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.

(MLive.com)   Proponents of Michigan's new open-carry gun law say they're loving their new sense of freedom, and they just wish the cops would remember that open carry is now legal and not to stage high-risk takedowns every time there's a gun call   (mlive.com) divider line 509
    More: Followup, Grand Rapids Press, gun laws  
•       •       •

2057 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jan 2014 at 3:42 PM (40 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



509 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-01-14 02:53:03 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-01-14 02:55:48 PM  
Call the police if someone open-carries a gun into a public building: That's the advice the Ottawa County Sheriff's Office is giving to Hudsonville city staff during trainings this month

I don't carry normally, but for this asshole, I would make an exception.  In fact I'd show up every damn day.
 
2014-01-14 03:15:50 PM  
what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?
 
2014-01-14 03:16:58 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Call the police if someone open-carries a gun into a public building: That's the advice the Ottawa County Sheriff's Office is giving to Hudsonville city staff during trainings this month

I don't carry normally, but for this asshole, I would make an exception.  In fact I'd show up every damn day.


was thinking this
wtf

so now that it is LEGAL, we want people TO PANIC !!!
they should call 911 whenever they see a cop carrying a gun too !!!
SWEET


is michigan a stand your ground state?
if you feel that your life is in danger can you just go blazing away??
 
2014-01-14 03:18:30 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


yes

on the OTHER HAND, I think that all carry should be open.
no more concealed carry.

at least that way, you have a clue who is packing and who isnt.

I cant wait to see the no gun signs in chicago stores/restaurants , now that concealed carry is permitted.
 
2014-01-14 03:21:30 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Many state laws used to make it illegal to carry concealed, so open carry was the only legal way to carry.  It was thought that carrying concealed showed some sort of ill-intent, because you were doing it on the sly.  So you must be up to no good.

That's flipped, of course:  Now most states have some form of concealed carry and they denigrate open carry, because, what?  It shocks the sensibilities of soccer moms?

"Sure, you can carry a gun, just don't let us see it, because Tammy gets the vapors from seeing a holstered 1911".
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-14 03:21:37 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


So you can let everyone know that you are a real he-man despite appearances.
 
2014-01-14 03:32:37 PM  

dittybopper: That's flipped, of course: Now most states have some form of concealed carry and they denigrate open carry, because, what? It shocks the sensibilities of soccer moms?


Or you can come to California where open carry is essentially illegal, and outside one or two counties, it is impossible to get a CCW.
 
2014-01-14 03:35:36 PM  
i970.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-14 03:40:39 PM  
99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."
 
2014-01-14 03:43:08 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Childish attention seeking mechanism for people with serious emotional development issues.

There are exceptions but a smart Bayesian would start here and look for disproof.
 
2014-01-14 03:46:04 PM  

JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."


And the sad thing is, the difference should be completely irrelevant to us gun control advocates.  The not-entirely-justified assumption of them not shooting people for no reason belies both activities.  Whether you see it or not, it can still be used to kill someone without a thought.
 
2014-01-14 03:46:22 PM  
Wait what?

Open Carry has been legal in Michigan for years. My brother's an open carry supporter.
 
2014-01-14 03:48:06 PM  
Well, at least Robocop won't have to use that ridiculous leg holster while he's walking around waiting to shoot people.
 
2014-01-14 03:48:58 PM  
Why stop there?  Let's institute "Open Aiming" laws so anyone can point their gun directly at anyone they choose at any time.

And of course, coupled with Free Speech laws that means you could scream into their face while you're doing it, too.

I mean, as long as nobody is actually pulling a trigger, what's the big deal?
 
2014-01-14 03:49:30 PM  
The secret to avoiding lawsuits from open carry proponents is to make sure the lawsuits are brought by their next of kin.
 
2014-01-14 03:49:45 PM  
With open carry, why do we even need the police anymore? Michigan will turn into a crime-free utopia!
 
2014-01-14 03:50:12 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


yes
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-01-14 03:50:38 PM  

JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."


Not only that but people know you are carrying.  If you are a neighborhood watchman they know to run.
 
2014-01-14 03:51:07 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


So the robbers know to shoot you before taking your wallet.
 
2014-01-14 03:51:10 PM  

UncomfortableSilence: Well, at least Robocop won't have to use that ridiculous leg holster while he's walking around waiting to shoot people.


Hey, man, if I'm a cyberpunk character, I'm going to use cool gadgets for every mundane task.

Drinking Water? Cyber straw with moisture-seeking electrodes.
Driving?  Forget a steering wheel, remote mental steering
Being a misogynistic pig?  Don't beat your wife, join reddit
 
2014-01-14 03:52:16 PM  

ikanreed: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

And the sad thing is, the difference should be completely irrelevant to us gun control advocates.  The not-entirely-justified assumption of them not shooting people for no reason belies both activities.  Whether you see it or not, it can still be used to kill someone without a thought.


To add on; there's also a big difference between open carry of a pistol and of a rifle/shotgun.  If I see someone walking with a holstered pistol/revolver, I'm not paying him much mind.  I see a guy walking through the grocery store parking lot with a long gun, I'm calling the police.
 
2014-01-14 03:53:15 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.
 
2014-01-14 03:53:28 PM  

Car_Ramrod: With open carry, why do we even need the police anymore? Michigan will turn into a crime-free utopia!


Well, that's the thing about coppers. The more coppers ya have, the more crimes seem to be done.
 
2014-01-14 03:53:30 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


From a tactical standpoint, it makes a lot more sense. It's more comfortable, it has an easier draw, and in an actual threatening situation, allows you to present your weapon to de-escalate without violating the law.

From a realistic (ie, not in the diseased power fantasies of small-dicked minds) standpoint, all it does is make everyone afraid of you and put your weapon in easy reach of a guy that wants it more than you.

Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.
 
2014-01-14 03:53:41 PM  
Yeah seasoning authoritarianism doesn't exactly go with Freedom Fries.  You'd think, of all groups, conservatives would understand this but they seem completely blind to it.  Like, are your new hyper-militarized police forces going to give you a wink and a nod when you're carrying an AR15 in a school zone because they somehow can discern that you're not one of those people?
 
2014-01-14 03:54:40 PM  
We had German friends visit us in Phoenix a decade ago, and when going out for lunch we pulled up at a stoplight behind a guy on a crotchrocket with a holstered gun on each hip (because that's the only way you were able to carry). The Germans got all excited "OOH OOH A COWBOY!" and then I got to explain that no, it was just some idiot, because it's really hot there and it boils their already retarded brains, much like an egg.

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-01-14 03:54:42 PM  
Open carry has always been legal in Michigan, it's just more popular with the attention whores now.
 
2014-01-14 03:55:10 PM  
Open carry is great.  My gut is no longer the first thing people notice about my waist.
 
2014-01-14 03:56:21 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: ikanreed: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

And the sad thing is, the difference should be completely irrelevant to us gun control advocates.  The not-entirely-justified assumption of them not shooting people for no reason belies both activities.  Whether you see it or not, it can still be used to kill someone without a thought.

To add on; there's also a big difference between open carry of a pistol and of a rifle/shotgun.  If I see someone walking with a holstered pistol/revolver, I'm not paying him much mind.  I see a guy walking through the grocery store parking lot with a long gun, I'm calling the police.


I'm in a rural area so when I see a guy walking through a parking lot with a rifle I'm like oh it's hunting season.
 
2014-01-14 03:56:49 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Open carry is great.  My gut is no longer the first thing people notice about my waist.


Try this one simple trick?
 
2014-01-14 03:56:59 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Yes, the police indeed open carry.
 
2014-01-14 03:57:43 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Open carry is great.  My gut is no longer the first thing people notice about my waist.


I'm so fat that if I open carried with a belt holster it would technically be concealed carry.
 
2014-01-14 04:01:49 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


cowboy cosplay

yeeee haw, gonna shoot me a minority and save me a damsel
 
2014-01-14 04:02:17 PM  
I would have been happier if they just got rid of the stupid gun-free zone law.
 
2014-01-14 04:02:20 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Open carry is great.  My gut is no longer the first thing people notice about my waist.


Unlikely.

annarborchronicle.com

/watch out...
 
2014-01-14 04:02:25 PM  
The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.
 
2014-01-14 04:02:37 PM  
Because if anyone understands that even the people with the most training and experience can still become colossal idiots when you put a gun on their hip, it's law enforcement.
 
2014-01-14 04:04:33 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Rapmaster2000: Open carry is great.  My gut is no longer the first thing people notice about my waist.

Unlikely.



/watch out...


Jesus fark, even his hair is scared of him.
 
2014-01-14 04:05:38 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

From a tactical standpoint, it makes a lot more sense. It's more comfortable, it has an easier draw, and in an actual threatening situation, allows you to present your weapon to de-escalate without violating the law.

From a realistic (ie, not in the diseased power fantasies of small-dicked minds) standpoint, all it does is make everyone afraid of you and put your weapon in easy reach of a guy that wants it more than you.

Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.


this is the best explanation i have yet heard. thanks.
 
2014-01-14 04:06:46 PM  
was were
 
2014-01-14 04:07:27 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


See here, we have great first-hand evidence of the teenage power fantasy being the driving mentality.    A lot of people have asked the question, and there's your anwer.  "I think it gives me power over others" is basically it.
 
2014-01-14 04:07:42 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.


one of the saddest things i've ever read on the internet
 
2014-01-14 04:08:07 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


So your intention is to make those around you uncomfortable?
 
2014-01-14 04:08:19 PM  
That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?
 
2014-01-14 04:09:41 PM  
Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.
 
2014-01-14 04:09:49 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


It's to make yourself a priority target for anyone carrying concealed illegally.

Really it's to show off mostly.
 
2014-01-14 04:10:36 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


Eh, 8 and a half inches isn't that big of a gun.
 
2014-01-14 04:10:42 PM  

ShawnDoc: Or you can come to California where open carry is essentially illegal, and outside one or two counties, it is impossible to get a CCW.


Exactly what problem is California trying to solve by denying CCW apps?  Its not making you any safer.

/now lives in California
//the snowflakes and their idiots they elect here perplex me at times
 
2014-01-14 04:11:11 PM  

Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.


but what about bears, snakes, coloreds and outspoken Liberals?
 
2014-01-14 04:11:37 PM  

FlashHarry: Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.

this is the best explanation i have yet heard. thanks.


except the part about the constant stream of stories about police shooting bystanders and unarmed "threats", sure.
 
2014-01-14 04:12:21 PM  

meat0918: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's to make yourself a priority target for anyone carrying concealed illegally.

Really it's to show off mostly.


I don't know what they're showing off, exactly.  Is it like the douchebags who have their cellphones clipped to their belt?

"Look at me and the cool things I can hang from my pants!  I'm special!"
 
2014-01-14 04:12:30 PM  
The 2nd Amendment is a Pandora's Box that can't be closed. Guns will be out there and will be relatively easily to acquire whether legally or illegally. It doesn't matter what kind of gun control legislation we try to push through, nothing is going to have any affect on an individual's ability to grab a firearm and use it to commit a crime.

Open Carry is either a way to warn people nearby that you're an asshole, or you aren't a potential victim. Not just for a crime, but for any kind of harassment at all. People may be less interested in asking you for money, asking you to buy this or buy that. Asking you to do this favor or that favor for them. If they see a gun on you, you're less likely to be bothered by other assholes.

The problem with Open Carry is the police can still find ways to nail you. You can get charged for 'inciting panic' by openly carrying a firearm on you or they'll just harass you and tell you that you should get whatever it is you're doing done and then go home (politely of course). But the message is pretty clear that people around don't like you carrying a pistol around and they want you to leave.

If you live alone and have no family or friends, whether you're female or male -- you can sometimes feel as if you are just a target for the rest of the world. Maybe you feel like you give off a sense of weakness that others are attracted to. People will try to solicit you products or services on the street, to get you to do this or do that.

If you're all alone in the world, sometimes the only way to drive the point home to the rest of the people around you is that even if you're only one person and you give off a sense of weakness, you do have a tool that can inflict lethal force if you are given reason to use it. And if you want to simply be left alone, open carry is a good way to do it. Whether people think you have a small dick, are a Teatard, have insecurity issues (and maybe you do), or just want to be an asshole -- what does it matter? The idea is to get people to simply leave you alone, so who cares what they think.
 
2014-01-14 04:13:17 PM  

Jackson Herring: EdNortonsTwin: because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

one of the saddest things i've ever read on the internet


But that's actually what they think. Panty waisted liebruls tremble in fear at the mere sight of a firearm.
 
2014-01-14 04:13:25 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Yes.
 
2014-01-14 04:13:31 PM  

mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?


Mr "going to knock over the quickymart" is not going to open cary so anyone that is not wearing a gun should be a suspect.
 
2014-01-14 04:14:36 PM  

mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?


I have been told in these threads you can "tell" if someone is being aggressive.

Which then I ask is it ok to shoot people who have their guns out (which they don't think you can) and if they already have their gun out and aimed at you isn't it too late for you to pull out your gun? - Where I am explained that somehow good guys are faster than bad guys and can pull out their gun and fire.

(then I am normally just called names and told I have no idea what I am talking about, though the never can explain it themselves)

I find it interesting the same people who seem to be against heavy "handed police tactics" don't have a problem with a any US citizen to be able to play judge, jury and executioner.
 
2014-01-14 04:15:42 PM  

MFAWG: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.


If you can't take some insults without pulling out your piece, you deserve the disrespect.
 
2014-01-14 04:16:00 PM  

Headso: Satanic_Hamster: ikanreed: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

And the sad thing is, the difference should be completely irrelevant to us gun control advocates.  The not-entirely-justified assumption of them not shooting people for no reason belies both activities.  Whether you see it or not, it can still be used to kill someone without a thought.

To add on; there's also a big difference between open carry of a pistol and of a rifle/shotgun.  If I see someone walking with a holstered pistol/revolver, I'm not paying him much mind.  I see a guy walking through the grocery store parking lot with a long gun, I'm calling the police.

I'm in a rural area so when I see a guy walking through a parking lot with a rifle I'm like oh it's hunting season.


I see that all the time too. These people aren't the ones that worry me. It's the moron who's trying to make a political statement by carrying his AR-15 into the Starbucks just BEGGING for someone to say something so he can go off.
 
2014-01-14 04:16:33 PM  
I LIKES TAH WAVE MY .357 AROUN' AN POINT AT THE LITTLE KIDS CUZ FLAGS CRYING EAGLES AND JAY-ZUSS!!!
 
2014-01-14 04:17:05 PM  

Saiga410: mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?

Mr "going to knock over the quickymart" is not going to open cary so anyone that is not wearing a gun should be a suspect.


Why not? That would actually be the smart way to do it.
 
2014-01-14 04:17:14 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Call the police if someone open-carries a gun into a public building: That's the advice the Ottawa County Sheriff's Office is giving to Hudsonville city staff during trainings this month

I don't carry normally, but for this asshole, I would make an exception.  In fact I'd show up every damn day.


Let us know what the floor tastes like.
 
2014-01-14 04:17:54 PM  
I don't care what the law is; whenever you take a stroll in public with a gun on your hip, people are going to notice, and some of them are going to freak out.  They're going to call the cops.  And the cops are going to come.  When they get there, they are going to talk to you.  How that conversation goes depends a LOT on your attitude.  If the cop politely asks you to stop freaking out everyone in the mall and please put your gun away, and you agree, then everything will probably be cool.  If the cop politely asks you to stop freaking everyone out and you refuse-better yet, start lecturing him on the Constitution and State statutes-you begin to walk down the narrow path which ends somewhere between you getting a warning and you being tasered in the nuts and thrown in the back of a police car.  Either way, nobody who sees you is going to find themselves "informed" or "aware" of anything that they weren't informed or aware of, before.  And nobody who isn't also an open carry afficienado is going to suddenly have a conversion and decide that they are, in fact, supporters of your rights.  If you want to make a statement or score political points, do it like the real men do-write a check.  You'll get a lot more traction with, and attention from, the people who matter and make decisions.  And it will cost you about the same as what you paid for that tricked out 1911 and Bianchi holster.
 
2014-01-14 04:18:09 PM  
Besides the attention whores, there are quite a few OCers trolling for a lawsuit, which is like shooting fish in a barrel simply because cops can't control themselves.  Once the OCer starts with the "I don't have to answer your questions", the police move right to the arrest, and then invariably get sued and lose.

No love lost on either side for me.
 
2014-01-14 04:18:12 PM  
Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.
 
2014-01-14 04:18:32 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


You should go dig up some gangsta rap songs from the late 80s and early 90s. I understand that you probably detest that idea, but you have soooooo much in common with angry oppressed black youth from that time period. You could be blasting NWA the next time the pigs pull you over for burning rubber in the piggly wiggly parking lot, and trust me, cops haaaate that shiat.
 
2014-01-14 04:18:52 PM  

Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.


Then don't feel that way.
 
2014-01-14 04:19:25 PM  

MFAWG: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.


Makes it easier to kill someone if they are texting during the previews of a movie.
 
2014-01-14 04:20:11 PM  

Vodka Zombie: "Look at me and the cool things I can hang from my pants!  I'm special!"


sort of like a bluetooth earpiece
 
2014-01-14 04:20:36 PM  
Uh, open-carry in MI has been legal. You just needed a CCW permit to carry in your vehicle.
 
2014-01-14 04:21:26 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2014-01-14 04:21:43 PM  

JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."


Of course, not all of those open carriers are actually tools. Many are like my brother in law, and work in law enforcement, and are on the way in to or home from work, and aren't in uniform.

But hey, broad generalizations aren't just the property of the Right, are they?
 
2014-01-14 04:22:00 PM  

Kit Fister: Uh, open-carry in MI has been legal. You just needed a CCW permit to carry in your vehicle.


What if you ride with your window open, and your arm holding your gun out the window. That sounds cool as shiat actually.
 
2014-01-14 04:22:12 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Marcus Aurelius: Call the police if someone open-carries a gun into a public building: That's the advice the Ottawa County Sheriff's Office is giving to Hudsonville city staff during trainings this month

I don't carry normally, but for this asshole, I would make an exception.  In fact I'd show up every damn day.

Let us know what the floor tastes like.


I'm curious it the OC law actually extends to public buildings.  I assume the courthouse is one they don't allow carry of any sort by civilians, and in the smaller county seats, the courthouse is in the county building with the assessor's office and a lot of other public functionaries.
 
2014-01-14 04:22:23 PM  

GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.


Pretty much this. Don't want to carry a gun? Don't. DOn't like guns? don't own them. I don't tell people not to ride bicycles or drink fruity coctails or get gay married if they want.
 
2014-01-14 04:23:02 PM  

TFerWannaBe: MFAWG: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.

If you can't take some insults without pulling out your piece, you deserve the disrespect.


A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim. If you're a responsible gun owner, one of the biggest things you learn (when getting licensed to carry) is not when to pull your sidearm -- but when not to. If you pull your piece, you can get arrested. You will be inconvenienced by law enforcement, you will have to sign statements. If you fire your piece, that can be a crime.

Responsible gun owners don't shoot from the hip, they have to have situational awareness, and they have to use discretion. Because even if there's a 'misunderstanding', a misunderstanding can waste that gun owner's time and money dealing with the legal paperwork.

People who openly carry guns will go out of their way not to be inconvenienced, and therefore will not simply pull their piece whenever they feel like they can.

But it does have something to do with respect, too. People see guns and there is a desire for self-preservation there, and they'll try not to disrespect or insult the gun owner. It's not even conscious. They simply see a gun and realize that there's something there designed to injure and kill another human being -- and their attitude and mood can change.

As for being 'the first target' for any crime being planned? This is true when it comes to tactics. But honestly, if someone is going to commit a crime they're either going to be too stupid to consider that (this isn't the movies where career criminals are geniuses), as noted by many many Fark articles where criminals are too stupid to recognize who they're farking with. Or if they're smart... they'll rethink their crime to begin with. Sure, they could pull their illegal gun and shoot someone when preparing to commit a robbery, but they also know if they do that if they get caught... the penalty is going to be much much higher. And that in of itself can be a big deterrant.

And honestly, people shouldn't have to be insulted or disrespected to begin with. But they are. And if people want to stop that behavior, open carry is a good way to get that result.
 
2014-01-14 04:23:11 PM  

BunkoSquad: Kit Fister: Uh, open-carry in MI has been legal. You just needed a CCW permit to carry in your vehicle.

What if you ride with your window open, and your arm holding your gun out the window. That sounds cool as shiat actually.


Nope, still considered concealed. Also if you have it on your dash.  They went over it in the CCW class.
 
2014-01-14 04:23:14 PM  

Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.


Until a lump of copper is lodged in your parietal lobe.  Then you can't react.  It's the perfect solution.
 
2014-01-14 04:23:22 PM  

GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.


Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?
 
2014-01-14 04:23:46 PM  
ITT:  Lots of people projecting their own insecurities onto people who carry openly.
 
2014-01-14 04:23:57 PM  

Mikey1969: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

Of course, not all of those open carriers are actually tools. Many are like my brother in law, and work in law enforcement, and are on the way in to or home from work, and aren't in uniform.

But hey, broad generalizations aren't just the property of the Right, are they?


Your brother in law is a 1%. And as someone who has spent his entire life around law enforcement, I'd say just because he is in law enforcement doesn't make him not a tool. Probably lends more towards him being a tool.

Broad generalizations indeed. He's in law enforcement so that means he is a good guy!
 
2014-01-14 04:24:42 PM  

Kit Fister: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Pretty much this. Don't want to carry a gun? Don't. DOn't like guns? don't own them. I don't tell people not to ride bicycles or drink fruity coctails or get gay married if they want.


Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?
 
2014-01-14 04:24:44 PM  

Kit Fister: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Pretty much this. Don't want to carry a gun? Don't. DOn't like guns? don't own them. I don't tell people not to ride bicycles or drink fruity coctails or get gay married if they want.


Only one of these things involves a weapon designed to kill. Your comparisons suck.
 
2014-01-14 04:24:45 PM  

Car_Ramrod: EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.

Eh, 8 and a half inches isn't that big of a gun.


LOL, actually it is...

Dirty Harry's big ass gun has a 9" barrel. A 6 inch barrel is pretty big to just be carrying.
 
2014-01-14 04:25:14 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


You sound like the guy I read about every 2 or 3 months that accidentally shoots himself.

\i didn't ask
 
2014-01-14 04:25:31 PM  

Superjew: Why stop there?  Let's institute "Open Aiming" laws so anyone can point their gun directly at anyone they choose at any time.


It's assault.
 
2014-01-14 04:25:44 PM  

Weatherkiss: TFerWannaBe: MFAWG: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.

If you can't take some insults without pulling out your piece, you deserve the disrespect.

A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim. If you're a responsible gun owner, one of the biggest things you learn (when getting licensed to carry) is not when to pull your sidearm -- but when not to. If you pull your piece, you can get arrested. You will be inconvenienced by law enforcement, you will have to sign statements. If you fire your piece, that can be a crime.

Responsible gun owners don't shoot from the hip, they have to have situational awareness, and they have to use discretion. Because even if there's a 'misunderstanding', a misunderstanding can waste that gun owner's time and money dealing with the legal paperwork.

People who openly carry guns will go out of their way not to be inconvenienced, and therefore will not simply pull their piece whenever they feel like they can.

But it does have something to do with respect, too. People see guns and there is a desire for self-preservation there, and they'll try not to disrespect or insult the gun owner. It's not even conscious. They simply see a gun and realize that there's something there designed to injure and kill another human being -- and their attitude and mood can change.

As for being 'the first target' for any crime being planned? This is true when it comes to tactics. But honestly, if someone is going to commit a crime they're either going to be too stupid to consider that (this isn't the movies where career criminals are geniuses), as noted by many many Fark articles where criminals are too stupid to recognize who they're farking with. Or if they're smart... they'll rethink their crime to begin with. Sure, they could pull their illegal gun and shoot someon ...


A whole lot of this.

ALso:

I can't find a link to it right now, sadly, but there was a statement by a training instructor who basically said "When you carry your gun, be prepared to lose every fight, admit your mother's a whore, your girlfriend's a slut, and you're a retard. You will always be wrong and you will always have to apologize."

Basically, you pull your gun if you have *no* other choice. You don't use it because you're losing an argument.
 
2014-01-14 04:26:36 PM  
So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.


Umm how does that make sense?

If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?
 
2014-01-14 04:27:14 PM  
12,000 or so Gun related deaths in the US last year and people think keeping an eye on people openly carrying a gun is silly and stupid?

These are mostly the same people than think wearing a hoodie is a good way to get shot I imagine.
 
2014-01-14 04:27:18 PM  

Mikey1969: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

Of course, not all of those open carriers are actually tools. Many are like my brother in law, and work in law enforcement, and are on the way in to or home from work, and aren't in uniform.

But hey, broad generalizations aren't just the property of the Right, are they?


I didn't say that they were tools. I said they look like tools.
 
2014-01-14 04:27:38 PM  
NY State has allowed women to open carry their breasts for years and they still get hauled off to jail for indecent exposure.
 
2014-01-14 04:27:39 PM  

Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?


Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.
 
2014-01-14 04:27:45 PM  

Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim


I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?
 
2014-01-14 04:28:14 PM  

mediablitz: Only one of these things involves a weapon designed to kill. Your comparisons suck.


Who said they were comparisons? I was naming things I don't like but don't tell others not to do. Or am I not allowed to do that?
 
2014-01-14 04:28:28 PM  

TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim

I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?


What color is he?
 
2014-01-14 04:28:30 PM  

capn' fun: I don't care what the law is; whenever you take a stroll in public with a gun on your hip, people are going to notice, and some of them are going to freak out.  They're going to call the cops.  And the cops are going to come.  When they get there, they are going to talk to you.  How that conversation goes depends a LOT on your attitude.


Pretty much.  Growing up in Minnesota where the hunting opener is essentially a state holiday - I have never seen people freak out over someone having a gun until I moved to Boulder, CO, after school.  One of the neighbors called the cops when they notice we were carrying a set of guns to our car (in their cases), locked them in our trunk, and drove off.  When we got back home - a cop was waiting, asked us one or two questions, shrugged, and just left.

A few weeks later I was able to ask one of the local cops about it and he mentioned they get one of those calls a few times a week.  Mainly from hikers freaking out after seeing hunters in wildlife areas.

/Boulder - the Berkley of Colorado
 
2014-01-14 04:28:32 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Like the zen riddle of life, it reduces violent crime, except when it increases it.

The Weapon Effect (look it up) means heated confrontations get worse and robberies become murders.  It also means the only person willing to start anything in the first place is dumb, mad, or crazy enough to be particularly dangerous.

Armed gays don't get bashed, but they do sometimes get shot.

The armed weekend warrior won't stop a rampage, but a rampage is less likely to kill you than traffic and the open-carry dude isn't going to flip out on you.
 
2014-01-14 04:28:48 PM  

Kit Fister: I can't find a link to it right now, sadly, but there was a statement by a training instructor who basically said "When you carry your gun, be prepared to lose every fight, admit your mother's a whore, your girlfriend's a slut, and you're a retard. You will always be wrong and you will always have to apologize."


So then no one is allowed to carry a gun unless they can do this?

Or do we hand out guns to any ass?

See all gun owners think they are the most awesome person in the world, but you know what, they aren't.
 
2014-01-14 04:29:09 PM  

Superjew: Why stop there?  Let's institute "Open Aiming" laws so anyone can point their gun directly at anyone they choose at any time.


Why stop there?  Let's institute "open murder" laws where any time you touch a gun you're required to shoot the closest person.  I mean, that's what a gun is made for, right?  It's purpose. Your life is empty because you spend it trying to stop the gun from becoming.
 
2014-01-14 04:30:08 PM  

mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?


Usually the hood doesn't spend $60 on a nice holster, $50 on a decent belt and broadcast his intent to bring a weapon into the Quickie-Mart.

Didn't realize these questions required Mensa-level intelligence.
 
2014-01-14 04:30:44 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.


Well drunk driving is illegal.

Yes it can happen anywhere.

Murder can happen anywhere, by your reasoning should we just make that legal too?


The point is the chance of it happening is less. No on is restricting guns will make all gun crimes go to zero. That's a stupid strawman.
 
2014-01-14 04:31:01 PM  

Kit Fister: You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.


And someone is much more likely to be injured or killed by their own gun than they are to prevent some imaginary criminal from crawling through their transom.   You know, as long as we're talking about fearing the unlikely.
 
2014-01-14 04:31:30 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.


So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?
 
2014-01-14 04:31:54 PM  

ShawnDoc: dittybopper: That's flipped, of course: Now most states have some form of concealed carry and they denigrate open carry, because, what? It shocks the sensibilities of soccer moms?

Or you can come to California where open carry is essentially illegal, and outside one or two counties, it is impossible to get a CCW.


Unless you're Diane Feinstein.
 
2014-01-14 04:32:29 PM  

Corvus: If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?


Because they like you wet the bed to be anywhere near a firearm.  That generally overrules any reason to have a firearm.

