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.

(KPTV Portland)   Two men go walking in Portland, OR with loaded assault rifles strapped to their backs to "educate" general public. Hilarity ensues   (kptv.com) divider line 1215
    More: Dumbass, Hilarity Ensues, assault rifles, public, concealed handgun, KPTV, portland police  
•       •       •

20302 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2013 at 8:42 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1215 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-10 08:16:03 PM  
No exactly a concealed handgun now is it.
 
2013-01-10 08:16:29 PM  
Try doing that in front of a school and see how impressed people are with you're version of education.
 
2013-01-10 08:16:55 PM  
It's a big scary world outside their mom's basement
 
2013-01-10 08:21:01 PM  
Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.
 
2013-01-10 08:24:08 PM  
"If you're scaring people, you aren't advancing your cause."

I'd call the police. They look like the bank robbers from Heat.

Ohhh...damn you Hollywood!
 
2013-01-10 08:38:00 PM  
Fark guns.  Fark war.  Fark cancer.  Three farks I give today,.  Ah...ah...ah
 
2013-01-10 08:39:35 PM  
And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?
 
2013-01-10 08:40:09 PM  
The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.
 
2013-01-10 08:44:53 PM  
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-10 08:45:27 PM  

whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?


Why would anyone be okay with that?
 
2013-01-10 08:45:53 PM  
wild madafakin PIGS everywhere up in Portland, amirite???????
 
2013-01-10 08:46:06 PM  
Two more responsible gun owners heard from.
 
2013-01-10 08:47:26 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.
 
2013-01-10 08:48:24 PM  
It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.
 
2013-01-10 08:48:28 PM  
www.spin.com

Not cool.
 
2013-01-10 08:48:40 PM  
Look, I don't care how much you "educate" me about guns, if I see you walking down the street with an assault rifle strapped to your back, I'm going to call the mothefarking cops. Why? BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DAMN BUSINESS WALKING DOWN THE STREET WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE STRAPPED TO YOUR BACK! If you think you need protection, conceal and carry, it's not something I would ever do but if you feel that way, OK. But this isn't farking Beirut circa 1982, all right? It is not that farking bad out there people. It's just not.
 
2013-01-10 08:48:50 PM  
i985.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-10 08:48:55 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.


Both of your statements are accurate.
 
2013-01-10 08:49:34 PM  
but seriously these shiatheads need an ass kicking something fierce. I can't think of a more antisocial, dickheaded, and nasty thing to do these days.
 
2013-01-10 08:49:39 PM  
A gun shop owner I've dealt with in the past (he's an ass, so I don't shop there any longer), said you're an idiot if you open carry. You're just making yourself a target for a criminal that might want your gun or otherwise knows to take you out first.
 
2013-01-10 08:49:40 PM  
The rightards are certainly going to provide us with oodles of lulz for the next four years at least, aren't they?
 
2013-01-10 08:50:38 PM  
Lochsteppe

Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


Because it's self-evident the 1:1 correspondence between breast-feeding infants and open carry assault rifles.
 
2013-01-10 08:53:25 PM  
There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.
 
2013-01-10 08:53:59 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.


no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez
 
2013-01-10 08:54:39 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez


Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.
 
2013-01-10 08:54:53 PM  

MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.


like...on fark?
 
2013-01-10 08:55:05 PM  

Lochsteppe: Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


The only solution is to arm the breastfeeding babies.
 
2013-01-10 08:55:35 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.


sorry gun porn enthusiast.
 
2013-01-10 08:55:37 PM  

Lochsteppe: Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


Are you trying to say that I should be concerned with a mother squirting breast milk at me?
 
2013-01-10 08:55:40 PM  
Hell, I own a "few" guns, and I would call the cops.
 
2013-01-10 08:55:42 PM  
Warren said he hoped people would approach them and talk to them, instead of calling police.

That makes total perfect sense.  I mean, if Isee a couple guys carrying a big-ass deadly weapon the FIRST thing I'm inclined to do is approach them and start a conversation.
No way my internal dialogue might go something like:
"Holy shiat...these guys are strolling around in public, heavily and openly armed.  Very high possibility they are lookin' for some ground to stand. DO NOT APPROACH.  Call for backup."
 
2013-01-10 08:55:50 PM  

queezyweezel: whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?

Why would anyone be okay with that?


Two guys carrying semi-autos? Gotta think worse case scenario.
 
2013-01-10 08:55:51 PM  
you'renothelping.jpeg
 
2013-01-10 08:55:53 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Two more responsible gun owners heard from.


It is amazing that they didn't shoot up a nunnery and/or a schoolbus full of cancer ridden children, amirite?
 
2013-01-10 08:55:55 PM  

edmo: Try doing that in front of a school and see how impressed people are with you're version of education.


That would be a violation of most states laws. That is the best justification for a school zone. You cannot carry in public like that without first taking a lot of time to find out that you are in a legal location. I hope any people who want to emulate them do the research. Otherwise this will get ugly fast.
 
2013-01-10 08:56:11 PM  
Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez


There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.
 
2013-01-10 08:56:37 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.


fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.


now shush
 
2013-01-10 08:56:39 PM  
I was visiting my granddad in OKC a couple of months ago. Was in a store and saw a big black guy with a handgun strapped on his belt. This person was not a police officer and looked more gangster than anything. Its funny. Nobody said a thing. Nobody was bothered. And I am sure a lot of people didn't even realize that Oklahoma had legalized open carry a few weeks before.

Frankly, it was nice to know that if some crazy came into the store shooting, there would be somebody that could defend us. Silly Libs, freaking out everytime you see a firearm.
 
2013-01-10 08:56:42 PM  

Lsherm: Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.


Absolutely. One of the guys also has a youtube channel that is nothing but him walking around with guns and provoking cops to stop him.

Why is it that the least of us always seek the most attention?
 
2013-01-10 08:56:49 PM  
Afterwards, the men returned home and gave each other a handy.
 
2013-01-10 08:56:58 PM  
They were fully automatic Glock-47's right?
 
2013-01-10 08:57:09 PM  
So how do I tell the difference between a educational demonstration or a couple of psychos on the way to kill a lot of people?
 
2013-01-10 08:57:25 PM  
Gary?
 
2013-01-10 08:57:57 PM  

whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?


You may want to avoid speaking like that in public.
 
2013-01-10 08:58:19 PM  
kptv.images.worldnow.com

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.
 
2013-01-10 08:58:37 PM  
I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.
 
2013-01-10 08:58:40 PM  
I don't think that Professor Derp and Dean Potato thought their lesson plan all the way through.
 
2013-01-10 08:58:53 PM  
Too bad the assault weapons carriers were shot dead by other concerned gun carriers.

/They're coming straight for us/ kids/grandma/aw fark it, killing things is fun. Gorsh.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:08 PM  
It is tools like this that give responsible gun owners a bad rep. The stupidity and lack of perspective is astonishing.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:13 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.

fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

now shush


I was mistaken. I had forgotten that article authors are infallible.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:16 PM  
Came for a fattie with a Don't Tread On Me shirt, leaving satisfied.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:27 PM  
I hope normal people pointed and laughed at the clowns.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:38 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.


i guess your internet is in braille?

keep on it gun porn trolls.
 
2013-01-10 08:59:39 PM  
The dreams of the 90s are alive in Portland Portland Portland
 
2013-01-10 09:00:05 PM  
kptv.images.worldnow.com

i don't think the terrorist bandana is helping any either.
 
2013-01-10 09:00:15 PM  
The fact that this is their big public contribution to the reaction to 20 schoolkids getting gunned down says all that needs to be known about their side of the argument.
 
2013-01-10 09:00:18 PM  

MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.


I'm not gun nut (thank god), but the sight of that one particular Brainiac with his rifle pointed downward made me wince. Maybe out in the woods if the gun discharges the bullet would sink into the ground, but imagine that thing going off and the round doing a ricochet straight off of the pavement and striking some kid riding by on his bike.

Even gunnies should be aghast at the utter lack of gun safety these oafs are displaying.
 
2013-01-10 09:00:26 PM  

Braggi: So how do I tell the difference between a educational demonstration or a couple of psychos on the way to kill a lot of people?


That's what I was wondering? No way would I have approached them.
 
2013-01-10 09:00:28 PM  
So the pro gun enthusiasts have decided that during a rash of school and public shootings with semi automatics (And there was yet another school shooting today, a shotgun against a student in california.) The best thing that can be done is to walk around with visible Semi Automatics? They should be arrested for disturbing the peace.
 
2013-01-10 09:00:41 PM  
ATTENTION! GIVE US ATTENTION!!! PLEASE GIVE US ATTENTION!!!
 
2013-01-10 09:00:59 PM  

KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.


I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.
 
2013-01-10 09:01:28 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.


kptv.images.worldnow.com
yeah..that is pretty blurry. AR 15's perhaps?
 
2013-01-10 09:01:39 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


And if they don't pull the trigger, they're one of the good guys.

And if they do...well, next time you'll know better.

EDUCATION!
 
2013-01-10 09:02:00 PM  

SlothB77: i don't think the terrorist bandana is helping any either.


He has camouflage gloves.

I had to tell you that 'cause the camouflage gloves make his hands really hard to see.
 
2013-01-10 09:02:16 PM  
How to be a dick in one easy lesson.


Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.
 
2013-01-10 09:02:58 PM  
> attention whores attention whoring with apparently legal guns

Won't someone please, PLEASE think of the children?
 
2013-01-10 09:03:03 PM  
Haliburton Cummings

i guess your internet is in braille?

Don't be so butthurt over a simple observation. If the article had called their weapons phased plasma rifles, I'd point out the unlikeliness of that as well.
 
2013-01-10 09:03:29 PM  

lymond01: It is tools like this that give responsible gun owners a bad rep. The stupidity and lack of perspective is astonishing.


Pretty much this all the way.

/not a gun owner, but holy fark with the morans packing heat today I'm tempted to get body armor.
 
2013-01-10 09:03:33 PM  
kptv.images.worldnow.com

kptv.images.worldnow.com

The guns in question.

/would call the police
//even if some 2nd amendment hero gives me a detailed explanation on why these aren't "assault" rifles
///still looks like it could kill a lot of people really quick
 
2013-01-10 09:03:49 PM  
I'm a very staunch supporter of the right to own firearms, whether they be for hunting, sport, self defense, or just because one wants to have them.  I don't even mind when people carry them, and carry them openly, so long as they're not doing it FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of attracting attention to themselves. These people weren't carrying for protection, if they were, they'd be carrying a defensive weapon like a handgun.  They were carrying to create a scene and to get exactly what they got, a police response and a news story.  People like these actually, in my opinion, do more to hurt the gun lobby than help.

In any political fight, you've got the 20% that are die hard pro-whatever, and the 20% that are die hard con-whatever.  Then there's the remaining 60% who are going to vote based on how well the other side sells their position.  People like this, who generate negative publicity, who act in a manner designed only to create fear or panic, don't help their cause in the least.

Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.
 
2013-01-10 09:04:06 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: yeah..that is pretty blurry. AR 15's perhaps?


zoomed in

kptv.images.worldnow.com
 
Poe
2013-01-10 09:04:38 PM  
Used to have a lot of people doing this with pistols out in Cali, where it was legal to open carry, so long as it was unloaded. State eventually passed a law against unloaded open carry just to stop it.
 
2013-01-10 09:05:28 PM  
What you libs don't understand is if there was an on-going school massacre as these guys were walking by, they would be able to stop the killer most likely before the police.

/You're not helping.
 
2013-01-10 09:06:07 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.


A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.
 
2013-01-10 09:06:11 PM  

Lsherm: Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.


Those guys are so lame . Tattoos are out also . All the hip attention whores these days are becoming white muslims .
 
2013-01-10 09:06:14 PM  
http://kptv.images.worldnow.com/images/1968884_G.jpg


again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

these two patriots are at home right now spanking each other with semen welded copies of Guns and Ammo.

i say the skinny guy with the soiled diaper on his head is the top here and fatty being the guy with the tits is the bottom.

this is Gunmerica.
these are your patriots.

lmao
 
2013-01-10 09:06:22 PM  
Thanks guys. You're part of the problem.

Honestly, open carry makes about as much sense as a rich guy walking around in a suit made of $100 bills.
 
2013-01-10 09:06:24 PM  

Harry_Seldon: Lochsteppe: Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.

Are you trying to say that I should be concerned with a mother squirting breast milk at me?


Concerned? I pay extra for that!
 
2013-01-10 09:06:47 PM  
"What they really should do is observe the person to determine if the person is aggressive," he said of seeing someone with a gun in public. "We're not doing anything threatening to anyone."

Whatever. You're both irresponsible farkwads. You don't really have the ball in your court to be telling other people how they might react to you.
 
2013-01-10 09:06:48 PM  
The ignorance of some people amaze the shiat out of me sometimes.
 
2013-01-10 09:06:58 PM  
...and not a single law was broken.
 
2013-01-10 09:07:03 PM  

Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.


Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?
 
2013-01-10 09:07:07 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.

like...on fark?


I haven't seen bands of Farkers going around telling people on the street what to do. Then again, I've never been to a Fark party so I could be wrong.
 
2013-01-10 09:07:20 PM  

Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.


They want gun owners to hide in closests like gays.

That whole let your freak flag fly movement was bullshiat.
 
2013-01-10 09:07:39 PM  

BafflerMeal: Gary?


That was the first thing I thought of, too. Been wondering where Gary and his statisticals have been.
 
2013-01-10 09:07:40 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.


From what university did you learn that a sample size of two constitutes a data set sufficient to derive such a conclusion?
 
2013-01-10 09:07:48 PM  

caddisfly: Lsherm: Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.

Absolutely. One of the guys also has a youtube channel that is nothing but him walking around with guns and provoking cops to stop him.

Why is it that the least of us always seek the most attention?


Because freedom.
 
2013-01-10 09:08:13 PM  

base935: What you libs don't understand is if there was an on-going school massacre as these guys were walking by, they would be able to stop the killer most likely before the police.

/You're not helping.


hurrrr
 
2013-01-10 09:08:23 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

i guess your internet is in braille?

Don't be so butthurt over a simple observation. If the article had called their weapons phased plasma rifles, I'd point out the unlikeliness of that as well.


no butthurt. you are a gun wanker... simple enough.

"oh it can't be because they didn't show the full mag selector empty gizmo crusher banana!"

gun nut jargon for gun porn freaks.

go have at yourself.
 
2013-01-10 09:08:26 PM  

TwoBeersOneCan: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

The guns in question.

/would call the police
//even if some 2nd amendment hero gives me a detailed explanation on why these aren't "assault" rifles
///still looks like it could kill a lot of people really quick


You know the pigs show up with the same "scary looking weapon" right? Odds are the two attention whores are better shots than the pigs are as well. They're without a doubt less likely to murder you I mean make an erronious no knock raid. Deity of your choice help you if there is a dog living with your or next door.
 
2013-01-10 09:08:37 PM  
i.imgur.com

also...

i.imgur.com

What a couple of jackasses.
 
2013-01-10 09:08:38 PM  
I would call 911 and get the fark out of dodge, personally.
 
2013-01-10 09:09:09 PM  

Zombie DJ: How to be a dick in one easy lesson.

Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.


you don't want to be talking about gun rights and abortion around this lady:
farm8.staticflickr.com
 
2013-01-10 09:09:18 PM  
I really wish a car had backfired and they pulled their guns out and started shooting, or at least got them in their hands and provoked a serious panic.
 
2013-01-10 09:09:34 PM  
Open carry is kinda pointless unless you are out hunting. It says, "hey I'm carrying an expensive easy to sell to my homies item- please rob me."
 
2013-01-10 09:09:45 PM  
What cacksuckers. I would never open carry my handgun. It would never enter my mind to sling my husbands Ar15 over my shoulder and go for a walk. And they had them behind their backs? Why would you have your gun where someone behind you can grab it or it would take longer to get it in a position to fire?
I hope the morons didnt take them out loaded.

I would have called the cops too.
 
2013-01-10 09:09:45 PM  
 
2013-01-10 09:09:49 PM  

whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?


I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:05 PM  
Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.


welp, my post here is done.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:06 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.


Seems to be the perfect way to describe most of the people in Portland, Oregon.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:35 PM  

calbert: Zombie DJ: How to be a dick in one easy lesson.

Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.

you don't want to be talking about gun rights and abortion around this lady:
[farm8.staticflickr.com image 500x627]


I have seen better photoshops on MySpace
 
2013-01-10 09:10:39 PM  

Jaws_Victim: So the pro gun enthusiasts have decided that during a rash of school and public shootings with semi automatics (And there was yet another school shooting today, a shotgun against a student in california.) The best thing that can be done is to walk around with visible Semi Automatics? They should be arrested for disturbing the peace.


...or for extreme, dangerous stupidity.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:43 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

From what university did you learn that a sample size of two constitutes a data set sufficient to derive such a conclusion?


drive over 40 mph in Gunmerica with your head out the window. if you don't get hit in the head by an obese idiot, you are in Kansas.

your troll is failing. now go get out your Rambo collection and have a toss.
 
2013-01-10 09:10:43 PM  
Just because you CAN, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Farking asshats.
 
2013-01-10 09:11:57 PM  

Mazzic518: calbert: Zombie DJ: How to be a dick in one easy lesson.

Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.

you don't want to be talking about gun rights and abortion around this lady:
[farm8.staticflickr.com image 500x627]

I have seen better photoshops on MySpace


You mean that wasn't real?
 
2013-01-10 09:11:58 PM  
Omgz, big skery gunz!!!! Call da police.

Maybe walking around town with an ar-15 is not the best idea; but, there it is perfectly legal and they weren't hurting anything. How else do you suppose guns get from gun safes to shooting ranges.

/ here, it is perfectly legal for me to ride a horse down Main Street with a rifle in the rifle scabbard and a pistol on the saddle horn; not that I'd ever do that.

// I know, I know; small pee pee; why are you guys so obsessed with dick if you're not gay? nttawwt
 
2013-01-10 09:12:03 PM  

calbert: Zombie DJ: How to be a dick in one easy lesson.

Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.

you don't want to be talking about gun rights and abortion around this lady:


Redneck Porn! Bet she ends up puttin' the rocket launcher in 'er cotter!
 
2013-01-10 09:12:05 PM  

SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.


I wouldn't.
The weapons are in clear view, it would be easy to see if either of them decided to become a menace.
Statistically speaking you'd be better off if licensed people carried exposed rifles rather than concealed, unlicensed, handguns.
Practically speaking, it might maybe be a crime deterrent but carrying a rifle is inconvenient. I don't see it catching on, even with the militia minded.

/These two aren't exactly helping the debate.
/But people need to stop panicking at the drop of a hat.
/Lest someone out there gives them something real to panic about.
 
2013-01-10 09:12:14 PM  

Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.


I wonder if, as a cyclist, open carry would decrease the potential that a car will road rage at you if they notice the gun.
 
2013-01-10 09:12:18 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

From what university did you learn that a sample size of two constitutes a data set sufficient to derive such a conclusion?

drive over 40 mph in Gunmerica with your head out the window. if you don't get hit in the head by an obese idiot, you are in Kansas.

your troll is failing. now go get out your Rambo collection and have a toss.


I believe that you have confused random insults with a validation of your position. While frequently confused by many Farkers, the two methods are not actually logically equivalent.
 
2013-01-10 09:12:27 PM  

meat0918: A gun shop owner I've dealt with in the past (he's an ass, so I don't shop there any longer), said you're an idiot if you open carry. You're just making yourself a target for a criminal that might want your gun or otherwise knows to take you out first.


My God, it's almost like he's admitting that the mere presence of guns can unnecessarily escalate a situation.

/If I see you holding a rock, you better farking believe I'm beaning you with a rock first.
 
2013-01-10 09:12:44 PM  
Haliburton Cummings

no butthurt. you are a gun wanker... simple enough.

gun nut jargon for gun porn freaks.


I've never posted any gun porn, I just know what words mean. You don't. Waaaah.
 
2013-01-10 09:13:04 PM  

iheartscotch: Maybe walking around town with an ar-15 is not the best idea; but, there it is perfectly legal and they weren't hurting anything. How else do you suppose guns get from gun safes to shooting ranges.


When transporting my AR-15, I keep it secured in a case until I am prepared either to use or to store it.
 
2013-01-10 09:13:08 PM  
I grew up around guns and I own guns.  I'm perfectly comfortable around guns.  But those that think its perfectly reasonable for people to walk around with load weapons on a city street are farking idiots.  And I would of called the cops on them as well.
 
2013-01-10 09:14:33 PM  

Glendale: Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.

I wonder if, as a cyclist, open carry would decrease the potential that a car will road rage at you if they notice the gun.


When I carried using a belt holster, it was attached near my right hip. Vehicles typically passed me on my left, and thus my firearm would have been out of sight were it visibly exposed.
 
2013-01-10 09:14:43 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.

fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

now shush


Unless its capable of select-fire, it is not an assault rifle.
 
2013-01-10 09:14:54 PM  

Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.


I agree with you 100%.  The other thing that open carriers don't get is that by carrying concealed, but accessible, YOU can dictate when you take action, if you do at all.  I know people want to live in this fantasy land where a guy walks in to rob the bank, shows a gun, and the gun open carrying draws and kills him in an instant.  That's now how it generally works.  A person carrying concealed can choose the moment at which he wants to intervene, as opposed to the bank robber seeing the gun and pre-emptively capping him just because.

