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.

(Leesburg Today)   Guns are welcome on the premises. Please keep all firearms holstered unless the need arises. In such case, judicious marksmanship is greatly appreciated by all. Enjoy your meal   (leesburgtoday.com) divider line 280
    More: Stupid, Leesburg, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Mississippi Delta, carrying a gun, cajuns, board of supervisors, Gun politics, Sandy Hook Elementary  
•       •       •

10375 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2013 at 12:58 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-05 02:58:20 PM

Civil_War2_Time: Flakeloaf

Pity such dinosaurs as Japan, Canada, the UK, France, Poland, Finland, India, Sweden, New Zealand, Switzerland...

Yep, those "old dinosaurs," whose populations have little white trash, and almost no blacks or Hispanics (our prison make-up demographic), are surely safer than we are in the US.

Japan - Almost all Japanese
Canada - Almost all white
UK - Mostly white
France - Mostly white
Poland - Almost all white
Finland - Almost all white
India - Almost all Indian
Sweden - Almost all white
NZ - Almost all white
Switzerland - Almost all white

See a pattern here? All of the countries with the lowest violent crime rates never substantially integrated like the U.S. did.

But of course you just pulled that from Wiki, without ever putting any thought into the reasons why they have such low violent crime rates in those countries. Basically, "old dinosaur" means "racist country" with respect to your comment.


So what you're saying is that you need to carry guns because you're afraid of negroes, that everyone with pale skin is culturally and ideologically identical, and that you know nothing about Indian, Canadian or French demographics.
 
2013-04-05 02:59:02 PM

Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.


You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.
 
2013-04-05 03:05:44 PM

xalres: BgJonson79: xalres: scarmig: xalres: I often wonder what it's like to go through life so pants-pissingly paranoid of the outside world that you feel the need to be armed everywhere at all times just in case!!!! It sounds exhausting.

You ever wear a seat belt, "just in case"?

Must be exhausting to be so pants-pissingly scared of other drivers.

No I wear one because a) it's the law and b) I don't want to go flying through my windshield should I end up rear ending someone.

I think if you're going to make a seat belt to gun analogy you'd be better off comparing them to the safety. Is it more responsible to walk around with the safety on or off? Does keeping the safety on while you're not ready to shoot something make you paranoid?

You're required to wear a seat belt in your state?  We don't even have helmet laws, sales or income tax.

Yeah. It's a ticketable offense. As is talking/texting on a cell phone.


They just added "distracting driving" to our list on Jan 1.
 
2013-04-05 03:12:07 PM

Dimensio: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.


Presumably people would be innoculated to the sight of guns within a month or two of the hypothetical open carry only ordinance and stop calling the police, but a couple of the thugs getting their lunch breaks ruined by panicked grannies is hardly something to trouble my sleep.
 
2013-04-05 03:16:40 PM
 

arentol: Lawful carriers have been statistically shown to commit far less violent crimes than the average citizen


You are saying that average citizens shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms.  Is your mind blown yet?
 
2013-04-05 03:17:04 PM
I would not frequent a restaurant that allows patrons to walk around with open carafes of hot coffee. Seriously.

Loaded firearms all 'round? I wouldn't even be willing to dine with close relatives like that.
 
2013-04-05 03:17:45 PM

Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.

Presumably people would be innoculated to the sight of guns within a month or two of the hypothetical open carry only ordinance and stop calling the police, but a couple of the thugs getting their lunch breaks ruined by panicked grannies is hardly something to trouble my sleep.


Perhaps advocates of requiring concealed weapons permit holders to make the public aware of the presence of a firearm upon their person could cite actual data justifying a need for such notice.
 
2013-04-05 03:18:45 PM

Watubi: arentol: Lawful carriers have been statistically shown to commit far less violent crimes than the average citizen

You are saying that average citizens shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms.  Is your mind blown yet?


In many states, "average citizens" are not permitted to carry firearms.
 
2013-04-05 03:23:39 PM

lostcat: master_dman: lostcat: dudicon: master_dman: All you scared whiny pussies can just stay away from this place.
I'm guessing this place won't be robbed.  EVER.

So the people who aren't so scared of the world they feel the need to be armed at all times are the pussies?

It's sad to me that there are people who sit in restaurants and worry that it may get robbed.

