If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Gun Nutjobs)   A group of gun enthusiasts plans on protesting a long-standing agreement between the city and an arts & crafts festival that forbids the presence of firearms. Now...why would you need a gun at a craft fair in the first place?   (candgnews.com) divider line 407
    More: Stupid, Royal Oak, carrying a firearm, Oakland County, city commission, firearms, city halls, festivals, arts  
•       •       •

3873 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Aug 2010 at 4:31 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-08 05:59:27 PM
Satanic_Hamster: If it's a private gathering controlled by the non-government, they have the right to ban, say, all white people if they felt about it, let alone you for wearing your t-shirt.

Then why didn't the city just point that out and be done with it?

thamike: They're both choices. And it is legal for a renter of public property to make either one of them. People have weddings receptions on public property all the time. If they didn't want guns in their wedding reception, they can legally make it so. They could also tell any gate crashers to f*ck off. And any well-armed wedding crasher howling about public land and getting aggressive would get arrested.

A wedding is different than a public admission event. Bad comparison.

As for their legal right, that's not settled. Try to the argument without resorting to an unproven point.
 
2010-08-08 05:59:51 PM
I think we can all agree that handing some random child a firearm is unwise. Why would the perception be any different for adults who act like children?
 
2010-08-08 06:01:16 PM
Me too. There is a place near me where people wear military fatigues all the time. They carry guns all the time too. What is wrong with those people on the base?

Soooo.. Midwest craft fairs and military bases are the same thing?
How dare those military bases restrict ME! A Tax-paying CITIZEN from wandering wherever I like! It's public land! They should also let me carry my gun everywhere I wander, right?

To some extent, yes. Charging admission for an event has a specific purpose. No charge, no event. Temporarily banning firearms serves what purpose, exactly?

Makes it less likely that someone will get careless and get hurt. People with small children have a thing about that. And lots of these come to craft fairs.

You can leave your gun in your car.
Gay guy can't leave his gay in the car.
Which is a great argument on private property. This is not private property. This is public property where it's legal to carry concealed every other day of the year. What makes these days special?
Secondly, what good reason is there for prohibiting firearms at an area where it's perfectly legal at all other times to carry?


In case you missed it the first dozen times it was said - Because they are renting the land, it effectively becomes private property for the duration of the contract. They can require everyone paint their toenails purple if they want. Don't like it? Then don't go to their event. Not like alot of these tough gun-toten guys would go to a craft fair anyway.
 
2010-08-08 06:02:20 PM
ronaprhys: misanthropic1: NoSugarAdded's point is valid; the festival is renting the land from the government, hence it is effectively private land for the duration of the festival.

That is not a fact, that's an opinion. Read the article - the city has openly said that they aren't sure they they can prohibit concealed carry.


The legality of banning firearms on private property is ironclad; the issue here is if the terms of the rental constitutes private property for intensive purposes, it would seem to me. I'm sure the local government can interpret either way. It seems it would make more sense to side with the festival organizers IMHO, but it's not our call, ostensibly.
 
2010-08-08 06:04:38 PM
ronaprhys: A wedding is different than a public admission event. Bad comparison.

Not if it's on "public land" which is what we are talking about. Apt comparison. Just because it is public land doesn't mean a privately owned group that rents the space can't call the shots.

Salt Lick Steady: You can't 'rent' a public sidewalk like that, such that it's no longer subject to constitutional parameters. And this cuts both ways; research constitutional law regarding whether you have to pay to have a parade.

Who cares if you have to pay? That's not even an issue here. Speaking of bad comparisons, let's take your parade. It closes down the street, right? Film and television shoots also close down the street. You don't have to pay to get in, they just won't let you. They have a PERMIT. Try walking into one of those unannounced carrying a piece. Same goes for parades.
 
2010-08-08 06:05:12 PM
thamike: Why is this such a hard concept to understand? If there's an event that is being held (not by the--let's say--gun friendly city, but merely in that city), the renters can ban weapons. They can ban cigarettes. They can make you wear a tie. They can charge an entrance fee.

Actually, they may not be able to do so. Read the article. The city isn't sure if they can legally ban those with concealed carry permits from carrying concealed.

No, I'm not letting that point go. Make the argument for need to ban concealed carry without that.

thamike: I didn't call people who carry concealed weapons assholes. I called people who take weapons into a place that doesn't want them there just to start a fight assholes. Almost my entire family has or has had concealed weapons permits, and used them. I don't really need one in VA. My glove compartment is just fine.