It  is a personal choice
 
2014-01-14 04:32:43 PM  

Corvus: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?


Personally I don't feel that I need to carry, but I don't presume to tell others how they should feel.
 
2014-01-14 04:32:45 PM  

Corvus: So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.


Umm how does that make sense?

If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?


You don't bring a knife to a gun fight? You don't bring fists to a gun fight? There are many ways to harm other people using completely legal methods (including your fists). There are many ways to manipulate people to do what you want.

But a gun is generally agreed upon as being the final decider of a fight. You carry a gun because it is the superior weapon to either a knife, fist, etc. (again, depending on situation this can be untrue, but for your common everyday life it is).

There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.
 
2014-01-14 04:33:19 PM  

MFAWG: Jackson Herring: EdNortonsTwin: because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

one of the saddest things i've ever read on the internet

But that's actually what they think. Panty waisted liebruls tremble in fear at the mere sight of a firearm.


That liberal might be my father, the guy who "won" a Silver Star and two wound badges in WW2.  Stinking, pansy, Fart Bama lover.  A REAL man would have dropped that 1000 pounder on a fleet carrier, not a puny escort carrier.
 
2014-01-14 04:34:16 PM  

Corvus: So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.


Umm how does that make sense?

If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?


Uhm, no. Gun nuts in this thread are stating that we choose to carry a firearm because it is a tool and likely to be useful should we need to defend ourselves. We recognize the fact that violent activities happen and would rather have the chance to fight back.

However, that being said, if you don't feel you need a gun, don't carry one. Chances are, none of us in this thread (except me, since I already have had to) will need a gun in their life for self defense, so you may choose your level of armament.

Just don't presume to conflate "I don't feel the need for a gun" with "I don't feel the need for the gun so no one should have guns." One is a personal choice, one is a projection.
 
2014-01-14 04:34:45 PM  

ikanreed: Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.

Until a lump of copper is lodged in your parietal lobe.  Then you can't react.  It's the perfect solution.


How weird... 44 years, all of them in states where carrying is permitted, and the last 20 or so years where concealed carry is permitted. Not once have I seen a person draw their weapon, and not once I have I known anyone else to have been around where someone drew their weapon. I'm sure you see it daily though, right? Any day you get home having dodged a bullet is one less trip to the ER.
 
2014-01-14 04:34:51 PM  

GoldSpider: Corvus: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?

Personally I don't feel that I need to carry, but I don't presume to tell others how they should feel.


So then you are admitting there isn't some need for people to carry a gun in public?

That sounded like a "yes" but I seem incapable of just saying that.
 
2014-01-14 04:35:07 PM  
I'm really hoping that the Blah population of Michigan really goes out of their way to make sure to open-carry everywhere that they possibly can from here on out.

I'm sure that'll make the people that came up with this ridiculousness feel safe.

/only cowards and criminals carry guns
 
2014-01-14 04:35:22 PM  

Corvus: So then no one is allowed to carry a gun unless they can do this?

Or do we hand out guns to any ass?

See all gun owners think they are the most awesome person in the world, but you know what, they aren't.


Nice strawman.
 
2014-01-14 04:35:25 PM  

gingerjet: capn' fun: I don't care what the law is; whenever you take a stroll in public with a gun on your hip, people are going to notice, and some of them are going to freak out.  They're going to call the cops.  And the cops are going to come.  When they get there, they are going to talk to you.  How that conversation goes depends a LOT on your attitude.

Pretty much.  Growing up in Minnesota where the hunting opener is essentially a state holiday - I have never seen people freak out over someone having a gun until I moved to Boulder, CO, after school.  One of the neighbors called the cops when they notice we were carrying a set of guns to our car (in their cases), locked them in our trunk, and drove off.  When we got back home - a cop was waiting, asked us one or two questions, shrugged, and just left.

A few weeks later I was able to ask one of the local cops about it and he mentioned they get one of those calls a few times a week.  Mainly from hikers freaking out after seeing hunters in wildlife areas.

/Boulder - the Berkley of Colorado


I totally agree, but I think we're not talking about the same thing.  There will always be folks who are just plain frightened of guns, period, and will call the cops if they see one in any form, in a case, or being carried by someone who is obviously hunting.  What the article and the conversation here is about are the Tackleberries who walk around in public (stores, restaurants, bars, etc.) with a loaded gun in a holster and who act shocked and indignant when everyone around them reacts with "WTF?!"
 
2014-01-14 04:36:36 PM  

monoski: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

So the robbers know to shoot you before taking your wallet.


Money and a free gun.  Bonus.
 
2014-01-14 04:36:38 PM  

TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim

I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?


I can't. Neither can you or anyone else.

However, openly carrying means you are alerting everybody around you that you do have a gun, but that it is holstered securely on your belt. People might get concerned. But you are displaying to your other human beings that you have nothing to hide.

A 'lone wolf' will simply not care. And the 'lone wolf' scenario is the majority of the most brutal gun crimes.

Someone who open carries does that as a courtesy to everyone around them that they're dangerous, but they aren't malicious.
 
2014-01-14 04:36:44 PM  

Kit Fister: Uhm, no. Gun nuts in this thread are stating that we choose to carry a firearm because it is a tool and likely to be useful should we need to defend ourselves. We recognize the fact that violent activities happen and would rather have the chance to fight back.

However, that being said, if you don't feel you need a gun, don't carry one. Chances are, none of us in this thread (except me, since I already have had to) will need a gun in their life for self defense, so you may choose your level of armament.


I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.

I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).
 
2014-01-14 04:36:53 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Any combo of those, yes.
 
2014-01-14 04:36:59 PM  

MFAWG: Jackson Herring: EdNortonsTwin: because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

one of the saddest things i've ever read on the internet

But that's actually what they think. Panty waisted liebruls tremble in fear at the mere sight of a firearm.


Nobody here is doing anything to prove otherwise...
 
2014-01-14 04:37:49 PM  

Corvus: So then you are admitting there isn't some need for people to carry a gun in public?

That sounded like a "yes" but I seem incapable of just saying that.


Whatever beliefs about gun ownership you have ascribed to me and are trying to get me to "admit", I am certain your assumptions are incorrect.
 
2014-01-14 04:38:02 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: So then no one is allowed to carry a gun unless they can do this?

Or do we hand out guns to any ass?

See all gun owners think they are the most awesome person in the world, but you know what, they aren't.

Nice strawman.


They are in this thread.

Ok so you admit many gun owners are bad people who really don't have the responsibility or sate of mind who is safe to have a gun?
 
2014-01-14 04:38:38 PM  

GoldSpider: Corvus: So then you are admitting there isn't some need for people to carry a gun in public?

That sounded like a "yes" but I seem incapable of just saying that.

Whatever beliefs about gun ownership you have ascribed to me and are trying to get me to "admit", I am certain your assumptions are incorrect.


No I am just wondering why you couldn't give a simple yes or no to my rather straight forward es or no question.
 
2014-01-14 04:39:39 PM  

Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.

So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?


Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?

Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?
 
2014-01-14 04:39:42 PM  

Kit Fister: Just don't presume to conflate "I don't feel the need for a gun" with "I don't feel the need for the gun so no one should have guns." One is a personal choice, one is a projection.


Funny never said "no one should have guns". That's the normal strawman you guys pull.
 
2014-01-14 04:40:34 PM  

Kit Fister: Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?


I need to "assault someone'' when I am drunk driving to get arrested?

Really?
 
2014-01-14 04:40:41 PM  

Weatherkiss: And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.

 People who feel the need to open carry are almost always assholes who need to have an attitude adjustment.
 
2014-01-14 04:40:49 PM  

Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.

I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).


I was jumped, beaten and stabbed while working ina  very bad neighborhood i had no choice but to be in. I had no firearm, and nearly died. Would you like the police report and the photos of the stab wounds?
 
2014-01-14 04:40:49 PM  

Corvus: No I am just wondering why you couldn't give a simple yes or no to my rather straight forward es or no question.


You're asking me to answer on behalf of other people for whom I don't speak.  I already gave you a straight answer about my personal belief, so at this point I suspect your deficiency is in reading comprehension.
 
2014-01-14 04:41:25 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


Gold, Jerry! Comedy gold!
 
2014-01-14 04:42:18 PM  

Weatherkiss: The 2nd Amendment is a Pandora's Box that can't be closed. Guns will be out there and will be relatively easily to acquire whether legally or illegally. It doesn't matter what kind of gun control legislation we try to push through, nothing is going to have any affect on an individual's ability to grab a firearm and use it to commit a crime.


Except in Australia where they fixed it in about three weeks.

But as a former British colony with large areas of open space once dominated by an indigenous people that is now a successful first world economy of immigrants Australia has nothing in common with the USA.
 
2014-01-14 04:42:20 PM  

Kit Fister: Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?


That's circular logic. You are saying it's the legality of it therefor it's right.

So if gun carrying was illegal you would be ok with that because you only care about the legality of it right?
 
2014-01-14 04:42:56 PM  

GoldSpider: Corvus: No I am just wondering why you couldn't give a simple yes or no to my rather straight forward es or no question.

You're asking me to answer on behalf of other people for whom I don't speak.  I already gave you a straight answer about my personal belief, so at this point I suspect your deficiency is in reading comprehension.


No I asked you to speak for yourself. Which you seem incapable of doing.
 
2014-01-14 04:43:57 PM  

Aexia: Weatherkiss: And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.
 People who feel the need to open carry are almost always assholes who need to have an attitude adjustment.


That's human beings in general. Human beings are assholes. So if most human beings are assholes, then whichever asshole is carrying a gun is the one who will more than likely cause the other asshole to rethink the way they deal with people.

I don't like it either, but people are assholes. Carry a gun and maybe people don't treat you like an asshole in public (or at least not as much), only on the interwebs.
 
2014-01-14 04:43:58 PM  

Aexia: Weatherkiss: And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.
 People who feel the need to open carry are almost always assholes who need to have an attitude adjustment.


Sure, but when you try, you get in trouble, or worse, for "assaulting a police officer".  Lot of good your "feelings" are doing.
 
2014-01-14 04:44:09 PM  

Corvus: No I asked you to speak for yourself. Which you seem incapable of doing.


    GoldSpider: Personally I don't feel that I need to carry

I can't read it for you...
 
2014-01-14 04:44:28 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.

I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).

I was jumped, beaten and stabbed while working ina  very bad neighborhood i had no choice but to be in. I had no firearm, and nearly died. Would you like the police report and the photos of the stab wounds?


What has that to do at all with the conversation?

Lets go back to the subject before. You said gun crimes would still happen with gun laws.

Drunk driving still happens with drunk driving laws, do you think those laws should be repealed too then?

(sorry you changed the subject on me and I feel for it)
 
2014-01-14 04:45:13 PM  
I don't have much of an opinion on open carry, but I do think it should be an automatic SYG trigger.  Not because I want to see gun owners get shot, I just see a lot of open carriers using their guns for the purposes of intimidation, and I think once you do that, you're a threat to public safety, and thus a fair target.
 
2014-01-14 04:46:49 PM  

FlashHarry: Obama's Reptiloid Master: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

From a tactical standpoint, it makes a lot more sense. It's more comfortable, it has an easier draw, and in an actual threatening situation, allows you to present your weapon to de-escalate without violating the law.

From a realistic (ie, not in the diseased power fantasies of small-dicked minds) standpoint, all it does is make everyone afraid of you and put your weapon in easy reach of a guy that wants it more than you.

Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.

this is the best explanation i have yet heard. thanks.


I am in the unenviable position of being a pansy libby lib in the land of guns who happens have a CCL and police training. I carry my gun, but have a really realistic picture in my head of just how useful it is to me, which is not very, outside of a few low-probability scenarios.

The only place I would want to open carry is perhaps the courtroom. But sometimes not. Courtrooms are full of criminals.
 
2014-01-14 04:47:40 PM  

Corvus: I need to "assault someone'' when I am drunk driving to get arrested?

Really?


Wow, you really are dense, aren't you?

Okay, fine. If you really want to get down to brass tacks, the act of driving while intoxicated would be similar to the act of knowingly taking out a firearm and shooting it in public. You have chosen to go past responsible behavior and have begun acting recklessly and in such a way as to endanger others by willfully acting in an unsafe manner.

If I were to pull out a firearm, legally carried or not, and started firing said gun in public without a damn good reason, I would be equally liable for charges as I would have been had I driven drunk.

The mere act of carrying a firearm, openly or concealed, is not equivalent to driving drunk. It would be similar to the responsible use of alcohol.

I may drink a beer, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not driving while under the influence of alcohol. Just like i may carry a gun, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not whipping it out for every situation, unless I have a very goddamn good reason.

And that was the point of my post you totally went full derp on: Just losing an argument, or being insulted, or not being right is not cause to use a firearm. Getting punched in the face or having a fistfight is not in and of itself directly a cause for pulling a gun. Having some asshole grab your wallet is not in and of itself cause for pulling a gun.

A gun is a last-resort tool. You use it if you have no other option and the choice is either be severely injured or killed by someone, or injure/kill them first. Pull a knife on me? if I think you're going to use it, I'm going to shoot you. Corner me and threaten me with a crowbar? I'm probably going to shoot you. hold me up and demand money? Here, fine, take the damn money, all $2 I have in my wallet and my oiverdrawn bank card.
 
2014-01-14 04:49:58 PM  

Corvus: Kit Fister: Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

That's circular logic. You are saying it's the legality of it therefor it's right.

So if gun carrying was illegal you would be ok with that because you only care about the legality of it right?


We can show statistically you are more likely to injure another person drunk driving but given the legalization of open and/or concealed carry in every state with no increase in criminal activity.... where is the need to make carrying illegal?
 
2014-01-14 04:50:51 PM  
I'm a Soldier in the U.S. Army and I have served the last ten years.  The complete lack of respect some people have for firearms makes me want to puke.  I hate the fact that any farking idiot with a few hundred dollars can buy a weapon and carry it around like he loaded the damn thing with jelly beans.  If you want to carry a weapon in the Army you have to pass the ASVAB, pass a physical and mental exam, then prove to a Drill Sergeant that you can handle it without blowing your (or your buddies) brains out.  However, in most states you bring a farking glock into a Denny's without anyone even checking if you can see. Fark JUST background checks, how about vision exams, mental and physical evaluations, and then we test your judgement.  NOW you can carry a gun around my children.
 
2014-01-14 04:50:53 PM  

Jackson Herring: Vodka Zombie: "Look at me and the cool things I can hang from my pants!  I'm special!"

sort of like a bluetooth earpiece


Yeah, I still don't understand the biatching about the BT earpiece thing...,. Is it just biatching to have something to biatch about? I can understand having a problem with people who feel the need to scream into them as if they were on the other side of the room, but that actually isn't the case all that often anymore. Besides, I'd rather see someone on a BT driving than dicking around with their phone.
 
2014-01-14 04:52:03 PM  
There are no more "injuns" looking to scalp you.
The robbers use PoS hacks now.
There won't be any slave uprisings any time soon.
There are no gangstas comin to cap yo ass, unless you tryin to creep turf or front off.
The game tend to avoid public places.
The city of Fallujah is nearly 7,000 mi away.
The Martians have ray-guns whose discharge travels at the speed of light.
What is the need for open-carry again?
 
2014-01-14 04:52:20 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: I need to "assault someone'' when I am drunk driving to get arrested?

Really?

Wow, you really are dense, aren't you?

Okay, fine. If you really want to get down to brass tacks, the act of driving while intoxicated would be similar to the act of knowingly taking out a firearm and shooting it in public. You have chosen to go past responsible behavior and have begun acting recklessly and in such a way as to endanger others by willfully acting in an unsafe manner.

If I were to pull out a firearm, legally carried or not, and started firing said gun in public without a damn good reason, I would be equally liable for charges as I would have been had I driven drunk.

The mere act of carrying a firearm, openly or concealed, is not equivalent to driving drunk. It would be similar to the responsible use of alcohol.

I may drink a beer, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not driving while under the influence of alcohol. Just like i may carry a gun, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not whipping it out for every situation, unless I have a very goddamn good reason.

And that was the point of my post you totally went full derp on: Just losing an argument, or being insulted, or not being right is not cause to use a firearm. Getting punched in the face or having a fistfight is not in and of itself directly a cause for pulling a gun. Having some asshole grab your wallet is not in and of itself cause for pulling a gun.

A gun is a last-resort tool. You use it if you have no other option and the choice is either be severely injured or killed by someone, or injure/kill them first. Pull a knife on me? if I think you're going to use it, I'm going to shoot you. Corner me and threaten me with a crowbar? I'm probably going to shoot you. hold me up and demand money? Here, fine, take the damn money, all $2 I have in my wallet and my oiverdrawn bank card.


You keep talking about responsible gun owners.

How can you tell if someone is a responsible gun owner? Should there be training and testing to ensure someone is a responsible gun owner?
 
2014-01-14 04:52:43 PM  

mediablitz: Mikey1969: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

Of course, not all of those open carriers are actually tools. Many are like my brother in law, and work in law enforcement, and are on the way in to or home from work, and aren't in uniform.

But hey, broad generalizations aren't just the property of the Right, are they?

Your brother in law is a 1%. And as someone who has spent his entire life around law enforcement, I'd say just because he is in law enforcement doesn't make him not a tool. Probably lends more towards him being a tool.

Broad generalizations indeed. He's in law enforcement so that means he is a good guy!


No, the broad generalization is that everyone carrying a gun must be some kind of wanna be hero who really doesn't need to carry a gun ever in their lives.

But thanks for trying. I feel like I should award you a participation certificate or something.
 
2014-01-14 04:53:00 PM  
Jeez. Is everything about dick size with you people? A little projection, maybe?
 
2014-01-14 04:53:24 PM  

Kit Fister: And that was the point of my post you totally went full derp on: Just losing an argument, or being insulted, or not being right is not cause to use a firearm. Getting punched in the face or having a fistfight is not in and of itself directly a cause for pulling a gun.


And all gun owners we can trust to be this responsible how?
 
2014-01-14 04:53:50 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


IQ?
Height?
 
2014-01-14 04:55:24 PM  

Kit Fister: Just losing an argument, or being insulted, or not being right is not cause to use a firearm. Getting punched in the face or having a fistfight is not in and of itself directly a cause for pulling a gun.


So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

That means the Gun bills Obama put out for gun shows background checks and not allowing sales to people with mental problems you support?

Because if your not those are just BS words.
 
2014-01-14 04:55:34 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: I need to "assault someone'' when I am drunk driving to get arrested?

Really?

Wow, you really are dense, aren't you?

Okay, fine. If you really want to get down to brass tacks, the act of driving while intoxicated would be similar to the act of knowingly taking out a firearm and shooting it in public. You have chosen to go past responsible behavior and have begun acting recklessly and in such a way as to endanger others by willfully acting in an unsafe manner.

If I were to pull out a firearm, legally carried or not, and started firing said gun in public without a damn good reason, I would be equally liable for charges as I would have been had I driven drunk.

The mere act of carrying a firearm, openly or concealed, is not equivalent to driving drunk. It would be similar to the responsible use of alcohol.

I may drink a beer, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not driving while under the influence of alcohol. Just like i may carry a gun, but I have a duty to act responsibly when doing so, including not whipping it out for every situation, unless I have a very goddamn good reason.

And that was the point of my post you totally went full derp on: Just losing an argument, or being insulted, or not being right is not cause to use a firearm. Getting punched in the face or having a fistfight is not in and of itself directly a cause for pulling a gun. Having some asshole grab your wallet is not in and of itself cause for pulling a gun.

A gun is a last-resort tool. You use it if you have no other option and the choice is either be severely injured or killed by someone, or injure/kill them first. Pull a knife on me? if I think you're going to use it, I'm going to shoot you. Corner me and threaten me with a crowbar? I'm probably going to shoot you. hold me up and demand money? Here, fine, take the damn money, all $2 I have in my wallet and my oiverdrawn bank card.


His reply will probably be that since everyone can't act that responsibly, no one should have that privilege, while ignoring the argument that since someone might drink and drive no one can drink, because he probably likes a little drink now and then.  Typical authoritarian minded selfishness.
 
2014-01-14 04:56:56 PM  

Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?


Hah.  Close enough.
 
2014-01-14 04:57:05 PM  

Saiga410: Corvus: Kit Fister: Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

That's circular logic. You are saying it's the legality of it therefor it's right.

So if gun carrying was illegal you would be ok with that because you only care about the legality of it right?

We can show statistically you are more likely to injure another person drunk driving but given the legalization of open and/or concealed carry in every state with no increase in criminal activity.... where is the need to make carrying illegal?


Not arguing that. He  said gun laws will not git rid of all gun crime. Anti-drunk driving laws don't get rid of all drunk driving so I asked him if he is for repealing those too.
 
2014-01-14 04:57:19 PM  

Tigger: You keep talking about responsible gun owners.

How can you tell if someone is a responsible gun owner? Should there be training and testing to ensure someone is a responsible gun owner?


There is. You have to get a permit to open carry, you have to get a permit to conceal carry. To do that, you have to go through the legal methods of doing so which vary from state to state. Some states are stringent on how they give out permits. Some states are not so stringent.

If you are given a permit to open carry or conceal carry, that permit says that the state's law enforcement branch has certified you as a responsible gun owner since you'd have had to pass that state's tests for said certification. The permit is the state's way of saying you are a responsible gun owner, since you are doing everything legally.

And if you choose to use your firearm in an illegal fashion, then you get that permit revoked. Since you would have demonstrated you are not a responsible gun owner.
 
2014-01-14 04:57:57 PM  

Farker Soze: His reply will probably be that since everyone can't act that responsibly, no one should have that privilege, while ignoring the argument that since someone might drink and drive no one can drink, because he probably likes a little drink now and then. Typical authoritarian minded selfishness.


Once again the "they want to take everyone's guns away!" strawman that I already pointed out was a lie.
 
2014-01-14 04:58:19 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


We live in a world where crazy assholes regularly go on shooting sprees.  You'll have to forgive the human race for not being mind readers who are always able to determine, with the merest glance, whether a person is engaged in peaceful open carry or whether they are choosing the best moment to open up on the crowd.
 
2014-01-14 04:58:20 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.

So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?

Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?

Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?


Yes he is... But he's not "afraid" of guns, of course...
 
2014-01-14 05:00:20 PM  

Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.


Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.
 
2014-01-14 05:00:43 PM  

Corvus: What has that to do at all with the conversation?

Lets go back to the subject before. You said gun crimes would still happen with gun laws.

Drunk driving still happens with drunk driving laws, do you think those laws should be repealed too then?

(sorry you changed the subject on me and I feel for it)


Gun crimes would still happen with gun laws (and I'm in favor of many gun laws, such as safety training requirements, background checks, and so on). Gun crimes happen with or without guns. People have the right to own guns, and should always have that right (with basic safety training, which is always a good idea, and universal background checks/a universally available system for conducting background checks in general). Booze crimes happen. We banned booze, and the booze crimes didn't stop. People have the right to drink booze, and should always have that right.

Likewise, whether guns, knives, booze, or any other thing, if people use them recklessly and irresponsibly, they should be held accountable and punished. I've never said that we should make either gun crimes or booze crimes legal, just enforce the law and charge those who break it.

The point of bringing up drunk driving-related deaths anyway is to compare deaths due to an illegal behavior: Driving while intoxicated vs. mishandling a firearm. And under those strict points of comparison, primary functions not withstanding, you have a higher chance of dying due to misuse of a vehicle in a criminal manner than you do of dying by a firearm misused in a criminal manner.

The fact that a firearm was made to kill is an emotional point only: A firearm was designed as a kinetic projectile launch platform. It was designed to supplant the bow and arrow and deliver effect on target from a longer range than arm's length. We had spears, then we developed the bow to do the damage at a longer range. The bow was awkward, so we developed the firearm. And we have been improving the firearm. I expect that sometime in the next century, we'll find a way to eliminate the need for kinetic projectiles and move on to plasma weapons or some other sci-fi tech.  When used safely, the firearm provides for enjoyment in the form of long-range competition, hunting, and so on. It also provides a convenient force multiplier for those who find themselves in a dangerous situation.

It in and of itself is a neutral technology. It can be used for good or ill, depending on the intent of the wielder, and it is extremely disingenuous to apply a negative connotation to the object when it is the will of its wielder that commits the crime.

Wake me up when you have a means of fixing human nature to prevent them from committing violence due to ego and emotion. Until then, I'll carry a firearm because I'm not physically capable of fending off a threat, killing dinner, or defending my livestock from coyotes without some form of force multiplier.
 
2014-01-14 05:00:59 PM  

Mikey1969: ikanreed: Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.

Until a lump of copper is lodged in your parietal lobe.  Then you can't react.  It's the perfect solution.

How weird... 44 years, all of them in states where carrying is permitted, and the last 20 or so years where concealed carry is permitted. Not once have I seen a person draw their weapon, and not once I have I known anyone else to have been around where someone drew their weapon. I'm sure you see it daily though, right? Any day you get home having dodged a bullet is one less trip to the ER.


Come on man, it was a joke.  The relevant points are all quite clearly encoded in ownership vs violent death rates, controlling for other variables.  I know that there's less than a 1% chance of any given person dying of a gunshot wound.
 
2014-01-14 05:01:39 PM  

Mikey1969: Kit Fister: Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.

So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?

Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?

Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

Yes he is... But he's not "afraid" of guns, of course...


You might want to look back. It was his analogy, not mine.

I am afraid of guns. Now why are gun owners so afraid to be out in public without a gun?
 
2014-01-14 05:02:15 PM  

Corvus: Mikey1969: Kit Fister: Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.

So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?

Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?

Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

Yes he is... But he's not "afraid" of guns, of course...

You might want to look back. It was his analogy, not mine.

I am afraid of STUPID PEOPLE with guns. Now why are gun owners so afraid to be out in public without a gun?


FTFM
 
2014-01-14 05:02:15 PM  

Weatherkiss: TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim

I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?

I can't. Neither can you or anyone else.

However, openly carrying means you are alerting everybody around you that you do have a gun, but that it is holstered securely on your belt. People might get concerned. But you are displaying to your other human beings that you have nothing to hide.

A 'lone wolf' will simply not care. And the 'lone wolf' scenario is the majority of the most brutal gun crimes.

Someone who open carries does that as a courtesy to everyone around them that they're dangerous, but they aren't malicious.


I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. You acknowledge that we can't tell the difference. Then you say a "lone wolf" won't care - implying that he may open carry, or may not. Then you go on to say that people who open carry aren't malicious; they just want to show people that they are carrying a dangerous weapon. This seems to contract your statement about the lone wolf - clearly some people who open carry may actually be malicious.

Regardless, I think you understand why some people, myself included, are uncomfortable with others walking around with firearms, even if they're in public view. It's impossible to tell if the armed person in front of you is a responsible citizen or some asshole who will shoot you over texting in a theatre (for which there is a special hell, but it's not the shooter's right to send him there).

I have no doubt that the vast majority of gun owners are mature and responsible, but since it's impossible to tell them from the maniacs and idiots until the bullets start to fly, how can I possibly support a policy permitting people to carry firearms in public?
 
2014-01-14 05:04:01 PM  

Corvus: Saiga410: Corvus: Kit Fister: Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

That's circular logic. You are saying it's the legality of it therefor it's right.

So if gun carrying was illegal you would be ok with that because you only care about the legality of it right?

We can show statistically you are more likely to injure another person drunk driving but given the legalization of open and/or concealed carry in every state with no increase in criminal activity.... where is the need to make carrying illegal?

Not arguing that. He  said gun laws will not git rid of all gun crime. Anti-drunk driving laws don't get rid of all drunk driving so I asked him if he is for repealing those too.


OK well I am asking you with the change in the carry laws over the past 30 years do you have any proof that open and or concealed carry endangers people or has a negative social consequence?  You seem to be against carrying in all forms.  What has formed your opinion to be against given the data out there?
 
2014-01-14 05:04:16 PM  

Kit Fister: Wake me up when you have a means of fixing human nature to prevent them from committing violence due to ego and emotion. Until then, I'll carry a firearm because I'm not physically capable of fending off a threat, killing dinner, or defending my livestock from coyotes without some form of force multiplier.


Sorry where did I said I want to ban all guns?

Seem to have missed that again but that's the strawman you guys keep going after.
 
2014-01-14 05:04:54 PM  

Saiga410: OK well I am asking you with the change in the carry laws over the past 30 years do you have any proof that open and or concealed carry endangers people or has a negative social consequence? You seem to be against carrying in all forms. What has formed your opinion to be against given the data out there?


Please show me where I said that and I will respond to that point.
 
2014-01-14 05:05:10 PM  
But what troubles me most about this suggestion - and the general More Guns approach to social ills - is the absolute abandonment of civil society it represents. It gives up on the rule of law in favor of a Hobbesian "war of every man against every man" in which we no longer have genuine neighbors, only potential enemies. You may trust your neighbor for now - but you have high-powered recourse if he ever acts wrongly.