Guns DO NOT make a person brave, nor do they make a person impervious to the natural human aversion to killing another human being.  It's not as easy as many gun owners try to make it out to be.  I'd be willing to bet that the majority of gun owners wouldn't have the fortitude to go through with it until they felt their life was in imminent danger, at which point it's usually too late.

If you're carrying concealed and you realize at that pivotal moment that you don't have what it takes to end a human life, then you just go on with the program until you are left with absolutely no other choice.
 
2013-01-10 09:15:06 PM  

Giltric: Link


I hate cops but wow that guy was good and the guy taking the video is a grade A douche-nozzle
 
2013-01-10 09:15:12 PM  
FTFA:"Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people."

Why can't they do both? Why must it be one or the other?
 
2013-01-10 09:15:21 PM  

Dimensio: When transporting my AR-15, I keep it secured in a case until I am prepared either to use or to store it.


You probably get in a lot of combat situations where you are prepared to use it. That must be stressful.
 
2013-01-10 09:15:39 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

From what university did you learn that a sample size of two constitutes a data set sufficient to derive such a conclusion?

drive over 40 mph in Gunmerica with your head out the window. if you don't get hit in the head by an obese idiot, you are in Kansas.

your troll is failing. now go get out your Rambo collection and have a toss.

I believe that you have confused random insults with a validation of your position. While frequently confused by many Farkers, the two methods are not actually logically equivalent.


well played troll.

look at american television, look at american news, walk through an american city.
pick any one.

the "sample size" is extra large with fries on the side, hold the books,hold the education, hold the ethics, extra helping of mashed priorities and a side of entitlement, all in the Honey Boo Boo Family pack and you have america. throw a toy gun in the bag and you got "the envy of the modern world".

Home of the slaves.
 
2013-01-10 09:15:47 PM  

gingerjet: I grew up around guns and I own guns.  I'm perfectly comfortable around guns.  But those that think its perfectly reasonable for people to walk around with load weapons on a city street are farking idiots.  And I would of called the cops on them as well.


*yeesh*
 
2013-01-10 09:16:08 PM  

whidbey: Mazzic518: calbert: Zombie DJ: How to be a dick in one easy lesson.

Look, I get it.
But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.

you don't want to be talking about gun rights and abortion around this lady:
[farm8.staticflickr.com image 500x627]

I have seen better photoshops on MySpace

You mean that wasn't real?


I can tell by the pixels
 
2013-01-10 09:16:24 PM  

KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.


Most CCWs are quite aware of what the local regs regarding open carry are.
 
2013-01-10 09:16:32 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: I'm a very staunch supporter of the right to own firearms, whether they be for hunting, sport, self defense, or just because one wants to have them.  I don't even mind when people carry them, and carry them openly, so long as they're not doing it FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of attracting attention to themselves. These people weren't carrying for protection, if they were, they'd be carrying a defensive weapon like a handgun.  They were carrying to create a scene and to get exactly what they got, a police response and a news story.  People like these actually, in my opinion, do more to hurt the gun lobby than help.

In any political fight, you've got the 20% that are die hard pro-whatever, and the 20% that are die hard con-whatever.  Then there's the remaining 60% who are going to vote based on how well the other side sells their position.  People like this, who generate negative publicity, who act in a manner designed only to create fear or panic, don't help their cause in the least.

Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.


This is the kind of opinion I want to read! Very good point. I don't understand the motivations behind attention whores, so it is harder for me to see that is what they are doing. I think both sides need to chill out. Democrats are wasting huge percentages of political capital over this. It is a total waste, this is an issue equivalent to abortion as far as political capital and waste of energy are concerned. One of the few.

Please Democrats, we have people starving from unemployment, you are focusing on the wrong thing!!!
 
2013-01-10 09:16:33 PM  

jaytkay: Dimensio: When transporting my AR-15, I keep it secured in a case until I am prepared either to use or to store it.

You probably get in a lot of combat situations where you are prepared to use it. That must be stressful.


On the contrary; I have used it only at an indoor firing range, and I have no expectation of ever using it in any combat situation.
 
2013-01-10 09:16:55 PM  

iheartscotch: How else do you suppose guns get from gun safes to shooting ranges.


Oh I don't know ... how 'bout properly stored in one's trunk?

/and even when carried it should be in storage container of some type
//gun safety 101 biatch
 
2013-01-10 09:17:42 PM  
so, nobody was arrested or hurt? I'd say they won.
 
2013-01-10 09:17:53 PM  
kptv.images.worldnow.compixelatedgeek.com
 
2013-01-10 09:18:05 PM  

calbert: gingerjet: I grew up around guns and I own guns.  I'm perfectly comfortable around guns.  But those that think its perfectly reasonable for people to walk around with load weapons on a city street are farking idiots.  And I would of called the cops on them as well.

*yeesh*


A grammer nazi in a fark gun thread?

/get a life
 
2013-01-10 09:18:17 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

From what university did you learn that a sample size of two constitutes a data set sufficient to derive such a conclusion?

drive over 40 mph in Gunmerica with your head out the window. if you don't get hit in the head by an obese idiot, you are in Kansas.

your troll is failing. now go get out your Rambo collection and have a toss.

I believe that you have confused random insults with a validation of your position. While frequently confused by many Farkers, the two methods are not actually logically equivalent.

well played troll.

look at american television, look at american news, walk through an american city.
pick any one.

the "sample size" is extra large with fries on the side, hold the books,hold the education, hold the ethics, extra helping of mashed priorities and a side of entitlement, all in the Honey Boo Boo Family pack and you have america. throw a toy gun in the bag and you got "the envy of the modern world".

Home of the slaves.


You have still provided no actual reasonable justification of your position. Are you doing this because you mistakenly believe your seemingly random comments to constitute a coherent argument, or are you intentionally issuing such statements because you do not wish to construct a rational argument?
 
2013-01-10 09:18:53 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: A person carrying concealed can choose the moment at which he wants to intervene...It's not as easy as many gun owners try to make it out to be....If you're carrying concealed and you realize at that pivotal moment that you don't have what it takes to end a human life, then you just go on with the program until you are left with absolutely no other choice.


Sounds like you've been called on many times to defend yourself and others with your concealed firearm.

Tell us all about that.
 
2013-01-10 09:18:58 PM  

jayhawk88: Look, I don't care how much you "educate" me about guns, if I see you walking down the street with an assault rifle strapped to your back, I'm going to call the mothefarking cops. Why? BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DAMN BUSINESS WALKING DOWN THE STREET WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE STRAPPED TO YOUR BACK! If you think you need protection, conceal and carry, it's not something I would ever do but if you feel that way, OK. But this isn't farking Beirut circa 1982, all right? It is not that farking bad out there people. It's just not.


Sorry, your belief that they have "no damn business...." Doesn't trump the law...call the cops, others did too...you read what happened, right? nothing.
 
2013-01-10 09:19:49 PM  
If you guys don't like this make it illegal.
 
2013-01-10 09:20:12 PM  

CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.

fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

now shush

Unless its capable of select-fire, it is not an assault rifle.


i'm glad this is a distinction between a fat and lazy american shooting people as opposed to a fat and lazy american who can pull the trigger really fast.

so, the difference is in the "kill spray" versus " slow and meticulous slaughter" modes.

well pat yourself on the back.

too bad the pictures don't show the mail order full auto mods or the home tooled breach or we'd be in business in this inane troll you gun princesses are rambling on about..
 
2013-01-10 09:20:30 PM  

Lou Stoolz: Afterwards, the men returned home to the compound they refer to as "The Island" and gave each other a handy.

 
2013-01-10 09:20:55 PM  
Are they sure they got enough people to see how hardcore they are? Maybe they should've worn army fatigues and chewed nitroglycerine-flavoured tobacco.
 
2013-01-10 09:21:01 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]
yeah..that is pretty blurry. AR 15's perhaps?


AK-47, of course.
 
2013-01-10 09:22:07 PM  
Dimensio: You have still provided no actual reasonable justification of your position.

you're validating him because you're getting trolled
 
2013-01-10 09:22:27 PM  
What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

kptv.images.worldnow.com
 
2013-01-10 09:22:28 PM  

Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.


I own guns and also ride my bike, but I've never felt the need to pack heat while cycling.

But then again, I've got a real penis. YMMV.
 
2013-01-10 09:22:48 PM  
Gary??
 
2013-01-10 09:23:11 PM  

Mr. Fuzzypaws: No exactly a concealed handgun now is it.


ftfa - Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal in Oregon

If it's legal, then it's not a problem. The rifles were slung on their backs, which isn't exactly menacing, unless you're an idiot. Rifles carried in their hands would be a different story. .

Honestly, I think all states should allow open carry, people watch too much tv and are programmed to think that anyone not in uniform with a gun on them, and not even in their hands is a danger. It's part of the reason why the left will never be able to propose a tolerable solution to gun violence. For the most part, they're living in a state of fear that's disproportionate to reality. The gun control crowd needs to peel themselves away from the tv, and go hang out at a decent gun club, they'll likely find a very different crowd than the retarded toothless yokels they're portrayed as in the media.
 
2013-01-10 09:23:22 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio:
whargble from a guntad


just winding you up so you get all frustrated, make an asshat of yourself and go shoot yourself out of frustration really.

you are already getting eaten alive in this thread so..

look, as a peace offering, you tell me where you buy sex and i'll mail them a cheque ok? OR i'll renew your subscription to Guns And Power for the next year...

in the meantime, go polish your porn ok?

ok bai professor.
 
2013-01-10 09:23:36 PM  
therealrevo.com

/Link Hot
 
2013-01-10 09:23:39 PM  
Plop these guys down in a "stand your ground" state, and watch them ditch those rifles in some random alley post-haste.

No self-respecting CCW'er with the legal precedent to kill anyone openly armed would hesitate to empty a clip on them, their camera crew, and their publicist.
 
2013-01-10 09:23:50 PM  
One is wearing a camo head wrap that could be easily pulled up to hide his face and the other is wearing a t-shirt with the "don't tread on me" flag on it favored by ignorant but extremely angry Tea Party types. The only people who would wear these in public are unhinged idiots. And that's before you get to the weapons.

You're goddamned right I'd call the cops. These people look like they're more likely to use those guns to kill innocent people than they are to prevent others from killing innocent people.
 
2013-01-10 09:23:56 PM  
So what happens when a police officer stop and tells them to put down their weapons? Do the get to say "No, I don't have to?"
 
BHK
2013-01-10 09:23:59 PM  
Scaring the sheep should be against the law.
 
2013-01-10 09:24:05 PM  

base935: What you libs don't understand is if there was an on-going school massacre as these guys were walking by, they would be able to stop the killer most likely before the police.

/You're not helping.


They would have been shot dead by cops who show up ten minutes after they take out the original shooter.
 
2013-01-10 09:24:19 PM  
Tomorrow on the 6 o'clock news:

"Portland Gun Owner Killed For His Guns."
 
2013-01-10 09:24:35 PM  

Lochsteppe: Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


This is so stupid that I'm too stupefied to even say, "What an incredibly stupid thing to say."
 
2013-01-10 09:25:03 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.

I own guns and also ride my bike, but I've never felt the need to pack heat while cycling.


Your lack of "need" is not of particular relevance


But then again, I've got a real penis. YMMV.

Your genitals are of absolutely no relevance to the current discussion. While you may feel an obsessive compulsion to make reference to them, your introduction of that topic is entirely inappropriate.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:07 PM  

kendelrio: FTFA:"Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people."

Why can't they do both? Why must it be one or the other?


If I feel threatened can I stand my ground and shoot them?

What a pair of total farking douchebags.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:09 PM  
They weren't loaded, or if they we re there's no mention of it in TFA. I think if they'd had loaded magazines attached or on their persons they'd be in a cell right talking to the FBI.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:13 PM  

Funbags: Plop these guys down in a "stand your ground" state, and watch them ditch those rifles in some random alley post-haste.

No self-respecting CCW'er with the legal precedent to kill anyone openly armed would hesitate to empty a clip on them, their camera crew, and their publicist.


fta: Oregon is an open carry state.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:13 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: I own guns and also ride my bike, but I've never felt the need to pack heat while cycling.


Sounds like you've never read a cycling thread on FARK. Just about every ITG on here has run over a cyclist.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:43 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio:
whargble from a guntad

just winding you up so you get all frustrated, make an asshat of yourself and go shoot yourself out of frustration really.

you are already getting eaten alive in this thread so..

look, as a peace offering, you tell me where you buy sex and i'll mail them a cheque ok? OR i'll renew your subscription to Guns And Power for the next year...

in the meantime, go polish your porn ok?

ok bai professor.


Thank you for admitting that you are intellectually dishonest. No further discussion with you is warranted.
 
2013-01-10 09:25:46 PM  
Nina_Hartley's_Ass

What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

"This is my attention-whoring mechanism. There are many like it, but this one is mine." Etc.
 
2013-01-10 09:26:17 PM  

jaytkay: HideAndGoFarkYourself: A person carrying concealed can choose the moment at which he wants to intervene...It's not as easy as many gun owners try to make it out to be....If you're carrying concealed and you realize at that pivotal moment that you don't have what it takes to end a human life, then you just go on with the program until you are left with absolutely no other choice.

Sounds like you've been called on many times to defend yourself and others with your concealed firearm.

Tell us all about that.


I'm a police officer in a fairly shiatty area.  I've also studied extensively the psychological side of killing as it relates to combat and combat stress.  I have fought for my life, I have used a firearm both offensively and defensively in a military setting.  I instruct at the state police academy and present workshops and training on the psychology of interpersonal human aggression.  In short order I will complete my Master's Degree in psychology, focusing on combat stress.  I have absolutely no problem admitting that the first time I was shot at in combat, I pissed myself and hid. I have no problem admitting that the first time I ever shot AT somebody in combat, I intentionally missed, hoping they'd just quit shooting at me.

I am, in no way, better than any other person out there who carries a gun.  I am different, in that I've had to use one before.

That's all there is to it.  I can speak with authority on what goes through a person's mind when they are faced with the realization that they may have to kill somebody.
 
2013-01-10 09:26:21 PM  
They were perfectly legal.
People need to stop crapping all over themselves every time they see a gun.

I have no problem with what they did. Some guy did the same thing here in Utah not too long ago.

Grow up and stop being afraid of the inanimate boogey man.
 
2013-01-10 09:26:22 PM  

TwoBeersOneCan:
//even if some 2nd amendment hero gives me a detailed explanation on why these aren't "assault" rifles
///still looks like it could kill a lot of people really quick


Well I should hope it can, thats the only thing its any damned good for so it ought to be good at that.

If you make an issue with someone calling that thing and assault rifle then you are a nutjob, its a sodding assault rifle, or an intentional replica of one designed to make people who see you think it is an assault rifle (that's sadder).
 
2013-01-10 09:26:54 PM  
These people ought to do a little patrol in front of those dudes houses.
disinfo.s3.amazonaws.com
//You do you mean these people?
 
2013-01-10 09:27:11 PM  

ultraholland: Dimensio: You have still provided no actual reasonable justification of your position.

you're validating him because you're getting trolled


shhhhhh.

he is going on about "valid justifiable positions" in defence of his gun nut rambling and making himself look like a wacko....let him roll...he thinks he's a smartypants...any minute now he'll post pictures of his gun collection too.

you're not helping...
 
2013-01-10 09:27:36 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?


When you see the next Adam Lanza approaching a school, salute him and thank him for standing up FOR the 2nd Amendment and AGAINST tyranny.
 
2013-01-10 09:27:45 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 850x477]


The fact that guy looks SO farkING GAY in that headscarf. Camo headscarf dude? really?
 
2013-01-10 09:27:47 PM  
It's the people arguing about what theycan do versus the people arguing about what they should do.

Again.
 
2013-01-10 09:27:55 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?


That just owning a gun doesn't mean that you are killing people 24/7, and that gun owners are people just like you and me.
 
2013-01-10 09:28:17 PM  

Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio:
whargble from a guntad

just winding you up so you get all frustrated, make an asshat of yourself and go shoot yourself out of frustration really.

you are already getting eaten alive in this thread so..

look, as a peace offering, you tell me where you buy sex and i'll mail them a cheque ok? OR i'll renew your subscription to Guns And Power for the next year...

in the meantime, go polish your porn ok?

ok bai professor.

Thank you for admitting that you are intellectually dishonest. No further discussion with you is warranted.


HAHAHAHHAHA

ok go cuddle up to your gun and cry now.
 
2013-01-10 09:28:26 PM  

gingerjet: iheartscotch: How else do you suppose guns get from gun safes to shooting ranges.

Oh I don't know ... how 'bout properly stored in one's trunk?

/and even when carried it should be in storage container of some type
//gun safety 101 biatch


It would be easier to retrieve your rifle from a carry case than to maneuver into a firing position from how they've got those rifles strapped in the photo. The guy on the left has a two point sling. Seems that should run over his left shoulder (muzzle down) for starters. Then he could quickly get the stock under his shoulder and hand in the grip.

Its going to take him a good twenty seconds to make that thing ready to shoot from where he has it.

/In his rush to attention whore, he's carrying like a newb.
/Makes you wonder if bad attention is the kind they intended to get.
 
2013-01-10 09:28:43 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: I'm a very staunch supporter of the right to own firearms, whether they be for hunting, sport, self defense, or just because one wants to have them.  I don't even mind when people carry them, and carry them openly, so long as they're not doing it FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of attracting attention to themselves. These people weren't carrying for protection, if they were, they'd be carrying a defensive weapon like a handgun.  They were carrying to create a scene and to get exactly what they got, a police response and a news story.  People like these actually, in my opinion, do more to hurt the gun lobby than help.

In any political fight, you've got the 20% that are die hard pro-whatever, and the 20% that are die hard con-whatever.  Then there's the remaining 60% who are going to vote based on how well the other side sells their position.   People like this, who generate negative publicity, who act in a manner designed only to create fear or panic, don't help their cause in the least.

Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.


Clearly, liberal agent provocateurs.
 
2013-01-10 09:28:55 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 850x477]



We learned that Portland is full of weirdos, and it's best to avoid that city.

/I keed.
//Fun place to go for weekend trips.
 
2013-01-10 09:29:17 PM  
[1] People who identify themselves as "victims" harbor excessive amounts of rage at other people, whom they perceive as "not victims."

[2] In order psychologically to deal with this rage, these "victims" utilize defense mechanisms that enable them to harm others in socially acceptable ways, without accepting responsibility or suffering guilt, and without having to give up their status as "victims."

[3] Gun owners are frequently the targets of professional victims because gun owners are willing and able to prevent their own victimization.
 
2013-01-10 09:29:40 PM  

TwoBeersOneCan: //even if some 2nd amendment hero gives me a detailed explanation on why these aren't "assault" rifles
///still looks like it could kill a lot of people really quick


What is the difference between this...
thespecialistsltd.com

...and this?
images-kitup.military.com

Trick question...they are the same rifle, the AR-7. Just different external bits. Just one looks scarier than the other.

/designed by the same guy that designed the AR-15
//off the same assembly line (or used to be, anyway)
///yes, the top one has a longer magazine
////that also fits in the other one
 
2013-01-10 09:30:04 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.

fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

now shush

Unless its capable of select-fire, it is not an assault rifle.

i'm glad this is a distinction between a fat and lazy american shooting people as opposed to a fat and lazy american who can pull the trigger really fast.

so, the difference is in the "kill spray" versus " slow and meticulous slaughter" modes.

well pat yourself on the back.

too bad the pictures don't show the mail order full auto mods or the home tooled breach or we'd be in business in this inane troll you gun princesses are rambling on about..


Translation: Whrrrrgarbl
 
2013-01-10 09:30:07 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.


Re: Trayvon Martin.
 
2013-01-10 09:30:24 PM  

Mazzic518: Giltric: Link

I hate cops but wow that guy was good and the guy taking the video is a grade A douche-nozzle


He was obviously nervous, and only wanted to exercise his rights. Not exactly a douche by a long shot, he didn't want to give his last name, big deal. The cop was definitely cool though, I wish we had more like that.
 
2013-01-10 09:30:39 PM  
Those guys both look young enough to join the military, in case they're really concerned about defending FREEDOM!!
 
2013-01-10 09:30:59 PM  
"So, why didn't you just arrest him before he got to the park?"
"For what?"
 
2013-01-10 09:31:07 PM  
See, gun people? The average person just doesn't give a shiat about what you think, they just want you to get that goddamned thing away from them.

You're not normal. Can't you understand that? When the mere sight of your fixation can cause panic attacks, it's time to give it up.

And don't try to argue with Dimensio. He's better at autism than actual autistic people.
 
2013-01-10 09:31:12 PM  
I would love to follow them around town calling them cowards. Just to see what they would do. I would be perfectly willing to explain to them why I thought they were cowards.
 
2013-01-10 09:31:18 PM  

dericwater: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

Re: Trayvon Martin.


Is that response an attempt to disprove my statement regarding laws related to use of deadly force?
 
2013-01-10 09:31:45 PM  

gingerjet: iheartscotch: How else do you suppose guns get from gun safes to shooting ranges.

Oh I don't know ... how 'bout properly stored in one's trunk?

/and even when carried it should be in storage container of some type
//gun safety 101 biatch


Hey skippy; I was being facetious.

My point was; it's gotta get transported from the house to the car.
 