The thought has never occurred to me once in 42 years.

I've also never been in a situation where deadly force was neccessary to protect my life, or the lives of those around me.

Your right.. It's still relatively safe out there.

Chances are, you can go your whole life without ever needing to protect your life... but I suspect if it ever did come to that.. you will just curl into a ball in the corner and piddle yourself waiting for the cops to show up.

Another bad assumption. I have anger-management isssues, I'm 6' and weigh over 220. I'm the last person who would cower when someone is being an asshole. I'm more likely to be shot my some coward who feels threatened by me when I lose my temper and start getting up in their face.

/sad but true internet tough guy



I find it amusing you admit you want other people disarmed so you can be safer when you lose your temper with people who are physically inferior to you.

And some people really don't get why other people choose to carry concealed...
 
2013-04-05 03:23:55 PM

Civil_War2_Time: Flakeloaf

Canada - Almost all white


Vancouver and Toronto are nearly 40% visible minorities.
 
2013-04-05 03:25:10 PM

Dimensio: Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.

Presumably people would be innoculated to the sight of guns within a month or two of the hypothetical open carry only ordinance and stop calling the police, but a couple of the thugs getting their lunch breaks ruined by panicked grannies is hardly something to trouble my sleep.

Perhaps advocates of requiring concealed weapons permit holders to make the public aware of the presence of a firearm upon their person could cite actual data justifying a need for such notice.


"Need"? I certainly haven't posited that it would save lives or any such thing. Only that people have a right to know when other people are carrying deadly weapons.
 
2013-04-05 03:29:37 PM

Ned Stark: Only that people have a right to know when other people are carrying deadly weapons.


Perhaps you could point out where this right is listed in our constitution.
 
2013-04-05 03:29:59 PM

Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.

Presumably people would be innoculated to the sight of guns within a month or two of the hypothetical open carry only ordinance and stop calling the police, but a couple of the thugs getting their lunch breaks ruined by panicked grannies is hardly something to trouble my sleep.

Perhaps advocates of requiring concealed weapons permit holders to make the public aware of the presence of a firearm upon their person could cite actual data justifying a need for such notice.

"Need"? I certainly haven't posited that it would save lives or any such thing. Only that people have a right to know when other people are carrying deadly weapons.


Then you should be able to identify a legal document wherein such a right is enumerated and protected. Please do so.
 
2013-04-05 03:32:07 PM

Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: Dimensio: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

You may wish to advocate your position to Louisville police officers, who have informed me that they prefer citizens to carry concealed so that they are not bothered by reports of armed individuals from frightened observers.

Presumably people would be innoculated to the sight of guns within a month or two of the hypothetical open carry only ordinance and stop calling the police, but a couple of the thugs getting their lunch breaks ruined by panicked grannies is hardly something to trouble my sleep.

Perhaps advocates of requiring concealed weapons permit holders to make the public aware of the presence of a firearm upon their person could cite actual data justifying a need for such notice.

"Need"? I certainly haven't posited that it would save lives or any such thing. Only that people have a right to know when other people are carrying deadly weapons.


Do people have the right to know if I'm carrying the flu?  I mean, I could kill a restaurant from the door.  Should I have to wear an armband or something?

Just curious how much personal information should be shared in the interests of public unease.
 
2013-04-05 03:34:24 PM

ha-ha-guy: Ah yeah, open carry, so the impulse criminal knows all he has to do is bash you in the head with a rock and suddenly he has a gun.


Surely you wouldn't make a statement like this without being able to back it up with actual examples of it happening.

Surely.
 
2013-04-05 03:40:29 PM

knbwhite: B) Probability suggests that there weren't at least a half-dozen guns in the Aurora movie theater when James Holmes started shooting. Nobody pulled one. Making me think that, even among gun carriers, "get the fark out of here" is the natural response to such a situation, not "big damned hero".

That's an interesting point about the Aurora theater. I wonder if any of the patrons did have a gun, but chose not to use it due to the confusion of the situation. Then again, perhaps no gun owners were of the mind that they wanted to go see a midnight premier of a batman movie.


It's also a possibility that since the folks running the theater have made it known that they don't want guns there, the folks who carry decided to take their business elsewhere. That's what I did.
 