Whatever lack of open violence may be procured by this method is not peace or civil order, but rather a standoff, a Cold War maintained by the threat of mutually assured destruction. Moreover, the person who wishes to live this way, to maintain order at universal gunpoint, has an absolute trust in his own ability to use weapons wisely and well: he never for a moment asks whether he can be trusted with a gun. Of course he can! (But in literature we call this hubris.) Link
 
2014-01-14 05:05:48 PM  

Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.

I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).

I was jumped, beaten and stabbed while working ina  very bad neighborhood i had no choice but to be in. I had no firearm, and nearly died. Would you like the police report and the photos of the stab wounds?

What has that to do at all with the conversation?


I'd say that it has THIS to do with the conversation...

Your post:
    
Corvus: So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.

Umm how does that make sense?
If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?


The response(With the relevant part bolded):

Kit Fister: Uhm, no. Gun nuts in this thread are stating that we choose to carry a firearm because it is a tool and likely to be useful should we need to defend ourselves. We recognize the fact that violent activities happen and would rather have the chance to fight back.
However, that being said, if you don't feel you need a gun, don't carry one. Chances are, none of us in this thread (except me, since I already have had to) will need a gun in their life for self defense, so you may choose your level of armament.


Your response:

Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.
I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).


BTW: It's  Milquetoast
Anyway, KF responded:

    
Kit Fister: Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.
I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).

I was jumped, beaten and stabbed while working ina  very bad neighborhood i had no choice but to be in. I had no firearm, and nearly died. Would you like the police report and the photos of the stab wounds?

In other words, that was the EXACT conversation, and you just didn't like being backed into a corner.

 
2014-01-14 05:06:21 PM  
Weatherkiss:

There is. You have to get a permit to open carry, you have to get a permit to conceal carry. To do that, you have to go through the legal methods of doing so which vary from state to state. Some states are stringent on how they give out permits. Some states are not so stringent.

Excellent.

So why not make everyone that wants a gun take and pass that training?

Like the military does?
 
2014-01-14 05:07:24 PM  

Tigger: Weatherkiss: The 2nd Amendment is a Pandora's Box that can't be closed. Guns will be out there and will be relatively easily to acquire whether legally or illegally. It doesn't matter what kind of gun control legislation we try to push through, nothing is going to have any affect on an individual's ability to grab a firearm and use it to commit a crime.

Except in Australia where they fixed it in about three weeks.

But as a former British colony with large areas of open space once dominated by an indigenous people that is now a successful first world economy of immigrants Australia has nothing in common with the USA.


But it's not in their constitution, now is it?  It's in ours, and the Supremes now agree with the pro-gun side.

If your solution to a problem requires an amendment to the constitution, then you don't actually have a solution to said problem.  So, banning guns is not going to happen; everybody (on both sides) needs to accept that fact and move on.
 
2014-01-14 05:07:31 PM  

Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?


Right now to get a CCW permit, you are given a state and federal background check against outstanding crimes. To buy a gun from an FFL, you are required to undergo a federal background check. I have stated multiple times previously that I'm also okay with requiring universal background checks for firearms purchases not covered by FFL laws, with the proviso that the check be made free, and the law basically either require FFLs to provide background checks to all persons conducting private sales and requiring the same of Law Enforcement agencies, or making the NICS background check system available to all citizens, as it should be anyway, with requirements to maintain records of the sale under threat of harsh penalties for failure to comply.

I'm also not against requiring basic training of firearms owners. I have to undergo basic firearms safety and hunting safety training to obtain a license to hunt (including hunting on my own property), and providing such a requirement is no big impairment to my ability to exercise my rights. My quid pro quo for such a system would be the requirement of national reciprocity: a standard of safety training tantamount to the basic driver's test is set, and all states must recognize the certification as legitimate.
 
2014-01-14 05:08:03 PM  

TFerWannaBe: Regardless, I think you understand why some people, myself included, are uncomfortable with others walking around with firearms, even if they're in public view. It's impossible to tell if the armed person in front of you is a responsible citizen or some asshole who will shoot you over texting in a theatre (for which there is a special hell, but it's not the shooter's right to send him there).


I see to you that's just life. You have to expect getting shot in a theater it just goes with your "rights"

You still never answered if you feel all gun owners should be responsible, are you against the laws that would make sure that gun owners where responsible like you said they should be?
 
2014-01-14 05:08:06 PM  

Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.


Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.
 
2014-01-14 05:09:39 PM  

Mikey1969: Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.

I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).

I was jumped, beaten and stabbed while working ina  very bad neighborhood i had no choice but to be in. I had no firearm, and nearly died. Would you like the police report and the photos of the stab wounds?

What has that to do at all with the conversation?

I'd say that it has THIS to do with the conversation...

Your post:
    
Corvus: So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.

Umm how does that make sense?
If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?

The response(With the relevant part bolded):

Kit Fister: Uhm, no. Gun nuts in this thread are stating that we choose to carry a firearm because it is a tool and likely to be useful should we need to defend ourselves. We recognize the fact that violent activities happen and would rather have the chance to fight back.
However, that being said, if you don't feel you need a gun, don't carry one. Chances are, none of us in this thread (except me, since I already have had to) will need a gun in their life for self defense, so you may choose your level of armament.

Your response:

Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's yourself in danger who needs to carry a gun while I am milk toast who would never find myself in a dangerous situation.
I am sorry I forget all gun nuts are "bad asses" that live a life of great danger (at least in their own minds).

BTW: It's  Milquetoast
Anyway, KF responded:

    
Kit Fister: Corvus: I see so your a rugged bad ass who get's you ...


So what does that prove about gun laws again? Please explain it to us.
 
2014-01-14 05:09:41 PM  

Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.


I dunno.  I see someone strapping in an area where they're not likely a hunter or something, more likely either a douchebag or some psycho?  I don't go there.  I leave.  Usually these subsets look exactly the same and I'm not about to cut my life short betting on the douchebag.

Businesses must love this shiat.
 
2014-01-14 05:10:14 PM  

Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.


HE BROUGHT UP DRUNK DRIVING NOT ME.

GO ASK HIM.
 
2014-01-14 05:10:26 PM  

Kit Fister: The fact that a firearm was made to kill is an emotional point only: A firearm was designed as a kinetic projectile launch platform. It was designed to supplant the bow and arrow and deliver effect on target from a longer range than arm's length. We had spears, then we developed the bow to do the damage at a longer range. The bow was awkward, so we developed the firearm. And we have been improving the firearm. I expect that sometime in the next century, we'll find a way to eliminate the need for kinetic projectiles and move on to plasma weapons or some other sci-fi tech.  When used safely, the firearm provides for enjoyment in the form of long-range competition, hunting, and so on. It also provides a convenient force multiplier for those who find themselves in a dangerous situation.

It in and of itself is a neutral technology. It can be used for good or ill, depending on the intent of the wielder, and it is extremely disingenuous to apply a negative connotation to the object when it is the will of its wielder that commits the crime.


I wonder what bows and arrows were used for? What was the purpose of the spear? How bout the atlatl? The slingshot? The crossbow? I mean, if we're gonna put it all in a historical context, don't stop short and just mention the target practice. Own the whole story.
 
2014-01-14 05:11:25 PM  

Corvus: So what does that prove about gun laws again? Please explain it to us.


It proves that bad shiat can happen to good people, so laws enabling good people to arm themselves and level the playing field against those who do bad things are beneficial.
 
2014-01-14 05:11:42 PM  
Kit Fister:
I'm also not against requiring basic training of firearms owners. I have to undergo basic firearms safety and hunting safety training to obtain a license to hunt (including hunting on my own property), and providing such a requirement is no big impairment to my ability to exercise my rights. My quid pro quo for such a system would be the requirement of national reciprocity: a standard of safety training tantamount to the basic driver's test is set, and all states must recognize the certification as legitimate.

We agree.

The gun lobby went absolutely batshiat farking crazy when something half as stringent as this was suggested and it couldn't even get to a vote.
 
2014-01-14 05:11:43 PM  

Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.


Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.



Right "I" brought it up.
 
2014-01-14 05:11:53 PM  
A quick game of "Knock Out."  Look!  A free pistol!
 
2014-01-14 05:11:56 PM  

Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.

HE BROUGHT UP DRUNK DRIVING NOT ME.

GO ASK HIM.


Well, are you for background checks on booze?  If not, why do you hate children?
 
2014-01-14 05:12:49 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: So what does that prove about gun laws again? Please explain it to us.

It proves that bad shiat can happen to good people, so laws enabling good people to arm themselves and level the playing field against those who do bad things are beneficial.


So people should be carrying guns all the time in public. Sorry I thought earlier you said they didn't.
 
2014-01-14 05:13:15 PM  

TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim

I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?

I can't. Neither can you or anyone else.

However, openly carrying means you are alerting everybody around you that you do have a gun, but that it is holstered securely on your belt. People might get concerned. But you are displaying to your other human beings that you have nothing to hide.

A 'lone wolf' will simply not care. And the 'lone wolf' scenario is the majority of the most brutal gun crimes.

Someone who open carries does that as a courtesy to everyone around them that they're dangerous, but they aren't malicious.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. You acknowledge that we can't tell the difference. Then you say a "lone wolf" won't care - implying that he may open carry, or may not. Then you go on to say that people who open carry aren't malicious; they just want to show people that they are carrying a dangerous weapon. This seems to contract your statement about the lone wolf - clearly some people who open carry may actually be malicious.

Regardless, I think you understand why some people, myself included, are uncomfortable with others walking around with firearms, even if they're in public view. It's impossible to tell if the armed person in front of you is a responsible citizen or some asshole who will shoot you over texting in a theatre (for which there is a special hell, but it's not the shooter's right to send him there).

I have no doubt that the vast majority of gun owners are mature and responsible, but since it's impossible to tell them from the maniacs and idiots until the bullets start to fly, how can I possibly support a policy permitting people to carry firearms in public?


I know what I say sounds contradictory, because it largely depends on one thing and one thing only. Motive.

A 'lone wolf' who wants to go on a massacre is not going to want to incite panic until the bullets start flying. You are technically correct that someone bound and determined to kill a lot of innocent people can conceivably do so through legal channels. This has often been the case in reality.

At the same time, those people generally conceal their weapons and intents until the last possible moment when your targets are completely unaware there's a 'wolf in the fold'.

People who openly carry do so as a courtesy. They show they do not want to conceal their weapon. They want people to know they are there and what they are capable of doing if it comes to a last resort.

A lone wolf will typically not do so because their motives are not benign. They try to hide their intentions from the get go. This is why lone wolves are the hardest criminals to catch.

While it is true someone who openly carries could conceivably whip out their gun and go to town -- if they have the permit to carry to begin with, then it is the closest thing to 'promise' that the person is responsible. People will always have free will. But by having a permit, it minimizes the risks. You at least know the person attended the seminars/instructions as issued by the state and can reasonably assume they were drilled repeatedly on how to use their firearm responsibly.
 
2014-01-14 05:13:28 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: I wonder what bows and arrows were used for? What was the purpose of the spear? How bout the atlatl? The slingshot? The crossbow? I mean, if we're gonna put it all in a historical context, don't stop short and just mention the target practice. Own the whole story.


Originally? All of the above were developed for killing dinner. Then man got the idea to use them against each other, too.  Caveman had a club to fend of the sabertooth tiger. He saw his buddy caveman with his woman, and used the club on him, too. And probably her.

Give a man an object that can be used as a weapon, he's likely to use it as a weapon if needed.

I've seen a guy beaten to death with a lamp before. Just goes to show, people will fark ecah other up, no matter what they have at hand.
 
2014-01-14 05:14:00 PM  

Tigger: Weatherkiss:

There is. You have to get a permit to open carry, you have to get a permit to conceal carry. To do that, you have to go through the legal methods of doing so which vary from state to state. Some states are stringent on how they give out permits. Some states are not so stringent.

Excellent.

So why not make everyone that wants a gun take and pass that training?

Like the military does?


I'm okay with that
 
2014-01-14 05:14:28 PM  

Corvus: So people should be carrying guns all the time in public. Sorry I thought earlier you said they didn't.


Nope, People who feel the need to carry a firearm should be allowed to. Nothing in my statement made any suggestion that it was a requirement. You are free to do as you wish
 
2014-01-14 05:15:05 PM  

Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.

HE BROUGHT UP DRUNK DRIVING NOT ME.

GO ASK HIM.

Well, are you for background checks on booze?  If not, why do you hate children?


Nope.


He said since gun crimes would still happen if gun laws were passed. I explained to him drunk driving still happens after their are drunk driving laws and if he thought those should be repealed too?

Ok let me put it this way "Rape still happens even though we have laws against rape, do you think then we should get rid of those laws?"

Does that make it better for you?
 
2014-01-14 05:15:36 PM  

Corvus: Mikey1969: Kit Fister: Corvus: Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.

So then we should make drunk driving legal right because it still happens even though its illegal?

Uhm, you do realize that, like drunk driving, using a firearm to assault someone without a very very good reason (self defense) is already illegal, right? And that the use of a firearm in the commission of any other crime is a huge pile-on charge, right?

Drinking booze is legal. Drinking booze and then driving is illegal. Owning/carrying a gun is legal. Using a gun in a reckless or criminal manner is illegal.

Or are you somehow suggesting that mere ownership or carrying of a firearm at all is tantamount to the criminally negligent use of booze?

Yes he is... But he's not "afraid" of guns, of course...

You might want to look back. It was his analogy, not mine.

I am afraid of guns. Now why are gun owners so afraid to be out in public without a gun?


Most aren't... It looks like roughly a third of all Americans own guns. Do you really see 1 out of EVERY three people you encounter throughout the day carrying?
 
2014-01-14 05:16:39 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: So people should be carrying guns all the time in public. Sorry I thought earlier you said they didn't.

Nope, People who feel the need to carry a firearm should be allowed to. Nothing in my statement made any suggestion that it was a requirement. You are free to do as you wish


I am not talking about "feeling". Are you saying you just "Feel" like you need to carry a gun but realy don't have to?

You keep switching it. You weren't saying "feeling" before and then when I ask you to be specific you switch it to "feeling".
 
2014-01-14 05:17:06 PM  

Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.

Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.


Right "I" brought it up.


*I* brought up drunk driving, for the specific reason I stated earlier:

Drunk Driving is an example of the criminally negligent use of booze/a car. You are using both items in a manner which present a danger to the public.

The firearms equivalent of this is taking the gun out and waving it around and firing it in public. You are using the firearm, and your right ot carry a firearm, in a criminally negligent manner.

Based on those strict conditionals, I was pointing out that it's more likely that you will be harmed by the misuse of booze/a car than you are by the misuse of a firearm.
 
2014-01-14 05:17:59 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: So people should be carrying guns all the time in public. Sorry I thought earlier you said they didn't.

Nope, People who feel the need to carry a firearm should be allowed to. Nothing in my statement made any suggestion that it was a requirement. You are free to do as you wish


Am I free to not live in a country where I have to worry that some nut will shoot me in the head because I am texting?

"Freedom" doesn't just work in some magical bubble that doesn't affect others like you pretend it does.
 
2014-01-14 05:19:20 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.

Kit Fister: Corvus: Well except other people can shoot you with their gun and kill you. So that part is not your own choice now is it?

Considering that can happen just about anywhere, even the UK  (albeit much less likely), then I don't see how that's ever a reasonably sound thought.

You still have a greater chance, in the US, of dying due to a drunk driver, drowning in a pool, or having a heart attack than you do getting shot. But yes, do continue to fear the unlikely.


Right "I" brought it up.

*I* brought up drunk driving, for the specific reason I stated earlier:

Drunk Driving is an example of the criminally negligent use of booze/a car. You are using both items in a manner which present a danger to the public.

The firearms equivalent of this is taking the gun out and waving it around and firing it in public. You are using the firearm, and your right ot carry a firearm, in a criminally negligent manner.

Based on those strict conditionals, I was pointing out that it's more likely that you will be harmed by the misuse of booze/a car than you are by the misuse of a firearm.


Right but your original  point was even if we had gun laws we will still have gun crime.

Well we have laws against rape should those be removed because rape still exists?

Or is that logic you were using faulty?
 
2014-01-14 05:19:23 PM  

Weatherkiss: There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.


Dude, you spend a lot of time concerned with the attitudes of complete strangers.
 
2014-01-14 05:19:35 PM  

Weatherkiss: Tigger: Weatherkiss:

There is. You have to get a permit to open carry, you have to get a permit to conceal carry. To do that, you have to go through the legal methods of doing so which vary from state to state. Some states are stringent on how they give out permits. Some states are not so stringent.

Excellent.

So why not make everyone that wants a gun take and pass that training?

Like the military does?

I'm okay with that


Apologies for the repetition of a previous post; however what this implies is we have a serious problem here.

If a bunch of gun owners can agree on something as simple as "you should have to get training to wield something dangerous" then we have a giant problem with the fact that we can't even get a vote on anything approaching that level of stringency in Congress. Wayne LaPierre even reversed his OWN position on universal background checks.
 
2014-01-14 05:20:51 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.

I dunno.  I see someone strapping in an area where they're not likely a hunter or something, more likely either a douchebag or some psycho?  I don't go there.  I leave.  Usually these subsets look exactly the same and I'm not about to cut my life short betting on the douchebag.

Businesses must love this shiat.


I've stood next to people with guns on their hips and never once gotten shot. It's amazing, I must have lead-repelling properties or something. I even carry my pistol on my hip on occasion, when heading to the gun range, and nobody has ever gotten shot by my gun, nor have they opened fire upon me. Funny part is that the businesses I've been in haven't had an issue either. People come in, they buy their soda, pay for their gas, buy their groceries, get a donut, a cup of coffee, etc., and nothing happens except that they get out their wallet, pay, and head back out the door.

I know, it's weird. the way everyone's talking here, you'd expect them to be pulling a Homer, and using the gun to punch the buttons on the card reader when it comes time to enter their PIN, but that's not what happens. Even weirder: Some people have survived being in a business with a gun present more than once.
 
2014-01-14 05:21:51 PM  

Weatherkiss: However, openly carrying means you are alerting everybody around you that you do have a gun, but that it is holstered securely on your belt. People might get concerned. But you are displaying to your other human beings that you have nothing to hide.


Open carry is an open threat that if you have the temerity to not respect mah authoritay, I'll blow your farking head off.
 
2014-01-14 05:21:57 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: So what does that prove about gun laws again? Please explain it to us.

It proves that bad shiat can happen to good people, so laws enabling good people to arm themselves and level the playing field against those who do bad things are beneficial.


Hmm I don't see you saying here "People FEEL that bad shiat can happen.."

When you are talking about yourself you make it sound like a fact you "good people" need guns but when I ask you if that means all "good people" need guns you switch to it depends on how they "feel",
 
2014-01-14 05:23:49 PM  

quizzical: Dude, you spend a lot of time concerned with the attitudes of complete strangers.


He just wants people to know that he can adjust their non-compliant attitude with a bullet to the head. That means blah people not getting uppity, women knowing their place and children not speaking up.
 
2014-01-14 05:24:08 PM  

Corvus: I am not talking about "feeling". Are you saying you just "Feel" like you need to carry a gun but realy don't have to?

You keep switching it. You weren't saying "feeling" before and then when I ask you to be specific you switch it to "feeling".


I have never switched on this. Never. I have said alternately that gun owners carry because it's a tool they might need, or they feel they might need, or that they absolutely might need.

I have also said repeatedly that if you don't believe you need one, or don't want one, don't carry one.

Personally, I carry a firearm for the same reason I carry a pocket knife or a multitool: I may have a need for it at some point, and I'd rather have it than not. Does that mean that I will absolutely need it every time I go out? God I hope not.

However, given my past experience where bad shiat happened to me after repeatedly being told it doesn't happen/isn't likely to, I'm going to plan for the worst case scenario. This is the same reason I keep a first aid kit and a set of tools in my truck, and always keep a spare tire in good condition.

I don't think I can be any more clear than that. If you want to keep twisting my words to make some kind of point, go for it, but I think I've stated quite clearly and directly my point:

I carry a gun because I want to, because I think I might need it, and because history has taught me that the worst case scenario can happen. I don't like being unprepared, so I make that personal choice to carry.
 
2014-01-14 05:24:09 PM  

ikanreed: Mikey1969: ikanreed: Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.

Until a lump of copper is lodged in your parietal lobe.  Then you can't react.  It's the perfect solution.

How weird... 44 years, all of them in states where carrying is permitted, and the last 20 or so years where concealed carry is permitted. Not once have I seen a person draw their weapon, and not once I have I known anyone else to have been around where someone drew their weapon. I'm sure you see it daily though, right? Any day you get home having dodged a bullet is one less trip to the ER.

Come on man, it was a joke.  The relevant points are all quite clearly encoded in ownership vs violent death rates, controlling for other variables.  I know that there's less than a 1% chance of any given person dying of a gunshot wound.


Fine, but you gotta put something in to tag it as a joke in a hot thread like this. There is no such thing as subtext when it's all text based, there's a reason people invented emoticons...
 
2014-01-14 05:25:22 PM  

Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: I wonder what bows and arrows were used for? What was the purpose of the spear? How bout the atlatl? The slingshot? The crossbow? I mean, if we're gonna put it all in a historical context, don't stop short and just mention the target practice. Own the whole story.

Originally? All of the above were developed for killing dinner. Then man got the idea to use them against each other, too.  Caveman had a club to fend of the sabertooth tiger. He saw his buddy caveman with his woman, and used the club on him, too. And probably her.

Give a man an object that can be used as a weapon, he's likely to use it as a weapon if needed.

I've seen a guy beaten to death with a lamp before. Just goes to show, people will fark ecah other up, no matter what they have at hand.


We're not discussing random objects that "can" be used as weapons. We're discussing actual weapons, designed to be used as weapons. A lamp, a bat, a cro-bar "can" all be used as a weapons, but that's not their primary purpose. Let's not try to whitewash what firearms' primary purpose is, cuz open carry is a non-issue on the range and in the woods. You're talking about urban and suburban locales, where the primary target is people, not paper, not deer.
 
2014-01-14 05:25:41 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: But what troubles me most about this suggestion - and the general More Guns approach to social ills - is the absolute abandonment of civil society it represents. It gives up on the rule of law in favor of a Hobbesian "war of every man against every man" in which we no longer have genuine neighbors, only potential enemies. You may trust your neighbor for now - but you have high-powered recourse if he ever acts wrongly.

Whatever lack of open violence may be procured by this method is not peace or civil order, but rather a standoff, a Cold War maintained by the threat of mutually assured destruction. Moreover, the person who wishes to live this way, to maintain order at universal gunpoint, has an absolute trust in his own ability to use weapons wisely and well: he never for a moment asks whether he can be trusted with a gun. Of course he can! (But in literature we call this hubris.) Link


This is a pretty good point, and underlies the girth of the pro-guns everywhere side.  There is a millennial/messianic belief that we are in the end times (for them), and they need to arm themselves for the wars preeminent in our society.  More likely than not, this is a racial war that they are expecting.  Of course there is little confusion why this has ramped up since Obama was elected.

Essentially, these people have given up on civil society.  For whatever reason, it's not exactly clear, but presumably because they feel 1) emasculated, 2) impoverished, 3) their decision making freedoms have been curbed.  Since they are often straight white males, who are often lower class, and socially troubled, that none of these things have legitimately happened, but have only happened circumstantially to them, doesn't really occur to them.  They are massively about projection, and the only way they can seek defense against the changes in the world is by waving their prosthetics around against threats that don't actually exist.
 
2014-01-14 05:26:03 PM  

Weatherkiss: TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: TFerWannaBe: Weatherkiss: A responsible gun owner will never pull their piece on a whim

I can't tell the difference between a responsible gun owner and a maniac until he pulls and starts shooting. Can you?

I can't. Neither can you or anyone else.

However, openly carrying means you are alerting everybody around you that you do have a gun, but that it is holstered securely on your belt. People might get concerned. But you are displaying to your other human beings that you have nothing to hide.

A 'lone wolf' will simply not care. And the 'lone wolf' scenario is the majority of the most brutal gun crimes.

Someone who open carries does that as a courtesy to everyone around them that they're dangerous, but they aren't malicious.

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. You acknowledge that we can't tell the difference. Then you say a "lone wolf" won't care - implying that he may open carry, or may not. Then you go on to say that people who open carry aren't malicious; they just want to show people that they are carrying a dangerous weapon. This seems to contract your statement about the lone wolf - clearly some people who open carry may actually be malicious.

Regardless, I think you understand why some people, myself included, are uncomfortable with others walking around with firearms, even if they're in public view. It's impossible to tell if the armed person in front of you is a responsible citizen or some asshole who will shoot you over texting in a theatre (for which there is a special hell, but it's not the shooter's right to send him there).

I have no doubt that the vast majority of gun owners are mature and responsible, but since it's impossible to tell them from the maniacs and idiots until the bullets start to fly, how can I possibly support a policy permitting people to carry firearms in public?

I know what I say sounds contradictory, because it largely depends on one thing and one thing only. Motive.

A 'lone ...


Most armed muggers aren't "lone wolf" crazies.  They're mostly lazy criminals who've done plenty of B&Es, car thefts, hustling, or such, got tired of selling stolen crap for money and decided to cut out the middleman and steal the money directly from people.  Sociopaths, hardened career criminals who don't care if you live or die, sure, but for the most part opportunists.  The mere presence of an open carried gun will dissuade most as he doesn't want to risk the carrier being some crazy farker who will draw on him even though he has the drop on the guy.  You'll find some willing to go after a known armed individual if they needed the money, but there are easier targets.
 
2014-01-14 05:26:38 PM  

quizzical: Weatherkiss: There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.

Dude, you spend a lot of time concerned with the attitudes of complete strangers.


I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Unless I have to be a masochist and enjoy being treated like a walking dollar sign that has to be pushed until giving up said money either legally or illegally because other people do.

Tigger: If a bunch of gun owners can agree on something as simple as "you should have to get training to wield something dangerous" then we have a giant problem with the fact that we can't even get a vote on anything approaching that level of stringency in Congress. Wayne LaPierre even reversed his OWN position on universal background checks.


This is a problem, yes. I'm okay with more background checks. My real gun control measures would involve more affordable and accessible mental health to the people who need it. It's my belief that guns are a neutral tool to be used for legal or criminal purposes -- but the people behind them are the problem.

Background checks addresses one of the symptoms of unacceptable gun crimes, and you're right it is something to be worked on. The root of the problem is getting people with guns to not want to shoot up innocent people to begin with.
 
2014-01-14 05:26:49 PM  

Corvus: So what does that prove about gun laws again? Please explain it to us.


What it proves is that you like to dodge the issues when they get uncomfortable, you decided to drag it out when the OP said that he(she?) had been in a situation where self defense would have been possible, and as soon as that was stated, you made it into a cowboy pretending to have been in danger. As soon as you were actually presented with the actual situation, you acted like it was someone jumping topics. All I did was provide the post by post thread that YOU kept responding to, so that you wouldn't be so confused.
 
2014-01-14 05:26:59 PM  
Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King
 
2014-01-14 05:27:36 PM  

Corvus: Am I free to not live in a country where I have to worry that some nut will shoot me in the head because I am texting?

"Freedom" doesn't just work in some magical bubble that doesn't affect others like you pretend it does.


There is no absolute right anywhere in the constitution which guarantees you the right or privilege of removing the rights and privileges of others because you feel threatened by them.

Nor is there any guarantee of the right to exist without bad shiat happening, I'm sorry to say. You are at risk every day of your life. If it's not a gun, it's a knife, or a baseball bat or a drunk driver or the flu or getting hit by a meteor.

You do not have the right to revoke my freedoms because you feel threatened, you have only the right to take the necessary steps to ensure that you, yourself, are not directly in danger.
 
2014-01-14 05:29:06 PM  
I'll interpret your silence as "I'm sorry my argumentative personality defect caused me to not read your post and made me look like an even more insufferable douche than normal".

Apology accepted.
 
2014-01-14 05:29:16 PM  

Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: Farker Soze: Corvus: So you are for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal gun owner is this responsible?

Hah.  Close enough.

Huh?

So holding people to their own words about Responsible gun ownership is "banning all guns".

Yu think not letting crazy people have guns and background checks is 100% the same as "banning all guns".

Wow you are brainwashed by the NRA.

Ok, you don't want to take them all, just want to make it a privilege instead of a right, right?  I get it.  Still don't understand why you guys always throw around the drink driving comparison so much yet not one of you ever seems to be for very strict background checks so that we can make sure every legal drinker is responsible enough not to drink and drive.

HE BROUGHT UP DRUNK DRIVING NOT ME.

GO ASK HIM.

Well, are you for background checks on booze?  If not, why do you hate children?

Nope.


He said since gun crimes would still happen if gun laws were passed. I explained to him drunk driving still happens after their are drunk driving laws and if he thought those should be repealed too?

Ok let me put it this way "Rape still happens even though we have laws against rape, do you think then we should get rid of those laws?"

Does that make it better for you?


