Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(The Raw Story)   Teenager in Aurora, Colorado trots around town carrying a shotgun, says he's free to do what he wants and to hell with everyone still concerned about the theater shooting; he has the Second Amendment on his side   (rawstory.com ) divider line
    More: Sick  
•       •       •

15181 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Aug 2014 at 6:11 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1161 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
MFK
2014-08-04 09:02:36 AM  
seems to me that a lot of these problems could be solved with "rude carry" or "brandishing" laws. You want to carry your gun in public like a responsible adult? Fine. Here are the definitions of acceptable open carry that won't make everyone else "uncomfortable" to the point where they're all calling 911 in a panic.

You want to walk down the street with your rifle at the ready - willing and able to confront danger wherever you perceive it? Sorry that's brandishing. You want to bring your AR-15 to Cracker Barrel to protect your deep-fried dinner? Sorry - that's rude carry. Leave it in the rack like a normal person.

The fact of the matter is while these guys may be the "good guys" in their own heads, nobody else knows if they are a good guy or someone who's on his way to shoot up a mall. We shouldn't have to wait to find out the hard way.

Guns are not something we "need to be comfortable around". They are not toys and we need to stop pretending like they are. That's when accidents happen. Unfortunately, gun accidents can be serious and deadly and it simply amazes me that people are actually in denial about this.
 
2014-08-04 09:04:13 AM  

kim jong-un: fusillade762: "For the defense of myself and those around me."

Sure, because a shotgun is such a precise weapon and could never hit a bystander by accident. And that's in the astronomically remote chance this idiot's fantasy played out.

Most shotguns are very precise. They fire different types of shells, and if its loaded with a slug its as accurate as any other firearm.

But you would know that if you had any experience with firearms other than what you learned in videogames.


Irony defined.
 
2014-08-04 09:04:43 AM  

dookdookdook: I love the part of the video at about 1:00 where he's pointing the thing directly at his own face for like 10 seconds.

Fat, ugly, no-doubt-virgin white trash high schooler looking for a sense of empowerment through guns.  Hopefully he can work through enough of his bitterness and self-hate by being a public asshat that he won't end up shooting up his school.


Liberal hate burns white hot don't it?
 
2014-08-04 09:05:08 AM  

Tunney: What's his Fark handle?


Shh, farkers aren't supposed to own guns. That would mean we're more individualistic than people think.

So say I a guy who doesn't own a gun. By choice not by political jackassery
 
2014-08-04 09:05:15 AM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: serpent_sky: My point is the kid is an idiot, could easily get shot by someone else, and should not be doing what he's doing because clearly, he is frightening and intimidating people (hence, multiple calls to get the police out there when he's wandering with his gun), as opposed to merely expressing his right to bear arms and being harassed for doing so. I'm fairly certain we agree on all of this?

I noticed that one of the local restaraunts had posted a "no firearms" notice on their door as well as one of the local movie theaters which is, I think, a great response. If these idiots want to walk into a business I'm patronizing like a high plains drifter then I'll take my business elsewhere.


Some drifters had very impeccable reputations in the old west, and that just doesn't seem to apply to open-carry protesters.

I prefer to call them "Red Dawn LARPers."
 
2014-08-04 09:06:27 AM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: I noticed that one of the local restaraunts had posted a "no firearms" notice on their door as well as one of the local movie theaters which is, I think, a great response. If these idiots want to walk into a business I'm patronizing like a high plains drifter then I'll take my business elsewhere.


Let's be honest here. Aside from the real nutjobs kike this kid, everyone realizes the intent of open carry laws were not "wander down a busy street with a rifle in your hand" or "sit at Taco Bell and eat a burrito with a couple of long guns strapped to your back."  They're doing things like that because they technically can - and there are many things we can all legally - and within our rights - do that are not without repercussions. Any one of us, go spend the day sitting in a public playground watching the kids and see how long until the cops come ask who you are and what you're doing, as it is deemed suspicious, even though you have a right to sit in a public park. And that's far less threatening than wandering around as if you're in the Wild West... but would not go without notice, nonetheless. 
Some things that are legal still become potential public safety issues, or actual public safety issues.
 