So insisting on not having your rights infringed makes you an asshole? That's all this is. Would you also call someone an asshole who showed up a the city meeting and insisted on freedom of speech (by wearing some placard, tee shirt, or the like that offended the commissioners but not a good portion of the population) an asshole?
 
2010-08-08 06:06:23 PM
Why do gay people need to get married anyway.
 
2010-08-08 06:07:24 PM
misanthropic1: ronaprhys: misanthropic1: NoSugarAdded's point is valid; the festival is renting the land from the government, hence it is effectively private land for the duration of the festival.

That is not a fact, that's an opinion. Read the article - the city has openly said that they aren't sure they they can prohibit concealed carry.

The legality of banning firearms on private property is ironclad; the issue here is if the terms of the rental constitutes private property for intensive purposes, it would seem to me. I'm sure the local government can interpret either way. It seems it would make more sense to side with the festival organizers IMHO, but it's not our call, ostensibly.


Public parks and sidewalks have long been recognized as public fora for the purposes of first amendment jurisprudence. This means the local KKK can't rent the park for the day and prohibit people from saying non-Aryan things while they're there.

There's a body of jurisprudence to be written now, but methinks the same basic principle applies regarding concealed carrying. Who knows though.
 
2010-08-08 06:07:33 PM
Glad to see Pocket Ninja bring the voice of reason to this thread.
 
2010-08-08 06:08:31 PM
paygun: Why do gay people need to get married anyway.

They don't; it's a conspiracy perpetuated by wedding planners and florists.
 
2010-08-08 06:09:08 PM
ronaprhys: So insisting on not having your rights infringed makes you an asshole? That's all this is. Would you also call someone an asshole who showed up a the city meeting and insisted on freedom of speech (by wearing some placard, tee shirt, or the like that offended the commissioners but not a good portion of the population) an asshole?

Ever kill a man with your speech?

Yes the 2nd Amendment is a constitutional right, but let's not play footsie about what guns are.

You can defend your legal rights and still be an asshole, you know.

All I'm saying is, have some class. Gunholes are ruining it for the rest of us.
 
2010-08-08 06:11:52 PM
What purpose is served by carrying a gun to a craft show? Do you do it because its your right? Why the need? To you go to church because its your constitutional right? Do you publish a paper because its your right? Do you stand on the street corner yelling conspiracy theories? Do you vote just because you can? If you do any of these, Im sure you have a reason, not just because you can. So why the need to carry at a craft show?
 
2010-08-08 06:12:00 PM
thamike:

Who cares if you have to pay? That's not even an issue here. Speaking of bad comparisons, let's take your parade. It closes down the street, right? Film and television shoots also close down the street. You don't have to pay to get in, they just won't let you. They have a PERMIT. Try walking into one of those unannounced carrying a piece. Same goes for parades.


You... don't get it. Are you unfamiliar with the first amendment right of assembly? Are you sure a permit is necessary for a parade on a public sidewalk or park?

I somehow doubt it.
 
2010-08-08 06:12:49 PM
ronaprhys: Actually, they may not be able to do so. Read the article. The city isn't sure if they can legally ban those with concealed carry permits from carrying concealed.

No, I'm not letting that point go. Make the argument for need to ban concealed carry without that.


No, I understand that it's under review. But, since I'm not an asshole, if I walked into an arts and crafts show (of all things)and they told me to stow my weapon, I would. It's called courtesy.

/unless I was going to stick the place up, in which case I would just be a different kind of asshole.
 
2010-08-08 06:13:19 PM
NotARocketScientist: Makes it less likely that someone will get careless and get hurt. People with small children have a thing about that. And lots of these come to craft fairs.

Think of the children? Really? Failure of an argument. A person with a CCW is incredibly unlikely (read this as zero chance, for all practical purposes) to commit a crime or not appropriately handle their firearm.

In case you missed it the first dozen times it was said - Because they are renting the land, it effectively becomes private property for the duration of the contract. They can require everyone paint their toenails purple if they want. Don't like it? Then don't go to their event. Not like alot of these tough gun-toten guys would go to a craft fair anyway.

Actually, you can't prove the private property point. That legal point has not been decided. In fact, the city openly admits that they've got to research it.

misanthropic1: The legality of banning firearms on private property is ironclad; the issue here is if the terms of the rental constitutes private property for intensive purposes, it would seem to me. I'm sure the local government can interpret either way. It seems it would make more sense to side with the festival organizers IMHO, but it's not our call, ostensibly.