No, seems hypocritical to me to wish for some pre-crime laws on one hand and not for them on the other.
 
2014-01-14 05:29:53 PM  

Mikey1969: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Mikey1969: Staff also were taught how to react when someone open-carries into a building because "it's something that's coming out more and more," Bagladi said.

You know how I react? I don't. I go on about my business. It's amazing how farking easy it is, no training is needed.

I dunno.  I see someone strapping in an area where they're not likely a hunter or something, more likely either a douchebag or some psycho?  I don't go there.  I leave.  Usually these subsets look exactly the same and I'm not about to cut my life short betting on the douchebag.

Businesses must love this shiat.

I've stood next to people with guns on their hips and never once gotten shot. It's amazing, I must have lead-repelling properties or something. I even carry my pistol on my hip on occasion, when heading to the gun range, and nobody has ever gotten shot by my gun, nor have they opened fire upon me. Funny part is that the businesses I've been in haven't had an issue either. People come in, they buy their soda, pay for their gas, buy their groceries, get a donut, a cup of coffee, etc., and nothing happens except that they get out their wallet, pay, and head back out the door.

I know, it's weird. the way everyone's talking here, you'd expect them to be pulling a Homer, and using the gun to punch the buttons on the card reader when it comes time to enter their PIN, but that's not what happens. Even weirder: Some people have survived being in a business with a gun present more than once.


All it takes to get killed by some addle-pated elderly ex-cop who is packing in a movie theater is one time.  That's all it takes.  So, I don't have your faith in people.

What's wrong with your philosophy is that you feel that white dudes openly carrying weapons are magically the most harmless people on earth.

Nope.  I read the news, dude.  I know who is most likely to shoot up shopping malls and churches and schools.  Guess what?  It's white dudes with guns.

If I see some goober with a canon slung over his back, I'm getting out.  I'm calling the cops.  End of story.  And that's what civil society does, despite fools like you trying to break it down.
 
2014-01-14 05:30:28 PM  

Kit Fister: Gun crimes happen with or without guns.


how can a gun crime happen without a gun?
 
2014-01-14 05:31:09 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Am I free to not live in a country where I have to worry that some nut will shoot me in the head because I am texting?

"Freedom" doesn't just work in some magical bubble that doesn't affect others like you pretend it does.

There is no absolute right anywhere in the constitution which guarantees you the right or privilege of removing the rights and privileges of others because you feel threatened by them.

Nor is there any guarantee of the right to exist without bad shiat happening, I'm sorry to say. You are at risk every day of your life. If it's not a gun, it's a knife, or a baseball bat or a drunk driver or the flu or getting hit by a meteor.

You do not have the right to revoke my freedoms because you feel threatened, you have only the right to take the necessary steps to ensure that you, yourself, are not directly in danger.


You should read Isaiah Berlin on 'positive and negative freedom'. He (literally) wrote the book on the difference between 'freedom from' a thing and 'freedom to" a thing. It's a bit more nuanced than that.

Plus he's about the smartest political philosopher of the 20th Century so he's got that going for him.
 
2014-01-14 05:32:00 PM  

Corvus: Right but your original point was even if we had gun laws we will still have gun crime.

Well we have laws against rape should those be removed because rape still exists?

Or is that logic you were using faulty?


And we have gun laws. It's illegall to kill someone with a gun. it's illegal to hurt someone with a gun. it's illegal to use a gun during the commission of another crime. it is illegal to sell a gun to a minor. it's illegal to sell a gun to a felon. it's illegal to sell a gun across state lines without an FFL. It's illegal to carry a firearm concealed without a permit in most states.

And yet people still kill each other with guns.

It's illegal to drink and drive. It's illegal to operate a motor vehicle if you have a BAC above a certain limit. It's illegal to drive while using certain intoxicating medications and substances.  It's illegal to use a motor vehicle to cause injury to another person. It's illegal to injure someone and leave the scene or an accident.

And yet people still kill each other with cars.

I don't see where the logic or comparison is faulty at all. The point is now as it has always been: Laws against the device or the act will not curb the behavior. It will allow us to punish those who display the behavior. THat's the best anyone can do.
 
2014-01-14 05:33:32 PM  

skyotter: Kit Fister: Gun crimes happen with or without guns.

how can a gun crime happen without a gun?


whoops.
 
2014-01-14 05:34:11 PM  

justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King


Another rape lover appears.
 
2014-01-14 05:35:30 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: All it takes to get killed by some addle-pated elderly ex-cop who is packing in a movie theater is one time.  That's all it takes.  So, I don't have your faith in people.

What's wrong with your philosophy is that you feel that white dudes openly carrying weapons are magically the most harmless people on earth.

Nope.  I read the news, dude.  I know who is most likely to shoot up shopping malls and churches and schools.  Guess what?  It's white dudes with guns.

If I see some goober with a canon slung over his back, I'm getting out.  I'm calling the cops.  End of story.  And that's what civil society does, despite fools like you trying to break it down.



Ahhh, I see the problem here. You're putting words into my posts...

Got it. I mean, if we want to talk race, we could look at the incidences of crimes committed by minorities here, and that would total FAR more people than are shot in "shopping malls, churches and schools", but I'm not the one trying to bring racism into the discussion  here.
 
2014-01-14 05:35:41 PM  

Farker Soze: justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King

Another rape lover appears.


And just like a person who casually throws out the word rape like it's in vogue, to him the accusation is the evidence.
 
2014-01-14 05:37:26 PM  

Kit Fister: Corvus: Am I free to not live in a country where I have to worry that some nut will shoot me in the head because I am texting?

"Freedom" doesn't just work in some magical bubble that doesn't affect others like you pretend it does.

There is no absolute right anywhere in the constitution which guarantees you the right or privilege of removing the rights and privileges of others because you feel threatened by them.

Nor is there any guarantee of the right to exist without bad shiat happening, I'm sorry to say. You are at risk every day of your life. If it's not a gun, it's a knife, or a baseball bat or a drunk driver or the flu or getting hit by a meteor.

You do not have the right to revoke my freedoms because you feel threatened, you have only the right to take the necessary steps to ensure that you, yourself, are not directly in danger.


Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse.  Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat.  Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.
 
2014-01-14 05:37:54 PM  

Farker Soze: justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King

Another rape lover appears.


And now I remember why I have j******y blocked as a "moron".
 
2014-01-14 05:38:01 PM  

Tigger: You should read Isaiah Berlin on 'positive and negative freedom'. He (literally) wrote the book on the difference between 'freedom from' a thing and 'freedom to" a thing. It's a bit more nuanced than that.

Plus he's about the smartest political philosopher of the 20th Century so he's got that going for him.


I'll do that.
 
2014-01-14 05:42:06 PM  

Tigger: Weatherkiss: Tigger: Weatherkiss:

There is. You have to get a permit to open carry, you have to get a permit to conceal carry. To do that, you have to go through the legal methods of doing so which vary from state to state. Some states are stringent on how they give out permits. Some states are not so stringent.

Excellent.

So why not make everyone that wants a gun take and pass that training?

Like the military does?

I'm okay with that

Apologies for the repetition of a previous post; however what this implies is we have a serious problem here.

If a bunch of gun owners can agree on something as simple as "you should have to get training to wield something dangerous" then we have a giant problem with the fact that we can't even get a vote on anything approaching that level of stringency in Congress. Wayne LaPierre even reversed his OWN position on universal background checks.


This is they key point people always forget.  Forget about the hard left and hard right, most people still believe that the US can be a safe place where you can own a gun, and most will agree that a modicum of training and checking is what's really required.

I don't 'get' open carry, but if you want all the headaches that come with it, then more power to you... as long as you go through everything necessary to be a legal owner.  Yet when people talk of just making these kind of proactive checks and training universal, the worse of you lot start spewing the 'DER TAKIN WAY MEH GAWNS'.  You should be thoroughly embarrassed by that small percentage of your hobby, and should be working as hard as you can to distance yourself or ostracize them from the rest of you.
 
2014-01-14 05:42:34 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: But what troubles me most about this suggestion - and the general More Guns approach to social ills - is the absolute abandonment of civil society it represents. It gives up on the rule of law in favor of a Hobbesian "war of every man against every man" in which we no longer have genuine neighbors, only potential enemies. You may trust your neighbor for now - but you have high-powered recourse if he ever acts wrongly.


Only for the paranoid... I carry my gun when I travel interstate. I'm not taking the chance that if I break down, people will wait until the police get there before deciding to rob me. This doesn't mean that I expect to ever use my gun, but I also carry a jack in my car and don't expect to have a flat tire. People who carry in public aren't saying that they are GOING to use a gun, but they are acknowledging the fact that despite your "civil society", there isn't a police officer every 15 feet, and people get killed or mortally wounded before the cops get there almost every time.
 
2014-01-14 05:43:08 PM  

Weatherkiss: Farker Soze: justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King

Another rape lover appears.

And just like a person who casually throws out the word rape like it's in vogue, to him the accusation is the evidence.




You should just go with the godwin when you have nothing.

You know, it could be that corvus has shown all arguments to be at minimum, based faulty premises, and at worse to be objectively logically incorrect in this thread, but you keep on believing whatever you have to.

If gun nuts had logic, there would be no gun nuts.

Exhibit 1 - "gun crime exists with or without guns"

I wish i could say that was the stupidest argument posed by gun nuts in this thread, but the constant "laws dont work so why have laws?" Is still being touted out in this thread, so.... Yeah. Just wow.
 
2014-01-14 05:43:34 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.


If you don't notice people in everyday life being pushy, aggressive, manipulative, or intimidating then it's because it is so commonplace as to be unnoticable.

You have aggressive salesmen, you have manipulative Scumbag Steves, you have intimidating acquaintances who feed off of the weakness and fear of people. You have your criminal opportunists who simply want what you have and see you as prey. This has happened without guns. This has happened with guns.

People will never stop using negative social behaviors to get something out of you in public.

There was always a threatening element that other people have had and continue to have. They have refined their social tools to an artform in some cases. Manipulative people have always existed, even before firearms were invented. They will continue to exist with or without firearms.

Firearms in of themselves, carried openly -- is a courtesy to others around them, and those who interact with them socially to tread lightly because despite whatever 'aura' they give off, they do have a tool made specifically to destroy.

And the subconscious self-preservation instincts in people respond to that when they might otherwise not have.
 
2014-01-14 05:43:58 PM  

Kit Fister: It's illegal to drink and drive.


Kit Fister: And yet people still kill each other with cars.


Drunk driving deaths have decreased about 50% over the last thirty years. That wasn't by chance. It was through legislation, public policy, and public awareness.

The gun control crowd understands there will always be deaths by guns, suicidal, accidental and otherwise. But they think we can do better than 30,000 deaths a year. That's all. Let's get that number down to a lower steady state.
 
2014-01-14 05:43:58 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.


Ah, okay, and here no one actually said that.

To that end, I don't believe openly carrying a firearm is in and of itself a threat, if the person carrying the firearm is not himself behaving in a manner suggesting intent to use it.  However, I also agree that if i'm going to be going somewhere where firearms are not commonly displayed, the general sense of it not being a natural item in the environment would cause some consternation because it's strange and new and now you have the question why it's there and the intent of its presence.

To that end, i agree that it's polite for those who wish to carry guns to conceal them, or at least keep them out of plain sight, simply because it's unnecessary to display it. I keep a set of tools with me, but I don't need to hang those out in public, either, because why should I? I get them out if I need to.

I can understand and agree with that point of view.
 
2014-01-14 05:44:28 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse.  Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat.  Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.


No, BRANDISHING weapons is a threat. Look up the difference.
 
2014-01-14 05:46:09 PM  

Mikey1969: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: All it takes to get killed by some addle-pated elderly ex-cop who is packing in a movie theater is one time.  That's all it takes.  So, I don't have your faith in people.

What's wrong with your philosophy is that you feel that white dudes openly carrying weapons are magically the most harmless people on earth.

Nope.  I read the news, dude.  I know who is most likely to shoot up shopping malls and churches and schools.  Guess what?  It's white dudes with guns.

If I see some goober with a canon slung over his back, I'm getting out.  I'm calling the cops.  End of story.  And that's what civil society does, despite fools like you trying to break it down.


Ahhh, I see the problem here. You're putting words into my posts...

Got it. I mean, if we want to talk race, we could look at the incidences of crimes committed by minorities here, and that would total FAR more people than are shot in "shopping malls, churches and schools", but I'm not the one trying to bring racism into the discussion  here.


There's enough dog whistling in gun discussions that I know precisely who someone is depending on their view on the matter.  Sure, there are outliers, but they are very few and far between.

Race is a very, very powerful undercurrent in the devotion gun fans have to their instruments.  I know you'll try to deny it.  What animates the rest of us is a confusion why you guys perpetually feel your homes and womenfolk are going to be invaded by inner city blacks from Chicago at any minute.

But hey, I live in a big, densely populated city.  I actually deal with black people on a daily basis, sometimes with bad results.  I don't fear getting randomly shot by anybody in my pretty safe city, because I know there are other precautions rather than waddling around with a gun on my hip.  But then, my city is actually civil, despite any differences.  I am far more afraid, whenever I visit some red state, that the movie theater I'm entering might get shot up by one of you guys because of your inherent anger and other ugly emotions.

I think, legitimately, gun lobbies are energized nearly 98% by fear.
 
2014-01-14 05:46:12 PM  

Mikey1969: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: All it takes to get killed by some addle-pated elderly ex-cop who is packing in a movie theater is one time.  That's all it takes.  So, I don't have your faith in people.

What's wrong with your philosophy is that you feel that white dudes openly carrying weapons are magically the most harmless people on earth.

Nope.  I read the news, dude.  I know who is most likely to shoot up shopping malls and churches and schools.  Guess what?  It's white dudes with guns.

If I see some goober with a canon slung over his back, I'm getting out.  I'm calling the cops.  End of story.  And that's what civil society does, despite fools like you trying to break it down.


Ahhh, I see the problem here. You're putting words into my posts...

Got it. I mean, if we want to talk race, we could look at the incidences of crimes committed by minorities here, and that would total FAR more people than are shot in "shopping malls, churches and schools", but I'm not the one trying to bring racism into the discussion  here.


But I'm betting you're not part of a gang and you probably frequent suburban shopping malls and schools a lot more often than say the corner of 14th/Campbell in Oakland or Jefferson/Denker in LA. So let's stay on topic.
 
2014-01-14 05:46:15 PM  

Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.


Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.
 
2014-01-14 05:46:37 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Kit Fister: It's illegal to drink and drive.

Kit Fister: And yet people still kill each other with cars.

Drunk driving deaths have decreased about 50% over the last thirty years. That wasn't by chance. It was through legislation, public policy, and public awareness.

The gun control crowd understands there will always be deaths by guns, suicidal, accidental and otherwise. But they think we can do better than 30,000 deaths a year. That's all. Let's get that number down to a lower steady state.


Considering the 30k number is over 60% suicides, and the rest are largely based on the illegal drug trade and gang activity, I think we absolutely can do better than that, in pretty obvious ways.
 
2014-01-14 05:46:58 PM  

Weatherkiss: Farker Soze: justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King

Another rape lover appears.

And just like a person who casually throws out the word rape like it's in vogue, to him the accusation is the evidence.


Rape is in Vogue?  That magazine has really undergone a surprising change of direction.
 
2014-01-14 05:47:21 PM  

Weatherkiss:  I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Unless I have to be a masochist and enjoy being treated like a walking dollar sign that has to be pushed until giving up said money either legally or illegally because other people do.


No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.
 
2014-01-14 05:48:35 PM  

justtray: Exhibit 1 - "gun crime exists with or without guns"

I wish i could say that was the stupidest argument posed by gun nuts in this thread, but the constant "laws dont work so why have laws?" Is still being touted out in this thread, so.... Yeah. Just wow.


Yeah, that actually should've said "gun crime exists with or without gun bans".

It was a poor statement that I apologize for profusely.

Gun crimes will exist with or without severe restriction, and I favor figuring out ways to combat the behavior and not simply restrict the tools.

Does that make more sense to you?
 
2014-01-14 05:49:35 PM  

justtray: Weatherkiss: Farker Soze: justtray: Wow, Corvus laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.

Extra props to Kit Fisher for getting absolutely destroyed and just keep coming back for more. Bravo, I havent seen this kind of abuse since Rodney King

Another rape lover appears.

And just like a person who casually throws out the word rape like it's in vogue, to him the accusation is the evidence.

You should just go with the godwin when you have nothing.

You know, it could be that corvus has shown all arguments to be at minimum, based faulty premises, and at worse to be objectively logically incorrect in this thread, but you keep on believing whatever you have to.

If gun nuts had logic, there would be no gun nuts.

Exhibit 1 - "gun crime exists with or without guns"

I wish i could say that was the stupidest argument posed by gun nuts in this thread, but the constant "laws dont work so why have laws?" Is still being touted out in this thread, so.... Yeah. Just wow.


It's funny when you try to get all intellectual and shiat.
 
2014-01-14 05:50:39 PM  

quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.


I agree. But until there's a drastic change in human behavior, I'll feel more comfortable keeping people at arm's length and being wary of them, and having a gun for the really bad ones, than I will trusting them.

Of course, I also fully admit that after basically getting trashed just because i was in the wrong place at the wrong time on the wrong people's "turf', along with a few other really shiatty things that happened that took advantage of my trust, I'm just not willing to trust anyone again.

You may be a good person. You may be a saint. But keep your hands where I can see them and stay out of my house.
 
2014-01-14 05:51:15 PM  

Weatherkiss: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.

If you don't notice people in everyday life being pushy, aggressive, manipulative, or intimidating then it's because it is so commonplace as to be unnoticable.

You have aggressive salesmen, you have manipulative Scumbag Steves, you have intimidating acquaintances who feed off of the weakness and fear of people. You have your criminal opportunists who simply want what you have and see you as prey. This has happened without guns. This has happened with guns.

People will never stop using negative social behaviors to get something out of you in public.

There was always a threatening element that other people have had and continue to have. They have refined their social tools to an artform in some cases. Manipulative people have always existed, even before firearms were invented. They will continue to exist with or without firearms.

Firearms in of themselves, carried openly -- is a courtesy to others around them, and those who interact with them socially to tread lightly because despite whatever 'aura' they give off, they do have a tool made specifically to destroy.

And the subconscious self-preservation instincts in people respond to that when they might otherwise not have.


Well, you know, I've actually lived on this planet for a while and have known lots of people, so your little society lesson isn't big news.  But what amuses is the sense that openly carried weapons is a 'courtesy' to let me know where people stand when I speak to them.

I'm far less likely to speak to them.  Look at the fool in the movie theater, who shot a guy for texting.  I'm...  not going to deal with someone with a gun.  I already figure they have a shrunken sense of self and, because I cannot trust our government to govern on this issue, have never adequately proven they have the mental wherewithal to tote something like that around.

So, you have a gun?  I'm not even acknowledging you.  If somehow we have to speak, I do so with fake reverence, then zip off.  I'm pretty happy where I am, in my thriving, healthy, economically diverse city, where we actually have laws about this sort of thing.  I'm happy not going to wherever people have to creep around showing off the guns they've bought.  There's a reason Michigan is a shiathole.  Not because of the guns, but they come from the same, disenfranchised, fearful place.
 
2014-01-14 05:52:14 PM  

CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.


The people I piss off are generally those I don't give a shiat about.

quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.


Correct. They shouldn't. But such is life. I'd love a utopian society where I wouldn't feel safer using a gun. I hate the fact a gun is the only thing that can make me feel safe. I work at a hospital and the last thing I desire to do is hurt or injure another person. But when reality doesn't give a shiat about what things should be like, you have to sometimes do things you really don't feel like you should have to do.
 
2014-01-14 05:52:28 PM  
Perhaps your fellow citizens should start "standing their ground" and just blast away at anyone they see open-carrying because "hey, I felt threatened".
 
2014-01-14 05:52:41 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Kit Fister: Corvus: Am I free to not live in a country where I have to worry that some nut will shoot me in the head because I am texting?

"Freedom" doesn't just work in some magical bubble that doesn't affect others like you pretend it does.

There is no absolute right anywhere in the constitution which guarantees you the right or privilege of removing the rights and privileges of others because you feel threatened by them.

Nor is there any guarantee of the right to exist without bad shiat happening, I'm sorry to say. You are at risk every day of your life. If it's not a gun, it's a knife, or a baseball bat or a drunk driver or the flu or getting hit by a meteor.

You do not have the right to revoke my freedoms because you feel threatened, you have only the right to take the necessary steps to ensure that you, yourself, are not directly in danger.

Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse.  Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat.  Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development.


The irrational fear of inanimate objects is a treatable phobia.
 
2014-01-14 05:53:28 PM  

Kit Fister: quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.

I agree. But until there's a drastic change in human behavior, I'll feel more comfortable keeping people at arm's length and being wary of them, and having a gun for the really bad ones, than I will trusting them.

Of course, I also fully admit that after basically getting trashed just because i was in the wrong place at the wrong time on the wrong people's "turf', along with a few other really shiatty things that happened that took advantage of my trust, I'm just not willing to trust anyone again.

You may be a good person. You may be a saint. But keep your hands where I can see them and stay out of my house.


This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?
 
2014-01-14 05:53:48 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: There's a reason Michigan is a shiathole.


Really? You haven't seen much of it outside of detroit, then.
 
2014-01-14 05:54:36 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: But I'm betting you're not part of a gang and you probably frequent suburban shopping malls and schools a lot more often than say the corner of 14th/Campbell in Oakland or Jefferson/Denker in LA. So let's stay on topic.


I'm not the one who brought race into it... And before I moved out of Phoenix, I lived in extremely shiatty neighborhoods. For the last 3 1/2 years, I had the ghetto bird over my block multiple times a night, and spotlighting my actual yard at least once a week, so what's your point?
 
2014-01-14 05:55:37 PM  

CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.


His idealism is also a complete and utter fallacy.  Statistics already show that someone owning a gun is actually MORE likely to be assaulted or challenged.  Having the gun isn't protecting you from the criminals, but rather daring them to come at you, if the statistics are to be believed.
 
2014-01-14 05:55:50 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?


you must have missed my post regarding open carry specifically.

Open carry is impolite, in my personal opinion, unless in a situation that specifically warrants it. At the range? In the field? Hot day and have to take off the garment covering up the gun? Okay, I'll give it a pass. But I don't want to do it just to shove it in your face.

Well, maybe justtray's face. I'd love to shove it in his face. Repeatedly.
 
2014-01-14 05:55:51 PM  

Kit Fister: quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.

I agree. But until there's a drastic change in human behavior, I'll feel more comfortable keeping people at arm's length and being wary of them, and having a gun for the really bad ones, than I will trusting them.

Of course, I also fully admit that after basically getting trashed just because i was in the wrong place at the wrong time on the wrong people's "turf', along with a few other really shiatty things that happened that took advantage of my trust, I'm just not willing to trust anyone again.

You may be a good person. You may be a saint. But keep your hands where I can see them and stay out of my house.


So you admit to being a coward.   You could have saved a lot of time.
 
2014-01-14 05:56:35 PM  

quiotu: His idealism is also a complete and utter fallacy. Statistics already show that someone owning a gun is actually MORE likely to be assaulted or challenged. Having the gun isn't protecting you from the criminals, but rather daring them to come at you, if the statistics are to be believed.


[citation needed]
 
2014-01-14 05:56:49 PM  

Mikey1969: rzrwiresunrise: But I'm betting you're not part of a gang and you probably frequent suburban shopping malls and schools a lot more often than say the corner of 14th/Campbell in Oakland or Jefferson/Denker in LA. So let's stay on topic.

I'm not the one who brought race into it... And before I moved out of Phoenix, I lived in extremely shiatty neighborhoods. For the last 3 1/2 years, I had the ghetto bird over my block multiple times a night, and spotlighting my actual yard at least once a week, so what's your point?


Making sure you keep those red herrings out of the boat.
 
2014-01-14 05:57:10 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Well, you know, I've actually lived on this planet for a while and have known lots of people, so your little society lesson isn't big news. But what amuses is the sense that openly carried weapons is a 'courtesy' to let me know where people stand when I speak to them.

I'm far less likely to speak to them. Look at the fool in the movie theater, who shot a guy for texting. I'm... not going to deal with someone with a gun. I already figure they have a shrunken sense of self and, because I cannot trust our government to govern on this issue, have never adequately proven they have the mental wherewithal to tote something like that around.

So, you have a gun? I'm not even acknowledging you. If somehow we have to speak, I do so with fake reverence, then zip off. I'm pretty happy where I am, in my thriving, healthy, economically diverse city, where we actually have laws about this sort of thing. I'm happy not going to wherever people have to creep around showing off the guns they've bought. There's a reason Michigan is a shiathole. Not because of the guns, but they come from the same, disenfranchised, fearful place.


If I'm carrying a gun in public, it's because I want to run my errands and take care of business without being hassled. I don't openly carry a gun during social events. If I'm going to a bar or out with friends, I don't carry. Because it is a social event where I don't mind being bothered.

If I'm out and about with a daily agenda of things to get done, particularly if I have to go into an area I really don't like to be? I will carry. If someone sees me carry and doesn't want to talk to me, then that is better for the both of us. They're scared of me, and I don't feel like being social with them.

I don't do it to be malicious. I just want to be left the fark alone.
 
2014-01-14 05:57:35 PM  

CynicalLA: So you admit to being a coward. You could have saved a lot of time.


Freely and openly. Happens when you nearly die at the hands of another. If you're looking for some sense of shame in that from me, you're not going to find one. :)
 
2014-01-14 05:58:03 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.

I agree. But until there's a drastic change in human behavior, I'll feel more comfortable keeping people at arm's length and being wary of them, and having a gun for the really bad ones, than I will trusting them.

Of course, I also fully admit that after basically getting trashed just because i was in the wrong place at the wrong time on the wrong people's "turf', along with a few other really shiatty things that happened that took advantage of my trust, I'm just not willing to trust anyone again.

You may be a good person. You may be a saint. But keep your hands where I can see them and stay out of my house.

This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?


What, you have to be in your house to tell someone to stay out of your house?  Vampires are going to love that.
 
2014-01-14 05:58:26 PM  

Weatherkiss: quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.

Correct. They shouldn't. But such is life. I'd love a utopian society where I wouldn't feel safer using a gun. I hate the fact a gun is the only thing that can make me feel safe. I work at a hospital and the last thing I desire to do is hurt or injure another person. But when reality doesn't give a shiat about what things should be like, you have to sometimes do things you really don't feel like you should have to do.


You are the type of person that should never have a gun.  You are paranoid and need some mental help.  I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California.  A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.
 
2014-01-14 05:59:08 PM  

Weatherkiss: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Well, you know, I've actually lived on this planet for a while and have known lots of people, so your little society lesson isn't big news. But what amuses is the sense that openly carried weapons is a 'courtesy' to let me know where people stand when I speak to them.

I'm far less likely to speak to them. Look at the fool in the movie theater, who shot a guy for texting. I'm... not going to deal with someone with a gun. I already figure they have a shrunken sense of self and, because I cannot trust our government to govern on this issue, have never adequately proven they have the mental wherewithal to tote something like that around.

So, you have a gun? I'm not even acknowledging you. If somehow we have to speak, I do so with fake reverence, then zip off. I'm pretty happy where I am, in my thriving, healthy, economically diverse city, where we actually have laws about this sort of thing. I'm happy not going to wherever people have to creep around showing off the guns they've bought. There's a reason Michigan is a shiathole. Not because of the guns, but they come from the same, disenfranchised, fearful place.

If I'm carrying a gun in public, it's because I want to run my errands and take care of business without being hassled. I don't openly carry a gun during social events. If I'm going to a bar or out with friends, I don't carry. Because it is a social event where I don't mind being bothered.

If I'm out and about with a daily agenda of things to get done, particularly if I have to go into an area I really don't like to be? I will carry. If someone sees me carry and doesn't want to talk to me, then that is better for the both of us. They're scared of me, and I don't feel like being social with them.

I don't do it to be malicious. I just want to be left the fark alone.


How many strangers accost you on a typical day when you aren't carrying?
 
2014-01-14 05:59:25 PM  

quiotu: CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.

His idealism is also a complete and utter fallacy.  Statistics already show that someone owning a gun is actually MORE likely to be assaulted or challenged.  Having the gun isn't protecting you from the criminals, but rather daring them to come at you, if the statistics are to be believed.


So true but the gun nuts eat up all the fear.
 
2014-01-14 05:59:54 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: There's enough dog whistling in gun discussions that I know precisely who someone is depending on their view on the matter.  Sure, there are outliers, but they are very few and far between.

Race is a very, very powerful undercurrent in the devotion gun fans have to their instruments.  I know you'll try to deny it.  What animates the rest of us is a confusion why you guys perpetually feel your homes and womenfolk are going to be invaded by inner city blacks from Chicago at any minute.