2013-01-10 09:31:45 PM  

Lobster_of_Hate: ...and not a single law was broken.


If you walk down the street pretending that you're jerking off, you're not breaking the law either.

But don't hold for applause as you assert your 1st Amendment rights while doing it.
 
2013-01-10 09:32:18 PM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: I have absolutely no problem admitting that the first time I was shot at in combat, I pissed myself and hid. I have no problem admitting that the first time I ever shot AT somebody in combat, I intentionally missed, hoping they'd just quit shooting at me.


Makes sense to me.

It takes 3 engagements to get your head on straight.
 
2013-01-10 09:32:27 PM  
How much you want to bet they think taxes are too high and government spending is out of control?
 
2013-01-10 09:32:30 PM  

omnibus_necanda_sunt: See, gun people? The average person just doesn't give a shiat about what you think, they just want you to get that goddamned thing away from them.

You're not normal. Can't you understand that? When the mere sight of your fixation can cause panic attacks, it's time to give it up.

And don't try to argue with Dimensio. He's better at autism than actual autistic people.


Insulting me will not validate your position.
 
2013-01-10 09:32:44 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: What is the difference between this...
thespecialistsltd.com

...and this?
images-kitup.military.com

Trick question...they are the same rifle, the AR-7.


So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!
 
2013-01-10 09:33:19 PM  

KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.


I would think that the mere presence of a firearm would not be reason to open fire.
Perhaps if they were pointed at someone, and not merely slung over their shoulder, maybe, bu just because they are there ... not so much.
 
2013-01-10 09:33:35 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


Guys with guns isn't suspicious at all and should never be reported.
 
2013-01-10 09:33:47 PM  

Slutter McGee: I was visiting my granddad in OKC a couple of months ago. Was in a store and saw a big black guy with a handgun strapped on his belt. This person was not a police officer and looked more gangster than anything. Its funny. Nobody said a thing. Nobody was bothered. And I am sure a lot of people didn't even realize that Oklahoma had legalized open carry a few weeks before.

Frankly, it was nice to know that if some crazy came into the store shooting, there would be somebody that could defend us. Silly Libs, freaking out everytime you see a firearm.


Good thing you knew the criminal history and mental state of that big black gangster-lookin' guy!
 
2013-01-10 09:33:50 PM  

fusillade762: How much you want to bet they think taxes are too high and government spending is out of control?



In all fairness, spending is out of control.
 
2013-01-10 09:34:01 PM  
Looks like the public is more educated now. Good work.
 
2013-01-10 09:34:09 PM  

Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.


The burden of proof has been decreased in many states to be "threatened". And in some state, like Texas, you can kill people for just property crimes, you don't have to be threatened at all. In fact, it does not even have to be your property. For example a member of the public killed a shoplifter in a parking lot in Texas, and was not prosecuted. In another case (not sure where, guessing FL) a guy stole a potted plant and the owner followed the thief to his car and killed him in the car. The owner was not threatened.  In another case, a guy saw someone breaking into his neighbors house, chased the intruder for blocks then killed him with a gun.  That's what "stand  your ground" is all about, apparently you no longer have to retreat, if you feel threatened you can kill someone. In fact, in many cases you can apparently pursue them.

Personally, if I were, say, a store owner, and these two fools walked in, one with an Arab scarf on his head, both with what look like real assault rifles and also pistols on their belts, I'm be ducking and grabbing for my piece.  If I fired at them in haste or out of fear I'm not sure any jury would convict me, especially if the weapons proved to be real and loaded. That's why the concealed part of concealed carry is there, so that does not happen. Hopefully most everyone can agree that these guys were idiots.
 
2013-01-10 09:34:43 PM  

MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.


Wait, are you still talking about the two guys with guns?
 
2013-01-10 09:34:47 PM  

CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest:

Translation: Whrrrrgarbl


from a gun nut i take that as a compliment...

just a question;

when out shooting civilians, or babies in another country, why is that ok? ya know, shooting up a school for say "Uncle Sam" instead of say "shiats and giggles" here at home?

I'm just wondering about the cognitive dissonance there...

you seem like you may be an expert on the subject
 
2013-01-10 09:35:07 PM  

DarkSoulNoHope: Facetious_Speciest: That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

Seems to be the perfect way to describe most of the people in Portland, Oregon.


Marc Maron came here and described a portion of the population who counterbalance the facial tattoo/elongated ear piercing set. ( I don't know what that thingy is called when you out discs in your ears and stretch them out.) He calls us "aggressively plain". We wear a lot of earth tones.

The NRA set is in the suburbs and Vantucky, where my brother lives. On if my sister's neighbors in Gresham won't come to the "big bad city" without a gun, which I find hysterical, especially given that the little girls who were kidnapped and murdered were in Oregon City (suburb), the mall shooting spree was in Clackamas (suburb), and I lived in a dead end in an industrial area (think Fight Club, but without the flooding or Brad Pitt) for years but never felt the need to shoot anyone.
 
2013-01-10 09:35:13 PM  

dericwater: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

Re: Trayvon Martin.

 
2013-01-10 09:35:17 PM  
jaytkay

So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

The origin of defining "assault rifle" lies with the military, not civilian gun owners.
 
2013-01-10 09:35:18 PM  
There are gun owners groups that do "public carry" events to prove the point but this was retarded. Kudos to the cops for being the grown ups and handling it well. As a refugee from Oregon I cant imagine this as anything but derp.

Leave the city slickers in Portland alone and they will leave you alone..... thats how Oregon works.
 
2013-01-10 09:35:30 PM  

syzygy whizz: Warren said he hoped people would approach them and talk to them, instead of calling police.

That makes total perfect sense.  I mean, if Isee a couple guys carrying a big-ass deadly weapon the FIRST thing I'm inclined to do is approach them and start a conversation.
No way my internal dialogue might go something like:
"Holy shiat...these guys are strolling around in public, heavily and openly armed.  Very high possibility they are lookin' for some ground to stand. DO NOT APPROACH.  Call for backup."


Oh, c'mon. You sure it wouldn't be to approach them with one simple question:

"So, how tiny are your penises?"
 
2013-01-10 09:35:37 PM  

jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!


Congratulations, you missed the point. The difference between "assault rifles" and any other rifle, is also typically only cosmetic.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:17 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

The burden of proof has been decreased in many states to be "threatened". And in some state, like Texas, you can kill people for just property crimes, you don't have to be threatened at all. In fact, it does not even have to be your property. For example a member of the public killed a shoplifter in a parking lot in Texas, and was not prosecuted. In another case (not sure where, guessing FL) a guy stole a potted plant and the owner followed the thief to his car and killed him in the car. The owner was not threatened.  In another case, a guy saw someone breaking into his neighbors house, chased the intruder for blocks then killed him with a gun.  That's what "stand  your ground" is all about, apparently you no longer have to retreat, if you feel threatened you can kill someone. In fact, in many cases you can apparently pursue them.

Personally, if I were, say, a store owner, and these two fools walked in, one with an Arab scarf on his head, both with what look like real assault rifles and also pistols on their belts, I'm be ducking and grabbing for my piece.  If I fired at them in haste or out of fear I'm not sure any jury would convict me, especially if the weapons proved to be real and loaded. That's why the concealed p ...


Perhaps, then, you could reference a specific state deadly force statute that defines a "feeling" of being "threatened" as sufficient legal justification for the use of deadly force in public. I am currently aware of none, but I admit that I may merely be ignorant of such statutes that do exist.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:20 PM  
At least carry a placard that describes what you're doing. farking idiots.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:25 PM  

James F. Campbell: Lochsteppe: Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.

This is so stupid that I'm too stupefied to even say, "What an incredibly stupid thing to say."


Maybe you read it wrong. Try again with your tongue in your cheek.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:30 PM  

Shae123: jayhawk88: Look, I don't care how much you "educate" me about guns, if I see you walking down the street with an assault rifle strapped to your back, I'm going to call the mothefarking cops. Why? BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DAMN BUSINESS WALKING DOWN THE STREET WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE STRAPPED TO YOUR BACK! If you think you need protection, conceal and carry, it's not something I would ever do but if you feel that way, OK. But this isn't farking Beirut circa 1982, all right? It is not that farking bad out there people. It's just not.

Sorry, your belief that they have "no damn business...." Doesn't trump the law...call the cops, others did too...you read what happened, right? nothing.


There's no law against stupid.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:38 PM  

spasemunki: I would love to follow them around town calling them cowards. Just to see what they would do. I would be perfectly willing to explain to them why I thought they were cowards.


Please explain.
 
2013-01-10 09:36:59 PM  

threadjackistan: [therealrevo.com image 402x307]

/Link Hot


I've been there. Open carry is mandatory.

/and at least one 30 round magazine
 
2013-01-10 09:37:02 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.


http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand- your-ground-enacted/

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Paragraph 3 basically gives the last guy standing all he needs, especially if there's no other witnesses.
 
2013-01-10 09:37:12 PM  

Dimensio: omnibus_necanda_sunt: See, gun people? The average person just doesn't give a shiat about what you think, they just want you to get that goddamned thing away from them.

You're not normal. Can't you understand that? When the mere sight of your fixation can cause panic attacks, it's time to give it up.

And don't try to argue with Dimensio. He's better at autism than actual autistic people.

Insulting me will not validate your position.


listen, you validate the position and i'll drive my point home ok?

oh wait...you are on your way to portland to get right on that with Fatty and Skinny aren't ya?

VALIDATE THE POSITIONZ!!

you are a laugh riot.
 
2013-01-10 09:37:18 PM  

omnibus_necanda_sunt: And don't try to argue with Dimensio. He's better at autism than actual autistic people.


Dude is calm cool and collected. Well disciplined....probably a Shaolin Monk.

or a text bot.

/i keed
 
2013-01-10 09:37:19 PM  

flamingboard: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Guys with guns isn't suspicious at all and should never be reported.


Not when they aren't breaking the law. Arizona PDs don't even bother taking MYAG calls unless the gun is out.
 
2013-01-10 09:37:51 PM  
Mark Portland off the list of places I'd like to relocate to...

Then again, I'm in Texas so maybe not
 
2013-01-10 09:38:56 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest:

Translation: Whrrrrgarbl

from a gun nut i take that as a compliment...

just a question;

when out shooting civilians, or babies in another country, why is that ok? ya know, shooting up a school for say "Uncle Sam" instead of say "shiats and giggles" here at home?

I'm just wondering about the cognitive dissonance there...

you seem like you may be an expert on the subject


Potato/10
Like in said in the other thread, you're trying too hard. Pace yourself or you'll burn out, Spanky.
 
2013-01-10 09:39:13 PM  

jaytkay: YouPeopleAreCrazy: What is the difference between this...
thespecialistsltd.com

...and this?
images-kitup.military.com

Trick question...they are the same rifle, the AR-7.

So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!


It simply goes toward showing that libby libs are reacting emotionally instead of intelligently.

"OOOh, big scary gun...only used in less than 3% of gun murders?, eh, it's still really scary, let's ban it. STOP LIKING WHAT WE DON'T LIKE."
 
2013-01-10 09:39:13 PM  

The_Sponge: fusillade762: How much you want to bet they think taxes are too high and government spending is out of control?

In all fairness, spending is out of control.


OBAMA!!! Oh, wait...

blogs-images.forbes.com
 
2013-01-10 09:39:35 PM  
guidesmedia.ign.com
 
2013-01-10 09:39:47 PM  

Mr. Fuzzypaws: No exactly a concealed handgun now is it.


they have something calt Ohphen Carrie.
 
2013-01-10 09:40:02 PM  

jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!


The point is, both of those rifles are functionally no different than the AR-15's carried by the two idiots in the article. No matter how evil they look.

'Scary looking' does not equal 'assault'.
 
2013-01-10 09:40:12 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mazzic518: Giltric: Link

I hate cops but wow that guy was good and the guy taking the video is a grade A douche-nozzle

He was obviously nervous, and only wanted to exercise his rights. Not exactly a douche by a long shot, he didn't want to give his last name, big deal. The cop was definitely cool though, I wish we had more like that.


No I can recognize when someone is being a dick to cops cause I do it frequently
 
2013-01-10 09:40:14 PM  

whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand - your-ground-enacted/

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Paragraph 3 basically gives the last guy standing all he needs, especially if there's no other witnesses.


The statute that you have referenced explicitly relates to a "reasonable fear of great death or bodily harm", which would be consistent with my original statement. Are you stating that an individual who is attacked in public should not be presumed to have reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury?
 
2013-01-10 09:40:59 PM  

CthulhuCalling: flamingboard: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Guys with guns isn't suspicious at all and should never be reported.

Not when they aren't breaking the law. Arizona PDs don't even bother taking MYAG calls unless the gun is out.


what does that stand for? I'm assuming the 'g' is 'gun'.
 
2013-01-10 09:41:00 PM  

Giltric: omnibus_necanda_sunt: And don't try to argue with Dimensio. He's better at autism than actual autistic people.

Dude is calm cool and collected. Well disciplined....probably a Shaolin Monk.

or a text bot.

/i keed


I am, in fact, configured with a graphical user interface.
 
2013-01-10 09:41:02 PM  

Silly Jesus: It simply goes toward showing that libby libs are reacting emotionally instead of intelligently


Pulling out your AR15 and walking around with it is a totally reasoned response.
 
2013-01-10 09:41:22 PM  

CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: CthulhuCalling: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest:

Translation: Whrrrrgarbl

from a gun nut i take that as a compliment...

just a question;

when out shooting civilians, or babies in another country, why is that ok? ya know, shooting up a school for say "Uncle Sam" instead of say "shiats and giggles" here at home?

I'm just wondering about the cognitive dissonance there...

you seem like you may be an expert on the subject

Potato/10
Like in said in the other thread, you're trying too hard. Pace yourself or you'll burn out, Spanky.


yeah i wouldn't want to get PTSD and shoot up a mall or something...and i don't follow your posts...

but you didn't answer my question.. VALIDATE THE POSITION

/mmm baby killers
//blood for oil
//takin it for Uncle Sam
 
2013-01-10 09:42:00 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!

The point is, both of those rifles are functionally no different than the AR-15's carried by the two idiots in the article. No matter how evil they look.

'Scary looking' does not equal 'assault'.


How would I load a .223 Remington caliber round into an AR-7?
 
2013-01-10 09:42:03 PM  

Lochsteppe: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


Hmm...
Mass public exhibition of loaded firearms vs. mass public exhibition of loaded boobies.
Decisions, decisions...
 
2013-01-10 09:42:14 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: favored by ignorant but extremely angry Tea Party types


Good lord, where in the world did you get that 30 megawatt projector?
 
2013-01-10 09:42:31 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!

Congratulations, you missed the point. The difference between "assault rifles" and any other rifle, is also typically only cosmetic.


Congratulations, you missed the original point. You're a wanker!
 
2013-01-10 09:42:38 PM  

Zombie DJ: But it's asshats like this that make me HATE gun owners more, simply because I don't see someone marching around the city against abortion with a real fetus strapped to their body.


I live in a small town in Maryland, and we have what I would call VERY graphic pro life demonstrations twice a month. Lots of pictures, and sometimes mock fetuses. God I hope they've never used a real one, I might not notice the difference. I hate it. But they aren't really breaking any REAL laws, and life sorta goes on.
 
2013-01-10 09:43:04 PM  

calbert: CthulhuCalling: flamingboard: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Guys with guns isn't suspicious at all and should never be reported.

Not when they aren't breaking the law. Arizona PDs don't even bother taking MYAG calls unless the gun is out.

what does that stand for? I'm assuming the 'g' is 'gun'.


Cellphone keyboard. MWAG = man with a gun.
 
2013-01-10 09:43:07 PM  

gaspode: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 850x477]

The fact that guy looks SO farkING GAY in that headscarf. Camo headscarf dude? really?


He's almost certainly not gay. No gay man in the history of the world would be caught dead in those awful jeans.
 
2013-01-10 09:43:14 PM  
I'd still trust these two guys over two cops carrying the same guns.
 
2013-01-10 09:43:26 PM  
Haliburton Cummings: drive over 40 mph in Gunmerica with your head out the window. if you don't get hit in the head by an obese idiot, you are in Kansas.

Wow..his next post will be "USA NOT OK! USA, PA...TOOIE!!!!"

waitaminnit.....

Haliburton Cummings is the Iron Sheik!! Friggin' awesome! I loved that guy!!

/gets popcorn...okay, you may continue....
 
2013-01-10 09:43:35 PM  

Mazzic518: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mazzic518: Giltric: Link

I hate cops but wow that guy was good and the guy taking the video is a grade A douche-nozzle

He was obviously nervous, and only wanted to exercise his rights. Not exactly a douche by a long shot, he didn't want to give his last name, big deal. The cop was definitely cool though, I wish we had more like that.

No I can recognize when someone is being a dick to cops cause I do it frequently


ITG
 
2013-01-10 09:43:43 PM  

rev. dave: HideAndGoFarkYourself: I'm a very staunch supporter of the right to own firearms, whether they be for hunting, sport, self defense, or just because one wants to have them.  I don't even mind when people carry them, and carry them openly, so long as they're not doing it FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of attracting attention to themselves. These people weren't carrying for protection, if they were, they'd be carrying a defensive weapon like a handgun.  They were carrying to create a scene and to get exactly what they got, a police response and a news story.  People like these actually, in my opinion, do more to hurt the gun lobby than help.

In any political fight, you've got the 20% that are die hard pro-whatever, and the 20% that are die hard con-whatever.  Then there's the remaining 60% who are going to vote based on how well the other side sells their position.  People like this, who generate negative publicity, who act in a manner designed only to create fear or panic, don't help their cause in the least.

Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

This is the kind of opinion I want to read! Very good point. I don't understand the motivations behind attention whores, so it is harder for me to see that is what they are doing. I think both sides need to chill out. Democrats are wasting huge percentages of political capital over this. It is a total waste, this is an issue equivalent to abortion as far as political capital and waste of energy are concerned. One of the few.

Please Democrats, we have people starving from unemployment, you are focusing on the wrong thing!!!


I think you have misinterpreted the Dems goals here. Those goal include lots of small donations from their base on an issue that they've keep on slow boil for 30 years. And it does conveniently push that pesky "economy" thing off the front page.

In the end, they'll propose a stupid and ineffective solution, it will be reviled by the right and our helpful media, and we'll move along. Progress!
 
2013-01-10 09:43:49 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: But then again, I've got a real penis. YMMV.


DRINK!
 
2013-01-10 09:43:53 PM  
Because it's self-evident the 1:1 correspondence between breast-feeding infants and open carry assault rifles.

Makes as much sense as comparing deaths due to cars with deaths due to guns.

i.e. none
 
2013-01-10 09:44:06 PM  
Just so needless and dangerous.  Stupid white dudes in the whitest major city in America.  If these clowns were to parade around my neighborhood like that, more that a few residents would likely relieve them of their weapons and probably their lives.  Given the current social climate here, the police might do the same...and they might even get to the scene before anybody else.
 
2013-01-10 09:44:14 PM  

The Larch: gaspode: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: What sort of "education" are we supposed to get from this?

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 850x477]

The fact that guy looks SO farkING GAY in that headscarf. Camo headscarf dude? really?

He's almost certainly not gay. No gay man in the history of the world would be caught dead in those awful jeans.


You have not observed my wardrobe.
 
2013-01-10 09:44:25 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: "So, how tiny are your penises?"


DRINK! (again)
 
2013-01-10 09:44:53 PM  
Warren said he hoped people would approach them and talk to them, instead of calling police

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-10 09:45:26 PM  

Jaws_Victim: I really wish a car had backfired and they pulled their guns out and started shooting, or at least got them in their hands and provoked a serious panic.


Uh. That could be really bad for the person in the (hypothetical) car.

/or bystanders
 
2013-01-10 09:45:59 PM  

pedrop357: ArcadianRefugee: "So, how tiny are your penises?"

DRINK! (again)


.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
..

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
penis
 
2013-01-10 09:46:01 PM  
I'm waiting for a bus at the same intersection these guys got stopped, so I'm getting a kick...
 
2013-01-10 09:46:34 PM  
Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.
 
2013-01-10 09:46:44 PM  

Evil High Priest: And it does conveniently push that pesky "economy" thing off the front page


I think I found a flaw in your evil plan.
 
2013-01-10 09:47:13 PM  

Silly Jesus: Mazzic518: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mazzic518: Giltric: Link

I hate cops but wow that guy was good and the guy taking the video is a grade A douche-nozzle

He was obviously nervous, and only wanted to exercise his rights. Not exactly a douche by a long shot, he didn't want to give his last name, big deal. The cop was definitely cool though, I wish we had more like that.

No I can recognize when someone is being a dick to cops cause I do it frequently

ITG


I got yer ITG swinging....


www.fbastard.com
 
2013-01-10 09:47:35 PM  

CthulhuCalling: calbert: CthulhuCalling: flamingboard: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Guys with guns isn't suspicious at all and should never be reported.

Not when they aren't breaking the law. Arizona PDs don't even bother taking MYAG calls unless the gun is out.

what does that stand for? I'm assuming the 'g' is 'gun'.

Cellphone keyboard. MWAG = man with a gun.


ok. thx. I was confused and all the internet provided was "Marine and Yachting Association of Grenada". Strangely, your post still makes sense even if it was that.
 
2013-01-10 09:47:46 PM  

Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.