I agree with you on private property. Absolutely the landowner's choice. No argument.

On public property, however, that's completely different. I disagree that they should side with the organizers here, though. No need has been demonstrated that shows there's any negative impacts. Hell, it's probably more dangerous to allow senior citizens to drive near there as they seem to have problems with farmer's markets and the like.

thamike: Not if it's on "public land" which is what we are talking about. Apt comparison. Just because it is public land doesn't mean a privately owned group that rents the space can't call the shots.

No - they are different. At a fair like this anyone who pays the admission fee has to be admitted. At a wedding, that's completely different. One has to be invited.

Who cares if you have to pay? That's not even an issue here. Speaking of bad comparisons, let's take your parade. It closes down the street, right? Film and television shoots also close down the street. You don't have to pay to get in, they just won't let you. They have a PERMIT. Try walking into one of those unannounced carrying a piece. Same goes for parades.

Why shouldn't you be able to carry at a public event? If there's no law that prohibits carrying during normal times, it's unlikely that a law will prohibit viewing the parade while carrying concealed.
 
2010-08-08 06:14:42 PM
ronaprhys: Satanic_Hamster: If it's a private gathering controlled by the non-government, they have the right to ban, say, all white people if they felt about it, let alone you for wearing your t-shirt.

Then why didn't the city just point that out and be done with it?


You think a bunch of gutless city officials gives a shiat about this? They're caught between two desires; renting out the property to a group they don't want to bully or piss off because it brings tourism and money into their coffers and dealing with a bunch of whiney loud mouths who are implicitly threatening to sue.
 
2010-08-08 06:15:09 PM
I made a gun out of macaroni and peppercorns earlier, so I'm really getting a kickback from this thread,
 
2010-08-08 06:16:04 PM
Salt Lick Steady: You... don't get it. Are you unfamiliar with the first amendment right of assembly? Are you sure a permit is necessary for a parade on a public sidewalk or park?

I somehow doubt it.


I am aware, actually. You need a permit. It usually doesn't cost anything (unless you're a movie studio), but yes you need a permit in most cases. You think Macy's Day or St. Patrick's Day happens on the fly? Do you think the police keep the Westboro Baptist Church people from getting torn limb from limb because it's their hobby?
 
2010-08-08 06:16:44 PM
thamike: cuzsis: whatnottocrochet.files.wordpress.com

Indeed. It's a whole untapped market out there!

And they wonder why all the penis jokes keep coming in.


I'm not sure where you were going with that...

Unless you are trying to make the crotched holster out to be some kind of condom. I hope not though, that wouldn't work well at all.
 
2010-08-08 06:17:59 PM
ronaprhys: Why shouldn't you be able to carry at a public event?

Should has nothing to do with it. You can't if they say you can't. If you have a problem with this you have too much time on your hands and pay way too much attention to your firearm.
 
2010-08-08 06:18:47 PM
cuzsis: Unless you are trying to make the crotched holster out to be some kind of condom. I hope not though, that wouldn't work well at all.

Come on, it looks like a cackenballs nuzzle.
 
2010-08-08 06:20:13 PM
brynaldo: Whatever keeps your mind off your tiny dicks.

I like guns and have a giant cock, so there.

Farkin' anti-gun idiots. STFU.
 
2010-08-08 06:20:34 PM
Pocket Ninja: Are you farking kidding me? Subby, there's very little difference between an arts and crafts festival and an armory.

"I have a robot that runs with scissors."
 
2010-08-08 06:21:37 PM
 
2010-08-08 06:21:51 PM
And as far as constitutionality goes, free assembly is protected by the constitution if it is peaceable. Brandishing firearms is questionable.
 
2010-08-08 06:23:25 PM
Salt Lick Steady: Public parks and sidewalks have long been recognized as public fora for the purposes of first amendment jurisprudence. This means the local KKK can't rent the park for the day and prohibit people from saying non-Aryan things while they're there.

There's a body of jurisprudence to be written now, but methinks the same basic principle applies regarding concealed carrying. Who knows though.


There's a huge difference between a disturbance and acting on a right. Seriously - those acting for the ban to be lifted have no stated agenda, nor even what appears to be an implied one, that would lead one to think they're planning to disrupt the event in any way. They just want the ability to exercise their right if they so choose.

thamike: Ever kill a man with your speech?