But hey, I live in a big, densely populated city.  I actually deal with black people on a daily basis, sometimes with bad results.  I don't fear getting randomly shot by anybody in my pretty safe city, because I know there are other precautions rather than waddling around with a gun on my hip.  But then, my city is actually civil, despite any differences.  I am far more afraid, whenever I visit some red state, that the movie theater I'm entering might get shot up by one of you guys because of your inherent anger and other ugly emotions.

I think, legitimately, gun lobbies are energized nearly 98% by fear.


Except you don't know shiat about me, it turns out. For one, as I've mentioned, I don't carry, except when traveling between states, or when going to the gun range. The former because I will travel hundreds of miles without seeing a police officer or driving through a "civil city"(Whatever you mean by that), and the latter because it's easier, I don't end up with a concealed weapon, I don't have to make multiple trips to the car when I get to the range, or when I leave.

I have no problem going to the movies in a Red State. I might be a little concerned in Colorado(A Blue State), since that's where people tend to shoot each other. Weird how that happens.  Connecticut? That one's blue. So's Virginia. So I guess maybe just throwing the label around isn't such a good tactic for you.
 
2014-01-14 06:00:36 PM  

CynicalLA: You are the type of person that should never have a gun. You are paranoid and need some mental help. I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California. A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.


Ah, i love internet judgements based on some written statements and no actual experience with a person. :)
 
2014-01-14 06:00:56 PM  

Kit Fister: CynicalLA: So you admit to being a coward. You could have saved a lot of time.

Freely and openly. Happens when you nearly die at the hands of another. If you're looking for some sense of shame in that from me, you're not going to find one. :)


Ride that fear to then grave.  Sounds like a great life.
 
2014-01-14 06:01:15 PM  

quiotu: CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.

His idealism is also a complete and utter fallacy.  Statistics already show that someone owning a gun is actually MORE likely to be assaulted or challenged.  Having the gun isn't protecting you from the criminals, but rather daring them to come at you, if the statistics are to be believed.


I'm a her.

Also, I don't give a shiat about your statistics because I've said multiple times it's not just to deter criminal acts. It's to force people who interact with you into recognizing that despite however small or weak you might seem, you have the ability to injure or kill them. It's a very visible social symbol the same as punks with stupid haircuts, tats, and piercings in their face. They show the rest of the world they want to be left alone by going against the social norm.

Carrying guns openly is a similar way to tell people around you to leave you the fark alone. I'm not Annie Oakley, I'm not going to shoot from the hip. But if I'm 'daring' any criminal to come at me, that criminal is going to think long and hard about whether or not the risk of harming me outweighs the odds of him getting injured or killed. Either that criminal will think about that, or they won't.

The gun minimizes risks, it does not eliminate them.
 
2014-01-14 06:01:54 PM  

Kit Fister: CynicalLA: You are the type of person that should never have a gun. You are paranoid and need some mental help. I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California. A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.

Ah, i love internet judgements based on some written statements and no actual experience with a person. :)


Do you read her statements about changing people's attitude when she openly carries?
 
2014-01-14 06:03:01 PM  

Weatherkiss: t's to force people who interact with you into recognizing that despite however small or weak you might seem, you have the ability to injure or kill them.


See, this a farking crazy person that should not have a weapon.
 
2014-01-14 06:03:26 PM  

CynicalLA: Ride that fear to then grave. Sounds like a great life.


Hasn't stopped me from skydiving, white-water rafting, seeing most of the US, Canada, Mexico, and Europe, and doing a hell of a lot else I enjoy doing. I just hate people, and don't want to deal with them.
 
2014-01-14 06:03:39 PM  

CynicalLA: Kit Fister: CynicalLA: So you admit to being a coward. You could have saved a lot of time.

Freely and openly. Happens when you nearly die at the hands of another. If you're looking for some sense of shame in that from me, you're not going to find one. :)

Ride that fear to then grave.  Sounds like a great life.


Of course his decision to carry has zero impact on your life. What's important here, though, is that you feel superior to him.
 
2014-01-14 06:04:01 PM  

CynicalLA: See, this a farking crazy person that should not have a weapon.


Yeah, that might be going just a little beyond rational...
 
2014-01-14 06:04:40 PM  

CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: t's to force people who interact with you into recognizing that despite however small or weak you might seem, you have the ability to injure or kill them.

See, this a farking crazy person that should not have a weapon.


Yeah, a same woman just let's the rape happen.
 
2014-01-14 06:05:08 PM  

CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: quizzical: No one should have to feel like they need a gun to navigate unmolested through society.

Correct. They shouldn't. But such is life. I'd love a utopian society where I wouldn't feel safer using a gun. I hate the fact a gun is the only thing that can make me feel safe. I work at a hospital and the last thing I desire to do is hurt or injure another person. But when reality doesn't give a shiat about what things should be like, you have to sometimes do things you really don't feel like you should have to do.

You are the type of person that should never have a gun.  You are paranoid and need some mental help.  I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California.  A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.


CynicalLA:  ITG with a 20th degree blackbelt in Bullshido.  too bad everyone can't be as strong and brave as you.
 
2014-01-14 06:06:46 PM  

Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?

you must have missed my post regarding open carry specifically.

Open carry is impolite, in my personal opinion, unless in a situation that specifically warrants it. At the range? In the field? Hot day and have to take off the garment covering up the gun? Okay, I'll give it a pass. But I don't want to do it just to shove it in your face.

Well, maybe justtray's face. I'd love to shove it in his face. Repeatedly.


Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.
 
2014-01-14 06:08:51 PM  

CynicalLA: You are the type of person that should never have a gun. You are paranoid and need some mental help. I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California. A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.


I am paranoid and maybe I do need mental help. But that seems to happen when you have people close to you try to scare or harm you. Just because I am exercising my legal right to carry does not mean that I am trying to scare people. If they are scared, that is their problem -- because I have no interest in them. The only people who should be scared are those who try to take advantage of me.

GoldSpider: How many strangers accost you on a typical day when you aren't carrying?


Depends on what I'm doing, where I'm doing it, and what day it is. On the weekend, people will usually be out and about more. Which means more potential targets. If I'm going to a busy or unfamiliar area I might carry. It also depends on what your definition of 'accost' is.

My definition is dealing with someone I really don't want to be dealing with. If a single person on the street hands me a flyer, asks me if they can borrow a dollar, if I can do this or that for them no matter the slightest inconvenience -- it's one too many times.

I still deal with those people, but when I carry I don't deal with them as often and when I do the interactions are usually brief, short, and to the point. Just the way I prefer it. People aren't as pushy.
 
2014-01-14 06:09:31 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.


Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.
 
2014-01-14 06:09:41 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?

you must have missed my post regarding open carry specifically.

Open carry is impolite, in my personal opinion, unless in a situation that specifically warrants it. At the range? In the field? Hot day and have to take off the garment covering up the gun? Okay, I'll give it a pass. But I don't want to do it just to shove it in your face.

Well, maybe justtray's face. I'd love to shove it in his face. Repeatedly.

Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite?


A place that charges six bucks for a coffee?  Yes, they're highway robbers.
 
2014-01-14 06:11:44 PM  

Weatherkiss: CynicalLA: You are the type of person that should never have a gun. You are paranoid and need some mental help. I'm glad they don't let idiots like you carry in California. A coward that can't go through life without a deadly weapon to try and scare people.

I am paranoid and maybe I do need mental help. But that seems to happen when you have people close to you try to scare or harm you. Just because I am exercising my legal right to carry does not mean that I am trying to scare people. If they are scared, that is their problem -- because I have no interest in them. The only people who should be scared are those who try to take advantage of me.

GoldSpider: How many strangers accost you on a typical day when you aren't carrying?

Depends on what I'm doing, where I'm doing it, and what day it is. On the weekend, people will usually be out and about more. Which means more potential targets. If I'm going to a busy or unfamiliar area I might carry. It also depends on what your definition of 'accost' is.

My definition is dealing with someone I really don't want to be dealing with. If a single person on the street hands me a flyer, asks me if they can borrow a dollar, if I can do this or that for them no matter the slightest inconvenience -- it's one too many times.

I still deal with those people, but when I carry I don't deal with them as often and when I do the interactions are usually brief, short, and to the point. Just the way I prefer it. People aren't as pushy.


I can only speak for myself, but I'd think some variant of "no, thanks" would accomplish the same thing. But then I've never been approached aggressively by a stranger on the street, so YMMV.
 
2014-01-14 06:11:52 PM  

Weatherkiss: My definition is dealing with someone I really don't want to be dealing with. If a single person on the street hands me a flyer, asks me if they can borrow a dollar, if I can do this or that for them no matter the slightest inconvenience -- it's one too many times.


Normal people ignore panhandlers. Mentally ill people threaten to kill them for daring to breathe.

I guess this settles which one you are.
 
2014-01-14 06:14:26 PM  

Aexia: Weatherkiss: My definition is dealing with someone I really don't want to be dealing with. If a single person on the street hands me a flyer, asks me if they can borrow a dollar, if I can do this or that for them no matter the slightest inconvenience -- it's one too many times.

Normal people ignore panhandlers. Mentally ill people threaten to kill them for daring to breathe.

I guess this settles which one you are.


God you're stupid.
 
2014-01-14 06:14:26 PM  
All the people I know in Wyoming who are all gung ho about open carry are complete tools.  Most of them are collectively known as "that guy."  They are always biatching about how persecuted they are, getting in other people's business, and generally making a nuisance of themself to others.  Each one is pretty much the LAST person you want carrying a weapon, and they definitely fantasize about using it.
 
2014-01-14 06:14:27 PM  

GoldSpider: I can only speak for myself, but I'd think some variant of "no, thanks" would accomplish the same thing. But then I've never been approached aggressively by a stranger on the street, so YMMV.


Walk a mile in my shoes before I carried and even if you don't agree with why I carry, at least maybe you'd understand why I'd want to.

Aexia: Normal people ignore panhandlers. Mentally ill people threaten to kill them for daring to breathe.

I guess this settles which one you are.


You do realize it's illegal for me to threaten to shoot a panhandler with my gun in public, right? Threatening to shoot anyone while openly carrying would result in jailtime.

If they think I'm going to shoot them, maybe that says more about their motives than it does mine.
 
2014-01-14 06:15:06 PM  

Aexia: Weatherkiss: My definition is dealing with someone I really don't want to be dealing with. If a single person on the street hands me a flyer, asks me if they can borrow a dollar, if I can do this or that for them no matter the slightest inconvenience -- it's one too many times.

Normal people ignore panhandlers. Mentally ill people threaten to kill them for daring to breathe.

I guess this settles which one you are.


If you equate someone carrying a gun with threatening to kill them for daring to breathe, I'd guess she's not the one with the mental illness.
 
2014-01-14 06:16:46 PM  

Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.

Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.


It wasn't about nervous or twitchy, it was about monitoring everyone's safety awareness, regardless of the safety-rules we would talk about every time we got together. Now imagine everyone has a firearm in a public place and these are people you don't know. I don't know about you,  but I'm not about to assume everyone has my level of safety awareness or training. I'd rather there be no one carrying, including me.
 
2014-01-14 06:19:13 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.

Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.

It wasn't about nervous or twitchy, it was about monitoring everyone's safety awareness, regardless of the safety-rules we would talk about every time we got together. Now imagine everyone has a firearm in a public place and these are people you don't know. I don't know about you,  but I'm not about to assume everyone has my level of safety awareness or training. I'd rather there be no one carrying, including me.


Which is why I'm a proponent of mandatory safety training, and why I'm OK with CCW permits requiring in person on the range safety training.
 
2014-01-14 06:19:13 PM  

Weatherkiss: GoldSpider: I can only speak for myself, but I'd think some variant of "no, thanks" would accomplish the same thing. But then I've never been approached aggressively by a stranger on the street, so YMMV.

Walk a mile in my shoes before I carried and even if you don't agree with why I carry, at least maybe you'd understand why I'd want to.

Aexia: Normal people ignore panhandlers. Mentally ill people threaten to kill them for daring to breathe.

I guess this settles which one you are.

You do realize it's illegal for me to threaten to shoot a panhandler with my gun in public, right? Threatening to shoot anyone while openly carrying would result in jailtime.

If they think I'm going to shoot them, maybe that says more about their motives than it does mine.


I'd say a smallish woman has more of a reason to carry than most, but I will freely admit I'm a bit put off by the idea of using a gun to avoid typical day-to-day social interaction. But you're right, I haven't walked a mile in your shoes.
 
2014-01-14 06:19:20 PM  

Obama's Reptiloid Master: Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.


You assume that those are two mutually exclusive groups. You would be wrong. Those two groups overlap so much that they are almost identical.
 
2014-01-14 06:20:36 PM  

DrPainMD: Obama's Reptiloid Master: Open carry is great for police officers and trained professionals. Open carry is bad for Johnny Wantstobeahero.

You assume that those are two mutually exclusive groups. You would be wrong. Those two groups overlap so much that they are almost identical.


Especially laughable considering the guy that shot someone in a theater yesterday is a retired cop.
 
2014-01-14 06:20:59 PM  

Kit Fister: justtray: Exhibit 1 - "gun crime exists with or without guns"

I wish i could say that was the stupidest argument posed by gun nuts in this thread, but the constant "laws dont work so why have laws?" Is still being touted out in this thread, so.... Yeah. Just wow.

Yeah, that actually should've said "gun crime exists with or without gun bans".

It was a poor statement that I apologize for profusely.

Gun crimes will exist with or without severe restriction, and I favor figuring out ways to combat the behavior and not simply restrict the tools.

Does that make more sense to you?



Ok ill give you a pass on the first mistake. So then why did you follow up that mistake with a 'laws dont stop crime so dont have laws" argument? Surely youre aware that particular fallacy was disproven in the first gun thread after Sandy Hook and every one since.And of course i agree with changing the behavior, to which i will expand upon in my next post.
 
2014-01-14 06:21:03 PM  
Every morning, I commute.
Mild-mannered man. In a business suit.
When I wanna come home at the end of my day
There's all these other cars stacked up in my way.
I pull up behind one
Pull out my pistol
Blow 'em away

When I'm driving my car I wanna go fast
But there's this slow car, won't let me pass
I flash my lights. I honk my horn.
Well.... I have to consider him warned.
I pull up behind him
Pull out my pistol
Blow 'em away

Jesse James behind the wheel
It's high noon in my automobile
You call me crazy,
You call me sick

Yeah, I got to get to where I'm going to quick
Son of a biatch, he cut me off.
Three whole lanes he pulled across
Made me mad. Made me swerve.
Son of a biatch got what he deserved.
I pulled up behind him
Pulled out my pistol
Blew 'em away.

Oh, look
Motorcycle, is riding between
He's splittin' lanes, if you know what I mean
This cuttin' in line that's an act of war
I saw him comin'. I opened my door.
Knocked him over
Pulled out my pistol
Blew 'em away

Jesse James behind the wheel
It's high noon in my automobile
You call me crazy,
You call me sick

Yeah, I got to get to where I'm going to quick
Little ol' lady, bless her heart.
She's walkin' her poodle 'cross the boulevard.
It was wearin' a red knit sweater, little knitted hat
Probably named "Fifi" or somethin' stupid like that!
I say, "Here Fifi"
Pulled out my pistol
Blew it away.
 
2014-01-14 06:22:14 PM  

Corvus: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?


Need isn't the issue.
 
2014-01-14 06:22:37 PM  

justtray: Ok ill give you a pass on the first mistake. So then why did you follow up that mistake with a 'laws dont stop crime so dont have laws" argument? Surely youre aware that particular fallacy was disproven in the first gun thread after Sandy Hook and every one since.And of course i agree with changing the behavior, to which i will expand upon in my next post.


But I didn't make a laws don't stop crime so don't have laws argument. I said that laws themselves don't stop crime, which is why I think we should focus on changing the behaviors.
 
2014-01-14 06:22:40 PM  

Weatherkiss: You do realize it's illegal for me to threaten to shoot a panhandler with my gun in public, right? Threatening to shoot anyone while openly carrying would result in jailtime.

 You already said the reason you open carry is as an open threat to anyone who dares breath in your vicinity. You don't have to speak to threaten someone.
 
2014-01-14 06:24:23 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Marcus Aurelius: Call the police if someone open-carries a gun into a public building: That's the advice the Ottawa County Sheriff's Office is giving to Hudsonville city staff during trainings this month

I don't carry normally, but for this asshole, I would make an exception.  In fact I'd show up every damn day.

Let us know what the floor tastes like.


Tastes like sweet sweet lawsuit settlement money to me.

That being said, I never carry, mostly because it is the absolute best way to get yourself shot.

/and you look like an asshole
 
2014-01-14 06:24:57 PM  

GoldSpider: I'd say a smallish woman has more of a reason to carry than most, but I will freely admit I'm a bit put off by the idea of using a gun to avoid typical day-to-day social interaction. But you're right, I haven't walked a mile in your shoes.


Even being a smallish woman doesn't really matter. Because people give off the 'weakness' vibe no matter the size and gender they are. There are people from all walks of life who just want to be left the fark alone without needing to say anything, and plenty of people who might be anxious or simply give off an aura that they're an easy mark for quick money (whether legally or illegally), and a gun can change the way that person is perceived.

Everyone has the right to let everyone around them know to leave them alone. If guns are a good way to get that point across, then so be it.
 
2014-01-14 06:27:14 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: There are no more "injuns" looking to scalp you.
The robbers use PoS hacks now.
There won't be any slave uprisings any time soon.
There are no gangstas comin to cap yo ass, unless you tryin to creep turf or front off.
The game tend to avoid public places.
The city of Fallujah is nearly 7,000 mi away.
The Martians have ray-guns whose discharge travels at the speed of light.
What is the need for open-carry again?


Ummm... there may not be any of those things anymore, but there still is a 2nd Amendment.
 
2014-01-14 06:28:47 PM  

skyotter: Kit Fister: Gun crimes happen with or without guns.

how can a gun crime happen without a gun?


If I recall, ITAR makes it unlawful to post files to 3D print guns.  Is that a gun crime without a gun?

/I remember the days when PGP was a munition.
 
2014-01-14 06:28:51 PM  

Weatherkiss: GoldSpider: I'd say a smallish woman has more of a reason to carry than most, but I will freely admit I'm a bit put off by the idea of using a gun to avoid typical day-to-day social interaction. But you're right, I haven't walked a mile in your shoes.

Even being a smallish woman doesn't really matter. Because people give off the 'weakness' vibe no matter the size and gender they are. There are people from all walks of life who just want to be left the fark alone without needing to say anything, and plenty of people who might be anxious or simply give off an aura that they're an easy mark for quick money (whether legally or illegally), and a gun can change the way that person is perceived.

Everyone has the right to let everyone around them know to leave them alone. If guns are a good way to get that point across, then so be it.


I just think we would be better off if guns weren't perceived as something to fear and mistrust. You apparently disagree, and that's OK.
 
2014-01-14 06:30:37 PM  

Aexia: You already said the reason you open carry is as an open threat to anyone who dares breath in your vicinity. You don't have to speak to threaten someone.


Rattlesnakes give you the courtesy of rattling their tail. It means back off. It doesn't mean they're going to attack you. It means if you don't back the fark off out of their personal space, they're going to bite you.

Shaking my ass is reserved for dancing. So carrying a pistol openly is my way of telling people to leave me alone. A lot of other people feel the same way.

If people are threatened by me carrying my pistol around, they're free to call the police and have them waste taxpayer money shadowing a small white girl who barely reaches five feet tall. I have no motive to use my pistol in an illegal fashion, so I have nothing to worry about.

If people are afraid of me and my gun, then maybe they have a guilty conscience or maybe they're paranoid. In either case, that's a problem with their brain -- not mine.
 
2014-01-14 06:30:43 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Kit Fister: It's illegal to drink and drive.

Kit Fister: And yet people still kill each other with cars.

Drunk driving deaths have decreased about 50% over the last thirty years. That wasn't by chance. It was through legislation, public policy, and public awareness.

The gun control crowd understands there will always be deaths by guns, suicidal, accidental and otherwise. But they think we can do better than 30,000 deaths a year. That's all. Let's get that number down to a lower steady state.


The problem is that almost all forms of gun control that pass constitutional muster do nothing to reduce that death count.  Banning or restricting "assault weapons", limiting the concealed or open carry of firearms, and the like do nothing to reduce that death count.

As long as guns are legal and easily available, people are going to use said guns to shoot other people.  And, thanks to the second amendment, and lacking a huge super-majority of people wanting to ban guns to overturn the second amendment, guns are always going to be legal and easily available.
 
2014-01-14 06:32:17 PM  

Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: This is not a basis for open-carry. Is your house the local Starbucks? The public library? A gas station?

you must have missed my post regarding open carry specifically.

Open carry is impolite, in my personal opinion, unless in a situation that specifically warrants it. At the range? In the field? Hot day and have to take off the garment covering up the gun? Okay, I'll give it a pass. But I don't want to do it just to shove it in your face.

Well, maybe justtray's face. I'd love to shove it in his face. Repeatedly.


Penis metaphor aside, your attitude here is very well representative of gun nuts in general. They just want to 'stick it to the libs.'

The problem is, you assume I have a personal problem with your 2nd ammendment rights. I don't give a shiat what you're allowed to do, so long as you bear the societal cost of your personal decisions. I don't want to take away any tools, I simply want to disincentivize their ownership and change the behavior of people like you that feel the need to not only own them, but stockpile them, and bring them to public areas.

What I would like to see is increased taxation on guns, either through the manufacturers, to the consumers, on the bullets, or whatever other mechanism is decided to be most effective. There should be a registry of guns and their owners, exactly like there is for cars, so that liability can be accurately and quickly determined when a gun is improperly used. The legal owner will be liable for the actions commited with the gun due to negligence unless it was reported stolen prior to the incident. (obviously there is nuance here - this isn't a simple 1 page law issue) Finally, there should be at some interval, training requirements, much like the initial intended purpose of the 2nd ammendment being linked to miltiia use at a time when there was no standing federal army. I think if we do not restrict what can be owned, but instead put the cost and responsibility on those who want the priviledge of gun ownership, we will change the behavior of these individuals in the long run.

Now a side note;
Here's a simple but irrelevant question - Have you ever discharged your weapon, legally, to defend or stop a crime? No, I'm not talking about made up DGU where some guy yelled at you and you pulled your piece and he walked away. I'm talking about have you EVER actually had to use the weapon you feel the need to carry around? If the answer is no, why do you feel the need to carry it around. This should be introspective to any gun nut, I hope, and should help you understand why everyone on the other side finds you so paranoid.
 
2014-01-14 06:33:15 PM  

Kit Fister: justtray: Ok ill give you a pass on the first mistake. So then why did you follow up that mistake with a 'laws dont stop crime so dont have laws" argument? Surely youre aware that particular fallacy was disproven in the first gun thread after Sandy Hook and every one since.And of course i agree with changing the behavior, to which i will expand upon in my next post.

But I didn't make a laws don't stop crime so don't have laws argument. I said that laws themselves don't stop crime, which is why I think we should focus on changing the behaviors.


Okay, then I retract my criticism. Sorry.
 
2014-01-14 06:33:49 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Mikey1969: rzrwiresunrise: But I'm betting you're not part of a gang and you probably frequent suburban shopping malls and schools a lot more often than say the corner of 14th/Campbell in Oakland or Jefferson/Denker in LA. So let's stay on topic.

I'm not the one who brought race into it... And before I moved out of Phoenix, I lived in extremely shiatty neighborhoods. For the last 3 1/2 years, I had the ghetto bird over my block multiple times a night, and spotlighting my actual yard at least once a week, so what's your point?

Making sure you keep those red herrings out of the boat.


Once again, I AM NOT THE ONE WHO BROUGHT RACE INTO THE DISCUSSION.

So take your "red herring" bullshiat up with the person who DID brig up race.

I know, I know, not convenient, but that's the way it goes.
 
2014-01-14 06:38:26 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Drunk driving deaths have decreased about 50% over the last thirty years. That wasn't by chance. It was through legislation, public policy, and public awareness.

..

...and throwing millions of people in jail for driving safely from Point A to Point B, just because they have an arbitrary amount of alcohol in their bloodstream. Oh, and we accomplished it by gutting the Constitution.
 
2014-01-14 06:39:09 PM  

Geotpf: The problem is that almost all forms of gun control that pass constitutional muster do nothing to reduce that death count. Banning or restricting "assault weapons", limiting the concealed or open carry of firearms, and the like do nothing to reduce that death count.


HAHAHAHAH, what? How can you possibly make this bare assertion?

First of all, I garauntee you have an entirely false understanding of what the constitution means. Secondly, none of the things you proposed are actually on the table all. What is currently being shot down is universal background checks, registration, and ammo size limits. You know, things way, way less extreme that even from just a common sense standpoint, will impact gun deaths, let alone the mountain of data other countries have essentially given us. Or even our own country.

Do you require citations that you yourself cannot even provide to back your assertions? Because I CAN.
 
2014-01-14 06:40:44 PM  

justtray: Have you ever discharged your weapon, legally, to defend or stop a crime? No, I'm not talking about made up DGU where some guy yelled at you and you pulled your piece and he walked away. I'm talking about have you EVER actually had to use the weapon you feel the need to carry around? If the answer is no, why do you feel the need to carry it around. This should be introspective to any gun nut, I hope, and should help you understand why everyone on the other side finds you so paranoid.


No, and I hope I never have to. I would rather have and not need than need and not have.

This isn't like Lisa Simpson's "tiger-repelling rock" argument. Everyone knows what a gun is capable of doing. Unless you're getting mugged by an infant that has no concept of what a gun is, people know what guns are made to do.

To expect people to actually hope to use their firearm to hurt or injure another person in order to justify a firearm's existance is straight up evil. No human being should feel that bloodshed should occur in order to justify a gun's existance.

If the 'other' people on the gun issue think that responsible owners should have to kill or injure another person commiting a violent crime in order to justify its continued legal existance, I think they're more batshiat insane than some of the Teatards who think Obama is going to take their guns.
 
2014-01-14 06:41:47 PM  

justtray: Here's a simple but irrelevant question - Have you ever discharged your weapon, legally, to defend or stop a crime? No, I'm not talking about made up DGU where some guy yelled at you and you pulled your piece and he walked away. I'm talking about have you EVER actually had to use the weapon you feel the need to carry around? If the answer is no, why do you feel the need to carry it around. This should be introspective to any gun nut, I hope, and should help you understand why everyone on the other side finds you so paranoid.


You've convinced me.  I've never been in an auto accident, so seat belts are useless fetishes for the paranoid.  Helmets... those are straight up for pussies.
 
2014-01-14 06:42:04 PM  

quiotu: CynicalLA: Weatherkiss: I'd rather be concerned with their attitudes than their actions. Using a gun deters their actions. Carrying a gun openly deters their attitude. I don't like being insulted or disrespected or treated as a potential target for financial or criminal gain. I was tired of being a victim of pushy, aggressive people. I got a gun. Now people aren't so pushy or aggressive with me anymore.

Wow, you must piss a lot of people off.

His idealism is also a complete and utter fallacy.  Statistics already show that someone owning a gun is actually MORE likely to be assaulted or challenged.  Having the gun isn't protecting you from the criminals, but rather daring them to come at you, if the statistics are to be believed.


Someone OWNING a gun, or someone CARRYING a gun? There's a difference, and if you're going to cite "statistics", you should try and get it right.

Of course, you should also back up your assertions with some kind if a citation, but we're not gonna overdo it on your first rodeo, buddy...
 
2014-01-14 06:44:09 PM  

justtray: Now a side note;
Here's a simple but irrelevant question - Have you ever discharged your weapon, legally, to defend or stop a crime? No, I'm not talking about made up DGU where some guy yelled at you and you pulled your piece and he walked away. I'm talking about have you EVER actually had to use the weapon you feel the need to carry around? If the answer is no, why do you feel the need to carry it around. This should be introspective to any gun nut, I hope, and should help you understand why everyone on the other side finds you so paranoid.


Had to discharge a firearm? No. Had the need to use one to stop a crime? yes.

Next question?
 
2014-01-14 06:54:42 PM  

rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.

Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.

It wasn't about nervous or twitchy, it was about monitoring everyone's safety awareness, regardless of the safety-rules we would talk about every time we got together. Now imagine everyone has a firearm in a public place and these are people you don't know. I don't know about you,  but I'm not about to assume everyone has my level of safety awareness or training. I'd rather there be no one carrying, including me.


Of course you're leaving out the difference between people carrying in public and people at the range.


People carrying in public tend to leave their guns in the holster, and even if someone does pull their gun out for some reason, it's not 20 people with the express purpose of shooting their guns. It's people who are just doing normal stuff and happen to have a gun with them. It's not like the range at all really.
 
2014-01-14 06:59:09 PM  

Geotpf: The problem is that almost all forms of gun control that pass constitutional muster do nothing to reduce that death count.  Banning or restricting "assault weapons", limiting the concealed or open carry of firearms, and the like do nothing to reduce that death count.


I never advocated for a ban on anything. And I do not agree that "all forms of gun control" do nothing to reduce death count.
 