When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.
 
2013-01-10 09:48:17 PM  

Dimensio: How would I load a .223 Remington caliber round into an AR-7?


Yes, the round is a different size.
But by "functionally", I meant 1 trigger pull, 1 bullet. Be it a .22 or .223. Or .45 or 9mm.
1 pull, 1 bullet, not matter how tacticool it looks.

/the two images in my original post are both AR-7 variants
 
2013-01-10 09:48:49 PM  

pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.


Which candidate had the magical detail-free plan in last year's election?

Whoops. Another flaw!
 
2013-01-10 09:49:29 PM  
Mazzic518

Wow. That's...pretty absurdly terrible, actually. "Obnoxious attitude towards law enforcement" shouldn't be a punishable offense in any civilised land...
 
2013-01-10 09:49:55 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

FTA
"The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911."

No, they did exactly as they were asked to do. These "educators" just wasted lots of peoples time.
 
2013-01-10 09:50:24 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand - your-ground-enacted/

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Paragraph 3 basically gives the last guy standing all he needs, especially if there's no other witnesses.

The statute that you have referenced explicitly relates to a "reasonable fear of great death or bodily harm", which would be consistent with my original statement. Are you stating that an individual who is attacked in public should not be presumed to have reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury?


No. My point is that if there's only one person alive, without any other witnesses, we need to take his (or her) word for it. That's a bold thing to ask when there's a body lying on the ground.
 
2013-01-10 09:50:30 PM  
good for them.

/+eleventy thousand irl troll points for these guys
 
2013-01-10 09:50:56 PM  
Once a guy I knew was walking through our little town with his rifle over his shoulder. I don't remember why--if he'd been out in the woods, or if he was just moving it somewhere, but since he was a big, hairy kind of scary-looking guy, several people called the police.

So the cops came and told him that they were getting calls and maybe he should take the gun home. He rared back and he told them---no, actually since he wasn't a douchebag, he laughed about it and took the gun home. He was surprised that anyone thought that was worth calling the cops over.
 
2013-01-10 09:51:25 PM  
Openly carrying a gun doesn't do anything except say to the public "Hey look! I'm an asshole! With a gun! And an attention whore!" It's also guaranteed a rampage shooter will shoot you first. Have fun with that.
 
2013-01-10 09:51:33 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Mazzic518

Wow. That's...pretty absurdly terrible, actually. "Obnoxious attitude towards law enforcement" shouldn't be a punishable offense in any civilised land...


That is just one of the reasons they would not let me out early.
 
2013-01-10 09:51:49 PM  

whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand - your-ground-enacted/

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Paragraph 3 basically gives the last guy standing all he needs, especially if there's no other witnesses.

The statute that you have referenced explicitly relates to a "reasonable fear of great death or bodily harm", which would be consistent with my original statement. Are you stating that an individual who is attacked in public should not be presumed to have reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury?

No. My point is that if there's only one person alive, without any other witnesses, we need to take his (or her) word for it. That's a bold thing to ask when there's a body lying on the ground.


I would advocate investigation of any such circumstance, to verify that the claims of the user of deadly force are supported by data, rather than merely "take the word" of the user of force.
 
2013-01-10 09:52:46 PM  
I would be more alarmed about a single person brandishing a rifle than a pair.
 
2013-01-10 09:52:56 PM  

pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.


I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.
 
2013-01-10 09:53:58 PM  
"Exercising my rights with a rifle to try to decrease the demonizing of peacefully exercising your rights in public," one of the men told Fox 12. He said his name is Warren, but did not want to provide a last name.

Yeah, spot on with that attention whore call. Good jorb.
 
2013-01-10 09:54:35 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-10 09:54:46 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.


The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.
 
2013-01-10 09:54:55 PM  
If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.
 
2013-01-10 09:55:01 PM  

whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?


He would certainly approve.
 
2013-01-10 09:55:10 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.


hmm... what is mentally unstable or irresponsible about the guys in the article? oh hellz ya they ruffled feathers, but they don't match either of your claims.
 
2013-01-10 09:55:30 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: KarmicDisaster: I wonder what the law would say if a CCW who felt threatened opened fire on them. Most of the laws are written very vaguely now, it you feel threatened, open fire! You know, there are a lot of things that you can do, like having sex, that aren't really appropriate in public.

I am aware of no law allowing the use of deadly force in public without a "reasonable" established fear of imminent grievous bodily injury -- including death -- kidnapping, sexual assault or arson. If the individuals were not actively threatening others -- and the legal, even if anti-social, act of carrying rifles as they did would not establish such "reasonable" belief -- then the use of deadly force would not be justified under any existing statute.

Do you skip all the "Florida" tagged links?

I do not believe that your question is related to my statement.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand - your-ground-enacted/

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Paragraph 3 basically gives the last guy standing all he needs, especially if there's no other witnesses.

The statute that you have referenced explicitly relates to a "reasonable fear of great death or bodily harm", which would be consistent with my original statement. Are you stating that an individual who is attacked in public should not be presumed to have reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury?

No. My point is that if there's only one person alive, without any other witnesses, we need to take his (or her) word for it. That's a bold thing to ask when there's a body lying on the ground.

I would advocate investigation of any such circumstance, to verify that the claims of the user of deadly force are supported by data, rather than merely "take the word" of the user of force.


Well you'd do more due diligence than cops in Florida, which brings me back to my first question. Do you skip Florida tags?
 
2013-01-10 09:55:58 PM  

pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.


Or wonder why, in this current political climate, that two people would walk around with those out and slung incorrectly. It smacks of stupidity and attention-getting behavior. They could have been shot by someone else unaware of their intentions. The way they had them slung means getting the drop on them would not have been hard.

Also, not everyone with a left wing political view is a panty-waisted coward in the presence of firearms. The two geniuses in TFA were asking for trouble.
 
2013-01-10 09:56:03 PM  
All well and good, but were they zionist assault rifles?
 
2013-01-10 09:56:56 PM  

whither_apophis: Well you'd do more due diligence than cops in Florida, which brings me back to my first question. Do you skip Florida tags?


I do not intentionally overlook all headlines tagged with the "Florida" tag, but I also do not read all discussions on Fark.

A failure of police to adequately investigate a use of deadly force is not equivalent to a deadly force statute authorizing deadly force in public for reasons other than a reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury.
 
2013-01-10 09:57:10 PM  
Between the "concerned citizens" from this article and about 75% of people posting in this thread, there sure are a lot of people with irrational phobias.
 
2013-01-10 09:57:16 PM  

SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.


Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.
 
2013-01-10 09:57:51 PM  

star_topology: Mark Portland off the list of places I'd like to relocate to...

Then again, I'm in Texas so maybe not


When you get to see hundreds of people riding their bikes on the streets of Portland, naked, you might change your mind. Portland probably gives a lot of out of state people culture shock - stick around, you'll get over it.

Not one mass killing happened in the neighborhood while they walked around. I don't know what the percentage of active CCW is in Portland, but it's not low and they are all over the place. Maybe we need more open carry to remind people where they live and what the rights are here.
 
2013-01-10 09:58:18 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


More to the point -- THIS. That no one did that is a little surprising.

As I said earlier, stupid isn't against the law.
 
2013-01-10 09:58:19 PM  

trappedspirit: "Exercising my rights with a rifle to try to decrease the demonizing of peacefully exercising your rights in public," one of the men told Fox 12. He said his name is Warren, but did not want to provide a last name.

Yeah, spot on with that attention whore call. Good jorb.


His last name has been all over the local media. He apparently does this all the time in Medford, but this time decided to troll in the big city.
 
2013-01-10 09:59:18 PM  

I_C_Weener: I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.


No, you do... and that's your issue to deal with.
 
2013-01-10 09:59:21 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!

The point is, both of those rifles are functionally no different than the AR-15's carried by the two idiots in the article. No matter how evil they look.

'Scary looking' does not equal 'assault'.


The rifle was designed for combat. Nothing else. What should we call it?
 
2013-01-10 09:59:36 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


In Oregon you'd almost definitely be charged with menacing, and likely kidnapping as well.
 
2013-01-10 09:59:47 PM  

Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.


The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.
 
2013-01-10 10:00:09 PM  

queezyweezel: whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?

Why would anyone be okay with that?


With the right judge in Florida that would qualify as "standing your ground."
 
2013-01-10 10:01:23 PM  

GoldSpider: Between the "concerned citizens" from this article and about 75% of people posting in this thread, there sure are a lot of people with irrational phobias.


Right, because it's completely rational to carry a f*cking rifle downtown. I would probably shake my head and move on. Then again, here in the south, gun-tards, like churches, are everywhere here.

I have learned to tune out the derp here.
 
2013-01-10 10:01:28 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


If you were a ccw, you would know your jurisdiction's carry laws. You would also be a complete idiot starting a fight by yourself armed with just a handgun against two man with rifles. You may also find yourself on the wrong end of the law and brought up on several criminal charges, having your ccw permit revoked and your gun convienently lost.
 
2013-01-10 10:01:38 PM  
i.imgur.com
gun nuts with sprinkles on top
 
2013-01-10 10:02:08 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.

The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.


This. Also, your handle is hilarious.
 
2013-01-10 10:02:15 PM  

pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.


They also hate people who aren't victims like they are. Self reliance is threatening.
 
2013-01-10 10:02:44 PM  

pxlboy: GoldSpider: Between the "concerned citizens" from this article and about 75% of people posting in this thread, there sure are a lot of people with irrational phobias.

Right, because it's completely rational to carry a f*cking rifle downtown. I would probably shake my head and move on. Then again, here in the south, gun-tards, like churches, are everywhere here.

I have learned to tune out the derp here.


When did they go downtown? They did this in two suburban type areas.
 
2013-01-10 10:02:55 PM  

pxlboy: I would probably shake my head and move on. Then again, here in the south, gun-tards, like churches, are everywhere here.


That's the rational response to these AWs, not fear.
 
2013-01-10 10:03:25 PM  

Silly Jesus: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

They also hate people who aren't victims like they are. Self reliance is threatening.


LOLWUT

Time to bail on another Fark Gun Thread™.
 
2013-01-10 10:03:25 PM  
willfullyobscure

If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply.

Actually, you'd hopefully be taught in a mandated carry class that brandishing a weapon at people who aren't doing anything illegal is a quick route to jail, so it would never get that far.
 
2013-01-10 10:03:46 PM  

GoldSpider: I_C_Weener: I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.

No, you do... and that's your issue to deal with.


Ok.
 
2013-01-10 10:04:02 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


You also may be sued for unlawful use of a firearm by threatening them. How could you feel threatened by two guys walking around with neither hand on their guns, acting non-agressively, and obeying all laws. If they drew on you that is one thing, but when in Rome...
 
2013-01-10 10:04:11 PM  

GoldSpider: pxlboy: I would probably shake my head and move on. Then again, here in the south, gun-tards, like churches, are everywhere here.

That's the rational response to these AWs, not fear.


And so is comma abuse, it would seem. But the point remains.
 
2013-01-10 10:04:15 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: http://kptv.images.worldnow.com/images/1968884_G.jpg


again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

these two patriots are at home right now spanking each other with semen welded copies of Guns and Ammo.

i say the skinny guy with the soiled diaper on his head is the top here and fatty being the guy with the tits is the bottom.

this is Gunmerica.
these are your patriots.

lmao


Damn I damn near had a asthma attack
 
2013-01-10 10:04:28 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


notsureifseriousorjustmildlyretarded.jpg
 
2013-01-10 10:04:33 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.

The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.


Mental instability is substantially more narrowly defined than being of a propensity to engage in irresponsible behaviour. I would consider any parent who chose to use homeopathic remedies, eschewing actual medicine, upon their children to be irresponsible but I would not consider such a choice to be indicative of mental instability. Similarly, I believe that the actions of the two individuals mentioned in the article to be irresponsible, but without further data I cannot reasonably conclude them to be mentally unstable.
 
2013-01-10 10:04:41 PM  

davidphogan: and likely kidnapping as well.


federal charge or does it have to be acorss state lines.

Would they consider that a crime with a gun because that carries an additional minimum sentence.

I hope the farker means it and is not some ITG...cause I love it when a plan falls apart and we can get a chuckle out of it at their expense.
 
2013-01-10 10:04:42 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Actually, you'd hopefully be taught in a mandated carry class that brandishing a weapon at people who aren't doing anything illegal is a quick route to jail, so it would never get that far.


Snap!
 
2013-01-10 10:05:08 PM  

willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.


Slung over their shoulders? You'd probably just lose your license if you're lucky.
 
2013-01-10 10:05:58 PM  

spamdog: I would be more alarmed about a single person brandishing a rifle than a pair.


A pair of rifles? Yeah hard to aim.
 
2013-01-10 10:06:09 PM  

I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.


Sounds like a personal problem to me...

Or should we make a law so that you don't have to think?
 
2013-01-10 10:06:38 PM  

fusillade762: The rifle was designed for combat. Nothing else. What should we call it?


Call it what it is: a semi-automatic rifle.

Even DailyKOS knows this:
"To qualify as an "assault rifle" a rifle has to fit certain criteria: first, it is a small, light caliber because a small, light caliber allows you to carry a lot of bullets, both in size/volume and weight. Secondly, it is capable of firing full-auto fire, and doing so with some reasonable degree of accuracy & controllability. The smaller caliber bullet makes recoil less of a problem, and it is easier to retain control on full-auto. The problem is, civilian "assault rifles" are not capable of firing full-auto without extensive and very dangerous modifications. More later. First, let's define why full-auto is there."
 
2013-01-10 10:07:59 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


Because, of course, it is unpossible for anyone to do something legal that looks a hell of a lot like they're planning to do something illegal. Why, if I saw a nice young man at the store with wild eyes and unkempt hair buying rope, a shovel, a hunting knife, and various sex toys, I wouldn't feel threatened at  all, since it's completely legal to do all of the above!
 
2013-01-10 10:07:59 PM  

Giltric: davidphogan: and likely kidnapping as well.

federal charge or does it have to be acorss state lines.

Would they consider that a crime with a gun because that carries an additional minimum sentence.

I hope the farker means it and is not some ITG...cause I love it when a plan falls apart and we can get a chuckle out of it at their expense.


Oregon has kidnapping laws that would apply, not sure when Federal laws on that would kick in.
 
2013-01-10 10:08:03 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top


No way that dude is only 23
 
2013-01-10 10:08:08 PM  

fusillade762: YouPeopleAreCrazy: jaytkay: So we aren't versed in gun wanker minutia.

And you are.

Congratulations!!

The point is, both of those rifles are functionally no different than the AR-15's carried by the two idiots in the article. No matter how evil they look.

'Scary looking' does not equal 'assault'.

The rifle was designed for combat. Nothing else. What should we call it?


Better tell the Olympic committee to stop using those guns incorrectly then. They should know that they can't shoot targets with them, only people. Silly athletes.
 
2013-01-10 10:08:35 PM  
I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

My background: Country boy (Okie), working class family, grew up hunting, fishing, camping. High school, lumberjacked a while, 3 years army (vietnam 1965 - 1967, almost 2 years, all with a line company), college, graduate school, family, career (management the whole time, walked away from corporate life, started small business, got tired of it, sold out, bought farm/ranch, got West Nile virus, sold ranch, retired. Old.

When home from RVN, realized didn't want to kill anything big, quit hunting. For 12 years, only picked up gun to move it out of way.

1980, started hunting again, only birds. If I kill it, I eat it. Joined NRA, went through course and got instructor certification (rifle, pistol, shotgun, home security). Hunter safety instructor in Iowa.

C. Heston, W. LaPierre take over NRA, I watch for a while. Meet LaP at a soiree in DC, decide that, other than Robert Bork, most arrogant, self-serving, irrational person ever met. Quit NRA @ 1985. Still hunt because there a few things more delicious than a well prepared bird, and I enjoy it. Killing a bird is challenging and not the most important part of hunting them - I can buy a chicken/duck/turkey cheaper than I can hunt them.


Observations/opinions: 1. The current attitude of the management or the NRA is unreasonable and self-defeating, will ultimately lead to the destruction of the organization. Does not reflect the views of the majority of the members, rather that of the big money (firearm manufacturers).

2. No civilian needs a firearm with more than 5 rounds capacity. If you can't accomplish your goal with 5 round, you need more practice.

3. No one other than the military (to include civilian law enforcement) should be allowed to possess automatic weapons.

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Could go on ad nauseum, but need another G&T.
 
2013-01-10 10:09:13 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.

The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.


Irresponsible in what sense? They could have predicted that 911 would be tied up with bet-wetters, other than that I don't see "irresponsible."
 
2013-01-10 10:09:35 PM  

brandent: spamdog: I would be more alarmed about a single person brandishing a rifle than a pair.

A pair of rifles? Yeah hard to aim.


Its alot easier hanging upside down, tangled in a rope while using 2 pistols.

www.imfdb.org
 
2013-01-10 10:09:59 PM  

Funbags: Plop these guys down in a "stand your ground" state, and watch them ditch those rifles in some random alley post-haste.


came here to say this.
 
2013-01-10 10:10:53 PM  

I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.


I dunno. The lines at Voodoo Donuts can be unbearably long and they play their music way too loud. Plus, it's such a cult thing that every visitor "has" to go there, making it navel-gazing decision time when they finally get to the counter. And then they have to take pics with their cell phones. It was like living next to the goddamn Eiffel Tower only with a maple scent wafting through the air. I can see how it would test one's patience, especially if you're trying to get a donut and there's a wedding going on at the same time there.
 
2013-01-10 10:11:18 PM  
MORONS!

And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!
 
2013-01-10 10:11:30 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Well you'd do more due diligence than cops in Florida, which brings me back to my first question. Do you skip Florida tags?

I do not intentionally overlook all headlines tagged with the "Florida" tag, but I also do not read all discussions on Fark.

A failure of police to adequately investigate a use of deadly force is not equivalent to a deadly force statute authorizing deadly force in public for reasons other than a reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury.


Since the police are the legal entity charged with investigation into use of deadly force in public in cases where a person used deadly force if that person reasonably believed it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony, any lack of effort on the part of the police has the net effect of rendering any statute meaningless.

/that's kinda fun, I see why you post like that.
 
2013-01-10 10:11:36 PM  

Silly Jesus: I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.

Sounds like a personal problem to me...

Or should we make a law so that you don't have to think?


Well, I don't think it means you have to get aggressive and up in my face about a post.  I'm not comfortable around guns.  I find people who carry them as a matter of course to be strange.  I don't think it should be outlawed, but yes, I'd inquire with the cops as to what the hell was going on.  And I'd be very happy if they checked these gentlemen out to make sure they were just attention whoring and not something worse.

You don't have to like it.  But it isn't normal to walk around with a rifle slung over you back just because you can.  I'd be weirded out if you had a claymore on your back and were just trying to "educate" the masses by walking down Sunnyside street.

To claim this isn't weird and intended to shock and get the response they got is being disingenuous.
 
2013-01-10 10:12:18 PM  
See? This is why concealed carry should be banned: You can identify the idiots from a distance.
 
2013-01-10 10:13:33 PM  

Nestchick: I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.

I dunno. The lines at Voodoo Donuts can be unbearably long and they play their music way too loud. Plus, it's such a cult thing that every visitor "has" to go there, making it navel-gazing decision time when they finally get to the counter. And then they have to take pics with their cell phones. It was like living next to the goddamn Eiffel Tower only with a maple scent wafting through the air. I can see how it would test one's patience, especially if you're trying to get a donut and there's a wedding going on at the same time there.


This is why I drive a bulldozer.  Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT
 
2013-01-10 10:13:47 PM  

Demonrats: willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.

You also may be sued for unlawful use of a firearm by threatening them. How could you feel threatened by two guys walking around with neither hand on their guns, acting non-agressively, and obeying all laws. If they drew on you that is one thing, but when in Rome...


They look like farking Klebold and Harris, that's why. One of them is dressed like a farking haji on the warpath for farks sake. People are getting shot to death going to the mall and watching a movie, for farks sake, by damaged units THAT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THESE GUYS. If I see a black dude with his pants around his asshole and a bandanna over his face I'm gonna go ahead and assume that motherfarker isn't up to any good either, do you have a problem with that?

I wouldn't even need a lawyer, I'd show the judge a cell phone pic and he'd have them committed and give me a gift card to Applebees.
 
2013-01-10 10:14:15 PM  

crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

My background: Country boy (Okie), working class family, grew up hunting, fishing, camping. High school, lumberjacked a while, 3 years army (vietnam 1965 - 1967, almost 2 years, all with a line company), college, graduate school, family, career (management the whole time, walked away from corporate life, started small business, got tired of it, sold out, bought farm/ranch, got West Nile virus, sold ranch, retired. Old.

When home from RVN, realized didn't want to kill anything big, quit hunting. For 12 years, only picked up gun to move it out of way.

1980, started hunting again, only birds. If I kill it, I eat it. Joined NRA, went through course and got instructor certification (rifle, pistol, shotgun, home security). Hunter safety instructor in Iowa.

C. Heston, W. LaPierre take over NRA, I watch for a while. Meet LaP at a soiree in DC, decide that, other than Robert Bork, most arrogant, self-serving, irrational person ever met. Quit NRA @ 1985. Still hunt because there a few things more delicious than a well prepared bird, and I enjoy it. Killing a bird is challenging and not the most important part of hunting them - I can buy a chicken/duck/turkey cheaper than I can hunt them.