Yes the 2nd Amendment is a constitutional right, but let's not play footsie about what guns are.

You can defend your legal rights and still be an asshole, you know.

All I'm saying is, have some class. Gunholes are ruining it for the rest of us.


It is, in fact, possible to harm someone with speech. This is a recognized legal principle. I also don't argue that one can defend their rights and be an asshole. No doubt about it.

How does carrying concealed, where no one will see it, at a Fair make one an asshole?

Jeebus Saves: What purpose is served by carrying a gun to a craft show? Do you do it because its your right? Why the need? To you go to church because its your constitutional right? Do you publish a paper because its your right? Do you stand on the street corner yelling conspiracy theories? Do you vote just because you can? If you do any of these, Im sure you have a reason, not just because you can. So why the need to carry at a craft show?

Need doesn't enter into the discussion when it's a right. Rights are not justified by needs.

thamike: No, I understand that it's under review. But, since I'm not an asshole, if I walked into an arts and crafts show (of all things)and they told me to stow my weapon, I would. It's called courtesy.

/unless I was going to stick the place up, in which case I would just be a different kind of asshole.


If I was carrying concealed I'd probably then ask for my fare back and leave. Depends on the situation - if I really wanted something I might comply. Then again, other circumstances might make me not comply - not in a dickish way, mind you. The kind of manner that politely states that they've no legal right whatsoever, that this is public property, and if they'd like I'll happily and quietly wait right there while they get an officer to make a determination. Now, if the officer says I've got to leave then I will (unless I'm looking to make a case like Heller or McDonald.

I literally see this as no different than free speech. I'm not saying be an asshole, but I absolutely support not having the right infringed.
 
2010-08-08 06:23:55 PM
ronaprhys: Actually, you can't prove the private property point. That legal point has not been decided. In fact, the city openly admits that they've got to research it.

Dude, do you HONESTLY think this is the first time this issue has come up? Really?
 
2010-08-08 06:24:08 PM
thamike: Salt Lick Steady: You... don't get it. Are you unfamiliar with the first amendment right of assembly? Are you sure a permit is necessary for a parade on a public sidewalk or park?

I somehow doubt it.

I am aware, actually. You need a permit. It usually doesn't cost anything (unless you're a movie studio), but yes you need a permit in most cases. You think Macy's Day or St. Patrick's Day happens on the fly? Do you think the police keep the Westboro Baptist Church people from getting torn limb from limb because it's their hobby?


Sometimes for a larger gathering a permit can be constitutionally required. It doesn't mean people can be banned from 'getting in' as you said. And for most gatherings, a permit is generally an unconstitutional barrier to the right of assembly and speech.
 
2010-08-08 06:24:15 PM
I'm with Bermuda59. Gonna carry a big hammer around with me.

It'll go great with my winged helmet, greaves, and breastplate with six big white dots on it.

PS: B59 -- St. David's? I know some folks with your last name on that island.
 
2010-08-08 06:25:16 PM
Salt Lick Steady: "Speech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob...." (new window)

I'll leave this for you, thamike


Yeah, that's about using fees as censorship. What of it?
 
2010-08-08 06:25:28 PM
I've been to concerts where they wouldn't allow bottles or cameras. Should I have held a national protest or realized that these rules are at the discretion of the people holding the event and just shut up and enjoy the concert?
 
2010-08-08 06:26:35 PM
thamike: And as far as constitutionality goes, free assembly is protected by the constitution if it is peaceable. Brandishing firearms is questionable.

"Brandishing" has a specific legal connotation that's not at issue here. And there is nothing about carrying a weapon that is inherently "unpeaceable."
 
2010-08-08 06:27:26 PM
FuturePastNow: Because these people think you need a gun everywhere. They're not sane.

It's difficult to say exactly where you will need a weapon I agree. To say that there is NO need for a weapon at a street fair is not exactly correct though. There was a murder of a young child (7-9 years old) at a 1980's street fair in Middletown CT. The murderer legally purchased a knife from a vendor and within moments plunged it into the chest of a nearby child that was standing with her mom. A police officer was less than 20 feet away.

I remember that the murderer was from the local mental hospital and all that but I can't remember the outcome of the trial if there was one.
I was living about three blocks away at the time.

