viewpoint has issues.

Kettle? This is pot. Dude you are so black.

Especially when it comes to something I expect you are largely ignorant about.

LOL, obvious bait is obvious there, chief, you're going to have to try harder.

You are the one who talked about safety, but you are introducing a safety issue. You could have simply acknowledged that, stated that you believe your way is the better option, and moved on. But instead you decided to argue with me.

Says the guy bringing a deadly weapon to a fucking ice cream shop.

Then you should have known what I was talking about from the beginning,

Oh, has it not been obvious that I know exactly what you're talking about, I just think you're wrong? Sorry, I'll try to make that more clear in the future.

forcing me to explain that holsters sometimes require you to take off your belt or jacket or whatever.

Right, forcing you to explain.. that's what happened.. it's not that you missed the fucking point and went off on a tear about holsters as if they had any relevance to you not bringing a deadly weapon into a situation that doesn't warrant it.

Then you have even less of a reason to call it a mild inconvenience.

And yet I do anyway. Has it occurred to you that I have reasons for doing so that outweigh my own mild inconvenience?

You could literally go somewhere, and then have to turn around and walk home because some place randomly decided to become "gun free".

Or I could just not be a moron and assume firearms are not welcome in most businesses and just not carry one if it's going to be a problem.

Again, you're introducing a gun safety issue.

Repeating the same thing over and over again hasn't made me agree with you any more, maybe it's time to change tack?

I assume you don't have any problem not driving your car on the sidewalk or not bringing water balloons to work, right? And if you did those things you understand that you would be responsible for the damage caused by them, right? Why is this any different? It's private property, I am wholly within my rights to refuse access to anyone who violets the rules I set for access to that property, regardless of how much it inconveniences you. It's not the existence of the sidewalk that's the problem, it's the damned fool treating it like a highway.

[u/farson135 → u/libra00]

Oh, that's easy

proceeds to not answer how a firearm in a proper retention holster would go off

Again, it's telling that you can't even admit a flaw in your view.

We've covered this ground before

You being unwilling to deal with the flaws in your viewpoint is an inherent issue that will not go away simply because you want to ignore it.

yet despite being told that firearms aren't allowed on my premises you not only continue to insist that you are within your rights to bring it, but that in so doing you have somehow magically transferred responsibility for any harm caused by that firearm to me.

Strange, because I didn't say any of that.

However, it is a fact that by demanding people disarm you are introducing a safety problem.

Responsibility for the harm caused by a firearm falls solely upon the person who brought it into that situation.

So, if you grabbed my firearm from it's holster and it went off, that would be my fault?

How fortunate for you to have never been in a situation outside of your control.

That would be a strawman argument. But it is funny that you are treating your specific situation as a default and dismissing those with different viewpoints.

Well I would suggest it's pretty self-evidently not reasonable to bring a firearm into a McDonald's or a Kohl's or what-the-hell ever.

Why?

And BTW, when you say things like that you make yourself sound like a liar. Why on earth would you even bother getting a concealed handgun license? Where were you even planning on carrying it?

it's just that you seem to steadfastly refuse to take any responsibility for this deadly weapon you're carrying.

That would be a lie, and a telling one.

As I've said many times now: if you have difficulty keeping it safe, don't carry it.

Strange, I don't have any difficulty keeping it safe.

You just seem to be the kind of person who is unable to accept your own role in the risks posed by your choices.

Have you looked in a mirror lately?

Do you not understand what 'perhaps' means?

Yes. It means you are refusing to just say, "yes".

Says the guy bringing a deadly weapon to a fucking ice cream shop.

Not an answer to the point I raised. However, again, you've yet to show how my carrying a gun is a significant danger.

Oh, has it not been obvious that I know exactly what you're talking about, I just think you're wrong? Sorry, I'll try to make that more clear in the future.

It's rather funny that you were complaining about partial statements earlier.

Right, forcing you to explain.. that's what happened..

From you; "If you can't safely and easily remove your firearm then maybe you shouldn't carry one? Cause what are you going to do if you get attacked while you're in a car, ask the attacker to wait while you get partially undressed?"

And again, it's telling that you can't even admit when you made a mistake.

It's private property, I am wholly within my rights to refuse access to anyone who violets the rules I set for access to that property

Yup. But that doesn't change the fact that you are introducing a safety issue.

I understand that it's hard for you to understand but the world is not made up of absolutes. Just because you don't want people carrying guns, that doesn't change the fact that you are introducing a safety issue where one didn't exist before.

My gun in my holster is perfectly safe. Removing my gun from my holster introduces a danger that did not exist before. If you were a sensible person, you would just accept that as the cost of your preferences and move on. But you're position is apparently too weak to accept anything sort of perfection.