Observations/opinions: 1. The current attitude of the management or the NRA is unreasonable and self-defeating, will ultimately lead to the destruction of the organization. Does not reflect the views of the majority of the members, rather that of the big money (firearm manufacturers).

2. No civilian needs a firearm with more than 5 rounds capacity. If you can't accomplish your goal with 5 round, you need more practice.

Read the article about the lady in Atlanta a couple days ago who had a thug break into her home when she was there alone with her young kids. She hid in a closet and when he found her she shot him 5 times (all of her bullets) in the face at close range and he was still able to leave the home and drive partially down the road before collapsing. He happened to be alone. What if he wasn't?

3. No one other than the military (to include civilian law enforcement) should be allowed to possess automatic weapons.

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Could go on ad nauseum ...

 
2013-01-10 10:14:21 PM  
Maybe they were just on their way to see a movie.
 
2013-01-10 10:14:23 PM  

crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.


Well, at least we know you don't support the second amendment, and your opinions aren't derived from facts. I believe there have only been 2 illegal killings with full auto weapons since the 30's, and the 5 round capacity limit assumes the 2nd amendment is solely for hunting, which it is not.
 
2013-01-10 10:15:19 PM  

Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.

The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.

Mental instability is substantially more narrowly defined than being of a propensity to engage in irresponsible behaviour. I would consider any parent who chose to use homeopathic remedies, eschewing actual medicine, upon their children to be irresponsible but I would not consider such a choice to be indicative of mental instability. Similarly, I believe that the actions of the two individuals mentioned in the article to be irresponsible, but without further data I cannot reasonably conclude them to be mentally unstable.


Walking around in a public area with a weapon similar to (or exactly the same as) one used in multiple recent mass shootings in public areas - and with apparel that could be used to conceal one's identity - is absolutely a warning sign of instability. Going into town like that there are quite a lot of bad things that could happen as a result and very, very few good things. Nobody who is mentally stable would intentionally create that kind of a situation.
 
2013-01-10 10:15:22 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Maybe they were just on their way to see a movie.


Or have lunch with their kids at the local elementary school.
 
2013-01-10 10:15:50 PM  

DoctorOfLove: All well and good, but were they zionist assault rifles?


if somebody doesn't start posting those pictures of Israeli army women i'm going bed.
 
2013-01-10 10:15:58 PM  

whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Well you'd do more due diligence than cops in Florida, which brings me back to my first question. Do you skip Florida tags?

I do not intentionally overlook all headlines tagged with the "Florida" tag, but I also do not read all discussions on Fark.

A failure of police to adequately investigate a use of deadly force is not equivalent to a deadly force statute authorizing deadly force in public for reasons other than a reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury.

Since the police are the legal entity charged with investigation into use of deadly force in public in cases where a person used deadly force if that person reasonably believed it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony, any lack of effort on the part of the police has the net effect of rendering any statute meaningless.


If police are failing to adequately investigate uses of deadly force, then a legislative mandate establishing minimum investigative standards is warranted.


/that's kinda fun, I see why you post like that.

While my writing style is arguably "stilted", I believe that I have reduced the potential for ambiguity in my statements.
 
2013-01-10 10:16:02 PM  

I_C_Weener: This is why I drive a bulldozer. Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT


They do when you under bid them and get the job.

been there, done that,

had a union moron who was tryng to sabotage my excavators at gunpoint till the cops showed up.
 
2013-01-10 10:16:18 PM  

lordjupiter: MORONS!

And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!


What about open carry of any other gun? As in a holster? Or are you just clutching your pearls because these particular inanimate objects are big and scary looking?
 
2013-01-10 10:16:39 PM  

caddisfly: Lsherm: Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.

Absolutely. One of the guys also has a youtube channel that is nothing but him walking around with guns and provoking cops to stop him.

Why is it that the least of us always seek the most attention?


I don't know if it's the same dude, but I've seen a video like that before. Guy was wearing a handgun openly and a cop stopped and politely asked him about it. The officer couldn't have been more calm and courteous, but the idiot provocateur was borderline hysterical about his rights being violated and refused even to provide his name.

There are times I wish "gross attention whoring" was a crime.
 
2013-01-10 10:16:39 PM  

crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

My background: Country boy (Okie), working class family, grew up hunting, fishing, camping. High school, lumberjacked a while, 3 years army (vietnam 1965 - 1967, almost 2 years, all with a line company), college, graduate school, family, career (management the whole time, walked away from corporate life, started small business, got tired of it, sold out, bought farm/ranch, got West Nile virus, sold ranch, retired. Old.

When home from RVN, realized didn't want to kill anything big, quit hunting. For 12 years, only picked up gun to move it out of way.

1980, started hunting again, only birds. If I kill it, I eat it. Joined NRA, went through course and got instructor certification (rifle, pistol, shotgun, home security). Hunter safety instructor in Iowa.

C. Heston, W. LaPierre take over NRA, I watch for a while. Meet LaP at a soiree in DC, decide that, other than Robert Bork, most arrogant, self-serving, irrational person ever met. Quit NRA @ 1985. Still hunt because there a few things more delicious than a well prepared bird, and I enjoy it. Killing a bird is challenging and not the most important part of hunting them - I can buy a chicken/duck/turkey cheaper than I can hunt them.


Observations/opinions: 1. The current attitude of the management or the NRA is unreasonable and self-defeating, will ultimately lead to the destruction of the organization. Does not reflect the views of the majority of the members, rather that of the big money (firearm manufacturers).

2. No civilian needs a firearm with more than 5 rounds capacity. If you can't accomplish your goal with 5 round, you need more practice.

3. No one other than the military (to include civilian law enforcement) should be allowed to possess automatic weapons.

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Could go on ad nauseum ...


For a while there, I thought I was alone.

/Veteran.
//Not Vietnam.
 
2013-01-10 10:16:57 PM  
Hats off to the cops for playing it cool with these guys. Good work.

Citizens calling 911 need to turn off their TV sets and actually "read" the legal code where they live instead of just assuming they know it.
 
2013-01-10 10:17:07 PM  

FlashHarry: Funbags: Plop these guys down in a "stand your ground" state, and watch them ditch those rifles in some random alley post-haste.

came here to say this.


Umm, guys? Oregon has a stand your ground law. Know your rights.
 
2013-01-10 10:17:23 PM  

lordjupiter: And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!


"Situation"? You've really taken the whole "Don't talk to strangers" thing way too far.
 
2013-01-10 10:17:37 PM  

Giltric: I_C_Weener: This is why I drive a bulldozer. Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT

They do when you under bid them and get the job.

been there, done that,

had a union moron who was tryng to sabotage my excavators at gunpoint till the cops showed up.


Psst!  I was joking.  I don't drive a bulldozer as my personal vehicle...or otherwise.  That would be crazy.  It'd take all day to get across town...even if I took a direct route through houses.
 
2013-01-10 10:18:25 PM  

willfullyobscure: Demonrats: willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.

You also may be sued for unlawful use of a firearm by threatening them. How could you feel threatened by two guys walking around with neither hand on their guns, acting non-agressively, and obeying all laws. If they drew on you that is one thing, but when in Rome...

They look like farking Klebold and Harris, that's why. One of them is dressed like a farking haji on the warpath for farks sake. People are getting shot to death going to the mall and watching a movie, for farks sake, by damaged units THAT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THESE GUYS. If I see a black dude with his pants around his asshole and a bandanna over his face I'm gonna go ahead and assume that motherfarker isn't up to any good either, do you have a problem with that?

I wouldn't even need a lawyer, I'd show the judge a cell phone pic and he'd have them committed and give me a gift card to Applebees.


If you actually believe that enjoy your time in prison.
 
2013-01-10 10:18:37 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Two more farking idiots that make actual

responsible gun owners look like lunatics heard from.

FTFY.

The guy who called these morons attention whores had it right.
 
2013-01-10 10:19:11 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Walking around in a public area with a weapon similar to (or exactly the same as) one used in multiple recent mass shootings in public areas - and with apparel that could be used to conceal one's identity - is absolutely a warning sign of instability. Going into town like that there are quite a lot of bad things that could happen as a result and very, very few good things. Nobody who is mentally stable would intentionally create that kind of a situation.


Your psychology credentials, now please.

This is LEGAL in their state. It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right. How brainwashed are you people?
 
2013-01-10 10:19:30 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top


Hey you found Dimensio's picture.
 
2013-01-10 10:20:02 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top


Just so you know, that dude did those pictures as a joke. He knows damned well how stupid (and creepy) they look.
 
2013-01-10 10:20:26 PM  

I_C_Weener: Giltric: I_C_Weener: This is why I drive a bulldozer. Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT

They do when you under bid them and get the job.

been there, done that,

had a union moron who was tryng to sabotage my excavators at gunpoint till the cops showed up.

Psst!  I was joking.  I don't drive a bulldozer as my personal vehicle...or otherwise.  That would be crazy.  It'd take all day to get across town...even if I took a direct route through houses.


I didn't think you were talking about using it to commute heh. I thought you were an operator.

they get terrible mileage and tear up the macadam...

been there done that too

/whistled and slinked away hoping noone noticed
 
2013-01-10 10:20:31 PM  
Silly Jesus:

BraveNewCheneyWorld:

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.
 
2013-01-10 10:20:40 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top


I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
acecomputers-tn.com
 
2013-01-10 10:20:49 PM  

studebaker hoch: Hats off to the cops for playing it cool with these guys. Good work.

Citizens calling 911 need to turn off their TV sets and actually "read" the legal code where they live instead of just assuming they know it.


Try living in Vegas where open carry is legal, and everyone from California and other parts are constantly calling Metro about an armed man walking down the street.

No, I don't open carry, but have to listen to the OC crowd out here who does.
 
2013-01-10 10:21:00 PM  

I_C_Weener: Silly Jesus: I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.

Sounds like a personal problem to me...

Or should we make a law so that you don't have to think?

Well, I don't think it means you have to get aggressive and up in my face about a post. Sowwy.  I'm not comfortable around guns. Learn about them. Go to a range. Hold one. They really aren't scary.  I find people who carry them as a matter of course to be strange. And I the opposite.  I don't think it should be outlawed, but yes, I'd inquire with the cops as to what the hell was going on.  And I'd be very happy if they checked these gentlemen out to make sure they were just attention whoring and not something worse.The cops can't really just go up and check people out who aren't doing anything wrong. The could have just kept walking if they wanted to.

You don't have to like it.  But it isn't normal to walk around with a rifle slung over you back just because you can.  I'd be weirded out if you had a claymore on your back and were just trying to "educate" the masses by walking down Sunnyside street. Legal vs. illegal.

To claim this isn't weird and intended to shock and get the response they got is being disingenuous.

"Weird" only in the sense that it's rare. They could have also just been ignorant as to how much pearl clutching would occur. Maybe they naively thought that people would be open minded and talk to them about the inanimate objects on their back and all but inaccessible to them for nefarious purposes.

 
2013-01-10 10:21:18 PM  
i86.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-10 10:21:23 PM  
you're not helping.jpg
 
2013-01-10 10:21:39 PM  
Wayne 985

I don't know if it's the same dude, but I've seen a video like that before. Guy was wearing a handgun openly and a cop stopped and politely asked him about it. The officer couldn't have been more calm and courteous, but the idiot provocateur was borderline hysterical about his rights being violated and refused even to provide his name.

We've probably seen the same video. I get the impression that some of these people do this shiat a lot, and the cops have been briefed on how to handle it. I'm usually the typical Fark cop-hater, but respect where respect is due...the cops handle a lot of these taped situations like farking PR pros. Completely courteous, polite and reasonable.
 
2013-01-10 10:22:19 PM  

whither_apophis: And if a concerned citizen took them out with a .243 from 250 yards everyone would be cool with that right?


Mmmmm..... I doubt whether you could find a concerned citizen, who was trained in the use of firepower at 1250 feet, who would actually take proactive action with determining that the men were actually a threat. At least, none of the people I know that have firearms would be so excitable.

But then again, perhaps your friends are the excitable sort.
 
2013-01-10 10:22:23 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

Well, at least we know you don't support the second amendment, and your opinions aren't derived from facts. I believe there have only been 2 illegal killings with full auto weapons since the 30's, and the 5 round capacity limit assumes the 2nd amendment is solely for hunting, which it is not.


Well, you have two votes here against your interpretation from people who stuck their right paws up in the air and swore an oath and put their own lives on the line for the Constitution.

Have you been drilling with the village Militia?
 
2013-01-10 10:22:24 PM  

Silly Jesus: lordjupiter: MORONS!

And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!

What about open carry of any other gun? As in a holster? Or are you just clutching your pearls because these particular inanimate objects are big and scary looking?


They fit the EXACT stereotype of every spree shooter in the last few months. These two dickheads LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE KILLERS. God it makes me sick to have to type that out. We're at a point where young white men are killing people by the scores and dozens every fiscal quarter and somehow, some way, on God's green earth, you can pretend nothing's gone wrong? I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding.
 
2013-01-10 10:22:26 PM  

Giltric: I_C_Weener: Giltric: I_C_Weener: This is why I drive a bulldozer. Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT

They do when you under bid them and get the job.

been there, done that,

had a union moron who was tryng to sabotage my excavators at gunpoint till the cops showed up.

Psst!  I was joking.  I don't drive a bulldozer as my personal vehicle...or otherwise.  That would be crazy.  It'd take all day to get across town...even if I took a direct route through houses.

I didn't think you were talking about using it to commute heh. I thought you were an operator.

they get terrible mileage and tear up the macadam...

been there done that too

/whistled and slinked away hoping noone noticed


Nah.  I just play one on Fark.  :)  i have fanatasized about being able to bulldoze traffic before though.
 
2013-01-10 10:22:28 PM  
demaL-demaL-yeH:

There a a few of us, so there may be hope. My hat to you, sir.
 
2013-01-10 10:22:30 PM  
Man, assault weapons are over.
Here man, free, enjoy it, 'cause they're over. OVER!
 
2013-01-10 10:22:40 PM  
I can't imagine what this country's highway system would look like if we indulged everyone with an irrational fear of bridges.
 
2013-01-10 10:23:58 PM  
Hey, "educate" people all you want, but some of us just aren't comfortable being around devices designed for the sole purpose of injuring/killing living things, and can do that in less than a second.
 
2013-01-10 10:24:00 PM  
"I was a paid internet shill: For a little over six months, I was paid to spread disinformation and argue political points on the Internet"
/Guns are bad.
 
2013-01-10 10:24:22 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: Dimensio: AdmirableSnackbar: pedrop357: Silly Jesus: Libs are extremely scared of inanimate objects. Kinds sad, actually.

When everything is emotions and feelings, it's not surprising. A more logical person would do a quickie analysis and just move on.

I'm not afraid of guns. I'm afraid of the mentally unstable, irresponsible idiots like the ones in TFA owning them.

The subjects of the article were irresponsible, but no data yet justifies a claim of mental instability.

The concept of walking around with your buddy armed in such a way in an area other than an active war zone does not occur - or does not appear reasonable - to anyone who is mentally stable. Mostly because it's completely irresponsible.

Mental instability is substantially more narrowly defined than being of a propensity to engage in irresponsible behaviour. I would consider any parent who chose to use homeopathic remedies, eschewing actual medicine, upon their children to be irresponsible but I would not consider such a choice to be indicative of mental instability. Similarly, I believe that the actions of the two individuals mentioned in the article to be irresponsible, but without further data I cannot reasonably conclude them to be mentally unstable.

Walking around in a public area with a weapon similar to (or exactly the same as) one used in multiple recent mass shootings in public areas - and with apparel that could be used to conceal one's identity - is absolutely a warning sign of instability. Going into town like that there are quite a lot of bad things that could happen as a result and very, very few good things. Nobody who is mentally stable would intentionally create that kind of a situation.


Pistols are used to murder more people in Chicago every month than there were in the mass shootings. Those are just blah people though, so nobody cares etc. Anyway, would your opinion extend to me open carrying a pistol? Because they kill a hell of a lot more people yearly than the big bad scary rifle.
 
2013-01-10 10:24:38 PM  

davidphogan: willfullyobscure: Demonrats: willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.

You also may be sued for unlawful use of a firearm by threatening them. How could you feel threatened by two guys walking around with neither hand on their guns, acting non-agressively, and obeying all laws. If they drew on you that is one thing, but when in Rome...

They look like farking Klebold and Harris, that's why. One of them is dressed like a farking haji on the warpath for farks sake. People are getting shot to death going to the mall and watching a movie, for farks sake, by damaged units THAT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THESE GUYS. If I see a black dude with his pants around his asshole and a bandanna over his face I'm gonna go ahead and assume that motherfarker isn't up to any good either, do you have a problem with that?

I wouldn't even need a lawyer, I'd show the judge a cell phone pic and he'd have them committed and give me a gift card to Applebees.

If you actually believe that enjoy your time in prison.


Nice to know you don't have any kind of coherent rebuttal to my point. Seems like I'm on to something.
 
2013-01-10 10:25:41 PM  

Silly Jesus: I_C_Weener: Silly Jesus: I_C_Weener: SlothB77: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]

if that was walking down the street, i'd be a little freaked out too.

Agreed.  I'm all pro 2d Amendment but if you see someone walking around like that, you think school shooting, armed robbery...not...harmless stroll for a donut.

Sounds like a personal problem to me...

Or should we make a law so that you don't have to think?

Well, I don't think it means you have to get aggressive and up in my face about a post. Sowwy.  I'm not comfortable around guns. Learn about them. Go to a range. Hold one. They really aren't scary.  I find people who carry them as a matter of course to be strange. And I the opposite.  I don't think it should be outlawed, but yes, I'd inquire with the cops as to what the hell was going on.  And I'd be very happy if they checked these gentlemen out to make sure they were just attention whoring and not something worse.The cops can't really just go up and check people out who aren't doing anything wrong. The could have just kept walking if they wanted to.

You don't have to like it.  But it isn't normal to walk around with a rifle slung over you back just because you can.  I'd be weirded out if you had a claymore on your back and were just trying to "educate" the masses by walking down Sunnyside street. Legal vs. illegal.

To claim this isn't weird and intended to shock and get the response they got is being disingenuous.

"Weird" only in the sense that it's rare. They could have also just been ignorant as to how much pearl clutching would occur. Maybe they naively thought that people would be open minded and talk to them about the inanimate objects on their back and all but inaccessible to them for nefarious purposes.


www.jplegacy.org

You people were so focused on whether you could legally carry out in the open in an attention whore manner you never thought to ask, "should you legally carry out in the open in such an attention whore manner."
 
2013-01-10 10:25:55 PM  

BlippityBleep: what is mentally unstable or irresponsible about the guys in the article?


I have no information about their mental states but they were prima facie irresponsible for not considering how their actions would be misconstrued. If you're intending to communicate a message, you take precautions to limit possible misunderstandings. If one (perhaps) other person was wearing a placard saying "Ask Me About Your 2nd Amendment Rights" alongside the open carry its far more likely their message would have been more effective or at least not have backfired. If you watched the news story clearly they were criticized by other gun owners for being so irresponsible.
 
2013-01-10 10:26:20 PM  

willfullyobscure: I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding


Wow someone has a case of the violent fantasies...and it unsuprisingly comes from a rabid anti RKBAer.
 
2013-01-10 10:26:26 PM  

Aigoo: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Two more farking idiots that make actual responsible gun owners look like lunatics heard from.

FTFY.

The guy who called these morons attention whores had it right.


Here's the problem:

You may know hundreds or even thousands of responsible gun owners but every time we see, "But you'd be punishing millions of responsible gun owners" the source for that figure includes these two.

And James Holmes and Nancy Lanza, before they got famous.
 
2013-01-10 10:26:35 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Wayne 985

I don't know if it's the same dude, but I've seen a video like that before. Guy was wearing a handgun openly and a cop stopped and politely asked him about it. The officer couldn't have been more calm and courteous, but the idiot provocateur was borderline hysterical about his rights being violated and refused even to provide his name.

We've probably seen the same video. I get the impression that some of these people do this shiat a lot, and the cops have been briefed on how to handle it. I'm usually the typical Fark cop-hater, but respect where respect is due...the cops handle a lot of these taped situations like farking PR pros. Completely courteous, polite and reasonable.


Good point. You'd think the film makers would learn from that in some capacity. I'm always astonished at their failing to understand just how nutty they're making themselves look.
 
2013-01-10 10:26:42 PM  

crabsno termites: Silly Jesus:

BraveNewCheneyWorld:

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.


Examples please.
 
2013-01-10 10:26:53 PM  

calbert: Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top

I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
[acecomputers-tn.com image 800x600]


Jeeze, that's the same guy!
 
2013-01-10 10:28:12 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


And the men of the law as well. FTA:
The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911.
 
2013-01-10 10:28:14 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: This is LEGAL in their state. It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right. How brainwashed are you people?


What they did was the 2nd Amendment equivalent of writing "Free Candy" on a van and driving it through a school district to teach kids about abductions.
 
2013-01-10 10:28:18 PM  

willfullyobscure: Silly Jesus: lordjupiter: MORONS!

And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!

What about open carry of any other gun? As in a holster? Or are you just clutching your pearls because these particular inanimate objects are big and scary looking?