As a rule, my family and I won't attend this type of thing until all of us are able to fend for themselves. When we need to go to the mall I let my significant other and children walk ahead a few feet and I trail and watch the crowd.
The Middletown murder affected me that much. I never want to be that parent - ever.
 
2010-08-08 06:27:33 PM
ronaprhys: If I was carrying concealed I'd probably then ask for my fare back and leave.

Then you aren't one of the assholes I'm talking about. We'll leave it at that, yes?
 
2010-08-08 06:28:07 PM
thamike: Salt Lick Steady: "Speech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob...." (new window)

I'll leave this for you, thamike

Yeah, that's about using fees as censorship. What of it?


farking reading skills, how do they work?

Listen, ass, I know you didn't attempt to read that article in three minutes or attempt to divine from where I'm coming, so just shut the fark up about matters you know nothing of.
 
2010-08-08 06:28:52 PM
thamike: Should has nothing to do with it. You can't if they say you can't. If you have a problem with this you have too much time on your hands and pay way too much attention to your firearm.

That's simply not true. You've not proven this in any way and you keep repeating it. Bad form. Demonstrate where this right to prohibit firearms exists. Not a general argument, but a specific quote from the article or a similar article on the same subject that comes from the city saying that your view is correct.

thamike: And as far as constitutionality goes, free assembly is protected by the constitution if it is peaceable. Brandishing firearms is questionable.

Whoa there. You've been reasonable to this point, why start the wharbbblegrbbl now? No one is talking about brandishing. Concealed carrying doesn't equate to brandishing. If you keep up this sort of argument you're literally becoming a lying douchebag and a troll.

Satanic_Hamster: You think a bunch of gutless city officials gives a shiat about this? They're caught between two desires; renting out the property to a group they don't want to bully or piss off because it brings tourism and money into their coffers and dealing with a bunch of whiney loud mouths who are implicitly threatening to sue.

Doesn't matter one way or the other. The point is that it's not legally decided whether or not the organizers can ban those with legal CCW permits from carrying concealed. All of your stuff above doesn't touch on that.
 
2010-08-08 06:28:56 PM
Subby ... why would you need a gun at a craft fair in the first place? ...

The whole point of concealed carry is, you really don't know when or where you'll need your firearm. Don't leave home without it.
 
2010-08-08 06:29:27 PM
John Buck 41: I like guns and have a giant cock, so there.

Do you charge people $5 to see it?
 
2010-08-08 06:29:42 PM
ronaprhys: Since when did it become your right to determine where they can practice rights specifically enumerated in the Constitution (not granted by it, though)? I'm not saying I'd feel the need, but what good reason do you have to prevent someone who's had a full background check and registered themselves with the government from carrying a firearm? Hell, even the city themselves aren't sure whether or not this ban is legal.

You're missing my point, and probably intentionally so.

I'm not arguing anyone's right to carry a gun. You can carry ten guns if it makes you feel better. It matters not to me.

However, a craft fair in one of the safest suburbs of Detroit? This is where these people choose to fight the battle for gun rights? The one place where actually needing a gun is the remotest of possibilities?

There's a reason these particular guys are living in Royal Oak and not Highland Park. In Highland Park they might actually have to shoot somebody. They can't just carry their guns and feel all smug and manly about it, they might actually have to use the damn thing. If they really felt having a gun was making them safe from crime, they'd go live and shop in high crime areas. After all, they have a gun to protect them, right? No, they go to Royal Oak where the likelyhood of actually having to use a gun is remote, then they whine because they can't carry at a damn craft fair for chrissakes.

/rant off
 
2010-08-08 06:30:17 PM
Salt Lick Steady: "Brandishing" has a specific legal connotation that's not at issue here. And there is nothing about carrying a weapon that is inherently "unpeaceable."

Yeah, you're right. I misused the term. But I do believe that if my firearm was making people uncomfortable, I would stow it, unless I thought I needed it. That's all my main point was. People who make people uncomfortable by carrying a deadly weapon, and insist on turning it into a big f*cking deal are assholes, in my book. And they give rational gun owners, carriers, and collectors a stigma that they don't deserve.
 
2010-08-08 06:32:04 PM
thamike: Then you aren't one of the assholes I'm talking about. We'll leave it at that, yes?

We can leave this particular point at that, yes. There are other unresolved ones, though.

Satanic_Hamster: Dude, do you HONESTLY think this is the first time this issue has come up? Really?