2014-01-14 07:00:46 PM  

DrPainMD: ...and throwing millions of people in jail for driving safely from Point A to Point B, just because they have an arbitrary amount of alcohol in their bloodstream.


We shouldn't have drunk driving laws?
 
2014-01-14 07:00:53 PM  

mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?


We can't. Just like we can't differentiate between a normal 80 year old driving to the flea market and the crazed, senile 80 year old driving through the flea market until it's too late.

Several things might happen:

1. The carnage from gun fire will become so great that:
either the culture and/or laws will change or we'll decide that XXX number of deaths is just acceptable collateral damage

or

2. The carnage from gun fire won't substantially change at all and either we'll decide that the current level of carnage is okay or we'll make cultural/legal changes because of it

or

3. Perhaps the carnage will increase in a completely out of control fashion and we'll have daily world-wide FPS events and it will be normal for everyone to carry multiple, different weapons and to wear kevlar suits, and only move around with "cover me" and dodge around bullet blocking objects

or

4. Something completely different will happen that we can't even imagine
 
2014-01-14 07:15:24 PM  

Weatherkiss: If the 'other' people on the gun issue think that responsible owners should have to kill or injure another person commiting a violent crime in order to justify its continued legal existance, I think they're more batshiat insane than some of the Teatards who think Obama is going to take their guns.


So you think that whether or not things actually happen shouldn't affect public policy? Because that's what it seems like you're saying.

How can you justify the need for something without showing the need? I'd say that's the basis for every law to ever be fathomed.

For example, the gun control side can point to a myriad of studies that show that you're more at risk by having a gun, more likely to shoot a loved one than an intruder, that more guns = more crime on a state by state basis, that the states with the least restrictive laws have the most gun crime, etc, yet we can't even begin to form a law that restricts or requires, well, anything.

But as I said in my initial post, it was an irrelevant question, because you don't have to constantly prove the need for it. However, you should at least understand why you're seen as paranoid or unstable to outsiders. And it was a nice platform to show how obstructionist the gun nut side is when there is legitimate data to support additional gun control.
 
2014-01-14 07:18:19 PM  

Kit Fister: justtray: Now a side note;
Here's a simple but irrelevant question - Have you ever discharged your weapon, legally, to defend or stop a crime? No, I'm not talking about made up DGU where some guy yelled at you and you pulled your piece and he walked away. I'm talking about have you EVER actually had to use the weapon you feel the need to carry around? If the answer is no, why do you feel the need to carry it around. This should be introspective to any gun nut, I hope, and should help you understand why everyone on the other side finds you so paranoid.

Had to discharge a firearm? No. Had the need to use one to stop a crime? yes.

Next question?


I totes believe you, just like I totes believe there's more defensive gun use than violent crime.

It was just a thought experiment, thanks for replying.
 
2014-01-14 07:19:08 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: I never advocated for a ban on anything. And I do not agree that "all forms of gun control" do nothing to reduce death count.


I do not agree that gun control is necessarily the answer that will have the most impact. Again, the number of 30k deaths due to guns is 60% suicides. So, wouldn't treating suicidal people and increasing awareness of/treatment of suicide/depression be more beneficial? Of the remaining number, a large majority of the crimes are committed by low-income, poorly educated folks who are using firearms to further criminal means of wealth enhancement. So, wouldn't increasing education, outreach, and programs that help folks that are poor and/or at risk to make better choices and not need to turn to crime and gangs be more useful?

Don't get me wrong, there are many things we can do that will help keep guns from flowing into the hands of the lawless. A big part of that has to be addressing the issues that drive the behaviors, though, otherwise we're not really fixing the problem, we're just spackeling over it.
 
2014-01-14 07:21:23 PM  
So hypothetically since most businesses have insurance, does there tend to be discount/premium change for businesses that adopt a "no guns/notify police" policy. I'd expect that the insurer would want to make sure for their liability that they did everything in their power to prevent a shooting in the insured's facility.

Isn't this the same reason stores won't pursue a shoplifter who make it outside of the store, and employees are trained to not be a hero and just give the robber what they want and expedite them out of the store.
 
2014-01-14 07:24:24 PM  

justtray: I totes believe you, just like I totes believe there's more defensive gun use than violent crime.

It was just a thought experiment, thanks for replying.


You know, I would be perfectly happy if we had a means to stop violence that didn't involve bullets. I like guns, sure, but as it is, it's an inefficient process that results in bodily harm. Ideally, I never want that to happen. We really don't have many alternatives that will reliably stop a determined attacker, though. There's a stun gun, but those are generally illegal for private citizens to own. There's mace, but mace is often times iffy and not really useful unless you get it in the face. Then there's tranquilizer darts, but the tranquilizers are usually hard to come by without certain licenses and take time to take effect, then you have to get the dosage right and risk reaction with other substances and/or physiological conditions...

I'd love to have some kind of futuristic plasma gun or sonic gun or something that simply stunned my attacker, rather than killing him. But that's science fiction.  Until then, I'm going to stick with a tool that lets me have some chance against an attacker or group of attackers so that I can at least fight back rather than simply beg for death as I bleed out. That wasn't a pleasant experience the last time.
 
2014-01-14 07:26:47 PM  
You guys aren't understanding the intent of this legislation at all.  All they're trying to do is make it easier to tell who the most Responsible® people are in any given public space, that way we'll know who to put the least restrictions on.
 
2014-01-14 07:30:08 PM  

Kit Fister: Again, the number of 30k deaths due to guns is 60% suicides.


Right. But they are no less dead and a gun was no less involved.

Kit Fister: So, wouldn't treating suicidal people and increasing awareness of/treatment of suicide/depression be more beneficial?


Let's also do this.

Kit Fister: Of the remaining number, a large majority of the crimes are committed by low-income, poorly educated folks who are using firearms to further criminal means of wealth enhancement.


I don't know that this is true.

Kit Fister: So, wouldn't increasing education, outreach, and programs that help folks that are poor and/or at risk to make better choices and not need to turn to crime and gangs be more useful?


Let's also do this.

Kit Fister: A big part of that has to be addressing the issues that drive the behaviors, though, otherwise we're not really fixing the problem, we're just spackeling over it.


Every single one of the above situations has one thing in common - a gun. We can address all those thing you want to address and tackle the access part of the equation.
 
2014-01-14 07:34:43 PM  

LadySusan: mr intrepid: That's always been my question; how do we differentiate between the hood going to knock over the quicky-mart, and Mr responsible gun owner? Until it's too late?

We can't. Just like we can't differentiate between a normal 80 year old driving to the flea market and the crazed, senile 80 year old driving through the flea market until it's too late


Easily preventable . Senility and other imparments don't just happen in an instance. Mandatory extensive psych, physical, and toxological evaluations yearly for every driver, monthly when your reach a certain age. Weekly for teenagers. Biometrics and breathalizer starters on every car mandatory.  National criminal background checks at every point of alcohol sales.  But, there is no public or political will  to do this. Like you said,  we have reached an acceptable level of automotive carnage, and it is far greater than firearms. Meanwhile, the gun carnage level has been dropping for awhile.
 
2014-01-14 07:35:32 PM  

Kit Fister: Again, the number of 30k deaths due to guns is 60% suicides. So, wouldn't treating suicidal people and increasing awareness of/treatment of suicide/depression be more beneficial? Of the remaining number, a large majority of the crimes are committed by low-income, poorly educated folks who are using firearms to further criminal means of wealth enhancement. So, wouldn't increasing education, outreach, and programs that help folks that are poor and/or at risk to make better choices and not need to turn to crime and gangs be more useful?


If gun owners cared about these things as much as they cared about their guns, we'd have the most robust social safety net on earth.

Until I see self-conscious gun owners marching on Washington for education reform, universal healthcare and a living wage, I'd rather just take your precious dick-extenders away.
 
2014-01-14 07:37:37 PM  

justtray: So you think that whether or not things actually happen shouldn't affect public policy? Because that's what it seems like you're saying.


It's easy to make the case for gun crimes, mass shootings, etc. being cause for more gun control. Extremely easy. Because there is raw, tangible data there to use to back up your case.

It is not easy for those of us on the pro-gun side of the issue to defend it. While we do have access to stastistics and plenty of real life stories backed by solid documentation of firearms being used for their intended purpose of hunting game, target practice, and home defense -- what we do not have statistics on is how many crimes are prevented simply by the criminal recognizing their intended target as openly carrying a pistol, and simply not executing their criminal act as a result.

This is both good and bad. It is good because of the raw reality of crimes simply not being committed due to the would-be criminal unwilling to take the risk, biding their time, and going after someone else who is not carrying. Since 'thought crime' is an impossibility, the statistics on crimes being prevented through the presence of a legally-carried sidearm (not its use) are dubious at worst, and unknowable at best.

Gambles are taken every day by criminals. Risk vs. Reward. The criminal act vs. the reward of said act, and the consequences of being caught. If one of the consequences of being caught is getting killed -- this is a variable that will no doubt influence the criminal's decision to act.

But there are no statistics to back up the 'would be' crimes prevented. That doesn't mean it isn't a very real thing -- since that's the idea of carrying a gun, deterring negative social behavior towards your person or those around you. It's not the idea of actually using it on another living person. It's the idea of preventing them from acting to begin with.

It is bad, because as previously mentioned... without data to back up would be criminals, it makes the current gun laws seem highly unnecessary from a pure data standpoint. With guns being used in illegal ways, it overshadows the many responsible gun owners who live their entire lives without having to use it -- because they aren't newsworthy, and it prevents 'would be' crimes from entering the statistics because it's impossible to know what crimes might have been prevented. As opposed to the crimes that are commited against people who openly carry, which once again -- provides raw data suggesting people who openly carry 'dare' others to attack them. When in fact it could be just as feasible many more don't occur at all because people don't want to take the gamble.
 
2014-01-14 07:43:45 PM  

The Name: Kit Fister: Again, the number of 30k deaths due to guns is 60% suicides. So, wouldn't treating suicidal people and increasing awareness of/treatment of suicide/depression be more beneficial? Of the remaining number, a large majority of the crimes are committed by low-income, poorly educated folks who are using firearms to further criminal means of wealth enhancement. So, wouldn't increasing education, outreach, and programs that help folks that are poor and/or at risk to make better choices and not need to turn to crime and gangs be more useful?

If gun owners cared about these things as much as they cared about their guns, we'd have the most robust social safety net on earth.

Until I see self-conscious gun owners marching on Washington for education reform, universal healthcare and a living wage, I'd rather just take your precious dick-extenders away.


well, you certainly sound like a dick.  Like attracts like I guess.
 
2014-01-14 07:46:10 PM  

BunkoSquad: Kit Fister: Uh, open-carry in MI has been legal. You just needed a CCW permit to carry in your vehicle.

What if you ride with your window open, and your arm holding your gun out the window. That sounds cool as shiat actually.


dude yes, and once in a while you can shoot it in the air a few times, like if the guy in front of you is going too slow
 
2014-01-14 07:49:37 PM  

Farker Soze: well, you certainly sound like a dick. Like attracts like I guess.


Yeah.  A nation full of gun owners, most of whom never utter the words "poverty" or "mental health" unless followed by "should be focused on instead of guns."  And I'M the dick.
 
2014-01-14 07:58:11 PM  
I write my politicians and support every effort I can for education, higher minimum wages, and so on. All of the gun owners I know are parents and are heavily involved in education and social programs and many also donate to local shelters, mental health programs and what have you.

I am proud to say I donate regularly to many orgs that support these efforts.

But yeah, gun owners are the bad guys here.
 
2014-01-14 08:01:15 PM  
So when it comes to all the OC proponents here- are you just unholstering and leaving your weapon unsecured in your vehicle every time you come across a "No Guns Allowed" sign on private property? What about other areas that weapons are not allowed?
 
2014-01-14 08:06:20 PM  

Kit Fister: I write my politicians and support every effort I can for education, higher minimum wages, and so on. All of the gun owners I know are parents and are heavily involved in education and social programs and many also donate to local shelters, mental health programs and what have you.

I am proud to say I donate regularly to many orgs that support these efforts.

But yeah, gun owners are the bad guys here.


Again, if you (a collective "you") cared about social welfare as much as you do about your guns, we'd have a social safety net that is as strong as our gun laws are weak.  Why is the NRA the wealthiest and most prolific institution representing gun owners?  For as much as you guys talk about social welfare (when gun control is put on the table, at least), shouldn't it be "Gun Owners for Social Democracy" or something to that effect?
 
2014-01-14 08:09:14 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: well, you certainly sound like a dick. Like attracts like I guess.

Yeah.  A nation full of gun owners, most of whom never utter the words "poverty" or "mental health" unless followed by "should be focused on instead of guns."  And I'M the dick.


Oh boo hoo, someone cares more about one subject than another one that I prefer, so I'm going to take that away out of pure spite. Yep, your a dick.
 
2014-01-14 08:12:57 PM  

Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: well, you certainly sound like a dick. Like attracts like I guess.

Yeah.  A nation full of gun owners, most of whom never utter the words "poverty" or "mental health" unless followed by "should be focused on instead of guns."  And I'M the dick.

Oh boo hoo, someone cares more about one subject than another one that I prefer, so I'm going to take that away out of pure spite. Yep, your a dick.


But it's that "one subject that I prefer" that YOU guys are bringing up as the key to alleviating problems associated with your "subject."  That kind of puts the ball in you guys' court, and you're not following through.  So yeah, let's cut the BS and solve those problems the easy way.
 
2014-01-14 08:18:36 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: well, you certainly sound like a dick. Like attracts like I guess.

Yeah.  A nation full of gun owners, most of whom never utter the words "poverty" or "mental health" unless followed by "should be focused on instead of guns."  And I'M the dick.

Oh boo hoo, someone cares more about one subject than another one that I prefer, so I'm going to take that away out of pure spite. Yep, your a dick.

But it's that "one subject that I prefer" that YOU guys are bringing up as the key to alleviating problems associated with your "subject."  That kind of puts the ball in you guys' court, and you're not following through.  So yeah, let's cut the BS and solve those problems the easy way.


why are you ranting so much on the internet when you could be out working a soup kitchen or developmental half way house?   More dickish behavior showing through.
 
2014-01-14 08:19:56 PM  

Kit Fister: I write my politicians and support every effort I can for education, higher minimum wages, and so on. All of the gun owners I know are parents and are heavily involved in education and social programs and many also donate to local shelters, mental health programs and what have you.

I am proud to say I donate regularly to many orgs that support these efforts.


You forgot to tell us about your black friends.
 
2014-01-14 08:23:18 PM  
First the rape enthusiast shows and now the racists. Swell.
 
2014-01-14 08:26:11 PM  

Farker Soze: why are you ranting so much on the internet when you could be out working a soup kitchen or developmental half way house? More dickish behavior showing through.


Last semester I taught 56 undergrads ancient history; this semester I'm teaching about 75.  Education was one of the topics brought up here, and I'm following through by dedicating my life (not to mention sacrificing my health) to it.

I was going to follow that up with a challenge to your own contributions to society, but I've already lost track of the point, which is that the support gun owners show for social welfare is not reflected in their politics.  Again, if they brought as much fervor to social welfare issues as they do to gun issues, then Congressmen would be just as afraid to vote against the minimum wage increase as they are to vote for gun control.
 
2014-01-14 08:31:57 PM  

Ringshadow: Wait what?

Open Carry has been legal in Michigan for years. My brother's an open carry supporter.


There's at least one in every family.
 
2014-01-14 08:33:55 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: why are you ranting so much on the internet when you could be out working a soup kitchen or developmental half way house? More dickish behavior showing through.

Last semester I taught 56 undergrads ancient history; this semester I'm teaching about 75.  Education was one of the topics brought up here, and I'm following through by dedicating my life (not to mention sacrificing my health) to it.

I was going to follow that up with a challenge to your own contributions to society, but I've already lost track of the point, which is that the support gun owners show for social welfare is not reflected in their politics.  Again, if they brought as much fervor to social welfare issues as they do to gun issues, then Congressmen would be just as afraid to vote against the minimum wage increase as they are to vote for gun control.


When I think of helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach, teaching ancient history to college undergrads isn't high on my list. It's not even in the top 14.
 
2014-01-14 08:34:33 PM  
Real solutions to imaginary threats for imaginary heroes.
 
2014-01-14 08:39:09 PM  

edmo: Real solutions to imaginary threats for imaginary heroes.


Yeah, it's a good thing criminal acts only happen on TV, in the movies, and in video games.
 
2014-01-14 08:40:25 PM  

Farker Soze: When I think of helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach, teaching ancient history to college undergrads isn't high on my list. It's not even in the top 14.


Well, to begin with we weren't even talking about helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach per se.  I'm talking about public policy, not individual charity.  Simple question: why are Congressmen not afraid to vote against a minimum wage increase but very afraid to vote for gun control?

And while we're at it, just for the hell of it, tell me what contribution you're making to society that stacks up against my teaching.
 
2014-01-14 08:41:31 PM  

EdNortonsTwin: The reason people open carry is......................it's been a secret until now...................because it's funny to watch people wet themselves when they see a safely holstered pistol.

I'd open carry from time to time if it was legal here.

/ 8.5" thanks for asking.


They do make pistols that aren't chopped-down-to-stupid AR15s.

i1346.photobucket.com
 May I suggest something more purpose-built and useful, with a 6.5" barrel, like this:
ruger.com
 
2014-01-14 08:47:25 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: When I think of helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach, teaching ancient history to college undergrads isn't high on my list. It's not even in the top 14.

Well, to begin with we weren't even talking about helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach per se.  I'm talking about public policy, not individual charity.  Simple question: why are Congressmen not afraid to vote against a minimum wage increase but very afraid to vote for gun control?

And while we're at it, just for the hell of it, tell me what contribution you're making to society that stacks up against my teaching.


I give very large government checks to people who usually aren't very well off after events that would have otherwise devastated them financially.
 
2014-01-14 08:48:44 PM  

Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: When I think of helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach, teaching ancient history to college undergrads isn't high on my list. It's not even in the top 14.

Well, to begin with we weren't even talking about helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach per se.  I'm talking about public policy, not individual charity.  Simple question: why are Congressmen not afraid to vote against a minimum wage increase but very afraid to vote for gun control?

And while we're at it, just for the hell of it, tell me what contribution you're making to society that stacks up against my teaching.

I give very large government checks to people who usually aren't very well off after events that would have otherwise devastated them financially.


You forgot to tell me about your black friends.
 
2014-01-14 08:48:49 PM  

ikanreed: JerseyTim: 99% percent of open carriers look like tools, but it's still better than concealed carry. Concealed carry is like, "ok, if shiat goes down, I can be the hero." At least open is carry is, "Hopefully shiat won't go down if they see my piece."

And the sad thing is, the difference should be completely irrelevant to us gun control advocates.  The not-entirely-justified assumption of them not shooting people for no reason belies both activities.  Whether you see it or not, it can still be used to kill someone without a thought.


In fact, no, it can't.  Killing someone with a gun does, in fact, require a thought.  And when you stay stupid shiat like that, you make it harder for those of who would like to see intelligent restrictions get anything done, but you play into the "omg liberals think guns kill people by themselves!11!!" mindset.
 
2014-01-14 08:53:03 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: When I think of helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach, teaching ancient history to college undergrads isn't high on my list. It's not even in the top 14.

Well, to begin with we weren't even talking about helping the downtrodden and social welfare outreach per se.  I'm talking about public policy, not individual charity.  Simple question: why are Congressmen not afraid to vote against a minimum wage increase but very afraid to vote for gun control?

And while we're at it, just for the hell of it, tell me what contribution you're making to society that stacks up against my teaching.

I give very large government checks to people who usually aren't very well off after events that would have otherwise devastated them financially.

You forgot to tell me about your black friends.


What is it with your racists?
 
2014-01-14 08:53:49 PM  

justtray: Wow, dumbass thinks he laid down the old school alley rape on the gun nuts in this thread.


This must be that rape culture I hear so much about.
 
2014-01-14 08:53:56 PM  

DrPainMD: rzrwiresunrise: There are no more "injuns" looking to scalp you.
The robbers use PoS hacks now.
There won't be any slave uprisings any time soon.
There are no gangstas comin to cap yo ass, unless you tryin to creep turf or front off.
The game tend to avoid public places.
The city of Fallujah is nearly 7,000 mi away.
The Martians have ray-guns whose discharge travels at the speed of light.
What is the need for open-carry again?

Ummm... there may not be any of those things anymore, but there still is a 2nd Amendment.


Open-carry is different from right-to-bear.
 
2014-01-14 08:54:09 PM  

Farker Soze: What is it with your racists?


My racists are just fine, thank you very much.  Is there something wrong with yours?
 
2014-01-14 09:02:36 PM  

Weatherkiss: Corvus: So gun nuts in this thread are both saying:
A) There is NO reason you should feel nervous others have a gun or that you need a gun on public.
B) I MUST have a gun in public because of all those reason above I said you don't need to have a gun.


Umm how does that make sense?

If you feel you have to have a gun, then why don't others have the same reason need to have a gun?

You don't bring a knife to a gun fight? You don't bring fists to a gun fight? There are many ways to harm other people using completely legal methods (including your fists). There are many ways to manipulate people to do what you want.

But a gun is generally agreed upon as being the final decider of a fight. You carry a gun because it is the superior weapon to either a knife, fist, etc. (again, depending on situation this can be untrue, but for your common everyday life it is).

There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.


This is one of the more stupid things I have read this year.
/I'm sure your mom is proud.
//At least I think that's what she was trying to say.
///She wasn't enunciating clearly at the time.
 
2014-01-14 09:03:28 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: What is it with your racists?

My racists are just fine, thank you very much.  Is there something wrong with yours?


you. Stupid tablet. Twice in 20-so posts two guys invoke black people in a condescending way when they got nothing. Mighty white of you. Can't admit that you can't handle someone actually in the field helpng the poor, with both hard work and hard cash, while you're.. teaching them about the Phoenician Empire?
 
2014-01-14 09:04:07 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.


And don't you DARE suggest that guns are psychological substitutes for penises!
 
2014-01-14 09:08:20 PM  

The Name: Kit Fister: I write my politicians and support every effort I can for education, higher minimum wages, and so on. All of the gun owners I know are parents and are heavily involved in education and social programs and many also donate to local shelters, mental health programs and what have you.

I am proud to say I donate regularly to many orgs that support these efforts.

But yeah, gun owners are the bad guys here.

Again, if you (a collective "you") cared about social welfare as much as you do about your guns, we'd have a social safety net that is as strong as our gun laws are weak.  Why is the NRA the wealthiest and most prolific institution representing gun owners?  For as much as you guys talk about social welfare (when gun control is put on the table, at least), shouldn't it be "Gun Owners for Social Democracy" or something to that effect?


Would you like to concede this sweeping generalization to laziness or bigotry?
 
2014-01-14 09:10:29 PM  

The Name: demaL-demaL-yeH: There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.

And don't you DARE suggest that guns are psychological substitutes for penises!



You do know I didn't write that, right?
The original author of that idiotic tripe was Weatherkiss.
/Pistols are also a piss-poor substitute for brains, balls, and situational awareness.
 
2014-01-14 09:12:52 PM  
If all of you pants wetters are so intent on living in a country without guns.....there is nothing stopping you from doing that. I can even provide you with links to airlines if you are having trouble moving to Australia or England.
 
2014-01-14 09:17:51 PM  

Weatherkiss: There's a certain respect or fear for pistols. If you want to give someone an attitude adjustment, you openly carry. If you take the same human being and put them in front of someone who wants something from them, if that human being has a gunbelt and a holstered pistol -- more often than not the way you deal with that person will be extremely different.

And I think there are a lot of people in everyday life that needs to have an attitude adjustment.


www.tricitypsychology.com
 
2014-01-14 09:23:20 PM  

Toxicphreke: If all of you pants wetters are so intent on living in a country without guns.....there is nothing stopping you from doing that. I can even provide you with links to airlines if you are having trouble moving to Australia or England.


1. Do you carry a firearm?
b. What are the reasons you carry a firearm?
 
2014-01-14 09:32:45 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: You do know I didn't write that, right?


Yeah, I know.  Got distracted while quoting.  Sorry.
 
2014-01-14 09:42:37 PM  

mediablitz: MFAWG: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

It's so that you'll know to not disrespect the carrier.

Makes it easier to kill someone if they are texting during the previews of a movie.


So what you're saying is, "ban retired cops?"
 
2014-01-14 09:44:12 PM  

Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.


Actually you don't live in such a place. But if you live in the US you do live in a country where if you want to carry a gun 24 hours a day that option is available to you. Unless you live in one of the formerly free parts of the country where the uber-wealthy have decided that for their own personal safety you must be made helpless. Those same ones who are surrounded 24/7, often at YOUR expense, with armed bodyguards.
 
2014-01-14 09:46:27 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Toxicphreke: If all of you pants wetters are so intent on living in a country without guns.....there is nothing stopping you from doing that. I can even provide you with links to airlines if you are having trouble moving to Australia or England.

1. Do you carry a firearm?
b. What are the reasons you carry a firearm?


www.united.com
www.aa.com
www.delta.com
www.qantas.com.au/

Do you need more to feel better? If you live in the United States you accept and abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. If you feel so strongly about not abiding it...leave. Simple problem solved. You can sleep well tonight....well maybe not tonight..I am sure you are still packing your bags.
 
2014-01-14 09:51:18 PM  

ex-nuke: Unless you live in one of the formerly free parts of the country where the uber-wealthy have decided that for their own personal safety you must be made helpless.


Were our 300 million guns actually being used to wage literal class warfare, you'd have a point.
 
2014-01-14 09:53:34 PM  

WillJM8528: If you want to carry a weapon in the Army you have to pass the ASVAB, pass a physical and mental exam, then prove to a Drill Sergeant that you can handle it without blowing your (or your buddies) brains out.


Hahahahahahahaha. Are you seriously suggesting for even a second that any of that is difficult? Come on son, that's just absurd. There were so many "ND's" fired into that fkn sand barrel outside our barracks in my basic class that you'd have thought they handed the bullets out when we got back from the range.
 
2014-01-14 10:01:36 PM  

Mikey1969: rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.

Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.

It wasn't about nervous or twitchy, it was about monitoring everyone's safety awareness, regardless of the safety-rules we would talk about every time we got together. Now imagine everyone has a firearm in a public place and these are people you don't know. I don't know about you,  but I'm not about to assume everyone has my level of safety awareness or training. I'd rather there be no one carrying, including me.

Of course you're leaving out the difference between people carrying in public and people at the range.


People carrying in public tend to leave their guns in the holster, and even if someone does pull their gun out for some reason, it's not 20 people with the express purpose of shooting their guns. It's people who are just doing normal stuff and happen to have a gun with them. It's not like the range at all really.


Then there's no reason to have the gun. They can do their normal stuff unarmed.

One argument presented has been that the worst can happen so a firearm is necessary. If that's the case, the counter-argument can't be that these are just normal situations where people just happen to be carrying. It's disingenuous.
 
A7
2014-01-14 10:11:08 PM  
Nothing "New" about Open Carry in Michigan.
"Michigan is a traditional open carry state. Open carry is more common in rural areas. You may NOT open carry in a car without a permit. However, Michigan recognizes the  resident permits of all 50 states. ..."
http://www.opencarry.org/?page_id=257

The Boot-Strap Expat
http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/
 
2014-01-14 10:16:56 PM  

The Name: ex-nuke: Unless you live in one of the formerly free parts of the country where the uber-wealthy have decided that for their own personal safety you must be made helpless.

Were our 300 million guns actually being used to wage literal class warfare, you'd have a point.


his point is fine. What are you talking about?
 
2014-01-14 10:17:15 PM  

The Name: And don't you DARE suggest that guns are psychological substitutes for penises!


demaL-demaL-yeH: This is one of the more stupid things I have read this year.


So I'm assuming both of you have spoken to a police officer before. Or perhaps either of you have spoken to someone who openly carried.

In the case of the police officer, "Some people respect the badge, everybody respects the gun."

Or maybe one or both of you have felt someone else putting your life in danger where you felt completely helpless. How many times have either of you been raped or mugged? How about your mothers, sisters, or your daughters? How many times have you personally had to deal with pushy people when you were at your weakest?

If the presence of a person openly carrying a gun does not give off a signal that they are not to be farked with, then why are you bed-wetters so adamant about not allowing people to openly carry? Obviously if the people carrying them are weak or using them as penis substitutes and nothing more, then what the fark do you care?

If they're so impotent that they need a gun, what do you care? Obviously they're beneath you.

And obviously your female family members can just get raped like a pro and you'd mock them for feeling weak, paranoid, and helpless next time they go out the door by themselves?

Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.
 
2014-01-14 10:17:17 PM  
I'm really tired of the assumption that I'm supposed to feel safer with a group of gun-toting douchebags in the vicinity.
 