2014-08-04 09:06:37 AM  
Penis.
 
2014-08-04 09:06:56 AM  
See liberals. People do listen to Joe Biden.
 
2014-08-04 09:06:58 AM  

BlindRaise: Hilter loved gun control.


www.noz.de

He was also a big fan of cars.
 
2014-08-04 09:07:06 AM  
I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you gun nuts don't want phallic references about you favorite toys, stop giving cause for them.
 
2014-08-04 09:10:03 AM  

serpent_sky: italie: Are you supporting my comments or arguing against them? I'm having a hard time here...

My point is the kid is an idiot, could easily get shot by someone else, and should not be doing what he's doing because clearly, he is frightening and intimidating people (hence, multiple calls to get the police out there when he's wandering with his gun), as opposed to merely expressing his right to bear arms and being harassed for doing so. I'm fairly certain we agree on all of this?



Yes, we do. Just seemed written in a disagreeing tone while agreeing.

//Calling it lack of coffee, moving on.
 
2014-08-04 09:10:15 AM  

MadCat221: I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you gun nuts don't want phallic references about you favorite toys, stop giving cause for them.


They run around with guns all the time because they think they might need to get defensive every time a long shadow appears.

They ought to run around with dildos instead, because they definitely need to get farked.
 
2014-08-04 09:10:18 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: LazyMedia: MagSeven: August11: As a gun-owning liberal, should I even be in this thread?

No. You should be feeding your unicorn some New York City salsa!

Many Southern liberals own guns or have friends who do. We're just not dicks about it.

Dicks about guns, or dicks about being liberal?


Both.
 
2014-08-04 09:10:43 AM  

PreMortem: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

And if you had a lick of sense you would know most liberals are against stop and frisk, police checkpoints, voter ID laws, illegal searches and seizures, etc... . Conservatives have the market cornered on the desire for a police state.

It seems to me you have a lot more concern for his right to carry a shotgun than the cops demanding an ID. I wonder how you feel about stopping brown people and asking for their papers. Well, not really.


Counterpoint. Chicago, NYC, Baltimore... you liberals talk a big game yet the cities you dominate say differently.
 
2014-08-04 09:10:44 AM  

Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.


A Constitution attorney?
 
2014-08-04 09:12:53 AM  

scarbachi: Oh thank god some fat teenager in Aurora is attention whoring for his own safety, and those around him. That dude needs to touch some boobies and STFU.


I assume you mean besides his own.
 
2014-08-04 09:13:01 AM  

Thunderpipes: rzrwiresunrise: Punchable face?
[www.rawstory.com image 615x345]

Yep.

Regarding stop and identify in CO

And I'm not surprised this kid's being a douche. It's something only some teenage males grow out of. The idea that one needs to carry guns around people to help them feel more comfortable around them is asinine. Take your ass to a place where guns are actually necessary: Somalia, South Sudan, Nigeria. Otherwise, shut up and enjoy your clean streets, running water and 30-day return on purchases.

All of which are here because a bunch of upstarts decided that owning guns, and taking on an oppressive government was important.

It is so comical, because you libs are so terrified of the law abiding gun owners, which don't really do much wrong. Yet the hordes of Obama voting thugs out on the street are perfectly okay.... the ones actually doing the crime.

So you don't like the 2nd amendment. Seems you don't like the 1st, the 4th either. What is next to go? A right is exactly that, a right. Doesn't matter if using it makes other people offended. Speech does that. Should we outlaw that, depending on what party is in power? You want people disarmed, to the IRS, liberal feds, EPA, heck even the Office of Social Security will be so much more heavily armed, they can do what they want and citizens won't even be able to backtalk.


This post has much poetential. CO has a stop and identify law that's perfectly constitutional, just as I linked. Carrying a weapon in public has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. I never said anything about disarming anyone.

