The question arises, then: Is it worth the hassle of flying with a firearm (remember, I'm flying out of Logan Airport and changing planes in Chicago, so I hit two of the major GFW states on this trip)?
Ordinarily, I'd brave the hassle of flying with a firearm out of Logan and through Chicago, except that this year, the venue is specifically prohibited from concealed carry. Additionally, MO prohibits carrying in bars and restaurants, so this means that I'd be able to carry legally when I'm... um... in my hotel room. I just can't reconcile the hassle with the very limited opportunity to carry.
It's not like Pittsburgh, where the venue was okay with open or concealed carry and bars/restaurants were okay (but could post). That's all kinds of worth it, and if it were Phoenix, I'd deal with flying with guns. I just don't see putting up with the TSA, transfers, worrying about everything, only to lock the gun up in the hotel room for all but the 8 hours I'm sleeping there.
The commenters expressed agreement with this terrible quandary. Here's my comment:
Aren't you guys concerned that all this talk of not taking your guns will attract the bad guys like catnip to cats.What's your opinion? Wouldn't the decision to not carry a gun be tantamount to irresponsibility, according to their definition of it? Aren't these the same guys who continually talk about sheep and sheep dogs, the latter being the armed ones? Yet, now, after a bit of discussion they'll all travel to a city like St. Louis, no stranger to violence, unarmed? What gives?
That is one of your major arguments isn't it, bad guys seek out the sitting ducks?
Please leave a comment.