They fit the EXACT stereotype of every spree shooter in the last few months. These two dickheads LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE KILLERS. God it makes me sick to have to type that out. We're at a point where young white men are killing people by the scores and dozens every fiscal quarter and somehow, some way, on God's green earth, you can pretend nothing's gone wrong? I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding.


Lol 8/10
 
2013-01-10 10:28:22 PM  

Giltric: willfullyobscure: I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding

Wow someone has a case of the violent fantasies...and it unsuprisingly comes from a rabid anti RKBAer.


What does RKBA stand for?
 
2013-01-10 10:29:10 PM  

Silly Jesus: crabsno termites: Silly Jesus:

BraveNewCheneyWorld:

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.

Examples please.


Re-read the posts I cited, think (if you can), respond.
 
2013-01-10 10:29:13 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Hey, "educate" people all you want, but some of us just aren't comfortable being around devices designed for the sole purpose of injuring/killing living things, and can do that in less than a second.


Bless your heart.
 
2013-01-10 10:29:18 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.

I own guns and also ride my bike, but I've never felt the need to pack heat while cycling.

But then again, I've got a real penis. YMMV.


Gun owner and good penis reporting in here;
I used to bike commute, I got 'bumped' by cars 3-4 times, hit twice with ruined bikes and ambulance for me, coffee thrown at me twice, ... I thought of carrying a few times, won't and don't though.

why are people mad at me? When traffic is locked up and a bike just rolls by it is too much for people to take. They snap and do crazy stuff.

mini CSB- caught one guy at a light who 'assaulted' me with his seemingly full cup of coffee, I did a track stand right next to his window and stared at him. LOL he never looked over.
 
2013-01-10 10:29:39 PM  

jayhawk88: Look, I don't care how much you "educate" me about guns, if I see you walking down the street with an assault rifle strapped to your back, I'm going to call the mothefarking cops. Why? BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DAMN BUSINESS WALKING DOWN THE STREET WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE STRAPPED TO YOUR BACK! If you think you need protection, conceal and carry, it's not something I would ever do but if you feel that way, OK. But this isn't farking Beirut circa 1982, all right? It is not that farking bad out there people. It's just not.


I remember as a kid carrying my back-slung rifle down a residential street, in plain view of everyone. why? I was going to a friend's, whose dad was taking us up to Carbon Canyon for some plinking. I was too young to drive, my dad was at work, and my mom was OK with me walking (it was only 6 blocks). No one said didilly squat.

BTW, I'm a little unclear about what an "assault rifle" is. Is it an automatic fire weapon (i.e.: a machine gun)? If so, I'm confused. It's illegal to own those unless you are registered with the BATF and pay a fairly hefty license fee. Or is an assault rifle a semi-automatic rifle, but one that, stylistically, looks scary? From the picture ITFA it appears that they are carrying scary looking weapons, so I guess they ARE "assault rifles."
 
2013-01-10 10:30:00 PM  

crabsno termites: Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.


BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

Well, at least we know you don't support the second amendment, and your opinions aren't derived from facts. I believe there have only been 2 illegal killings with full auto weapons since the 30's, and the 5 round capacity limit assumes the 2nd amendment is solely for hunting, which it is not.


Please point out the anger, I don't see it.

Ignorance? I pointed out that you stated that nobody should have full auto even though only 2 people in the past 80 years abused that type of weapon. Is 2 in 80 years really too much? I don't think that it can be argued that this justifies stripping that right from the remaining 300,000,000 Americans.
I also pointed out that the 2nd amendment wasn't written to protect one's ability to hunt, it is for combat. If you believe these statements are born of ignorance, please elaborate.

Intolerance? Disagreement isn't intolerance. I support all amendments, including the first, so say what you will, but don't expect me to remain silent when you do.
 
2013-01-10 10:30:00 PM  

Silly Jesus: willfullyobscure: Silly Jesus: lordjupiter: MORONS!

And how are people supposed to know they're not crazy? Aren't these the same kind of people that blame bad early warning and early response systems for public shootings? Yet they see nothing wrong with this? What's the proper response, in their eyes, to a situation like this? Apparently it's walk up and talk to a gun-toting stranger to find out if they're dangerous! Seriously??? I guess the test of when concealed carriers can start shooting people with guns in public is either to walk up and make yourself a target, or wait until they kill someone first. How farking stupid can you get?!

What about open carry of any other gun? As in a holster? Or are you just clutching your pearls because these particular inanimate objects are big and scary looking?

They fit the EXACT stereotype of every spree shooter in the last few months. These two dickheads LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE KILLERS. God it makes me sick to have to type that out. We're at a point where young white men are killing people by the scores and dozens every fiscal quarter and somehow, some way, on God's green earth, you can pretend nothing's gone wrong? I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding.

Lol 8/10


Thanks man I appreciate the high score, defo helps my averages over the season. something something WILD PIGS
 
2013-01-10 10:30:12 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362][pixelatedgeek.com image 600x390]


Awesome!
 
2013-01-10 10:30:35 PM  

willfullyobscure: Giltric: willfullyobscure: I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding

Wow someone has a case of the violent fantasies...and it unsuprisingly comes from a rabid anti RKBAer.

What does RKBA stand for?


How do you keep an asshole in suspense?
 
2013-01-10 10:30:41 PM  
I forget what case it was but SCOTUS has ruled that the presence of a firearm alone is not cause to stop someone. That department is asking for a lawsuit.
 
2013-01-10 10:30:57 PM  

willfullyobscure: but seriously these shiatheads need an ass kicking something fierce. I can't think of a more antisocial, dickheaded, and nasty thing to do these days.


Posting stupid comments on Fark from an obvious alt account?
 
2013-01-10 10:31:00 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Hey, "educate" people all you want, but some of us just aren't comfortable being around devices designed for the sole purpose of injuring/killing living things, and can do that in less than a second.


I hope you get some help with that.
 
2013-01-10 10:31:28 PM  

davidphogan: trappedspirit: "Exercising my rights with a rifle to try to decrease the demonizing of peacefully exercising your rights in public," one of the men told Fox 12. He said his name is Warren, but did not want to provide a last name.

Yeah, spot on with that attention whore call. Good jorb.

His last name has been all over the local media. He apparently does this all the time in Medford, but this time decided to troll in the big city.

Portland police identified the men as Warren Drouin and Steven Boyce.


Well someone isn't reluctant to disclose their info.
 
2013-01-10 10:31:42 PM  

meat0918: A gun shop owner I've dealt with in the past (he's an ass, so I don't shop there any longer), said you're an idiot if you open carry. You're just making yourself a target for a criminal that might want your gun or otherwise knows to take you out first.


He's right.
 
2013-01-10 10:32:06 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio:
whargble from a guntad

just winding you up so you get all frustrated, make an asshat of yourself and go shoot yourself out of frustration really.

you are already getting eaten alive in this thread so..

look, as a peace offering, you tell me where you buy sex and i'll mail them a cheque ok? OR i'll renew your subscription to Guns And Power for the next year...

in the meantime, go polish your porn ok?

ok bai professor.


Smugness. Ignorance. Cowardice.

Despite your efforts, these are not virtues.
 
2013-01-10 10:32:19 PM  
Why is it that wimps will wet their panties over the sight of a firearm?

I carry a Glock on me at all times. Why? I feel the need and have the freedom to do so. My children are raised around and are allowed to interact with my firearms? Why? They might need to defend themselves or someone else, you never know.
 
2013-01-10 10:32:22 PM  

crabsno termites: Silly Jesus: crabsno termites: Silly Jesus:

BraveNewCheneyWorld:

Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.

Examples please.

Re-read the posts I cited, think (if you can), respond.


OK. I recapped an incident that occurred. I'm not seeing the anger/ignorance/intolerance.
 
2013-01-10 10:32:47 PM  

MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.


So THAT'S why Fark is so popular!
 
2013-01-10 10:33:01 PM  

whatshisname: BraveNewCheneyWorld: This is LEGAL in their state. It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right. How brainwashed are you people?

What they did was the 2nd Amendment equivalent of writing "Free Candy" on a van and driving it through a school district to teach kids about abductions.


But do you think what they did would be anywhere as effective as talking to kids dumb enough to jump in the free candy van? I think that would be some good training.
 
2013-01-10 10:33:13 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right.


I have the legal right to stand around on packed street corners and loudly proclaim the end of the world through UFO invasions starring Radioactive Apes, the Illuminati and the Trilaterial Commission too. That doesn't mean passersby won't reasonably think there might be something wrong with me. I don't know anything about their mental state, but your contention here isn't going to cut it.
 
2013-01-10 10:33:37 PM  
Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifle jam I waited for it - he had a 30 round mag. 30 rounders suck in the field. They don't fit in your belt well and tend to jam things up even if you tamp them. I believe one of the reasons more people weren't killed at the mall was because of that 30 round mag and the young guy with the CCW that showed the shooter his pistol just before the guy off'ed himself. Maybe we should outlaw mags with less than 30 rounds.
 
2013-01-10 10:34:02 PM  

KarmicDisaster: calbert: Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top

I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
[acecomputers-tn.com image 800x600]

Jeeze, that's the same guy!


sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net

ak0.okccdn.com

this guy is awesome
 
2013-01-10 10:34:11 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362][pixelatedgeek.com image 600x390]


I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought that.
 
2013-01-10 10:34:17 PM  

whatshisname: BraveNewCheneyWorld: This is LEGAL in their state. It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right. How brainwashed are you people?

What they did was the 2nd Amendment equivalent of writing "Free Candy" on a van and driving it through a school district to teach kids about abductions.


No, it wasn't. You're only saying that because they did it specifically to make a point. Who cares why they did it, it's still legal despite your disagreement with their motivations.
 
2013-01-10 10:34:36 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362][pixelatedgeek.com image 600x390]


+++++++++++++++++++1
 
2013-01-10 10:34:42 PM  

I_C_Weener: Giltric: I_C_Weener: This is why I drive a bulldozer. Nobody screws with a man driving a CAT

They do when you under bid them and get the job.

been there, done that,

had a union moron who was tryng to sabotage my excavators at gunpoint till the cops showed up.

Psst!  I was joking.  I don't drive a bulldozer as my personal vehicle...or otherwise.  That would be crazy.  It'd take all day to get across town...even if I took a direct route through houses.


Watch out for basements
 
2013-01-10 10:34:49 PM  

wildlifer: Why is it that wimps will wet their panties over the sight of a firearm?

I carry a Glock on me at all times. Why? I feel the need and have the freedom to do so. My children are raised around and are allowed to interact with my firearms? Why? They might need to defend themselves or someone else, you never know.


Thank you, Nancy.
 
2013-01-10 10:35:14 PM  

Ficoce: 30 rounders suck in the field


Steel/aluminum stamped mags?
 
2013-01-10 10:36:15 PM  

Vector R: And the men of the law as well. FTA:
The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911.



No. These two didn't need to be educated on the law - what they did was legal. They need to be educated on being dumbass attention whores who are not helping. That's totally different.
 
2013-01-10 10:36:18 PM  

Silly Jesus: Pistols are used to murder more people in Chicago every month than there were in the mass shootings. Those are just blah people though, so nobody cares etc


I love it when conservatives remind us of their long history of concern for minorities.
 
2013-01-10 10:36:39 PM  

calbert: KarmicDisaster: calbert: Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top

I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
[acecomputers-tn.com image 800x600]

Jeeze, that's the same guy!

[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 541x720]

[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 540x720]

[ak0.okccdn.com image 317x640]

this guy is awesome


You owe me a keyboard and half a can of diet mt dew. Is that some kind of Klingon battle garb? And he has all his ammo stacked right there by the computer, because... well you can't be too careful.
 
2013-01-10 10:37:12 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Dimensio: Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: It's highly unlikely they were carrying assault rifles.

That said, "look at me, I'm an attention whore!" seems about right.

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

Nothing within the article text mentioned confirmation of select-fire capability of either firearm.

fta:


GUNS IN PUBLIC
Two men carrying assault rifles on their backs said they were simply exercising their Second Amendment right, but police said they scared plenty of people.

now shush


Because know-nothing reporters ll know the difference between automatic fire-capable rifles (HIGHLY regulated) and standard, ordinary semi-automatic rifles. Scary-looking = Assault Rifle.
 
2013-01-10 10:37:23 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Well, you have two votes here against your interpretation from people who stuck their right paws up in the air and swore an oath and put their own lives on the line for the Constitution.

Have you been drilling with the village Militia?


Who gives a flying fark if you've been in the military? Does that mean your opinion is more valid or something?
 
2013-01-10 10:37:23 PM  

willfullyobscure: davidphogan: willfullyobscure: Demonrats: willfullyobscure: If I had a CCW and a weapon, and I saw this, i would draw, order them them to freeze and call the cops, and I would hold them at gunpoint and shoot to kill if they didn't comply. And, I'd get away scot free, and the cops would send me a Christmas card.

You also may be sued for unlawful use of a firearm by threatening them. How could you feel threatened by two guys walking around with neither hand on their guns, acting non-agressively, and obeying all laws. If they drew on you that is one thing, but when in Rome...

They look like farking Klebold and Harris, that's why. One of them is dressed like a farking haji on the warpath for farks sake. People are getting shot to death going to the mall and watching a movie, for farks sake, by damaged units THAT LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THESE GUYS. If I see a black dude with his pants around his asshole and a bandanna over his face I'm gonna go ahead and assume that motherfarker isn't up to any good either, do you have a problem with that?

I wouldn't even need a lawyer, I'd show the judge a cell phone pic and he'd have them committed and give me a gift card to Applebees.

If you actually believe that enjoy your time in prison.

Nice to know you don't have any kind of coherent rebuttal to my point. Seems like I'm on to something.


As I already responded to you, in your fantasy you've committed two crimes in Oregon. They are called menacing and kidnapping.
 
2013-01-10 10:37:49 PM  
It takes a certain kind to be a 22 year-old conservative douche, much less in Portland of all places.
They must feel like big shots, around those libs and their non-violent nature.
 
2013-01-10 10:38:24 PM  
I am so farking tired of hearing about everyone's goddamn "gun rights." Buy a gun if you want, or not, I don't care. But be responsible with it. People who open carry are just attention whores. They're the right's PETA.
 
2013-01-10 10:39:10 PM  

Ficoce: Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifle jam I waited for it - he had a 30 round mag. 30 rounders suck in the field. They don't fit in your belt well and tend to jam things up even if you tamp them. I believe one of the reasons more people weren't killed at the mall was because of that 30 round mag and the young guy with the CCW that showed the shooter his pistol just before the guy off'ed himself. Maybe we should outlaw mags with less than 30 rounds.


That didn't work out too well here in Tucson two years ago.
 
2013-01-10 10:40:05 PM  

Giltric: Wow someone has a case of the violent fantasies...and it unsuprisingly comes from a rabid anti RKBAer.


They do that a lot, talking about killing children, advocating suicide, dragging congresspeople behind vehicles, etc.

At least we have an idea why they don't believe in gun ownership-they don't trust themselves to exercise self control.
 
2013-01-10 10:40:50 PM  
I voted for Obama.

I don't own a gun; and I don't personally know anyone who does.

These guys were well within their rights, and the law, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with what they did.

The only story here is that there is a story here.

And what's with the anti-gun people's penis obsession?
 
2013-01-10 10:41:02 PM  

Somacandra: BraveNewCheneyWorld: It's amazing how many of you claim they're unbalanced for exercising a legal right.

I have the legal right to stand around on packed street corners and loudly proclaim the end of the world through UFO invasions starring Radioactive Apes, the Illuminati and the Trilaterial Commission too. That doesn't mean passersby won't reasonably think there might be something wrong with me. I don't know anything about their mental state, but your contention here isn't going to cut it.


Having something on you is not a statement, that's a terrible comparison. You realize you're essentially saying that just by looking, you know there's something wrong with them. You know who else judged people based on how they looked...
 
2013-01-10 10:41:09 PM  

Lochsteppe: serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.

Sure, it's just like breastfeeding in public--if you're made uncomfortable by it, it's just because you don't understand how natural and beneficial it really is.


You're good, you.
 
2013-01-10 10:41:20 PM  

jaytkay: Silly Jesus: Pistols are used to murder more people in Chicago every month than there were in the mass shootings. Those are just blah people though, so nobody cares etc

I love it when conservatives remind us of their long history of concern for minorities.


I'm a conservative now? News to me.
 
2013-01-10 10:41:50 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Or is an assault rifle a semi-automatic rifle, but one that, stylistically, looks scary?


i.imgur.com

I think you mean "designed to *create the image/fear/respect* of a military grade, high capacity weapon capable of killing. These rifles are all about creating image, as you admitted. That is precisely what many people are concerned about. No one cared when I carried my wood-grain stock 30-06 over my shoulder as a kid either. It wasn't designed to communicate the *cultural information* these rifles are explicitly designed to give. Maybe part of a solution is to mandate that rifles sold to civilians must not stylistically resemble military-grade arms. That would probably go a long in addressing common fears and impressions.
 
2013-01-10 10:42:10 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.

i guess your internet is in braille?

keep on it gun porn trolls.


It must be comforting and satisfying to be able to say stuff without regard to accuracy and truth. You must be a very happy man.
 
2013-01-10 10:42:20 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

Well, at least we know you don't support the second amendment, and your opinions aren't derived from facts. I believe there have only been 2 illegal killings with full auto weapons since the 30's, and the 5 round capacity limit assumes the 2nd amendment is solely for hunting, which it is not.

Please point out the anger, I don't see it.

Ignorance? I pointed out that you stated that nobody should have full auto even though only 2 people in the past 80 years abused that type of weapon. Is 2 in 80 years really too much? I don't think that it can be argued that this justifies stripping that right from the remaining 300,000,000 Americans.
I also pointed out that the 2nd amendment wasn't written to protect one's ability to hunt, it is for combat. If you believe these statements are born of ignorance, please elaborate.

Intolerance? Disagreement isn't intolerance. I support all amendments, including the first, so say what you will, but don't expect me to remain silent when you do.


Let me tell you what automatic weapons did for me: Went to RVN with M14's, one A2 (auto) per squad. Replaced with M16's. INSTANT, COMPLETE loss of any fire control. Ask anyone who had green tabs. Useless except under controlled conditions.

The inability to rationally consider any other position is intolerance.

Ever been in combat (not snarking)

I currently own 9 shotguns, 1 drielling (never could spell in German), one rifle, and three handguns (with ccp), so do support 2nd amendment, but will reiterate: ther is no legitimate use for automatic weapons outside the military, and limited use there.
 
2013-01-10 10:42:27 PM  

GoldSpider: Between the "concerned citizens" from this article and about 75% of people posting in this thread, there sure are a lot of people with irrational phobias.


You should see how some people react to one kid with iced tea and skittles!
 
2013-01-10 10:42:57 PM  

Kaenneth: And what's with the anti-gun people's penis obsession?


compensating, projecting, who knows. I wonder what the overlap between the guns=penis and truck=penis crowd is.
 
2013-01-10 10:43:39 PM  

TV's Vinnie: MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.

I'm not gun nut (thank god), but the sight of that one particular Brainiac with his rifle pointed downward made me wince. Maybe out in the woods if the gun discharges the bullet would sink into the ground, but imagine that thing going off and the round doing a ricochet straight off of the pavement and striking some kid riding by on his bike.

Even gunnies should be aghast at the utter lack of gun safety these oafs are displaying.


I must have missed the part of the article that said the guns were loaded.
 
2013-01-10 10:43:39 PM  

computerguyUT: They were perfectly legal.
People need to stop crapping all over themselves every time they see a gun.

I have no problem with what they did. Some guy did the same thing here in Utah not too long ago.

Grow up and stop being afraid of the inanimate boogey man.


When you're done talking to people and they start to turn away, do they roll their eyes, like, everytime?
 
2013-01-10 10:43:39 PM  

Somacandra: Maybe part of a solution is to mandate that rifles sold to civilians must not stylistically resemble military-grade arms. That would probably go a long in addressing common fears and impressions.


So, a cosmetic ban?
 
2013-01-10 10:44:06 PM  

DoctorOfLove: All well and good, but were they zionist assault rifles?


Holy shiat, dude. It's rare for trolling to be so goddamned bold that I spit out my drink. Hats off to The Obvious One, King of Kings!
 
2013-01-10 10:44:44 PM  

crabsno termites: I currently own 9 shotguns,


Be careful...you might have a new best friend here who is a hardcore proponent of shotguns.
 
2013-01-10 10:44:46 PM  
HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

The retards calling 911 should think about how they're delaying someone's actual emergency because they're shiatting themselves over a perfectly legal activity.

Dimensio: A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services.


The 911 callers should be prosecuted for wasting the time and resources of emergency responders. Use whatever law prevents me from pranking 911 or calling them 20 times because my shoes fell off.
Go wet your pants somewhere else.
 
2013-01-10 10:44:52 PM  

Somacandra: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Or is an assault rifle a semi-automatic rifle, but one that, stylistically, looks scary?

[i.imgur.com image 438x600]

I think you mean "designed to *create the image/fear/respect* of a military grade, high capacity weapon capable of killing. These rifles are all about creating image, as you admitted. That is precisely what many people are concerned about. No one cared when I carried my wood-grain stock 30-06 over my shoulder as a kid either. It wasn't designed to communicate the *cultural information* these rifles are explicitly designed to give. Maybe part of a solution is to mandate that rifles sold to civilians must not stylistically resemble military-grade arms. That would probably go a long in addressing common fears and impressions.