2014-01-14 10:24:22 PM  

kregh99: I'm really tired of the assumption that I'm supposed to

not feel safer with a group of gun-toting douchebags law abiding citizensin the vicinity.

Fixed that for you
 
2014-01-14 10:30:01 PM  

Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.


Ladies and gentlemen, your average gun owner.
 
2014-01-14 10:37:04 PM  

The Name: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

Ladies and gentlemen, your average gun owner.


Bet it just burns you up that you have to change your attitude when addressing someone who is carrying a holstered pistol in plain sight. You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you? Knowing that you have to treat the person with respect? Is that such a foreign feeling for you to treat strangers with respect?

You're so used to treating people like dirt under your fingernails, or seeing other people as potential ATM machines or labor if you push the right buttons on them that when you see a person safely carrying a pistol around it throws you off your game since you have to reconsider it?

Or maybe you think women should just mugged or raped and shrug it off and say that statistically it should never happen to them again. Does that make them feel better, you think? Knowing that they were in the statistical minority? Do you think they take comfort in knowing they're only a minority in a statistic so they shouldn't be able to carry a pistol around?
 
2014-01-14 10:40:00 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


You could make basically the same argument for glasses.

After all, contact lenses are a thing, so clearly anyone wearing frames must be trying to look like a douche.

Clearly, horn-rims should be illegal.
 
2014-01-14 10:40:22 PM  

Weatherkiss: You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you?


And don't you DARE suggest that gun enthusiasts are paranoid.
 
2014-01-14 10:43:26 PM  

The Name: Weatherkiss: You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you?

And don't you DARE suggest that gun enthusiasts are paranoid.


Pretty sure I said I was paranoid before. So you're trying to prove a point that was never attempted to be made.

I'm sure if Mommy The Name was ever raped or mugged and she told you that she wanted to carry a pistol around to feel safer, you'd mock her and tell her that she's just being paranoid. I'm sure she'd shrug her shoulders and say you were right and that the whole rape or mugging was just a statistic and not an actual experience for her.
 
2014-01-14 10:48:03 PM  

Weatherkiss: The Name: Weatherkiss: You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you?

And don't you DARE suggest that gun enthusiasts are paranoid.

Pretty sure I said I was paranoid before. So you're trying to prove a point that was never attempted to be made.

I'm sure if Mommy The Name was ever raped or mugged and she told you that she wanted to carry a pistol around to feel safer, you'd mock her and tell her that she's just being paranoid. I'm sure she'd shrug her shoulders and say you were right and that the whole rape or mugging was just a statistic and not an actual experience for her.


Ah, mother-rape.  The non-Godwin Godwin.
 
2014-01-14 10:49:01 PM  

Weatherkiss: The Name: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

Ladies and gentlemen, your average gun owner.

Bet it just burns you up that you have to change your attitude when addressing someone who is carrying a holstered pistol in plain sight. You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you? Knowing that you have to treat the person with respect? Is that such a foreign feeling for you to treat strangers with respect?

You're so used to treating people like dirt under your fingernails, or seeing other people as potential ATM machines or labor if you push the right buttons on them that when you see a person safely carrying a pistol around it throws you off your game since you have to reconsider it?

Or maybe you think women should just mugged or raped and shrug it off and say that statistically it should never happen to them again. Does that make them feel better, you think? Knowing that they were in the statistical minority? Do you think they take comfort in knowing they're only a minority in a statistic so they shouldn't be able to carry a pistol around?


Forget it, kiss, he's trolling. Ivory tower elitist history profs such as him don't give a damn about the lesser people's every day problems, let alone feelings. I mean, he actually said above he considers teaching rich college kids ancient history his life contribution to the underclass. The nerve. For a ball less wonder, what balls.
 
2014-01-14 10:53:08 PM  

The Name: Weatherkiss: The Name: Weatherkiss: You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you?

And don't you DARE suggest that gun enthusiasts are paranoid.

Pretty sure I said I was paranoid before. So you're trying to prove a point that was never attempted to be made.

I'm sure if Mommy The Name was ever raped or mugged and she told you that she wanted to carry a pistol around to feel safer, you'd mock her and tell her that she's just being paranoid. I'm sure she'd shrug her shoulders and say you were right and that the whole rape or mugging was just a statistic and not an actual experience for her.

Ah, mother-rape.  The non-Godwin Godwin.


So you don't dispute that you would treat your mother like any other person who wanted to carry a pistol after a life-altering experience and mock her.

You also apparently dispute that manipulative or intimidating people do not exist in the world, and that if such people did exist the only way they could be intimidating or manipulative is if they had a firearm on them.

You ever met a guy bigger than you? How about 2 or 3 feet taller? 3 times as bulky? And say he wanted you to do something for him. Didn't have to be illegal, but you really didn't want to do it. Could be the smallest of things, but it'd inconvenience and bother you regardless and you did it for fear of him being able to quite easily harm you physically?

You ever think maybe he wouldn't do that if he saw you carrying something that didn't care how big he was?

Didn't think so. You apparently don't have a mother nor have ever come across another human being in your life on Earth who has ever used you for their own gain.
 
2014-01-14 10:57:11 PM  

Corvus: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?


No, but I'll agree that there are some people who don't think they need a gun in public. If you think you need to carry a gun and don't NEED it you have wasted a few minutes and the extra effort of carrying a few extra ounces around all day. If you think you don't need it and it happens that you do, you've saved a little effort and possibly wasted the rest of your life.
 
2014-01-14 10:58:02 PM  

The Name: ex-nuke: Unless you live in one of the formerly free parts of the country where the uber-wealthy have decided that for their own personal safety you must be made helpless.

Were our 300 million guns actually being used to wage literal class warfare, you'd have a point.


They are, in a way.  Guns are used defensively, against the criminal class, hundreds of thousands of times a year.
 
2014-01-14 11:12:58 PM  

Toxicphreke: demaL-demaL-yeH: Toxicphreke: If all of you pants wetters are so intent on living in a country without guns.....there is nothing stopping you from doing that. I can even provide you with links to airlines if you are having trouble moving to Australia or England.

1. Do you carry a firearm?
b. What are the reasons you carry a firearm?

www.united.com
www.aa.com
www.delta.com
www.qantas.com.au/

Do you need more to feel better? If you live in the United States you accept and abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. If you feel so strongly about not abiding it...leave. Simple problem solved. You can sleep well tonight....well maybe not tonight..I am sure you are still packing your bags.


There are very few valid reasons to walk around armed in public.
Four come readily to mind:
1) It's hunting season.
2) I am the recipient a valid, credible, and direct threat to my life.
3) My job requires it.
4) I am in a combat zone.

There are a multitude of invalid excuses to walk around armed in public, which all pretty much boil down to armed Walter Mitty syndrome, looking for trouble, paranoia, persecution complex and other mental illnesses, fear, a lack of sound judgment and situational awareness, profound stupidity, inability to accurately assess threats (but I repeat myself), and fear.

I'll step away from your fear for a moment and point out that, from purely a statistical and actuarial standpoint, being around firearms significantly raises the probability of you or someone near and dear to you developing bullet holes.

Since I have personally experienced all four of the above valid reasons for walking around armed in public - hunting season covers one of them and being in combat zones covered the rest -, I will tell you flat out that the United States is not a combat zone; the voices in your head are wrong; and you're far, far more likely to become a gunshot or rape victim in your own home because the perpetrator will be somebody you trust. In public, it suffices to remain aware of your surroundings and unimpaired, stop going to places where you know you'll find trouble, and carry yourself with confidence.

Calling me afraid because I do not walk around armed in public and consider people who do so without valid reason seriously flawed and delusional (see above) is the single most egregious act of projection I have read this year. Congratulations.

Since I take my oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America far more seriously than the neo(confederate)s and certain toads in Congress, I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

PS It is perfectly legal to have firearms in both the United Kingdom and Australia.
PPS Your wall of words hasn't kept us from noticing that you still didn't answer my questions.
 
2014-01-14 11:14:48 PM  

ex-nuke: Corvus: GoldSpider: Corvus: Hey maybe all of us don't want to live in a country where we feel we must carry a gun around 24/7.

Then don't feel that way.

Oh then so you admit people don't need guns in public?

No, but I'll agree that there are some people who don't think they need a gun in public. If you think you need to carry a gun and don't NEED it you have wasted a few minutes and the extra effort of carrying a few extra ounces around all day. If you think you don't need it and it happens that you do, you've saved a little effort and possibly wasted the rest of your life.


If people who carry guns around were really concerned about safety, they'd be wearing helmets as well.
 
m00
2014-01-14 11:16:55 PM  

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Well imagine if you conceal carry. Someone sees evidence of the holster/bulge/whatever and goes "oh noes! why are they secretly carrying a gun!" so open carry is meant to advertise the person is a law abiding citizen and not trying to hide anything,
 
2014-01-14 11:19:24 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Toxicphreke: demaL-demaL-yeH: Toxicphreke: If all of you pants wetters are so intent on living in a country without guns.....there is nothing stopping you from doing that. I can even provide you with links to airlines if you are having trouble moving to Australia or England.

1. Do you carry a firearm?
b. What are the reasons you carry a firearm?

www.united.com
www.aa.com
www.delta.com
www.qantas.com.au/

Do you need more to feel better? If you live in the United States you accept and abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. If you feel so strongly about not abiding it...leave. Simple problem solved. You can sleep well tonight....well maybe not tonight..I am sure you are still packing your bags.

There are very few valid reasons to walk around armed in public.
Four come readily to mind:
1) It's hunting season.
2) I am the recipient a valid, credible, and direct threat to my life.
3) My job requires it.
4) I am in a combat zone.

There are a multitude of invalid excuses to walk around armed in public, which all pretty much boil down to armed Walter Mitty syndrome, looking for trouble, paranoia, persecution complex and other mental illnesses, fear, a lack of sound judgment and situational awareness, profound stupidity, inability to accurately assess threats (but I repeat myself), and fear.

I'll step away from your fear for a moment and point out that, from purely a statistical and actuarial standpoint, being around firearms significantly raises the probability of you or someone near and dear to you developing bullet holes.

Since I have personally experienced all four of the above valid reasons for walking around armed in public - hunting season covers one of them and being in combat zones covered the rest -, I will tell you flat out that the United States is not a combat zone; the voices in your head are wrong; and you're far, far more likely to become a gunshot or rape victim in your own home because the perpetrator will be somebody you trust. In ...


Ok...I fell for it...I got trolled..it took your wall of text comment for me to get it...good one bro.
 
2014-01-14 11:20:08 PM  

m00: FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

Well imagine if you conceal carry. Someone sees evidence of the holster/bulge/whatever and goes "oh noes! why are they secretly carrying a gun!" so open carry is meant to advertise the person is a law abiding citizen and not trying to hide anything,


Meh.  To me they're little different.  "Oh hey, a gun nut in a sports coat." vs. "Oh hey, a gun nut."
 
2014-01-14 11:21:17 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.


I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.
 
2014-01-14 11:30:53 PM  

Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.


Give him all the guns, because you don't need them. He knows what you need. Trust him, he was a soldier, he's got your best interests in mind.
 
m00
2014-01-14 11:32:58 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development


Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............. that's a dangerous argument. Anything can be perceived by anyone as a threat. If we want to ban all things that someone may consider a threat, welcome to having no rights.

Or do you mean just banning things you consider a threat, or just banning guns and the threat thing was just a justification?
 
m00
2014-01-14 11:35:15 PM  

The Name: Meh. To me they're little different. "Oh hey, a gun nut in a sports coat." vs. "Oh hey, a gun nut."


I was just explaining the point. As a society, we traditionally have disliked "hidden weapons" for some reason. We disliked hidden things in general. Now we don't mind if something is hidden, as long as we don't know about it (see: NSA wiretapping).
 
2014-01-14 11:36:43 PM  

Farker Soze: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

Give him all the guns, because you don't need them. He knows what you need. Trust him, he was a soldier, he's got your best interests in mind.


Hey now, don't piss him off TOO much.  I have it on the good authority of many Fark gun nuts that the military going turncoat is expected to be indispensable to the success of Revolutionary War II: Hoveround Hellfire.
 
2014-01-14 11:41:33 PM  

Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.


This thread has less airborne shiat:  Start around here.
 
2014-01-14 11:43:45 PM  

The Name: Farker Soze: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

Give him all the guns, because you don't need them. He knows what you need. Trust him, he was a soldier, he's got your best interests in mind.

Hey now, don't piss him off TOO much.  I have it on the good authority of many Fark gun nuts that the military going turncoat is expected to be indispensable to the success of Revolutionary War II: Hoveround Hellfire.


You should shut up and lay low after your massive self ownage, Mr "I contribute to the poor and sacrificed my health for them by teaching college history!"  Go taunt some more rape victims, you seem good at that.
 
2014-01-14 11:47:12 PM  

Toxicphreke: I'll step away from your fear for a moment and point out that, from purely a statistical and actuarial standpoint, being around firearms significantly raises the probability of you or someone near and dear to you developing bullet holes.

Since I have personally experienced all four of the above valid reasons for walking around armed in public - hunting season covers one of them and being in combat zones covered the rest -, I will tell you flat out that the United States is not a combat zone; the voices in your head are wrong; and you're far, far more likely to become a gunshot or rape victim in your own home because the perpetrator will be somebody you trust. In ...

Ok...I fell for it...I got trolled..it took your wall of text comment for me to get it...good one bro.


You need to step away from the meth lab, pull your head our of your fourth point of contact, and breathe some untainted air for once.
 
2014-01-14 11:52:27 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

This thread has less airborne shiat:  Start around here.


So, you want to ignore the Heller decision, ignore the Militia Act of 1903, disregard the "unorganized militia," and revert to compulsory military service?  So the military can come in to your house to inspect your militia M249/M4 (fully automatic, of course)?  You going to subsidize the safes everyone will need too?  How would we encourage the wealthier militia member to buy weapons for the poorer ones who can't afford them?  Maybe a tax subsidy for M-16s, mags, optics, a sidearm, and ammo?

I'm assuming this would invalidate all local gun control ordinances, the Hughes Amendment, and the NFA as a compromise, and would extend to people who are disabled/elderly and otherwise unable to participate in militia activities.
 
2014-01-14 11:52:45 PM  

Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

Give him all the guns, because you don't need them. He knows what you need. Trust him, he was a soldier, he's got your best interests in mind.

Hey now, don't piss him off TOO much.  I have it on the good authority of many Fark gun nuts that the military going turncoat is expected to be indispensable to the success of Revolutionary War II: Hoveround Hellfire.

You should shut up and lay low after your massive self ownage, Mr "I contribute to the poor and sacrificed my health for them by teaching college history!"  Go taunt some more rape victims, you seem good at that.


Lol.  I'm not trolling, but I'm beginning to see how it's fun.  Mr. "I write government checks for an unnamed agency that go to a vague class of people who are underprivileged for one reason or another," had you spent the past semester in my class, you would be a much better writer; heck, some of my students who came in virtually illiterate could now probably teach you a great deal.

Oh, and if we want to talk about how I'm contributing to helping the underclass, at least two of my students intend to teach high school history when they graduate.  So yeah, I may not be down in the gutters teaching inner-city school kids, or whatever image you have of what I should be doing, but I'm working 70 hours a week to equip a younger generation to do just that.
 
2014-01-14 11:56:28 PM  

Fark It: How would we encourage the wealthier militia member to buy weapons for the poorer ones who can't afford them?


Well Jesus, I should hope they wouldn't need any encouraging, considering how fervently dedicated they are to social equality.  And especially with guns.  I'd expect the wealthier ones to be showering Saturday Night Specials upon the common folk every Sunday at the barn dance.
 
2014-01-14 11:56:40 PM  

m00: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............. that's a dangerous argument. Anything can be perceived by anyone as a threat. If we want to ban all things that someone may consider a threat, welcome to having no rights.

Or do you mean just banning things you consider a threat, or just banning guns and the threat thing was just a justification?


Not really, since she has explicitly stated that she carries to threaten people. 

Weatherkiss: Bet it just burns you up that you have to change your attitude when addressing someone who is carrying a holstered pistol in plain sight. You have to think twice before trying to manipulate them, don't you? Knowing that you have to treat the person with respect? Is that such a foreign feeling for you to treat strangers with respect?


See? She is not well and she needs serious help. I fervently hope that she seeks the help she needs before she harms herself or somebody else.
 
2014-01-14 11:56:52 PM  

The Name: Oh, and if we want to talk about how I'm contributing to helping the underclass, at least two of my students intend to teach high school history when they graduate. So yeah, I may not be down in the gutters teaching inner-city school kids, or whatever image you have of what I should be doing, but I'm working 70 hours a week to equip a younger generation to do just that.


So, "teaching high school history" (or teaching people who may or may not teach high school history) is now serving the underclass?  Is everybody beneath you?
 
2014-01-15 12:00:17 AM  

Fark It: The Name: Oh, and if we want to talk about how I'm contributing to helping the underclass, at least two of my students intend to teach high school history when they graduate. So yeah, I may not be down in the gutters teaching inner-city school kids, or whatever image you have of what I should be doing, but I'm working 70 hours a week to equip a younger generation to do just that.

So, "teaching high school history" (or teaching people who may or may not teach high school history) is now serving the underclass?  Is everybody beneath you?


So . . . people who train other people to do socially valuable work contribute nothing?  So if I want to join Doctors without Borders, all I need is a passport, a stethoscope and a scalpel?  Sweet!
 
2014-01-15 12:01:39 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Toxicphreke: I'll step away from your fear for a moment and point out that, from purely a statistical and actuarial standpoint, being around firearms significantly raises the probability of you or someone near and dear to you developing bullet holes.

Since I have personally experienced all four of the above valid reasons for walking around armed in public - hunting season covers one of them and being in combat zones covered the rest -, I will tell you flat out that the United States is not a combat zone; the voices in your head are wrong; and you're far, far more likely to become a gunshot or rape victim in your own home because the perpetrator will be somebody you trust. In ...

Ok...I fell for it...I got trolled..it took your wall of text comment for me to get it...good one bro.

You need to step away from the meth lab, pull your head our of your fourth point of contact, and breathe some untainted air for once.


Yep...you told me...again what is keeping you in a country that you obviously hate due to their freedoms? You have no problem exercising your 1st amendment right...allow others to exercise their second.
 
2014-01-15 12:03:48 AM  

Toxicphreke: You have no problem exercising your 1st amendment right...allow others to exercise their second.


The fact that it's a right is a problem.
 
2014-01-15 12:11:28 AM  

The Name: Toxicphreke: You have no problem exercising your 1st amendment right...allow others to exercise their second.

The fact that it's a right is a problem.


And the truth comes out.  You're a history teacher.  You should know about the Amendment process.

Get cracking.
 
2014-01-15 12:14:22 AM  

Fark It: The Name: Toxicphreke: You have no problem exercising your 1st amendment right...allow others to exercise their second.

The fact that it's a right is a problem.

And the truth comes out.  You're a history teacher.  You should know about the Amendment process.

Get cracking.


Already on it.  Can I count on your help?
 
2014-01-15 12:15:08 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: See? She is not well and she needs serious help. I fervently hope that she seeks the help she needs before she harms herself or somebody else.


Wow. Serious concern trolling there.

I've been openly carrying for years. It's never crossed my mind to whip out my pistol and shoot others or myself. When I carry, it's when I run errands and more often than not I just see it as another part of my belt to put on.

I passed the state certifications, I've had my background checks. I'm of sound mind and body.

I'm sorry that you think a woman less of five feet in stature who chooses to carry a securely holstered, unloaded pistol on her daily errands constitutes as threatening those around her.

I'm sure you also feel the same way about people who have spiked bracelets, keep brass knuckles on their dashboard, carry swiss army knives on their keychain, have hatchets in their car, and anything else not covered in nerf foam.

For their own safety, that is.

The only people who should be threatened are those who want to bother me. I deal with many transactions when I carry, and since I do not always carry -- I deal with transactions then too.

I will tell you from first-hand experience that the way I am addressed, the tone of voice given to me, the sincerity, and the directness that I am given between having a pistol on and not having a pistol on are like night and day. Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.
 
2014-01-15 12:22:47 AM  

Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

This thread has less airborne shiat:  Start around here.

So, you want to ignore the Heller decision, ignore the Militia Act of 1903, disregard the "unorganized militia," and revert to compulsory military service?  So the military can come in to your house to inspect your militia M249/M4 (fully automatic, of course)?  You going to subsidize the safes everyone will need too?  How would we encourage the wealthier militia member to buy weapons for the poorer ones who can't afford them?  Maybe a tax subsidy for M-16s, mags, optics, a sidearm, and ammo?

I'm assuming this would invalidate all local gun control ordinances, the Hughes Amendment, and the NFA as a compromise, and would extend to people who are disabled/elderly and otherwise unable to participate in militia activities.


I'm not ignoring the Heller decision.
I'm suggesting that Congress fix the massive clusterfark instituted by the Militia Act of 1903 and the fictional "unorganized" Milita.
You bring your arms to drills for inspection.
Congress has the specified Constitutional power to build armories.
States originally had the problem of supplying weapons to the Milita. There's no reason they shouldn't have that problem again. (And should Congress decide that federal participation is needed, rifles are far less expensive than tanks. Or missiles. Or aircraft the Air Force does not want. Or...) Milspec ammunition for training and qualification added to the block grants that states already receive? Compared to the status quo, dirt cheap.

Everybody must participate as fully as possible. No exceptions. No excuses.

If you can afford to buy, securely store, feed, and equip it, you can buy what you want once you've qualified with the weapon. Crew-served weapons and ammunition must, however, be stored in an approved secure armory. Thanks to the Supreme Court, all arms are Militia arms and subject to the same fitness-for-use and inspection standards.

So I say we implement a real Militia of the United States, like the Founders did.
 
2014-01-15 12:28:00 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: So I say we implement a real Militia of the United States, like the Founders did.


We have one.  It's called the National Guard.  As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to play with guns is welcome to sign up.
 
2014-01-15 12:30:25 AM  

Weatherkiss: I will tell you from first-hand experience that the way I am addressed, the tone of voice given to me, the sincerity, and the directness that I am given between having a pistol on and not having a pistol on are like night and day. Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.


FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?


Apparently.
 
2014-01-15 12:33:25 AM  

Solutare: Weatherkiss: I will tell you from first-hand experience that the way I am addressed, the tone of voice given to me, the sincerity, and the directness that I am given between having a pistol on and not having a pistol on are like night and day. Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.

FlashHarry: what is the point of open carry? is it to show off? is it to make a political point? or is it just to warn other people that you're an asshole?

Apparently.


Assholes will exist regardless of firearms or not. If assholes are an inevitability, well then...
 
2014-01-15 12:35:47 AM  

Weatherkiss: Wow. Serious concern trolling there.


You've repeatedly stated that your purpose in walking around armed is to intimidate others because you are small and afraid. That is one  huge red flag. Please seek help.
 
2014-01-15 12:38:01 AM  

UndeadPoetsSociety: demaL-demaL-yeH: So I say we implement a real Militia of the United States, like the Founders did.

We have one.  It's called the National Guard.  As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to play with guns is welcome to sign up.


No, we don't. The National Guard is a half-assed substitute for a real Militia of the United States because Congress was full of men derelict in their named constitutional duties.
 
2014-01-15 12:38:50 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: You've repeatedly stated that your purpose in walking around armed is to intimidate others because you are small and afraid. That is one huge red flag. Please seek help.


Oh, no, no, see, assholes believe everyone else is the one with the problem.

/And they're right, we are the one with the problem: them.
 
2014-01-15 12:39:23 AM  
The only thing someone is really trying to say when they are open-carrying is "I could kill you right now, I just choose not to.  I might change my mind, I might not."  It's a power trip. Some people believe this is a good thing.
 
2014-01-15 12:39:24 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: Mikey1969: rzrwiresunrise: Kit Fister: rzrwiresunrise: Unfortunately, the in-your-face approach is what's becoming more prominent. There are situations where a weapon is warranted, but that's not what the open-carry movement is about. The movement is about bringing a gun to Starbucks, where we all know gun-toting gangstas with AK's are lyin' in wait take yo' sh*t, amirite? Open-carry thinks it's about de-escalation, but it's actually promoting escalation. Everyone carrying a gun doesn't defuse the environment, nor does it put everyone on equal footing. All it does is make everyone look at each other suspiciously, especially since everyone would be hyper-aware of the damage potential if one began to discharge. Even at the range I and my buddies were acutely aware of everyone who was holding. It was fun, but it was tense, because one bullet is all it takes.

Eh, I'm more in tune to the behaviors of the people with the gun than who has guns. If you look like you're nervous and twitchy, you're higher on the radar than some old man with a gun on.

It wasn't about nervous or twitchy, it was about monitoring everyone's safety awareness, regardless of the safety-rules we would talk about every time we got together. Now imagine everyone has a firearm in a public place and these are people you don't know. I don't know about you,  but I'm not about to assume everyone has my level of safety awareness or training. I'd rather there be no one carrying, including me.

Of course you're leaving out the difference between people carrying in public and people at the range.


People carrying in public tend to leave their guns in the holster, and even if someone does pull their gun out for some reason, it's not 20 people with the express purpose of shooting their guns. It's people who are just doing normal stuff and happen to have a gun with them. It's not like the range at all really.

Then there's no reason to have the gun. They can do their normal stuff unarmed.

One argument presented has been that the worst can happen so a firearm is necessary. If that's the case, the counter-argument can't be that these are just normal situations where people just happen to be carrying. It's disingenuous.


They can do whatever the fark they want, and it really isn't your place to dictate what they can or can't do. As long as they aren't brandishing the weapon, they don't threaten to use the weapon on someone(In some places, even telling an aggressor that you will shoot them is considered assault, although self defense is legal), they don't shoot someone without justification, and they don't use it to commit a crime, then they're doing nothing at all wrong.

As for your scenario, that's absolutely ridiculous. If bad things happen to people, it's not like there is some kind if schedule. They arenjust normal people who happen to be carrying until something happens and they no longer are normal people who happen to be carrying.

This fear of holstered guns is a little sad. I'm not sure I could walk down the street if I was that terrified of inanimate objects. Tanker trucks, semis with hazardous cargo, natural gas vehicles, a propane grill, these things must terrify all of the scared-of-guns crowd. Those things can level an entire building, and a truck full of propane barreling down the road at 80 miles per hour is far more dangerous than a pistol sitting in the holster of the guy in front of you at the 7-11.
 
2014-01-15 12:40:26 AM  
Here's the best part about this thread:

All the leftist shthead gun grabbers go nuts about open carry, except for "trained professionals", and yet the only evidence of open carry dumbassery any one of them will ever be able to cite is, TA DA, from "open carry professionals".

Idiots, the lot of them.
 
2014-01-15 12:41:01 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Weatherkiss: Wow. Serious concern trolling there.

You've repeatedly stated that your purpose in walking around armed is to intimidate others because you are small and afraid. That is one  huge red flag. Please seek help.


And who are you to say who needs help or not? Jesus, get off your high horse.

Here, I can play that game too. Watch.

You're intentionally being daft by taking portions of my statements out of context, please seek help since you might be legally retarded. I only say this because I'm concerned for your personal health and don't want you to drown in your soup without wearing water wings like Peter Griffin.
 
2014-01-15 12:43:01 AM  

Mikey1969: This fear of holstered guns is a little sad. I'm not sure I could walk down the street if I was that terrified of inanimate objects.


Your fear of animate objects is almost as irrational.
 
2014-01-15 12:43:37 AM  

Weatherkiss: You're intentionally being daft by taking portions of my statements out of context


Yeah, no, you're pretty much just an asshole. You said that you're okay with making people afraid:

Weatherkiss: Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.


So... yeah, asshole, and probably insane, too. His advice that you should seek help is well-founded.
 
2014-01-15 12:47:57 AM  

UndeadPoetsSociety: demaL-demaL-yeH: So I say we implement a real Militia of the United States, like the Founders did.

We have one.  It's called the National Guard.  As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to play with guns is welcome to sign up.


One other small note, citizen, you have a duty:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

That's the oath taken to become a citizen of the United States. If you're not naturalized, bearing arms in defense of the United States is the only responsibility of all the people that is specifically named in the Constitution.
 
2014-01-15 12:48:26 AM  

Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.


You are exactly the kind of person who should never be allowed to own a firearm. I'm not kidding at all.

It's scary that you are allowed to own one. You are absolutely the highest risk mental case for being an unresponsible gun owner. In fact, you define it.
 
2014-01-15 12:48:51 AM  

Solutare: Weatherkiss: You're intentionally being daft by taking portions of my statements out of context

Yeah, no, you're pretty much just an asshole. You said that you're okay with making people afraid:

Weatherkiss: Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.

So... yeah, asshole, and probably insane, too. His advice that you should seek help is well-founded.


Another Fark Psychiatrist(tm). Lovely.

So tell me, Doctor. What planet do you live on where there is not a brutal society that tries to intimidate and take advantage of other, weaker people? And is this the same planet that is completely devoid of assholes?