2013-04-05 03:41:43 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: ha-ha-guy: Ah yeah, open carry, so the impulse criminal knows all he has to do is bash you in the head with a rock and suddenly he has a gun.

Surely you wouldn't make a statement like this without being able to back it up with actual examples of it happening.

Surely.


Just like people telling me that I would be first to be shot by a robber during a robbery because I had a concealed weapon. Robbers are now equipped with x-ray vision I guess, either that or you are doing it wrong.

Stats and examples, whar they?
 
2013-04-05 03:44:14 PM

umad: Ned Stark: Only that people have a right to know when other people are carrying deadly weapons.

Perhaps you could point out where this right is listed in our constitution.


Its not there, obviously. But we've been over the constitutions woefully inadequacy and ineffectiveness before. I could perhaps make a case for the right being implied by a tortured reading of the third amendment. Would be nifty to be the first court case to cite it.
 
2013-04-05 03:44:54 PM
This place is sure to be an oasis in the criminal hotbed of Leesburg

2010 Crime (Actual Data)* Incidents
Aggravated Assault 34
Arson 3
Burglary 42
Forcible Rape 13
Larceny and Theft 679
Motor Vehicle Theft 32
Murder and Manslaughter 0
Robbery 10

Crime Rate (Total Incidents) 827
Property Crime 753
Violent Crime
 
2013-04-05 03:53:33 PM

Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.


So instead you want to out a large group of people, a group statistically proven to be less dangerous than the average person because... you're afraid? Tell me, did you also support that newspaper that made a map of every CCW holder in that one NY district?

Hell, if we're going to arbitrarily violate others rights to privacy I think everyone should have to submit their harddrives to their employers, the government, anyone that asks, ect, ect, just to prove you aren't a terrorist and or muslim pedophile. Think of the children!
 
2013-04-05 03:58:53 PM

GUTSU: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

So instead you want to out a large group of people, a group statistically proven to be less dangerous than the average person because... you're afraid? Tell me, did you also support that newspaper that made a map of every CCW holder in that one NY district?

Hell, if we're going to arbitrarily violate others rights to privacy I think everyone should have to submit their harddrives to their employers, the government, anyone that asks, ect, ect, just to prove you aren't a terrorist and or muslim pedophile. Think of the children!


I think everyone should be fitted with a government-issued GPS ankle monitor. Just think of all the crime we could stop!
 
2013-04-05 03:59:01 PM

wejash: A hero with a concealed carry sidearm opened fire last yr to protect patrons at Cracker Barrel here. Well he tried to shoot his cousin for pissing him off but I'm confident the offensive look or talk was definitely dangerous enough to justify 5-6 rounds fired off.

Fortunately the gun was in the hands of a law-abiding and responsible citizen. Well, right up to the moment he wasn't...and such an exciting moment for all concerned. The NRA just bringing some random excitement to us all. You're welcome.



Right, because it's a good idea to judge all 80 million gun owners based upon the findings in a single instance.


Good show!!!
 
2013-04-05 04:00:10 PM
Thought of this for some reason.....sorry...

minimalchanges.com
 
2013-04-05 04:00:21 PM

master_dman: give me doughnuts: HotWingConspiracy: master_dman: HotWingConspiracy: master_dman: All you scared whiny pussies can just stay away from this place.
I'm guessing this place won't be robbed.  EVER.

Doesn't mean you won't get shot there.

Yep.  Your right.  I'm sure we'll be reading a story about someone getting shot there by next Wednesday.

//sarcasm.

Pretty much all you got.

I enjoyed the article about the responsible gun owner that offed his baby while trying to holster his gun. So many isolated incidents, good thing they're isolated.

Between 800 and 1000 gun-shot deaths per year are classed as accidental. If they were all to the person who was clumsily or negligently handling the weapon, I would say this is a good thing (Darwin Award candidates), but all too often somebody else catches the bullet.

citation needed.


According to the CDC, there were 606 deaths due to "accidental discharge of firearms" in 2010. It seems my estimates were a bit too high.
 
2013-04-05 04:00:57 PM

Trilithon: Jument: America: still crazy about guns, in every sense of the word.

Got to have hobbies man!


Do crosswords or fly kites, then?
 