There are a lot of people who've built themselves a mental maze to reinforce this exact kind of paranoia, tho...
 
2014-08-04 09:13:07 AM  

MFK: You want to walk down the street with your rifle at the ready - willing and able to confront danger wherever you perceive it? Sorry that's brandishing.


In rural areas during hunting season it's common for people to walk down the roads with rifles or shotguns or even stop into a store for coffee. People who have never stepped foot out of a suburb should know that gun laws appropriate for their part of a state might not be applicable in other areas.
 
2014-08-04 09:13:35 AM  

MagSeven: /show me any shotgun as accurate as a rifle.
//I guess they're all pretty accurate if you're close enough.


To be fair to the kid, it looked like he was only going to blow his own face off the way he was holding the shotgun, ricochets notwithstanding.
 
2014-08-04 09:13:38 AM  

PreMortem: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

And if you had a lick of sense you would know most liberals are against stop and frisk, police checkpoints, voter ID laws, illegal searches and seizures, etc... . Conservatives have the market cornered on the desire for a police state.

It seems to me you have a lot more concern for his right to carry a shotgun than the cops demanding an ID. I wonder how you feel about stopping brown people and asking for their papers. Well, not really.


+1
 
2014-08-04 09:14:57 AM  

MadCat221: I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you gun nuts don't want phallic references about you favorite toys, stop giving cause for them.


Given that any cylindrical object can be viewed as phallic, how precisely do you propose that happens?  Guns (like swords, or artillery, or torpedoes, or lances [etc] ) are inherently phallic by nature of physics.  Sounds like you just want an excuse to talk about phalluses.
 
2014-08-04 09:15:57 AM  
I second open-carrying SWORDS
 
2014-08-04 09:16:26 AM  

Veloram: MagSeven: kim jong-un: fusillade762: "For the defense of myself and those around me."

Sure, because a shotgun is such a precise weapon and could never hit a bystander by accident. And that's in the astronomically remote chance this idiot's fantasy played out.

Most shotguns are very precise. They fire different types of shells, and if its loaded with a slug its as accurate as any other firearm.

But you would know that if you had any experience with firearms other than what you learned in videogames.

Huh?
/show me any shotgun as accurate as a rifle.
//I guess they're all pretty accurate if you're close enough.

[img.fark.net image 240x105]
I introduce to you, the AA-12


It's still a smoothbore, and still not effective beyond 50 yards or so. Maybe 100 yards firing slugs. That said, shotguns are considerably more accurate than pistols at across-the-room distances, because of the longer sight radius.
 
2014-08-04 09:16:33 AM  

StopDaddy: And here I thought apes with guns was the most worrying thing I've seen lately. That kid will never have consensual sex.


Technically, prostitution is consensual.  I think.


Then again, any hooker worth a used condom behind a shady furniture store on RT 13 south of Wilmington, DE wouldn't take fatty's cash....
 
2014-08-04 09:16:40 AM  

Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.


Drop what charges?  What do you imagine he is charged with?  Did you even read TFA?
 
2014-08-04 09:18:18 AM  

Headso: In rural areas during hunting season it's common for people to walk down the roads with rifles or shotguns or even stop into a store for coffee. People who have never stepped foot out of a suburb should know that gun laws appropriate for their part of a state might not be applicable in other areas.


That's great. And that applies to this situation how, exactly? Or did I miss the part of the story where this involved a teenager in a rural area during hunting season, acting in a way all the locals are accustomed to regarding his hunting rifle post- or pre-hunt?
 
2014-08-04 09:18:46 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

He wasn't cited for carrying the gun, he was cited for refusing to provide identification, which was a valid request as by his appearance it was not clear whether or not he was old enough to be legally carrying the weapon.

He has no grounds to stand on to sue.


But I heard  Trailltrader has a GED in law.  How could he possibly be wrong?
 
2014-08-04 09:19:13 AM  

Thunderpipes: This a joke post?


You are against weapon owners being properly trained?
 