And on this planet, if a person 'gets help' does it magically transform them into being invincible when people bigger and more evil than them decide to make them a target?

Because I'd really like to move to this fantastic world. The one I live on has reality. And sorry, if I'm mugged or assaulted in any way then being told it was 'statistically unlikely for it to have happened to me', that isn't going to give me much comfort.
 
2014-01-15 12:51:01 AM  

justtray: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

You are exactly the kind of person who should never be allowed to own a firearm. I'm not kidding at all.

It's scary that you are allowed to own one. You are absolutely the highest risk mental case for being an unresponsible gun owner. In fact, you define it.


No, no, no, no!  He's a Responsible Gun Owner®  because he hasn't killed or maimed anybody yet!  Until then, he can do whatever the hell he wants with his guns, cuz 'Murka!
 
2014-01-15 12:51:28 AM  

justtray: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

You are exactly the kind of person who should never be allowed to own a firearm. I'm not kidding at all.

It's scary that you are allowed to own one. You are absolutely the highest risk mental case for being an unresponsible gun owner. In fact, you define it.


Must be Fark Psychiatrist(tm) night here. I'll also ask you the same question I asked the other guy. What world do you live on where people aren't manipulative assholes who have no reservations about taking advantage of others for personal gain?

Noone has yet to refute that our civil society is full of self-serving douchebags. In fact, I think that's a nice healthy segment of all Fark articles that are greenlighted.
 
2014-01-15 12:52:45 AM  

The Name: justtray: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

You are exactly the kind of person who should never be allowed to own a firearm. I'm not kidding at all.

It's scary that you are allowed to own one. You are absolutely the highest risk mental case for being an unresponsible gun owner. In fact, you define it.

No, no, no, no!  He's a Responsible Gun Owner®  because he hasn't killed or maimed anybody yet!  Until then, he can do whatever the hell he wants with his guns, cuz 'Murka!


Are you saying that Responsible Gun Owners do not exist and every single gun owner who carries a securely holstered, unloaded firearm on them will eventually snap?
 
2014-01-15 12:55:42 AM  

Weatherkiss: demaL-demaL-yeH: See? She is not well and she needs serious help. I fervently hope that she seeks the help she needs before she harms herself or somebody else.

Wow. Serious concern trolling there.

I've been openly carrying for years. It's never crossed my mind to whip out my pistol and shoot others or myself. When I carry, it's when I run errands and more often than not I just see it as another part of my belt to put on.

I passed the state certifications, I've had my background checks. I'm of sound mind and body.

I'm sorry that you think a woman less of five feet in stature who chooses to carry a securely holstered, unloaded pistol on her daily errands constitutes as threatening those around her.

I'm sure you also feel the same way about people who have spiked bracelets, keep brass knuckles on their dashboard, carry swiss army knives on their keychain, have hatchets in their car, and anything else not covered in nerf foam.

For their own safety, that is.

The only people who should be threatened are those who want to bother me. I deal with many transactions when I carry, and since I do not always carry -- I deal with transactions then too.

I will tell you from first-hand experience that the way I am addressed, the tone of voice given to me, the sincerity, and the directness that I am given between having a pistol on and not having a pistol on are like night and day. Maybe it's fear, or maybe it's respect. In either case, it gives me peace of mind.


Ohhh, you have a persecution complex. That makes sense. Actually, all your posts make sense now. I feel bad for you. You should really see a counsellor, it would help. And I'm really not kidding here, you have an actual psychological problem that should be addressed. The way you feel the need to adjust other people's personality toward you should be a HUGE red flag to yourself. That it's not means you need to seek help from the outside.

Please.
 
2014-01-15 12:55:47 AM  

Weatherkiss: Are you saying that Responsible Gun Owners do not exist and every single gun owner who carries a securely holstered, unloaded firearm on them will eventually snap?



Why yes. By default, anyone that carries a gun is insane. Including, for example, rape victims. All timebombs.


Stable people know that violent crime happens in movies.
 
2014-01-15 12:57:10 AM  

Weatherkiss: What planet do you live on where there is not a brutal society that tries to intimidate and take advantage of other, weaker people?


I dunno -- you're the one who wears a gun in order to threaten people who "talk shiat to your face." You're the one who enjoys causing fear in others. Seems to me like you're the problem with society.

Let me make this as plain and simple and clear as I can: you're a bully. Okay? You're a farking bully, and our society would be much improved in your absence.
 
2014-01-15 12:57:18 AM  

Weatherkiss: And who are you to say who needs help or not? Jesus, get off your high horse.

Here, I can play that game too. Watch.

You're intentionally being daft by taking portions of my statements out of context, please seek help since you might be legally retarded. I only say this because I'm concerned for your personal health and don't want you to drown in your soup without wearing water wings like Peter Griffin.


When I see somebody who needs help, it's my responsibility to speak up.
I am not playing a game: Firearms are not toys, or fashion accessories, or extortion tools for eliciting "respect". Firearms are deadly serious.
You have repeatedly said that you walk around armed to intimidate others because you are afraid. That's not me indulging in selective quotation to imply the opposite of what you wrote - it is what you have repeatedly written in this thread.

Seek.
Professional.
Help.
 
2014-01-15 12:57:54 AM  

Toxicphreke: Do you need more to feel better? If you live in the United States you accept and abide by the Constitution of the United States of America. If you feel so strongly about not abiding it...leave. Simple problem solved. You can sleep well tonight....well maybe not tonight..I am sure you are still packing your bags.

There are very few valid reasons to walk around armed in public.
Four come readily to mind:
1) It's hunting season.
2) I am the recipient a valid, credible, and direct threat to my life.
3) My job requires it.
4) I am in a combat zone.

There are a multitude of invalid excuses to walk around armed in public, which all pretty much boil down to armed Walter Mitty syndrome, looking for trouble, paranoia, persecution complex and other mental illnesses, fear, a lack of sound judgment and situational awareness, profound stupidity, inability to accurately assess threats (but I repeat myself), and fear.

I'll step away from your fear for a moment and point out that, from purely a statistical and actuarial standpoint, being around firearms significantly raises the probability of you or someone near and dear to you developing bullet holes.

Since I have personally experienced all four of the above valid reasons for walking around armed in public - hunting season covers one of them and being in combat zones covered the rest -, I will tell you flat out that the United States is not a combat zone; the voices in your head are wrong; and you're far, far more likely to become a gunshot or rape victim in your own home because the perpetrator will be somebody you trust. In ...


Ok...I fell for it...I got trolled..it took your wall of text comment for me to get it...good one bro.


No, actually this was all just you getting totally owned. This takedown was so beautiful and the reply so pathetic and tweeny I had to save this thread. This thread is all the ammo any control prononent ever needs.

The best thing a gun nut can do to further their position is not speak. I've said it from the start, and they just don't listen.
 
2014-01-15 12:58:43 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: When I see somebody who needs help, it's my responsibility to speak up.



Haha. Nothing more important than a fool with an obligation. And I bet you despise evangelicals. Oh, irony.

Shut
The
Fark
Up
 
2014-01-15 12:59:08 AM  

justtray: Ohhh, you have a persecution complex. That makes sense. Actually, all your posts make sense now. I feel bad for you. You should really see a counsellor, it would help. And I'm really not kidding here, you have an actual psychological problem that should be addressed. The way you feel the need to adjust other people's personality toward you should be a HUGE red flag to yourself. That it's not means you need to seek help from the outside.

Please.


I've seen a lot in my life. I've had bad taste in boyfriends. And I grew up in a rural area where the sheriff was more than 20 minutes away if there was an emergency.

I've never felt persecuted, only paranoid. A lot of people in my every day life are much bigger than I am. Like I asked someone a while back -- walk a mile in my shoes, and then maybe you'll understand why I choose to carry even if you don't agree with my reasons why.

Still wondering what planet some of you live on that isn't full of assholes. I'd love to move there.
 
2014-01-15 12:59:37 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: You've repeatedly stated that your purpose in walking around armed is to intimidate others because you are small and afraid. That is one huge red flag. Please seek help.


Wow, funny I said the exact same thing...... She won't though, we both know that.
 
2014-01-15 01:01:08 AM  

Shryke: Here's the best part about this thread:

All the leftist shthead gun grabbers go nuts about open carry, except for "trained professionals", and yet the only evidence of open carry dumbassery any one of them will ever be able to cite is, TA DA, from "open carry professionals".

Idiots, the lot of them.


How did you get yourself off my ignore list? I don't get it.
 
2014-01-15 01:02:44 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: UndeadPoetsSociety: demaL-demaL-yeH: So I say we implement a real Militia of the United States, like the Founders did.

We have one.  It's called the National Guard.  As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to play with guns is welcome to sign up.

One other small note, citizen, you have a duty:

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."



I highlighted the relevant bit.  Also nowhere does the Constitution require that the militia consist of everybody, every adult, nor even every able-bodied man.  It allows Congress to "
provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
 "

So, right now, that provision consists of the National Guard, which meets all of these criteria, and is therefore the U.S. militia.
 
2014-01-15 01:03:35 AM  
s2.quickmeme.com
 
2014-01-15 01:04:39 AM  

Weatherkiss: You're intentionally being daft by taking portions of my statements out of context, please seek help since you might be legally retarded. I only say this because I'm concerned for your personal health and don't want you to drown in your soup without wearing water wings like Peter Griffin.


Since I said the same thing, what exactly was out of context when you said that you open carry because it forces people to adjust their attitude towards you? Please, do elaborate.

Weatherkiss: justtray: Weatherkiss: Go fark yourselves. You know damn well if you ever address a person with a pistol safely holstered on their hip you aren't going to talk shiat to their face. And maybe that's what upsets you so much. Someone has something that can hurt you in plain sight, and you can't do anything about it. They don't have to be using it. It just has to be present. And maybe your little internet tough guy balls just shrivel into raisins knowing that maybe it isn't a good idea to treat them like shiat like you do other people in your day to day lives.

You are exactly the kind of person who should never be allowed to own a firearm. I'm not kidding at all.

It's scary that you are allowed to own one. You are absolutely the highest risk mental case for being an unresponsible gun owner. In fact, you define it.

Must be Fark Psychiatrist(tm) night here. I'll also ask you the same question I asked the other guy. What world do you live on where people aren't manipulative assholes who have no reservations about taking advantage of others for personal gain?

Noone has yet to refute that our civil society is full of self-serving douchebags. In fact, I think that's a nice healthy segment of all Fark articles that are greenlighted.


Do you really believe what you're saying?

I'll play my Dr. Drew card if you think you can handle it. I'm willing to bet you were sexually abused as a child. Should we go on?
 
2014-01-15 01:06:47 AM  

justtray: I'll play my Dr. Drew card if you think you can handle it.


I don't care to waste any more time on her, but if you want my opinion -- she's a Cluster B. I can smell 'em a mile away by this point.
 
2014-01-15 01:07:54 AM  

Weatherkiss: justtray: Ohhh, you have a persecution complex. That makes sense. Actually, all your posts make sense now. I feel bad for you. You should really see a counsellor, it would help. And I'm really not kidding here, you have an actual psychological problem that should be addressed. The way you feel the need to adjust other people's personality toward you should be a HUGE red flag to yourself. That it's not means you need to seek help from the outside.

Please.

I've seen a lot in my life. I've had bad taste in boyfriends. And I grew up in a rural area where the sheriff was more than 20 minutes away if there was an emergency.

I've never felt persecuted, only paranoid. A lot of people in my every day life are much bigger than I am. Like I asked someone a while back -- walk a mile in my shoes, and then maybe you'll understand why I choose to carry even if you don't agree with my reasons why.

Still wondering what planet some of you live on that isn't full of assholes. I'd love to move there.


Look, ignore the rest of the shiat I wrote.

I'm certain your life has been rough, and that really sucks. I feel for you. Maybe you should try to escape whatever situation you're in. If everyone around you really is that much an asshole, get the hell out of there. I promise you, the world is not like that. Some people are mean, but a vast, vast majority are good, even those that disagree with you on everything.

I don't even want to be mean to you. I just want to help you realize the world isn't just shiat.
 
2014-01-15 01:09:24 AM  

Toxicphreke: [s2.quickmeme.com image 625x475]


Kid, one of the first things you learn on fark is that calling people who you can't logically keep up with trolls is one of the easiest ways to look like a total moron.

Congratulations.
 
2014-01-15 01:10:28 AM  

Solutare: I dunno -- you're the one who wears a gun in order to threaten people who "talk shiat to your face." You're the one who enjoys causing fear in others. Seems to me like you're the problem with society.

Let me make this as plain and simple and clear as I can: you're a bully. Okay? You're a farking bully, and our society would be much improved in your absence.


I'm a bully for carrying a securely holstered, unloaded pistol on my belt while running my daily errands? This is the biggest case of projection I've seen tonight. You're repeatedly patronizing and concern trolling over a person who legally carries an unloaded pistol on her, telling her to get help because she's tired of being a victim. Blaming the victim died out a while ago, I hate to tell you.

demaL-demaL-yeH: When I see somebody who needs help, it's my responsibility to speak up.


You aren't Spider-Man or Superman. You're a human being with a fragile human body. With fragile human organs.

 I am not playing a game: Firearms are not toys, or fashion accessories, or extortion tools for eliciting "respect". Firearms are deadly serious.
You have repeatedly said that you walk around armed to intimidate others because you are afraid. That's not me indulging in selective quotation to imply the opposite of what you wrote - it is what you have repeatedly written in this thread.


No, that's pretty much you indulging in selective quotation. You're taking the motive for why I carry out of context. You are completely ignoring the fact that A: I have been a victim before. B: I'm trained and legally allowed to carry. Which means knowing when to fire and when not to. C: I've never considered harming another person with my pistol, nor myself. D: We live in a society where people are self-serving assholes who have no problem taking advantage of people they perceive as weak.

When you insert my so-called 'intimidation' motive in there, it begins to make sense. But when you take it out, it makes me seem like a crazy person. "She just wants to scare people! Omg! Lock her away!"

"I think amputation of that limb is something to be considered, but hopefully as long as you continue to improve that won't have to be an issue, and let's hope it isn't." does not mean "Omg the doctor is thinking about taking my arm off when I'm healthy and improving!"
 
2014-01-15 01:10:55 AM  

Mikey1969: This fear of holstered guns is a little sad. I'm not sure I could walk down the street if I was that terrified of inanimate objects. Tanker trucks, semis with hazardous cargo, natural gas vehicles, a propane grill, these things must terrify all of the scared-of-guns crowd. Those things can level an entire building, and a truck full of propane barreling down the road at 80 miles per hour is far more dangerous than a pistol sitting in the holster of the guy in front of you at the 7-11.


Mikey, we both know that the streets of the United States are not a combat zone. We also both know that, of all the objects you named, only one is deliberately designed for the purpose of killing. (Save the bullshiat sophistries for somebody who's gullible. Like that one guy at your local watering hole.) And let's be perfectly clear, I am not fearful of firearms. I was raised to have a healthy respect for what they can do and trained to do it well. I spend the sweat, time, and treasure to remain proficient.

The guy in the 7-11 is, at the very least, afraid. He probably has other issues.
 
2014-01-15 01:16:29 AM  

justtray: Do you really believe what you're saying?

I'll play my Dr. Drew card if you think you can handle it. I'm willing to bet you were sexually abused as a child. Should we go on?


Not even close. You're a horrible psycho-analyst. This is real life, not CSI: Special Victims unit. People are assholes. Convince me the world is not full of assholes and I'll discard my pistol.

justtray: Look, ignore the rest of the shiat I wrote.

I'm certain your life has been rough, and that really sucks. I feel for you. Maybe you should try to escape whatever situation you're in. If everyone around you really is that much an asshole, get the hell out of there. I promise you, the world is not like that. Some people are mean, but a vast, vast majority are good, even those that disagree with you on everything.

I don't even want to be mean to you. I just want to help you realize the world isn't just shiat.


A random guy on the internet is telling me the world is not shiat while calling me mentally unstable and not deserving of carrying a holstered, unloaded pistol on my person to deter people from being an asshole to me.

Sounds legit. The world is full of saints and angels where they treat each other like cute little puppies.
 
2014-01-15 01:20:51 AM  

m00: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Surprise, you don't actually have the right to threaten people without recourse. Openly carrying weapons, as people are trying to explain to you, is a form of threat. Unsurprisingly, many would argue open carry laws are eroding civil society because they introduce a threatening element where there previously was none, and are troubled by this development

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............. that's a dangerous argument. Anything can be perceived by anyone as a threat. If we want to ban all things that someone may consider a threat, welcome to having no rights.

Or do you mean just banning things you consider a threat, or just banning guns and the threat thing was just a justification?


I said nothing about banning things.  I said if I see any basic schmo carrying a pistol in a holster or a rifle slung over his back, I'm going to treat that as a threat.  I'm leaving.  Starbucks or the mall shops or the movie theater can suffer the consequences.
 
2014-01-15 01:23:20 AM  

The Name: Mikey1969: This fear of holstered guns is a little sad. I'm not sure I could walk down the street if I was that terrified of inanimate objects.

Your fear of animate objects is almost as irrational.


Really? Any time a criminal kills a victim, it's the animate object doing the killing.

Besides, preparation isn't fear. I wear my seatbelt not because I'm afraid of getting in a car wreck, but because I am being prepared (Also because the car beeps and beeps and beeps and beeps if I don't). I also have jumper cables in the back and a basic emergency kit. Not because I know that I'm ever going to need them, but because if I DO need them, then I have them right there.

I figured out at about 8 years old that someone standing in front of me at a store with a gun on his hip was about as worrisome as someone at the park with a baseball bat. I know I developed some rather sophisticated concepts early, but this never seemed like one of those.
 
2014-01-15 01:24:20 AM  

Weatherkiss: justtray: Do you really believe what you're saying?

I'll play my Dr. Drew card if you think you can handle it. I'm willing to bet you were sexually abused as a child. Should we go on?

Not even close. You're a horrible psycho-analyst. This is real life, not CSI: Special Victims unit. People are assholes. Convince me the world is not full of assholes and I'll discard my pistol.

justtray: Look, ignore the rest of the shiat I wrote.

I'm certain your life has been rough, and that really sucks. I feel for you. Maybe you should try to escape whatever situation you're in. If everyone around you really is that much an asshole, get the hell out of there. I promise you, the world is not like that. Some people are mean, but a vast, vast majority are good, even those that disagree with you on everything.

I don't even want to be mean to you. I just want to help you realize the world isn't just shiat.

A random guy on the internet is telling me the world is not shiat while calling me mentally unstable and not deserving of carrying a holstered, unloaded pistol on my person to deter people from being an asshole to me.

Sounds legit. The world is full of saints and angels where they treat each other like cute little puppies.


I can only think of one single solution to your angst, dude.  Life must be utterly miserable for you.
 
2014-01-15 01:26:35 AM  

Shryke: demaL-demaL-yeH: When I see somebody who needs help, it's my responsibility to speak up.


Haha. Nothing more important than a fool with an obligation. And I bet you despise evangelicals. Oh, irony.

Shut
The
Fark
Up


I do despise evangelicals: They proselytize in order to do me some mythical good.
Telling a sick person to seek help is doing everybody good in reality. Think of it as a positive act of self-defense where society as a whole benefits along with her.
You can't read that woman's posts, where she gives her "reasons" for carrying a firearm in public, and tell me that you aren't hearing "tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick".
 
2014-01-15 01:30:47 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Telling a sick person to seek help is doing everybody good in reality. Think of it as a positive act of self-defense where society as a whole benefits along with her.
You can't read that woman's posts, where she gives her "reasons" for carrying a firearm in public, and tell me that you aren't hearing "tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick".


I think you sound a whole lot more farking paranoid and scared than I could ever hope to be. But keep blaming the victims for refusing to be afraid any longer, I'm sure it'll work out for you someday.
 
2014-01-15 01:34:33 AM  

UndeadPoetsSociety: I highlighted the relevant bit.  Also nowhere does the Constitution require that the militia consist of everybody, every adult, nor even every able-bodied man.  It allows Congress to "
provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
 "

So, right now, that provision consists of the National Guard, which meets all of these criteria, and is therefore the U.S. militia.


No, Congress drafted everybody into the Militia, but utterly failed to organize, arm, or discipline it. The National Guard is a half-assed solution backed by the utterly dimwitted clusterfark that is the "unorganized" Militia.
 
2014-01-15 01:36:40 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Everybody must participate as fully as possible. No exceptions. No excuses.


So the Constitution no longer applies to the elderly or people with disabilities.  Nice.  And you are ignoring the Heller decision, which states that the right to keep and bear arms is unconnected with any service in the militia.  In fact, you're arguing for something unheard of, that only the militia is allowed to keep and bear arms.

I knew there was a reason I had you ignored and labeled "complete lunatic."
 
2014-01-15 01:38:57 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Mikey1969: This fear of holstered guns is a little sad. I'm not sure I could walk down the street if I was that terrified of inanimate objects. Tanker trucks, semis with hazardous cargo, natural gas vehicles, a propane grill, these things must terrify all of the scared-of-guns crowd. Those things can level an entire building, and a truck full of propane barreling down the road at 80 miles per hour is far more dangerous than a pistol sitting in the holster of the guy in front of you at the 7-11.

Mikey, we both know that the streets of the United States are not a combat zone. We also both know that, of all the objects you named, only one is deliberately designed for the purpose of killing. (Save the bullshiat sophistries for somebody who's gullible. Like that one guy at your local watering hole.) And let's be perfectly clear, I am not fearful of firearms. I was raised to have a healthy respect for what they can do and trained to do it well. I spend the sweat, time, and treasure to remain proficient.

The guy in the 7-11 is, at the very least, afraid. He probably has other issues.


It doesn't matter what they are designed for, they are far more dangerous, and it must suck to be that terrified of inanimate objects. Hell, knives were designed to kill long before people Starr d to use them to scrape fat from the hide of their kills.

And there is no reason to assume that the guy has any "issues" or is "afraid". Merely being prepared for a situation does not indicate issues, and it takes either a moron or a liar to keep making those claims.

I've actually met someone as paranoid as you idiots keep implying gun owners are. This guy lived on a couple of acres of desert in AZ, his house had 3 foot thick walls filled with volcanic cinders to stop bullets, AMD if you walked anywhere on his property, it was smart to go with someone who knew the place, just in case you found one of his booby traps.

Unfortunately for you guys, none of you have presented am example that is even 1% as paranoid/fearful as this guy really was, and I've never met anyone else like this in my life, nor has anyone I've ever told the story to. With the occasional exception, your paranoid, living in fear gun nut, ready to explode at a mouse fart is nothing more than a straw man because you actually have nothing to offer to the debate, but really want to score a Bazinga! on everyone.

Pathetic. Like wearing your socks and underwear in the shower...
 
2014-01-15 01:47:47 AM  

Weatherkiss: demaL-demaL-yeH: Telling a sick person to seek help is doing everybody good in reality. Think of it as a positive act of self-defense where society as a whole benefits along with her.
You can't read that woman's posts, where she gives her "reasons" for carrying a firearm in public, and tell me that you aren't hearing "tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick-tick".

I think you sound a whole lot more farking paranoid and scared than I could ever hope to be. But keep blaming the victims for refusing to be afraid any longer, I'm sure it'll work out for you someday.


You tell us you were raped. That's an extremely traumatic experience. Your response was to buy a deadly weapon and walk around in public with it strapped to you.
Additionally, you claim that the world you're trapped in is full of greedy, grasping, manipulative bastards out to rape you - figuratively and literally - again.
You're of short stature, but you are intimidating and strong and more powerful than tall, strong men because you carry death on your hip. You are afraid. You've said so in many ways. You've even admitted your paranoia.

You've trapped yourself in a dystopian Randian nightmare parody of the United States.

In reality, the overwhelming majority people are good, decent, and hard-working. They love their families, value their friends, and, if you make the effort to get to know them, tend to be good neighbors. My neighbors are. Reality is, h. sap. sap. is a herd animal, and we do best when we have healthy interactions with other members of the herd.

You are ill. Seek help.
 
2014-01-15 01:49:56 AM  

The Name: Farker Soze: The Name: Farker Soze: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: I have proposed a solution that preserves the letter and spirit of the Constitution and fulfills the explicitly stated intentions of the Founders while reducing public danger and making room for solid budget cuts.

I'd like to hear this and I don't feel like scrolling through the shiat-flinging nonsense that constitutes this thread.

Give him all the guns, because you don't need them. He knows what you need. Trust him, he was a soldier, he's got your best interests in mind.

Hey now, don't piss him off TOO much.  I have it on the good authority of many Fark gun nuts that the military going turncoat is expected to be indispensable to the success of Revolutionary War II: Hoveround Hellfire.

You should shut up and lay low after your massive self ownage, Mr "I contribute to the poor and sacrificed my health for them by teaching college history!"  Go taunt some more rape victims, you seem good at that.

Lol.  I'm not trolling, but I'm beginning to see how it's fun.  Mr. "I write government checks for an unnamed agency that go to a vague class of people who are underprivileged for one reason or another," had you spent the past semester in my class, you would be a much better writer; heck, some of my students who came in virtually illiterate could now probably teach you a great deal.

Oh, and if we want to talk about how I'm contributing to helping the underclass, at least two of my students intend to teach high school history when they graduate.  So yeah, I may not be down in the gutters teaching inner-city school kids, or whatever image you have of what I should be doing, but I'm working 70 hours a week to equip a younger generation to do just that.


Get a load of the ego on this troll. Changing the world and saving humanity, 3 elective credits at a time.
 
2014-01-15 01:49:59 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: In reality, the overwhelming majority people are good, decent, and hard-working.


Except for the gun owners, of course.
 
2014-01-15 01:50:41 AM  

Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: Everybody must participate as fully as possible. No exceptions. No excuses.

So the Constitution no longer applies to the elderly or people with disabilities.  Nice.  And you are ignoring the Heller decision, which states that the right to keep and bear arms is unconnected with any service in the militia.  In fact, you're arguing for something unheard of, that only the militia is allowed to keep and bear arms.

I knew there was a reason I had you ignored and labeled "complete lunatic."


No, nimrod, they are full Militia members who must participate to the extent they are able. There is no retirement, just as military "retirement" pay is really retainer pay and "retirees" are subject to recall to active duty.
 
2014-01-15 01:58:20 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: You tell us you were raped. That's an extremely traumatic experience. Your response was to buy a deadly weapon and walk around in public with it strapped to you.
Additionally, you claim that the world you're trapped in is full of greedy, grasping, manipulative bastards out to rape you - figuratively and literally - again.
You're of short stature, but you are intimidating and strong and more powerful than tall, strong men because you carry death on your hip. You are afraid. You've said so in many ways. You've even admitted your paranoia.

You've trapped yourself in a dystopian Randian nightmare parody of the United States.

In reality, the overwhelming majority people are good, decent, and hard-working. They love their families, value their friends, and, if you make the effort to get to know them, tend to be good neighbors. My neighbors are. Reality is, h. sap. sap. is a herd animal, and we do best when we have healthy interactions with other members of the herd.

You are ill. Seek help.


I never said I was raped. I never said I was sexually abused. What is with you misogynists and automatically assuming every time a woman realizes the world is farking horrible your twisted minds immediately go towards sexual assault?

You might have thought I implied it, but I never went into specifics. Because my specifics aren't that important.

You guys really just can't stop thinking about a woman being humiliated in that way, can you? And you think I'm the one that needs help when you can't stop thinking about some woman getting raped or sexually abused as a child?
 
2014-01-15 01:59:38 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: Fark It: demaL-demaL-yeH: Everybody must participate as fully as possible. No exceptions. No excuses.

So the Constitution no longer applies to the elderly or people with disabilities.  Nice.  And you are ignoring the Heller decision, which states that the right to keep and bear arms is unconnected with any service in the militia.  In fact, you're arguing for something unheard of, that only the militia is allowed to keep and bear arms.

I knew there was a reason I had you ignored and labeled "complete lunatic."

No, nimrod, they are full Militia members who must participate to the extent they are able. There is no retirement, just as military "retirement" pay is really retainer pay and "retirees" are subject to recall to active duty.


So, you want compulsory military service as a prereq for exercising a Constitutional right, that is according to the Supreme Court "unconnected with service in the militia."

I appreciate your military service, but that does not make you an authority, it does not make your arguments, your opinions hold any more weight or validity.  I think your idea is stupid, and I don't support compulsory military service because I don't believe in fighting wars of aggression for Israel and corporate America.
 
2014-01-15 02:02:50 AM  

Mikey1969: Pathetic. Like wearing your socks and underwear in the shower...


No, what's pathetic is that more than 100,000 Americans every year suffer from Firearm "Unlucky" Sudden Onset Bullethole Syndrome. We also have a fat, untrained and mistrained populace who lack any real proficiency with their firearms, are unable to walk a quarter mile without medical intervention, let alone use the most rudimentary of small unit tactics, but are still considered to be the "last line of defense" for this country. What's infuriating is that Congress could fix this easily.

What