2013-04-05 04:05:25 PM

BgJonson79: xalres: BgJonson79: xalres: scarmig: xalres: I often wonder what it's like to go through life so pants-pissingly paranoid of the outside world that you feel the need to be armed everywhere at all times just in case!!!! It sounds exhausting.

You ever wear a seat belt, "just in case"?

Must be exhausting to be so pants-pissingly scared of other drivers.

No I wear one because a) it's the law and b) I don't want to go flying through my windshield should I end up rear ending someone.

I think if you're going to make a seat belt to gun analogy you'd be better off comparing them to the safety. Is it more responsible to walk around with the safety on or off? Does keeping the safety on while you're not ready to shoot something make you paranoid?

You're required to wear a seat belt in your state?  We don't even have helmet laws, sales or income tax.

Yeah. It's a ticketable offense. As is talking/texting on a cell phone.

They just added "distracting driving" to our list on Jan 1.


I'm kinda torn when it comes to seatbelt and helmet laws as I tend to be pretty laissez faire when it comes to personal choice in things that don't effect others. If you're in that much of a hurry to die be my guest. But I can totally get behind the cellphone and texting laws. I've seen too many swerving, inattentive, short-stopping and over all drunk looking drivers that turned out to have their eyes buried in a phone screen when I went to pass them. At that point you're putting others at risk. Sad that we have to use the law to tell people not to be farking retards when piloting a few tons of steel at 70+ mph.
 
2013-04-05 04:06:22 PM

lostcat: GUTSU: lostcat: GUTSU: dudicon: master_dman: All you scared whiny pussies can just stay away from this place.
I'm guessing this place won't be robbed.  EVER.

So the people who aren't so scared of the world they feel the need to be armed at all times are the pussies?

Wanting to be able to defend yourself is now being equated with being a pussy? You sure are grasping at straws, aren't you?

I think he's saying that because you apparently live in fear of everyone around you every moment of your life, you are a bit of a coward.

That's just my interpretation.

If he thinks people with guns live in constant fear, he's wrong. I use guns all the time and I'm not in constant fear I don't even think about my gun.
Why you people believe gun owners are paranoid schizophrenic's is beyond me, but I'm going to guess it's because you don't actually know any.

I've gone shooting with my friends who own guns.

I enjoy it.

But they don't feel the need to carry their guns around with them any time they leave the house.

That's called a "security blanket." Feeling safe only when you have something in your possession, and not feeling safe when you don't have it. Not that all people who want to carry have this issue, but reading these threads, I certainly have come across people who "feel safer" when they have their gun on them.

It would never occur to me that carrying a gun would make me feel safer. I feel pretty safe without one. I don't feel like I need weapons to go through life. I tend to talk to people and difuse any potentially bad situation. Maybe some people don't have that ability, so they feel they need a gun.

What I do say is that to call me a "pussy" because I don't feel the need to carry a deadly weapon around in public in order to feel safe is just backasswards.


Some people have careers or geographically just need to deal with a less than savory element of society. Not having the option to arm oneself would be imprudent. I'm glad you feel safe where you live, but where you live isn't the rest of the United States.
 
2013-04-05 04:08:51 PM

violentsalvation: Open carry in public for no reason is retarded. Attention whores.


Open carry in public brings gun ownership out of the closet.   I can't say how many people I"ve had either thing it's great that I do it, or people that were interested but didn't know it was legal, or other people who were surprised that I was a gun owner.   I'm a respectable, regular guy.  People I have known and didn't know I carried got to see that respectable and regular people carry.

Open carry is a GOOD thing.  Carrying isn't some deep dark secret to be hidden and never talked about.  YEs I understand some people want their concealed piece to go unknown, but the whole practice of carrying (there's tens of millions of concealed permit holders) needs to come out into the open.


CARRY ON!!!
 
2013-04-05 04:09:30 PM

GUTSU: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

So instead you want to out a large group of people, a group statistically proven to be less dangerous than the average person because... you're afraid? Tell me, did you also support that newspaper that made a map of every CCW holder in that one NY district?

Hell, if we're going to arbitrarily violate others rights to privacy I think everyone should have to submit their harddrives to their employers, the government, anyone that asks, ect, ect, just to prove you aren't a terrorist and or muslim pedophile. Think of the children!


You don't have an expectation of privacy on public streets and byways.
 