So if we make them pink and shaped like a unicorn the libs might stop shiatting themselves?
 
2013-01-10 10:45:41 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Who cares why they did it


The Portland police and public and other gun owners interviewed seem to, not to mention the two people that actually did this. If they didn't care why they were doing it they wouldn't have done it, dumbass.

/hate having to Red Forman the thread
 
2013-01-10 10:45:58 PM  

DoctorCal: GoldSpider: Between the "concerned citizens" from this article and about 75% of people posting in this thread, there sure are a lot of people with irrational phobias.

You should see how some people react to one kid with iced tea and skittles!


ZIMMERMAN THREAD! DRINK!

/just kidding
 
2013-01-10 10:46:00 PM  

calbert: KarmicDisaster: calbert:
I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
[acecomputers-tn.com image 800x600]
Jeeze, that's the same guy!
[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 541x720]
[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 540x720]
[ak0.okccdn.com image 317x640]
this guy is awesome


And apparently he's on OKCupid. Go get him, tiger!
 
2013-01-10 10:46:40 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: [kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362][pixelatedgeek.com image 600x390]


Do believe you win the Inter- and Intranets. Well played.
 
2013-01-10 10:47:19 PM  

pedrop357: demaL-demaL-yeH: Well, you have two votes here against your interpretation from people who stuck their right paws up in the air and swore an oath and put their own lives on the line for the Constitution.

Have you been drilling with the village Militia?

Who gives a flying fark if you've been in the military? Does that mean your opinion is more valid or something?


I do. My family does. My children do. Fellow veterans do. This country does.

Long experience with firearms should carry some weight in this discussion. You were bloviating about Amendment II conferring an unlimited personal right, weren't you? Because the first four words of Amendment II tend to give my (and crabsno termite's) take on it a bit more credence, given the way the Founders implemented Article I Section 8 Clauses 14-16 of the Constitution in 1792.
 
2013-01-10 10:47:32 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

The retards calling 911 should think about how they're delaying someone's actual emergency because they're shiatting themselves over a perfectly legal activity.

Dimensio: A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services.

The 911 callers should be prosecuted for wasting the time and resources of emergency responders. Use whatever law prevents me from pranking 911 or calling them 20 times because my shoes fell off.
Go wet your pants somewhere else.


this
 
2013-01-10 10:48:06 PM  
What is it with jerk offs and their attempt to hide behind dickwad behavior with "well it's legal and if you don't like it too bad I'm doing it anyway"?
Reminds me of the sovereign citizens loons, except only a tad more saner.
 
2013-01-10 10:49:03 PM  
pedrop357:  So, a cosmetic ban?

Real gun owners who love their weapons for themselves won't care if it looks like a military firearm or not. If a person is buying a type of gun based on the "image," maybe they should be discouraged. A gun is a tool. A gun is not a toy or a show dog.
 
2013-01-10 10:49:05 PM  
Somacandra

Maybe part of a solution is to mandate that rifles sold to civilians must not stylistically resemble military-grade arms. That would probably go a long in addressing common fears and impressions.

On the other end of the idea spectrum, I'd suggest that people just learn what the fark they're talking about instead of mandated catering to ignorance.

Seriously...the idea that manufacturers should be forced to change their production lines because "anti-gun" people won't educate themselves regarding the issue they're protesting is a bit silly.
 
2013-01-10 10:49:42 PM  

Silly Jesus: So if we make them pink and shaped like a unicorn the libs might stop shiatting themselves?


Make them look like a Strawman. I'm sure you'll buy dozens.
 
2013-01-10 10:50:16 PM  
Keep farkin that hornets nest, assholes.

/pro 2nd
//anti dumbshiat
 
2013-01-10 10:50:35 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: TV's Vinnie: MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.

I'm not gun nut (thank god), but the sight of that one particular Brainiac with his rifle pointed downward made me wince. Maybe out in the woods if the gun discharges the bullet would sink into the ground, but imagine that thing going off and the round doing a ricochet straight off of the pavement and striking some kid riding by on his bike.

Even gunnies should be aghast at the utter lack of gun safety these oafs are displaying.

I must have missed the part of the article that said the guns were loaded.


IIRC, Portland's open carry law restricts it to empty chamber under firing pin, magazine/cylinder may otherwise be loaded - could be wrong.
 
2013-01-10 10:51:03 PM  
I'm going to call 911 the next time I see a snake.
 
2013-01-10 10:51:04 PM  

Giltric: crabsno termites: I currently own 9 shotguns,

Be careful...you might have a new best friend here who is a hardcore proponent of shotguns.


Oh, it's Mr. Spray-and-pray-5.56-for-home-defense again.
 
2013-01-10 10:51:11 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

no those aren't assault rifles at all.

rtfa nozzle. pay attention to the picturez

There's nothing in the pictures to suggest they're carrying assault rifles. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.

[kptv.images.worldnow.com image 645x362]
yeah..that is pretty blurry. AR 15's perhaps?


Years ago, I once had an AR-15 lookalike called the AP-15. .22 cal semi-auto rifle (with a fake "selector" switch to full auto. Looked exactly like an AR-15, except to a slightly smaller scale. The magazine was even about the same size as the AR-15, but with a lot of empty space and a regular .22 cal clip mounted inside. Think it held maybe 18 or 20 rounds.

This was one of the first "assault-rifle-look" semi-autos, and it turned a lot of heads at rifle ranges.

One of my older friends came back from Vietnam with a Sig Saur semi-auto sniper rifle. The farker would cut trees down at half a mile with 2 or 3 shots.

When we both went to a range everyone else just stopped and watched.
 
2013-01-10 10:51:13 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

The retards calling 911 should think about how they're delaying someone's actual emergency because they're shiatting themselves over a perfectly legal activity.

Dimensio: A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services.

The 911 callers should be prosecuted for wasting the time and resources of emergency responders. Use whatever law prevents me from pranking 911 or calling them 20 times because my shoes fell off.
Go wet your pants somewhere else.


Calm down, child. You're being part of the problem right now.

And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD. Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".
 
2013-01-10 10:52:32 PM  

Pichu0102: What is it with jerk offs and their attempt to hide behind dickwad behavior with "well it's legal and if you don't like it too bad I'm doing it anyway"?
Reminds me of the sovereign citizens loons, except only a tad more saner.


Whenever anybody says, "Well, it's not illegal" you can kind of figure that they're assholes. Because nobody should ever exercise any control over their behavior unless there's a law against it.

And then guess who biatches the loudest about how we have too many laws?
 
2013-01-10 10:52:56 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD.


I haven't heard a rational reason why they shouldn't.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".


We wouldn't want that to happen, would we?
 
2013-01-10 10:53:06 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Haliburton Cummings

i guess your internet is in braille?

Don't be so butthurt over a simple observation. If the article had called their weapons phased plasma rifles, I'd point out the unlikeliness of that as well.


It would be so cool if they were phased plasma rifles.
 
2013-01-10 10:53:16 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

The retards calling 911 should think about how they're delaying someone's actual emergency because they're shiatting themselves over a perfectly legal activity.

Dimensio: A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services.

The 911 callers should be prosecuted for wasting the time and resources of emergency responders. Use whatever law prevents me from pranking 911 or calling them 20 times because my shoes fell off.
Go wet your pants somewhere else.


So, in your mind, at what point would it be "OK" to call 911, if at all? If they "act suspicious"? If they lift the barrel? Do you have to wait for them to make a threat? Do you have to wait until they shoot? When they shoot the first kid, then is it OK then? How can you tell what their intentions are by looking at them? How do I know these aren't a couple yahoos on their way to... whatever?
 
2013-01-10 10:53:30 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: You're only saying that because they did it specifically to make a point. Who cares why they did it, it's still legal despite your disagreement with their motivations.


Driving a van labelled "Free Candy" through a school yard is also legal.
That doesn't mean it's a sensible thing to do, though. Thumbing your nose at people just because you can is an abuse of freedom.
 
2013-01-10 10:53:42 PM  

Dimensio: whither_apophis: Dimensio: whither_apophis: Well you'd do more due diligence than cops in Florida, which brings me back to my first question. Do you skip Florida tags?

I do not intentionally overlook all headlines tagged with the "Florida" tag, but I also do not read all discussions on Fark.

A failure of police to adequately investigate a use of deadly force is not equivalent to a deadly force statute authorizing deadly force in public for reasons other than a reasonable belief of imminent death or bodily injury.

Since the police are the legal entity charged with investigation into use of deadly force in public in cases where a person used deadly force if that person reasonably believed it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony, any lack of effort on the part of the police has the net effect of rendering any statute meaningless.

If police are failing to adequately investigate uses of deadly force, then a legislative mandate establishing minimum investigative standards is warranted.


/that's kinda fun, I see why you post like that.

While my writing style is arguably "stilted", I believe that I have reduced the potential for ambiguity in my statements.


Dude, there's a huge tradeoff between lack of ambiguity and ease of use. If you really want to be free of ambiguity in communication, look up Ithkuil.

And screw you, Weener, he already said that's where he lived. It wasn't a secret.
 
2013-01-10 10:53:47 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: idea that manufacturers should be forced to change their production lines


Yeah, you'd let Rat Poison makers make their canisters look like Red Bull if it would sell better. Yadda yadda yadda. How dare public safety and public resources be of primary concern!
 
2013-01-10 10:54:15 PM  

Giltric: willfullyobscure: Giltric: willfullyobscure: I hope your mother is front row and center for the next public Klebolding

Wow someone has a case of the violent fantasies...and it unsuprisingly comes from a rabid anti RKBAer.

What does RKBA stand for?

How do you keep an asshole in suspense?


I do it by trolling them. YMMV
 
2013-01-10 10:54:28 PM  

crabsno termites: Let me tell you what automatic weapons did for me: Went to RVN with M14's, one A2 (auto) per squad. Replaced with M16's. INSTANT, COMPLETE loss of any fire control. Ask anyone who had green tabs. Useless except under controlled conditions.


I fully agree, full auto is terrible in practice, but that doesn't justify making them illegal. If people want them they should still be able to buy them, unless they're serious violent offenders.

crabsno termites: The inability to rationally consider any other position is intolerance.


I considered your position, then used facts to refute it. I think that's rational, no?

crabsno termites: Ever been in combat (not snarking)


Nope, and I hope I never am.

crabsno termites: I currently own 9 shotguns, 1 drielling (never could spell in German), one rifle, and three handguns (with ccp), so do support 2nd amendment, but will reiterate: ther is no legitimate use for automatic weapons outside the military, and limited use there.


There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds. There's arguably no legitimate use for alcohol, violent movies or some forms of art. The thing is though, that people enjoy those things, and the pursuit of happiness, as long as it doesn't infringe upon another person's rights, shouldn't be infringed. If owning a full auto gun is what makes someone happy, and they're responsible, I don't think anyone should have the right to deny them that right.
 
2013-01-10 10:54:34 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Long experience with firearms should carry some weight in this discussion. You were bloviating about Amendment II conferring an unlimited personal right, weren't you? Because the first four words of Amendment II tend to give my (and crabsno termite's) take on it a bit more credence, given the way the Founders implemented Article I Section 8 Clauses 14-16 of the Constitution in 1792.


I love the idea that only the military, under control of the federal government, can have certain firearms and only when the government says so. Nothing in the history of the constitution nor the amendments to it suggests that to be true.

Congress may be able to dictate standards that the militia must meet, but nothing in those powers gives Congress any power whatsoever in forbidding the possessing of arms byt he people.
 
2013-01-10 10:54:36 PM  

Silly Jesus: So if we make them pink and shaped like a unicorn the libs might stop shiatting themselves?


Yeah, you brave defenders against tyranny would just as well wield a pink rifle as a black one. It's just a tool. You woudn't care.

Cuz you're not posing at all. Nope,

You are serious, fearsome warriors.l
www.inquisitr.com
 
2013-01-10 10:55:05 PM  

Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.


Wow. A sane post, and poster, in this thread. Impressed.
 
2013-01-10 10:55:10 PM  

pedrop357: So, a cosmetic ban?


Yes. This should be banned.
ep.yimg.com

/CO2 BB gun
 
2013-01-10 10:55:26 PM  
Well, great job, guys. You've just helped 'educate' a bunch of people that they don't like a law that currently is on the books, a law they might have otherwise felt more inclined to ignore till you went around making them uncomfortable.
 
2013-01-10 10:55:42 PM  

GoldSpider: Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD.

I haven't heard a rational reason why they shouldn't.



Off the top of my head: Because they're doing this in a city after a highly-publicized massacre of children with the same type of weapon, and a simple misunderstanding could easily lead to accidental suicide by cop.
 
2013-01-10 10:55:51 PM  

Somacandra: pedrop357:  So, a cosmetic ban?

Real gun owners who love their weapons for themselves won't care if it looks like a military firearm or not. If a person is buying a type of gun based on the "image," maybe they should be discouraged. A gun is a tool. A gun is not a toy or a show dog.



This. As a gun owner, I definitely judge people by the guns they own. The more cosmetic it is, the more I initially assume that the tool has been fetishized by the owner. It's certainly not always true, but that's just my gut reaction every time.

I like the cut of your jib. You don't sound like the type to walk around town with a rifle on your back just for kicks.
 
2013-01-10 10:56:15 PM  

Giltric: Ficoce: 30 rounders suck in the field

Steel/aluminum stamped mags?


Yeah, the old steel "banana clip". You know, the ones shown in the movies with two duct taped together for "quick change". You ever tried to carry one of those things? They don't fit in ammo pouches and you have a heck of a time changing one out while laying on the ground. And they really get in the way when laying prone. The law should be no fewer than 30 rounds. 30 rounds for safety!

Round number is a really silly thing to talk about. Sustained auto isn't too accurate. The thrill of shooting auto goes away after about 12 rounds. We used to really have some fun with sustained, but after about 150 rounds you need to take the barrel guards off and pour oil on the barrel to cool it off - it's like, work. The M60 was built for it. The M16/AR? Not so much.
 
2013-01-10 10:56:22 PM  
i.imgur.com

Been getting a lot of use out of this one lately.
 
2013-01-10 10:56:23 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: pedrop357: So, a cosmetic ban?

Yes. This should be banned.
[ep.yimg.com image 400x187]

/CO2 BB gun


CO2 "Assault Weapon" you mean?
 
2013-01-10 10:56:30 PM  

Haliburton Cummings: http://kptv.images.worldnow.com/images/1968884_G.jpg


again, two MIT graduates...Fatty McShutin and Willie Wanker, the dynamic douchebags of Portland Oregon showing the world that most gun nuts are power mad weirdos with serious sex deficit disorder.

these two patriots are at home right now spanking each other with semen welded copies of Guns and Ammo.

i say the skinny guy with the soiled diaper on his head is the top here and fatty being the guy with the tits is the bottom.

this is Gunmerica.
these are your patriots.

lmao


You sound like you have Tourette's. Time for your meds?
 
2013-01-10 10:57:05 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Giltric: crabsno termites: I currently own 9 shotguns,

Be careful...you might have a new best friend here who is a hardcore proponent of shotguns.

Oh, it's Mr. Spray-and-pray-5.56-for-home-defense again.


Each guys life depends on all, on each man doing his job, you cover your zone, you know the man on you right has got your right covered, you know the man on your left will kill everything on your left! You're all part of each other, fingers on a hand, A FIRE TEAM!
 
2013-01-10 10:57:21 PM  
Somacandra

Yeah, you'd let Rat Poison makers make their canisters look like Red Bull if it would sell better. Yadda yadda yadda. How dare public safety and public resources be of primary concern!

What an absurd response.

I'm simply pointing out that forcing firearms-manufacturers to cater to ignorance is stupid. How can you possibly disagree with that? Objections based on ignorance are unfounded and misguided. Indulging them is silly.
 
2013-01-10 10:57:56 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Off the top of my head: Because they're doing this in a city after a highly-publicized massacre of children with the same type of weapon, and a simple misunderstanding could easily lead to accidental suicide by cop.


I'd be more worried about that city's cops then.
 
2013-01-10 10:57:56 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: It takes a certain kind to be a 22 year-old conservative douche, much less in Portland of all places.
They must feel like big shots, around those libs and their non-violent nature.


I miss the food carts.

/growing up in Phoenix, I saw a guy with a holstered six shooter playing pinball
//was unsettling
 
2013-01-10 10:58:45 PM  

Somacandra: Silly Jesus: So if we make them pink and shaped like a unicorn the libs might stop shiatting themselves?

Make them look like a Strawman. I'm sure you'll buy dozens.


duracoat makes an epoxy finish in '66-Pink Lady' to which you can add optional lubricative additives and/or flattening agents. it requires a coat of duracoat #21 white, and likely a phosphor followed by solvent wash to prep. with. protect this finish with duracoat clear overcoat. if i ever buy my wife an ar it'll get this finish, just to be funny.
 
2013-01-10 10:58:52 PM  

GoldSpider: I'd be more worried about that city's cops then.


Pretty much. Killing people because they are openly carrying firearms is certainly a sign of instability.
 
2013-01-10 10:59:11 PM  

Silly Jesus: They could have predicted that 911 would be tied up with bet-wetters, other than that I don't see "irresponsible."


wildlifer: Why is it that wimps will wet their panties over the sight of a firearm?



stiletto_the_wise: Go wet your pants somewhere else.



CATCHPHRASE!
 
2013-01-10 10:59:45 PM  

utah dude: duracoat makes an epoxy finish in '66-Pink Lady' to which you can add optional lubricative additives and/or flattening agents. it requires a coat of duracoat #21 white, and likely a phosphor followed by solvent wash to prep. with. protect this finish with duracoat clear overcoat. if i ever buy my wife an ar it'll get this finish, just to be funny.


there are also high-temperature versions of duracoat, i think, too, for the gas tube and barrel.
 
2013-01-10 10:59:53 PM  

KarmicDisaster: stiletto_the_wise: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

The retards calling 911 should think about how they're delaying someone's actual emergency because they're shiatting themselves over a perfectly legal activity.

Dimensio: A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services.

The 911 callers should be prosecuted for wasting the time and resources of emergency responders. Use whatever law prevents me from pranking 911 or calling them 20 times because my shoes fell off.
Go wet your pants somewhere else.

So, in your mind, at what point would it be "OK" to call 911, if at all? If they "act suspicious"? If they lift the barrel? Do you have to wait for them to make a threat? Do you have to wait until they shoot? When they shoot the first kid, then is it OK then? How can you tell what their intentions are by looking at them? How do I know these aren't a couple yahoos on their way to... whatever?


I see people open carrying pistols on an almost daily basis. Do you shiat yourself over them too? Should I call the cops every time I see one? Would that be reasonable?
 
2013-01-10 10:59:59 PM  

GoldSpider: I can't imagine what this country's highway system would look like if we indulged everyone with an irrational fear of bridges.


Unless you're William Shatner, I wouldn't give a fark.
 
2013-01-10 11:00:32 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.


Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

/Just a few thoughts.
 
2013-01-10 11:00:40 PM  

Zombie DJ: Silly Jesus: They could have predicted that 911 would be tied up with bet-wetters, other than that I don't see "irresponsible."

wildlifer: Why is it that wimps will wet their panties over the sight of a firearm?


stiletto_the_wise: Go wet your pants somewhere else.


CATCHPHRASE!


Another drinking game? I won't survive these threads-between the constant reference to penises in the threads and now this? I'll have to line up some more shot glasses.
 
2013-01-10 11:00:42 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifle jam I waited for it - he had a 30 round mag. 30 rounders suck in the field. They don't fit in your belt well and tend to jam things up even if you tamp them. I believe one of the reasons more people weren't killed at the mall was because of that 30 round mag and the young guy with the CCW that showed the shooter his pistol just before the guy off'ed himself. Maybe we should outlaw mags with less than 30 rounds.

That didn't work out too well here in Tucson two years ago.


If I remember right, the guy in Tucson went to reload and dropped the 30 round mag. Big mags are clumsy. They save lives by not being efficient.
 
2013-01-10 11:01:25 PM  

GoldSpider: Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD.

I haven't heard a rational reason why they shouldn't.

Keizer_Ghidorah: Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".

We wouldn't want that to happen, would we?


If anything, for their own safety. Especially since they're doing this after several mass shootings. It's like going outside in a bear costume after here's been a rash of bear attacks.

There are more intelligent ways to educate the masses than walking around town with a gun strapped to your back. Your smarmy little comment indicates that you're not thinking very hard about this, you're just in here to be a twit.
 
2013-01-10 11:01:39 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds. There's arguably no legitimate use for alcohol, violent movies or some forms of art. The thing is though, that people enjoy those things, and the pursuit of happiness, as long as it doesn't infringe upon another person's rights, shouldn't be infringed. If owning a full auto gun is what makes someone happy, and they're responsible, I don't think anyone should have the right to deny them that right.


There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds. There's arguably no legitimate use for alcohol, violent movies or some forms of art. The thing is though, that people enjoy those things, and the pursuit of happiness, as long as it doesn't infringe upon another person's rights, shouldn't be infringed. If owning a full auto gun is what makes someone happy, and they're responsible, I don't think anyone should have the right to deny them that right.