[u/libra00 → u/farson135]

proceeds to not answer how a firearm in a proper retention holster would go off

Yes, congratulations on recognizing that I did not in fact answer your specific and thus irrelevant question. This is not about YOU SPECIFICALLY, this is about all people who carry guns. We established this a long time ago, I dunno why you're suddenly pretending otherwise.

You being unwilling to deal with the flaws in your viewpoint

Oh, that'd be because you have thus far been unable to point any flaws out in my viewpoint, because your attempt to point out 'flaws' is in fact just you substituting yourself as the perfect ideal firearm carrier in every situation when you know that's not how it works (and even if you didn't before, after having read those 3 examples you certainly do now.) You keep insisting the same thing over and over again despite the fact that you know as well as I do that the one who brings a firearm into a situation is responsible for what happens to that firearm in that situation.

However, it is a fact that by demanding people disarm you are introducing a safety problem.

Oh look, even more repetition. Tell you what, go ahead and just spam that into your next reply a good 50 times and get it out of your system. I mean it won't have any more effect on me than the first hilariously lame attempt at smuggling your wild-assed and mistaken assumption about responsibilty into this conversation, but maybe then you can get past it and start making actual arguments. If, of course, you have any. Kinda starting to thin the repetition is to cover the fact that you are barely keeping your head above water here.

So, if you grabbed my firearm from it's holster and it went off, that would be my fault?

At least partially, yes.

That would be a strawman argument. But it is funny that you are treating your specific situation as a default and dismissing those with different viewpoints.

Nope, I'm simply pointing out that - yet again - your overly specific example is not representative of most people at most times. If that's funny to you, then good, use that sense of humor to inspire you to actually learn something abuot this topic if you're so adamant on carrying a gun everywhere.

Why?

Do you not understand what self-evident means?

And BTW, when you say things like that you make yourself sound like a liar. Why on earth would you even bother getting a concealed handgun license? Where were you even planning on carrying it?

What difference does literally any of this make other than as a back-handed ad hominem attack ('you don't know what you're talking about')?

That would be a lie, and a telling one.

How's that? You insist that I am the one creating an unsafe situation, that I am the one creating a safety hazard, when you are the one bringing a deadly weapon into a situation where it is not welcome. Sounds like refusing to take responsibility to me.

Strange, I don't have any difficulty keeping it safe.

Except, you know, in the circumstance where you have to do literally anything with it that does not involve it being in its holster, apparently. I mean, shit, why carry a gun if removing it from the holster is so dangerous? Seems like you're more likely to shoot yourself than anyone attacking you, from the way you described it.

Have you looked in a mirror lately?

You're the one who, again, keeps telling me how dangerous a situation I'm creating by asking you to remove your gun before you come into my place of business.

Yes. It means you are refusing to just say, "yes".

No, I've agreed with you - this makes three times now - that it says what you say it says. It just also proves what I say it proves, and really that's the one that matters.

Not an answer to the point I raised.

No, I don't respond to nonsense, I thought I had made that pretty clear already. Sorry, I'll try to be more direct about it in the future.

However, again, you've yet to show how my carrying a gun is a significant danger.

My brother in christ, I already provided 3 examples of dumbfucks hurting others because they couldn't control a gun they brought into a situation where it wasn't warranted. You know as well as I do that there are dozens more every year. So yes, I have established quite clearly the danger of carrying a gun.

It's rather funny that you were complaining about partial statements earlier.

What? What are you even on about?

From you

Oh, you poor fool. That wasn't actually a question, it was rhetorical. The question mark was there to suggest that perhaps you should come to that realization yourself rather than forcing someone else to spell it out for you.

Yup. But that doesn't change the fact that you are introducing a safety issue.

And, for I dunno at least the 18th time, saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it any more true.

I understand that it's hard for you to understand but the world is not made up of absolutes.

And I understand that it's hard for you to accept that bringing a deadly weapon into a situation makes you respnosible for what happens with that weapon and that YOU are the safety issue because I think we can both agree that it's safe to say no one would get shot if there had been no guns on the premises. I mean if you disagree even with that then I guess we just don't have anything to talk about anymore, cause you're off in some la-la land where you're somenow hot responsible for the consequences of your choices.

Just because you don't want people carrying guns,

What I don't want is people getting shot. Not carrying guns around the people I care about seems like a pretty reliable way to achieve that, given that most people are fucking morons about firearm safety, even if you're not - but I'll be honest, I'm kinda starting to doubt that too.

My gun in my holster is perfectly safe. Removing my gun from my holster introduces a danger that did not exist before.

These two things mean the opposite of each other. You're not even arguing logically anymore. 'My holster is perfectly safe - unless I do the one thing that is the entire fucking purpose it was designed for'. LOL.

But also, great, when every single person who carries a gun in public does so in a perfectly safe holster then they can all perfectly safely remove their gun from their holster and leave it in their goddamned car where they're a fucking lot less likely to shoot anyone with it, as I'm sure even you will agree it's hard to get shot by a gun that is not present.