2013-04-05 04:09:35 PM

xalres: But I can totally get behind the cellphone and texting laws.


I can't. I don't think we went about them the right way. We shouldn't ban texting and driving. We should ban vehicles that make texting and driving possible. Who really needs an automatic transmission anyway? It even has the word "automatic" in it, so they are only good for doing evil.
 
2013-04-05 04:10:01 PM

Fark France: Canada allows citizens to own guns in their home; they actually are able to import some cooler guns than here in America. Every home in Sweden has a gun. Every one. The Finns can own guns as well. If there was anywhere I would want a gun, it would be the UK. They have an enormous violent crime problem. Japan's culture is so homogenous and different than anywhere else that it's really not even worth mentioning. The odds of committing suicide are much higher than being mugged IIRC.


And despite their very strict firearms laws, Japan still has a suicide rate three times that of the US with its ease of access to guns.
 
2013-04-05 04:11:28 PM

super_grass: Fart gets trollbait articles about restaurants and other establishments that allow firearms on premise all the time and the gun nuts goes their nutty routine every time.

Maybe Fark should meet them half way and start linking to stories about the dozens of shooting that must happen a day in these places to shut them up?


Like these?
http://www.reddit.com/r/dgu
 
2013-04-05 04:11:30 PM

Allen. The end.: My problem is this: the nature of the discussion of open carry is flawed. [...] The second point is that while 'Joe' has a gun, I do not. This changes the nature of the initial relationship between he and I, whether we are in the same restaurant or church, or just on the same sidewalk. His capacity to inflict harm is MUCH greater than mine, and his possession and presentation of a weapon changes the dynamic of any relationship we could have.


So you only hang out with people who are essentially your size and with a similar fighting skill?  That's...interesting.
 
2013-04-05 04:14:09 PM

Ned Stark: But do the rest of us not have a right to know when we are dealing with someone carrying a deadly weapon?


Not really, no.  Treat everyone as if they could be armed and kill you if you're a total asshole and you'll find that people treat you better, too...especially potential muggers.
 
2013-04-05 04:14:58 PM

xalres: BgJonson79: xalres: BgJonson79: xalres: scarmig: xalres: I often wonder what it's like to go through life so pants-pissingly paranoid of the outside world that you feel the need to be armed everywhere at all times just in case!!!! It sounds exhausting.

You ever wear a seat belt, "just in case"?

Must be exhausting to be so pants-pissingly scared of other drivers.

No I wear one because a) it's the law and b) I don't want to go flying through my windshield should I end up rear ending someone.

I think if you're going to make a seat belt to gun analogy you'd be better off comparing them to the safety. Is it more responsible to walk around with the safety on or off? Does keeping the safety on while you're not ready to shoot something make you paranoid?

You're required to wear a seat belt in your state?  We don't even have helmet laws, sales or income tax.

Yeah. It's a ticketable offense. As is talking/texting on a cell phone.

They just added "distracting driving" to our list on Jan 1.

I'm kinda torn when it comes to seatbelt and helmet laws as I tend to be pretty laissez faire when it comes to personal choice in things that don't effect others. If you're in that much of a hurry to die be my guest. But I can totally get behind the cellphone and texting laws. I've seen too many swerving, inattentive, short-stopping and over all drunk looking drivers that turned out to have their eyes buried in a phone screen when I went to pass them. At that point you're putting others at risk. Sad that we have to use the law to tell people not to be farking retards when piloting a few tons of steel at 70+ mph.


I tend to be in the same boat.  Don't protect me from me, but to protect me from others, without infringing on both of our rights.
 
2013-04-05 04:15:21 PM
I don't see what the big deal is with this restaurant and encouraging open carry.  I've been to places like this before.  I don't necessarily feel safer (than any other time) but I don't feel like I'm in any danger of being shot over the last french fry, either.  I guess I just don't really think about it either way.

I have always been intrigued by those who are against open carry, specifically.  It's ok to if you want to be armed, I just don't want to know?
 
2013-04-05 04:16:02 PM

Ned Stark: GUTSU: Ned Stark: They should be able to know because you are able to end their life in a matter of seconds from dozens of yards away. Its a petty bi shift from the default assumption of being able to kids hurt them from one armlength away.