It may be. With the SCOTUS knocking down unConstitutional laws left and right (see Heller and McDonald, this may be the first time it's come up.

However, what relevance does that have. If it wasn't, don't you think the city would point that out?
 
2010-08-08 06:32:06 PM
I know if I see another pottery soap dispenser I'd want to shoot somebody.
 
2010-08-08 06:33:01 PM
Dr. Nick Riviera: Guairdean: Criminals notice the places where firearms are prohibited. These are called "Mugger Safe Zones". After all, the muggers are perfectly safe.

How would you know? Do you see a lot of criminals while peering out your basement window?


Criminals are always safe when honest people have been disarmed. You panicky hoplophobes (Look it up) (new window) always seem to miss this simple fact.
 
2010-08-08 06:33:16 PM
ronaprhys: Doesn't matter one way or the other. The point is that it's not legally decided whether or not the organizers can ban those with legal CCW permits from carrying concealed. All of your stuff above doesn't touch on that.

Again, the city can't outlaw state ccl's in the part while the part is a *public* park. As soon as it is rented out to an event, it's no longer a public park. It's not open to the part. It's only open to people who the renters want to enter.

And *they* are the ones who can prohibit weapons in the park for the duration they control access to it.

Again, ron. This is NOT the first time or place this has come up.
 
2010-08-08 06:33:48 PM
That building isn't on fire, why would you want fire extinguishers?
 
2010-08-08 06:34:41 PM
Salt Lick Steady: farking reading skills, how do they work?

Listen, ass, I know you didn't attempt to read that article in three minutes or attempt to divine from where I'm coming, so just shut the fark up about matters you know nothing of.


I read it. It ruled that having broad, varying fees on different public assemblies was unconstitutional because it was at the city's discretion what the fee amount would be and that inevitably results in a form of censorship. Why don't you tell me what your point is instead of acting like a twat?
 
2010-08-08 06:35:13 PM
in this post: everything I normally say in gun threads.
 
2010-08-08 06:35:54 PM
Anyone who thinks they have a legal right to carry a firearm into any "public place" whatsoever should try taking one into their local criminal courts. They will shortly find that the law is, indeed, quite well settled on these matters.
The rights conferred by the second amendment are conditional, and not absolute - and the same applies to all rights.
The first amendment does not confer a global freedom of speech. There are things you cannot say, and times and places you cannot say them. And the same applies to the second.
There are no absolute and unconditional rights.
 
2010-08-08 06:37:48 PM
CruiserTwelve: You're missing my point, and probably intentionally so.

I'm not arguing anyone's right to carry a gun. You can carry ten guns if it makes you feel better. It matters not to me.

However, a craft fair in one of the safest suburbs of Detroit? This is where these people choose to fight the battle for gun rights? The one place where actually needing a gun is the remotest of possibilities?

There's a reason these particular guys are living in Royal Oak and not Highland Park. In Highland Park they might actually have to shoot somebody. They can't just carry their guns and feel all smug and manly about it, they might actually have to use the damn thing. If they really felt having a gun was making them safe from crime, they'd go live and shop in high crime areas. After all, they have a gun to protect them, right? No, they go to Royal Oak where the likelyhood of actually having to use a gun is remote, then they whine because they can't carry at a damn craft fair for chrissakes.

/rant off


No - I see your point. It's based on need vs right. I don't say that I see any particular need to carry at a craft fair because the chance of fire is minimal. But, then again, I have a fire extinguisher at home, too. While I've not bolted one in my Xterra yet, I absolutely will be doing so. It's incredibly unlikely that I'll ever need either, but it's still my right to do so.

Same thing here - maybe I normally carry concealed and decide, randomly, to attend the fair. How would anyone even know I'm carrying? If so, why should it be an issue? Stowing it could be even more problematic as cars are broken into at events like this all the time. If I got the gate and had to go back and stow, it's now become more likely that someone could see me stowing and decide to steal the weapon (I'd know, I'd report it, etc., but damn if that's not a hassle that I don't need).

I just can't see any good reason that anyone should be prohibited - especially not if they've got a CCW. The only reason I've seen here is that artsy types are afraid of them. And honestly, that's not sufficient.

So, I ask you directly - who would I be harming if I were carrying concealed?
 
2010-08-08 06:38:35 PM
jso2897: Anyone who thinks they have a legal right to carry a firearm into any "public place" whatsoever should try taking one into their local criminal courts.

Or the Holocaust Museum.
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report