There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds. There's arguably no legitimate use for alcohol, violent movies or some forms of art. The thing is though, that people enjoy those things, and the pursuit of happiness, as long as it doesn't infringe upon another person's rights, shouldn't be infringed. If owning a full auto gun is what makes someone happy, and they're responsible, I don't think anyone should have the right to deny them that right.
 
2013-01-10 11:01:59 PM  

whatshisname: Thumbing your nose at people just because you can is an abuse of freedom.


2 people are walking down the street, both with rifles slung over their backs. One is on his way to a friend's house to go hunting, and the other is making a political statement. You're not telepathic, so you don't know which one is "abusing" their freedom, and which one is exercising their freedom. The only reason you get to judge these people is because you've been given all the facts, if you hadn't can you so surely claim that the exact same act is "abuse" as you call it? Nobody should be this judgmental over the simple exercise of a right. This is the most ridiculous thing for people to be outraged by.
 
2013-01-10 11:02:18 PM  

serial_crusher: The men told officers they were hoping to educate the public about gun rights.
...
Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal

Sounds like the public needed a little education in that department.


Just because it's legal doesn't make it a good idea.
 
2013-01-10 11:02:47 PM  

jaytkay: Silly Jesus: So if we make them pink and shaped like a unicorn the libs might stop shiatting themselves?

Yeah, you brave defenders against tyranny would just as well wield a pink rifle as a black one. It's just a tool. You woudn't care.

Cuz you're not posing at all. Nope,

You are serious, fearsome warriors.l
[www.inquisitr.com image 500x400]


How did you fit everyone in America who owns a rifle into one picture?

/he may have eaten them all
 
2013-01-10 11:03:15 PM  

Somacandra: I think you mean "designed to *create the image/fear/respect* of a military grade, high capacity weapon capable of killing. These rifles are all about creating image, as you admitted. That is precisely what many people are concerned about. No one cared when I carried my wood-grain stock 30-06 over my shoulder as a kid either. It wasn't designed to communicate the *cultural information* these rifles are explicitly designed to give.


As silly as this description is, it's probably come as close as any to define exactly what it means to be an "assault weapon".

It's not about how dangerous a weapon is, it's about how scary it looks.

Perhaps gun manufacturers should just start making their guns look more pink and fluffy. Then people will stop wetting their pants when they see them.
 
2013-01-10 11:03:31 PM  
their goal is to normalize weapons in public. i agree with their goal. Where i live, people occasionally open carry and no one cares much.
 
2013-01-10 11:03:48 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.

Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

/Just a few thoughts.


Don't you love the people who keep equating guns with cars, bathtubs, and spilled water?
 
2013-01-10 11:04:15 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.


1.)Guns have numerous safety features all without the makers being told to.
2.)Why does the registration, insuring, or taxation of a car make a difference as to its safety?
3.)This remains to be seen given the numerous fatalities and injuries on roads.
4.)Why does the intent of the designer matter so much? If a person plows into someone doing 90 and kills them, are they any less or uniquely dead than if they had been shot?
 
2013-01-10 11:04:23 PM  

Dimensio: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Not to mention that somewhere, somebody is dialing 911 with an actual emergency, and their help is being delayed because these two jackwagons want to walk around carrying AR-15's and wagging their dicks around.

A local police officer informed me that he prefers citizens to carry concealed for the specific reason that legally openly carried firearms may cause observers unfamiliar with the law to contact and thus waste the resources of emergency services. That explanation prompted me to obtain a holster that more effectively conceals my firearm when cycling, as until then I had worn a holster that was frequently exposed, inadvertently, when I cycled.


We should do that in all areas where the alternatives are 1. educate the ignorant 2. hide reality from the ignorant so we don't have to educate them.

/sarcasm

There are legitimate reasons to not open carry. That isn't one of them.
 
2013-01-10 11:04:35 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: Editorial: So much anger/ignorance/intolerance on both sides. How stupid we all are.

Thank you for making my point.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: crabsno termites: I usually snark on this site, but not this time.

Well, at least we know you don't support the second amendment, and your opinions aren't derived from facts. I believe there have only been 2 illegal killings with full auto weapons since the 30's, and the 5 round capacity limit assumes the 2nd amendment is solely for hunting, which it is not.

Please point out the anger, I don't see it.

Ignorance? I pointed out that you stated that nobody should have full auto even though only 2 people in the past 80 years abused that type of weapon. Is 2 in 80 years really too much? I don't think that it can be argued that this justifies stripping that right from the remaining 300,000,000 Americans.
I also pointed out that the 2nd amendment wasn't written to protect one's ability to hunt, it is for combat. If you believe these statements are born of ignorance, please elaborate.

Intolerance? Disagreement isn't intolerance. I support all amendments, including the first, so say what you will, but don't expect me to remain silent when you do.


Why the hell are we supporting the right for civilians to engage in combat with deadly weapons?
 
2013-01-10 11:04:37 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD. Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".


Just because you shouldn't do something doesn't mean that you should get accosted by the police over it, and doesn't mean that people should get all butthurt over it.
 
2013-01-10 11:04:47 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: There are more intelligent ways to educate the masses than walking around town with a gun strapped to your back.


I'm listening (reading).
 
2013-01-10 11:04:54 PM  

Ficoce: demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifle jam I waited for it - he had a 30 round mag. 30 rounders suck in the field. They don't fit in your belt well and tend to jam things up even if you tamp them. I believe one of the reasons more people weren't killed at the mall was because of that 30 round mag and the young guy with the CCW that showed the shooter his pistol just before the guy off'ed himself. Maybe we should outlaw mags with less than 30 rounds.

That didn't work out too well here in Tucson two years ago.

If I remember right, the guy in Tucson went to reload and dropped the 30 round mag. Big mags are clumsy. They save lives by not being efficient.


You're an ass. A malicious, deliberate, vile, nasty ass.
 
2013-01-10 11:05:10 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: GoldSpider: Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD.

I haven't heard a rational reason why they shouldn't.

Off the top of my head: Because they're doing this in a city after a highly-publicized massacre of children with the same type of weapon, and a simple misunderstanding could easily lead to accidental suicide by cop.


WTF? Really?
 
2013-01-10 11:05:11 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: The only reason you get to judge these people is because you've been given all the facts, if you hadn't can you so surely claim that the exact same act is "abuse" as you call it?


Of course I'm judging them based on the facts. If the story was "2 guys head off hunting and scare people" we'd be having another conversation. We have the facts in spades here, and the facts are that these two idiots were doing something provocatively stupid.
 
2013-01-10 11:05:42 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.


you must not own a GM.
 
2013-01-10 11:06:11 PM  

ambercat: Well, great job, guys. You've just helped 'educate' a bunch of people that they don't like a law that currently is on the books, a law they might have otherwise felt more inclined to ignore till you went around making them uncomfortable.


Then again, if more people did it, the fearful people would eventually realize it's not so scary. They need to be deprogrammed from what they've experienced on tv, and experience some reality.
 
2013-01-10 11:06:41 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: Perhaps gun manufacturers should just start making their guns look more pink and fluffy. Then people will stop wetting their pants when they see them.


nah, then they'd claim that children will pick them up and use them as toys. Bloomberg talked about banning gun paint and colorful guns for that reason.

Put wood grain on them and they'd call it a loophole.
 
2013-01-10 11:06:58 PM  

pedrop357: YouPeopleAreCrazy: pedrop357: So, a cosmetic ban?

Yes. This should be banned.
[ep.yimg.com image 400x187]

/CO2 BB gun

CO2 "Assault Weapon" you mean?


CO2 "semi-automatic assault weapon, if you want to be precise.
 
2013-01-10 11:07:53 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifle jam I waited for it - he had a 30 round mag. 30 rounders suck in the field. They don't fit in your belt well and tend to jam things up even if you tamp them. I believe one of the reasons more people weren't killed at the mall was because of that 30 round mag and the young guy with the CCW that showed the shooter his pistol just before the guy off'ed himself. Maybe we should outlaw mags with less than 30 rounds.

That didn't work out too well here in Tucson two years ago.

If I remember right, the guy in Tucson went to reload and dropped the 30 round mag. Big mags are clumsy. They save lives by not being efficient.

You're an ass. A malicious, deliberate, vile, nasty ass.


Maybe, but I don't have an anger problem. Do us a favor and stay gun free.
 
2013-01-10 11:08:33 PM  

Lsherm: Open carry if you aren't hunting makes you an attention whore.


GF named my left testicle thundercles: their goal is to normalize weapons in public. i agree with their goal. Where i live, people occasionally open carry and no one cares much.


Yep, and I bet most of the folks who called 911 in Portland wouldn't have blinked an eye at a holstered handgun. That's the thing, really - I grew up in rural New England, and folks that wouldn't have blinked at a slung shotgun or a holstered handgun would've called 911 if some moron had been walking around with an AR-15.

It's not the "open carry" that was the issue, it was the incongruous appearance - and incongruity is a perfectly good reason to call 911. Had they been walking with cracked shotguns, few folks would've even blinked an eye, even in downtown Portland.
 
2013-01-10 11:08:48 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.

Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

/Just a few thoughts.


How is point 4 at all relevant if I legally own a rifle and enjoy using it for target practice?
 
2013-01-10 11:08:58 PM  

Somacandra: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Or is an assault rifle a semi-automatic rifle, but one that, stylistically, looks scary?

[i.imgur.com image 438x600]

I think you mean "designed to *create the image/fear/respect* of a military grade, high capacity weapon capable of killing. These rifles are all about creating image, as you admitted. That is precisely what many people are concerned about. No one cared when I carried my wood-grain stock 30-06 over my shoulder as a kid either. It wasn't designed to communicate the *cultural information* these rifles are explicitly designed to give. Maybe part of a solution is to mandate that rifles sold to civilians must not stylistically resemble military-grade arms. That would probably go a long in addressing common fears and impressions.


I wouldn't have a problem with that.
 
2013-01-10 11:09:13 PM  

pedrop357: demaL-demaL-yeH: Well, you have two votes here against your interpretation from people who stuck their right paws up in the air and swore an oath and put their own lives on the line for the Constitution.

Have you been drilling with the village Militia?

Who gives a flying fark if you've been in the military? Does that mean your opinion is more valid or something?


It means he has access to facts that you don't, so listen.

Or list up. Whatever.
 
2013-01-10 11:09:29 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.


www.remington.com

Is the Remington 700 designed to specifically take human lives? Careful. This is a trick question.
 
2013-01-10 11:10:31 PM  

omnibus_necanda_sunt: It means he has access to facts that you don't, so listen.

Or list up. Whatever.


We've seen his facts all over this thread, they're either irrelevant or deliberate misreadings of the COTUS, its amendments, or the interaction(s) of the laws passed by congress based on delegated powers.
 
2013-01-10 11:10:53 PM  

GoldSpider: Keizer_Ghidorah: There are more intelligent ways to educate the masses than walking around town with a gun strapped to your back.

I'm listening (reading).


He's right. Perhaps hanging around on a street corner, with those guns and signs that read something like "Ask me about my rifle", or handing out NRA leaflets, or something similar - something, anything, that indicated a more educational intent than just "two morons walking around with slung assault-style weapons", would've made them both more approachable and less alarming.
 
2013-01-10 11:11:08 PM  
i270.photobucket.comhawt.
 
2013-01-10 11:11:17 PM  

Silly Jesus: pedrop357: YouPeopleAreCrazy: pedrop357: So, a cosmetic ban?

/CO2 BB gun

CO2 "Assault Weapon" you mean?

CO2 "semi-automatic assault weapon, if you want to be precise.


That has a magazine that holds 40 rounds
 
2013-01-10 11:11:18 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD. Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".

Just because you shouldn't do something doesn't mean that you should get accosted by the police over it, and doesn't mean that people should get all butthurt over it.


Hey, when you decide to walk around with large rifles as a political statement after several mass shootings, don't be upset when someone doesn't immediately understand what you're doing.

GoldSpider: Keizer_Ghidorah: There are more intelligent ways to educate the masses than walking around town with a gun strapped to your back.

I'm listening (reading).


Oh, I don't know. Pamphlets, seminars, meetings, TV appearances, press conferences, standing on the street corner. Classrooms, maybe? You know, where education occurs?
 
2013-01-10 11:12:08 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Aigoo: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Two more farking idiots that make actual responsible gun owners look like lunatics heard from.

FTFY.

The guy who called these morons attention whores had it right.

Here's the problem:

You may know hundreds or even thousands of responsible gun owners but every time we see, "But you'd be punishing millions of responsible gun owners" the source for that figure includes these two.

And James Holmes and Nancy Lanza, before they got famous.


You know, you're right. Except for the fact that every single responsible gun owner I know is calling these two irresponsible.

You see, I'm well aware that open carry is perfectly legal in Oregon. It is also perfectly legal here in my own state of Oklahoma with a concealed carry license.

But the fact that something is legal does not mean that to do so is responsible or sensible. I would not, will not, and do not open carry my pistols - even though it is perfectly legal for me to do so - because there is no legitimate reason for me to be walking down the farking street with a .45 on my hip or under my arm. None whatsoever. Yes, it's legal. Yes, I am well within my rights to do so. But yes, it is absolutely irresponsible of me to terrorize the general public by walking around with a goddamned hand cannon when I can just as easily conceal the weapon and have the exact same protection for myself and others.

You cannot educate people about firearms by carrying them around nonchalantly on a noonday stroll when everything they have been taught all their lives tells them to be terrified of them and the people who own them.

Common sense. How does it work?
 
2013-01-10 11:12:51 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: demaL-demaL-yeH: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.

Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

/Just a few thoughts.

Don't you love the people who keep equating guns with cars, bathtubs, and spilled water?


I love people that keep repeating those points while ignoring the points about top speed and acceleration, and a beverage that kills 5x as many people as guns, then dismiss the heightened danger of these 2 items "because they weren't specifically designed to hurt anyone". It's kind of like talking about a rollercoaster that kills 100,000 people every year, but refusing to acknowledge it's a bigger problem than guns because it wasn't specifically designed for carnage, even though it excels at it. It's amazing that people who trot out those arguments don't realize how ridiculous they sound.
 
2013-01-10 11:12:53 PM  

pedrop357: demaL-demaL-yeH: Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

1.)Guns have numerous safety features all without the makers being told to.
2.)Why does the registration, insuring, or taxation of a car make a difference as to its safety?
3.)This remains to be seen given the numerous fatalities and injuries on roads.
4.)Why does the intent of the designer matter so much? If a person plows into someone doing 90 and kills them, are they any less or uniquely dead than if they had been shot?


The difference is that nearly all deaths by cars are accidents, not deliberate murders.
 
2013-01-10 11:12:55 PM  

utah dude: [i270.photobucket.com image 850x566]hawt.


Neat. Stay away from NYC though.
Link
 
2013-01-10 11:12:59 PM  

calbert: Haliburton Cummings: [i.imgur.com image 480x372]
gun nuts with sprinkles on top

I will never get tired of seeing that guy on the internet.
[acecomputers-tn.com image 800x600]


I barely have any facial hair (I can't even grow a mustache at 44 years old), but if I was going to have a monobrow, I would want one as majestic as his.
 
2013-01-10 11:14:11 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Oh, I don't know. Pamphlets, seminars, meetings, TV appearances, press conferences, standing on the street corner. Classrooms, maybe? You know, where education occurs?


Unlike people who want to bring back the AWB, these guys chose to try something that hasn't already proven ineffective.
 
2013-01-10 11:14:27 PM  

pedrop357: Neat. Stay away from NYC though.
Link


you should prolly avoid a bright orange or similar at the barrel tip... gets way too confusing for toys vs. nontoys.
 
2013-01-10 11:14:36 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: Silly Jesus: pedrop357: YouPeopleAreCrazy: pedrop357: So, a cosmetic ban?

/CO2 BB gun

CO2 "Assault Weapon" you mean?

CO2 "semi-automatic assault weapon, if you want to be precise.

That has a magazine that holds 40 rounds


Are they child-heat-seeking rounds? Or just regular women-and-children-heat-seeking rounds?
 
2013-01-10 11:15:23 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: ambercat: Well, great job, guys. You've just helped 'educate' a bunch of people that they don't like a law that currently is on the books, a law they might have otherwise felt more inclined to ignore till you went around making them uncomfortable.

Then again, if more people did it, the fearful people would eventually realize it's not so scary. They need to be deprogrammed from what they've experienced on tv, and experience some reality.


Because everyone watches TV, and that's how they get their ideas about being uncomfortable about having armed amateurs walking the streets. Profile much?
 
2013-01-10 11:15:23 PM  
That wasn't polite or mature of them.
 
2013-01-10 11:15:47 PM  

Aigoo: You cannot educate people about firearms by carrying them around nonchalantly on a noonday stroll when everything they have been taught all their lives tells them to be terrified of them and the people who own them.


www.slideshowblog.com
 
2013-01-10 11:15:50 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: stiletto_the_wise: Keizer_Ghidorah: And just because you CAN walk around with deadly weapons strapped to your back doesn't mean you SHOULD. Especially if it's for a stupid reason like "educating the masses".

Just because you shouldn't do something doesn't mean that you should get accosted by the police over it, and doesn't mean that people should get all butthurt over it.

Hey, when you decide to walk around with large rifles as a political statement after several mass shootings, don't be upset when someone doesn't immediately understand what you're doing.

This argument from the same people who don't understand how a woman walking around in a whore's uniform might be interpreted as being a whore.

 
2013-01-10 11:16:07 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Hey, when you decide to walk around with large rifles as a political statement after several mass shootings, don't be upset when someone doesn't immediately understand what you're doing.


I never get upset at how stupid people are (I'd be upset all day). But I would get upset if these stupid people called the cops on me while I was going about my day doing nothing illegal or wrong.
 
2013-01-10 11:16:10 PM  

pedrop357: demaL-demaL-yeH: Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

1.)Guns have numerous safety features all without the makers being told to.
2.)Why does the registration, insuring, or taxation of a car make a difference as to its safety?
3.)This remains to be seen given the numerous fatalities and injuries on roads.
4.)Why does the intent of the designer matter so much? If a person plows into someone doing 90 and kills them, are they any less or uniquely dead than if they had been shot?


1. A gun is a crew-served weapon. Firearm manufacturers were sued. Repeatedly.
2. I hope you don't have an uninsured/underinsured rider on your auto policy. Because they have piles of cash.
3. Which number is declining due to improved safety via regulation, getting chronicly drunk drivers off the roads, and imited and graduated licenses for inexperienced drivers.
4. So on your home planet this is the scenario that happens every damned day: A couple are at home having a loud disagreement. One goes out to the driveway, gets in the car, and drives the other to death at the dinner table.
 
2013-01-10 11:16:47 PM  
Dammit, how many people did these nutjobs kill before the police took them down?
 
2013-01-10 11:17:00 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: The difference is that nearly all deaths by cars are accidents, not deliberate murders.


That's a nonsensical defense. Dead is dead, they are exactly equal.
 
2013-01-10 11:17:08 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: TV's Vinnie: MrEricSir: There's nothing the general public likes more than insensitive self-righteous pricks who think they know everything.

I'm not gun nut (thank god), but the sight of that one particular Brainiac with his rifle pointed downward made me wince. Maybe out in the woods if the gun discharges the bullet would sink into the ground, but imagine that thing going off and the round doing a ricochet straight off of the pavement and striking some kid riding by on his bike.

Even gunnies should be aghast at the utter lack of gun safety these oafs are displaying.

I must have missed the part of the article that said the guns were loaded.


Oh, dolts like this aren't going to walk around with UNloaded guns. When they go retard, they go Full Retard.
 
2013-01-10 11:17:34 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: The difference is that nearly all deaths by cars are accidents, not deliberate murders.


Nearly all deaths by knives and baseball bats are also deliberate. Ban them?
 
2013-01-10 11:17:57 PM  
They should have been wearing shirts that said STILL NOT ASKING FOR IT. That would be lullzy.
 
2013-01-10 11:18:48 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Keizer_Ghidorah: demaL-demaL-yeH: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There's no legitimate use for a car that goes over the speed limit, or one that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.

Automobiles are:
1) Subject to stringent safety regulations that lower the risk of death, dismembership and injury.
2) Subject to stringent registration, taxation, and insurance standards.
3) Must have a qualified, trained, tested operator in order to be on the streets.
and 4) Are not designed specifically to take human lives.

/Just a few thoughts.

Don't you love the people who keep equating guns with cars, bathtubs, and spilled water?

I love people that keep repeating those points while ignoring the points about top speed and acceleration, and a beverage that kills 5x as many people as guns, then dismiss the heightened danger of these 2 items "because they weren't specifically designed to hurt anyone". It's kind of like talking about a rollercoaster that kills 100,000 people every year, but refusing to acknowledge it's a bigger problem than guns because it wasn't specifically designed for carnage, even though it excels at it. It's amazing that people who trot out those arguments don't realize how ridiculous they sound.


But we can fix or get rid of the roller coaster and no one will complain. But try to do anything about guns and everyone goes apeshiat. Cars also kill because of mechanical problems, while I've never heard of someone being killed by a gun with mechanical problems, unless they looked down the barrel to see why it didn't fire.

Neither cars nor booze were specifically designed to injure/kill living things. Equating them with guns just doesn't work.
 
2013-01-10 11:19:06 PM  

Ficoce: demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: demaL-demaL-yeH: Ficoce: Lol, combat vets advocating 5 round mags? I actually earned a combat patch and when I heard the guy at Clackamas had his rifl