So instead you want to out a large group of people, a group statistically proven to be less dangerous than the average person because... you're afraid? Tell me, did you also support that newspaper that made a map of every CCW holder in that one NY district?

Hell, if we're going to arbitrarily violate others rights to privacy I think everyone should have to submit their harddrives to their employers, the government, anyone that asks, ect, ect, just to prove you aren't a terrorist and or muslim pedophile. Think of the children!

You don't have an expectation of privacy on public streets and byways.


So you believe that the police can grab anyone on the street and give them cavity searches?
 
2013-04-05 04:19:14 PM
Any VA CCW holders here know how you can legally inform your waiter that you are carrying? Just showing the gun is out in most jurisdictions (you have a license to "carry concealed", not "carry usually concealed"). Do you just show your CCW permit? Do you ask him if he feels lucky? Do you, punk?

/Only time I felt threatened in Leesburg was while canvasing for Obama
//Looked in mirror, saw that the US needed big ol' white guys to knock on VA doors
///no gun needed
 
2013-04-05 04:22:44 PM

Ned Stark: You don't have an expectation of privacy on public streets and byways.


Sure you do, it's just diminished. Try taking some upskirt pics sometime if you don't believe me. Be sure to let me know how far your "no expectation of privacy" argument gets you.
 
2013-04-05 04:25:26 PM

yet_another_wumpus: Any VA CCW holders here know how you can legally inform your waiter that you are carrying? Just showing the gun is out in most jurisdictions (you have a license to "carry concealed", not "carry usually concealed"). Do you just show your CCW permit? Do you ask him if he feels lucky? Do you, punk?

/Only time I felt threatened in Leesburg was while canvasing for Obama
//Looked in mirror, saw that the US needed big ol' white guys to knock on VA doors
///no gun needed


Virgina does not restrict the openly displayed carrying of firearms. Before Virginia recently removed a prohibition upon carrying concealed firearms in any establishment where alcohol was served for consumption upon the premises (a repeal which, for some unusual reason, has not resulted in a substantial increase in shootings at bars and taverns), armed patrons would typically alter their clothing to openly display their firearm so that they would not be in violation of the law when inside a restaurant.

To my knowledge, concealed weapons permit holders are not prohibited by law from simply informing restaurant workers of their permit status, though I am unaware of any rational reason for a permitted patrons to divulge such information to a restaurant worker.
 
2013-04-05 04:31:45 PM

JoanHaus: Me, personally, I see a guy like that, with a gun, and I am anything BUT intimidated. One seriously hard slap in the face is all it's gonna take, to get that gun.

content8.flixster.com
Damn right, you're scared. I can see that in your eyes.
Go ahead, skin it! Skin that smoke wagon and see what happens.
I'm gettin' tired of your gas. Now jerk that pistol and go to work.
I said throw down, boy.
You gonna do somethin', or just stand there and bleed?
No? I didn't think so.
 
2013-04-05 04:38:10 PM

umad: xalres: But I can totally get behind the cellphone and texting laws.

I can't. I don't think we went about them the right way. We shouldn't ban texting and driving. We should ban vehicles that make texting and driving possible. Who really needs an automatic transmission anyway? It even has the word "automatic" in it, so they are only good for doing evil.


I know those are words in the English language but the way you've arranged them has left me wondering just what the holy hell you're trying to convey.

erm...I mean...wat?
 
2013-04-05 04:38:26 PM

KrustyKitten: I have always been intrigued by those who are against open carry, specifically. It's ok to if you want to be armed, I just don't want to know?


Here's why I'm against open carry specifically: If a person is carrying a concealed weapon they have to have a CCW permit. Which means that they were serious enough about carrying a firearm that they went through all the proper procedures and a basic level of training in order to carry one. Or at the least they were willing to pay the fee. Open carry on the other hand, can be done by any yahoo with a gun. It comes across as "Hey look at me, I've got a gun". They are like the guy that walks into a bar and tells everyone they know karate instead of just being the quietly competent guy at the bar minding his business. People who open carry are looking for a confrontation whether it comes from a criminal or an anti-gun person. One way or another, open carry people are actively seeking confrontation and people with that kind of mind set don't need to be carrying a gun

Now, that's just my opinion and I've been known to be wrong before.
 
2013-04-05 04:40:22 PM

Flakeloaf: Civil_War2_Time: Flakeloaf

Pity such dinosaurs as Japan, Canada, the UK, France, Poland, Finland, India, Sweden, New Zealand, Switzerland...

Yep, those "old dinosaurs," whose populations have little white trash, and almost no blacks or Hispanics (our prison make-up demographic), are surely safer than we are in the US.

Japan - Almost all Japanese
Canada - Almost all white
UK - Mostly white
France - Mostly white
Poland - Almost all white
Finland - Almost all white
India - Almost all Indian
Sweden - Almost all white
NZ - Almost all white
Switzerland - Almost all white

See a pattern here? All of the countries with the lowest violent crime rates never substantially integrated like the U.S. did.

But of course you just pulled that from Wiki, without ever putting any thought into the reasons why they have such low violent crime rates in those countries. Basically, "old dinosaur" means "racist country" with respect to your comment.

So what you're saying is that you need to carry guns because you're afraid of negroes, that everyone with pale skin is culturally and ideologically identical, and that you know nothing about Indian, Canadian or French demographics.


Demographics do not lie. Study the health and welfare and violent crime rates of countries that are white, black, oriental, etc. and get back to us. Somalia or Norway? Rwanda or Sweden? Chicago or Burlington, VT?
 
2013-04-05 04:43:53 PM
Having to put your holster outside your shirt: just like a random full cavity search.
 
2013-04-05 04:46:10 PM
Crosswhite already has seen some backlash from his customers. One couple told him, after seeing a sign posted in the restaurant about Open Carry Wednesdays, they would not be eating at his establishment again. Crosswhite paid for their meal.
"This couple got on my case," he said. "Are they going to criticize me for my rights?" After being asked why he decided to give the couple their meal for free, he said, "I don't need their money."

So, free meals if you don´t have a gun and biatch about it?
 
2013-04-05 04:49:05 PM
If I was to look over and see a table of people with exposed guns sitting at a table in a restaurant you know what the first thing that would pop into my mind

Table full of cops
 
2013-04-05 04:52:52 PM

Ned Stark: Having to put your holster outside your shirt: just like a random full cavity search.


You didn't answer my question. You said "You don't have an expectation of privacy on public streets and byways." Does this mean that the police could search you, or anyone? Or does it only apply to things that you're afraid of?
 
2013-04-05 04:56:24 PM
Funny how you never hear about biker gangs accidentally shooting each other.
maybe they all have certificates and training.
 
2013-04-05 04:57:15 PM

xalres: scarmig: xalres: I often wonder what it's like to go through life so pants-pissingly paranoid of the outside world that you feel the need to be armed everywhere at all times just in case!!!! It sounds exhausting.

You ever wear a seat belt, "just in case"?

Must be exhausting to be so pants-pissingly scared of other drivers.

No I wear one because a) it's the law and b) I don't want to go flying through my windshield should I end up rear ending someone.

I think if you're going to make a seat belt to gun analogy you'd be better off comparing them to the safety. Is it more responsible to walk around with the safety on or off? Does keeping the safety on while you're not ready to shoot something make you paranoid?


The pistol I carry...
i819.photobucket.com
...doesn't have a safety.  But then again, I don't carry it charged either.  Loaded, not charged.

I carry like that because I don't expect (nor desire) a wild west shootout.  If I have enough time to draw from my holster in the gawdawful event that I need to...I'll go ahead and take the extra second or two to rack the slide.

Most people who carry do so because:
 - the weapon doesn't scare us
 - we carry it responsibly enough that 99.9999% of the time, those around us have no idea
 - we regard it in the same way as everyone regards health or fire insurance (have it and hope not to use it but realize life would suck hard if we needed it but didn't have it)

Nobody is forcing anybody to carry or own a firearm.  There are two towns near where I live that have a law on the books that says each household must have a gun but they're not enforced.  But just as nobody is compelled to own one, it's equally piss poor to want to deny others the right to lawfully own one.

You want to address gun violence in this country...start with the rights the mentally unstable have to refuse treatment and yet still be allowed to roam free in public.  They're the ones committing the massacres.  If you're going to curtail peoples' rights, how about start with the ones who are abusing them?
 
Displayed 50 of 280 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report