2014-08-04 09:19:39 AM  

dookdookdook: PunGent: You don't HAVE to clean your gun after you use it, and you don't HAVE to change your oil every few thousand miles...but your gun and your car will each last longer if you do those things...or pay someone else to do them.

The point is a car engine will run for months with no maintenance without any particular increased risk of failure, yet something that basically does nothing but smack a small piece of metal with another small piece of metal not only needs constant TLC to stay safe and functional, but will blow off body parts if not done with maximum care and attention.


Powder residue is sticky, filthy, corrosive, and the exhaust gasses are used to operate the mechanism in many semiautomatic firearms (which means the stuff in question is getting all up in the fiddly bits.). Hence the need for frequent cleaning vs. cars. (Gas burns relatively cleanly, and cars are designed in such a way that they're largely self cleaning anyway, although that adds to complexity and expense.) Older cars still get carbon buildup in their nether regions, and there are procedures for that.

Firearms also do not have pumps actively circulating oil through them, hence the need for manual lubrication.

The blowing up body parts thing occurs when you try to take apart a loaded weapon. Performing maintenance on a running car is also discouraged.

Personally, as a paranoid, i do things like disconnecting the battery before doing engine work, unplugging the garbage disposal before sticking my hand down there (and looking nervously at the wire while doing so) and measuring wood three times (!) before cutting it, with my hands as far away from the saw blade as possible, and making sure that I'm holding the saw such that I am not in the potential flight path of a blade or blade fragments. (Yes, there's a guard, but let's pretend it's not there.)

Living in fear is a terrible curse.
 
2014-08-04 09:20:26 AM  

Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law 2: has committed no crime 3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.


This can really be seen as trolling the electorate to tighten the laws although we are talking CO here and the voters have already shown that they will get their panties in a bunch when gun regs are on the table so it will be interesting to see where this tasteless display of impotency leads this kid.
 
2014-08-04 09:21:04 AM  

lilbjorn: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

Drop what charges?  What do you imagine he is charged with?  Did you even read TFA?


I didnt read the article. What did they charge him with? My guess is obstruction because that is what they always charge people with right before they get sued and settle it out of court.
 
2014-08-04 09:21:45 AM  
When my aunt was goring up in Brooklyn, she around age 13, would take a rifle and her little brother (age 6) on the New York City subway, to go to and from a shooting range fairly frequently.

total number of farks given by everyone else: 0
 
2014-08-04 09:22:24 AM  

BeerGraduate: I second open-carrying SWORDS



Playing around with swords is my job.  I sure as hell don't.  Swords (or any other melee weapons) give all the advantage to the strong, the large, and the young adults.  Women, older persons, short people, disabled folks...they'd become even more of a victim class than they already are.

Don't get me wrong - I'd actually like to see a Code Duello come back with melee weapons.  Let young, stupid, men fight each other in a legal, controlled setting in a manner that won't hurt bystanders.  But for general defensive use?  Speaking as a disabled vet who's getting up in years, it's in nobody's best interest to force melee implements to be the primary self-defense tool...save for large men between about 16-30.

Which gender/age demographic commits (by far) the most crime already?  Oh right....men between about 16-30.
 
2014-08-04 09:22:57 AM  
Dude looks like Francis from Pee Wee's Big Adventure. Pasty fat fark.
 
2014-08-04 09:24:06 AM  

serpent_sky: Headso: In rural areas during hunting season it's common for people to walk down the roads with rifles or shotguns or even stop into a store for coffee. People who have never stepped foot out of a suburb should know that gun laws appropriate for their part of a state might not be applicable in other areas.

That's great. And that applies to this situation how, exactly? Or did I miss the part of the story where this involved a teenager in a rural area during hunting season, acting in a way all the locals are accustomed to regarding his hunting rifle post- or pre-hunt?


it doesn't apply to this situation but it applies to the suggestion that people should be charged with a crime when they are walking down the road with a gun, the post I was responding to. Gun laws should be the most local level. This situation appears to be a protest, nothing wrong with that either, protests aren't supposed to make everyone happy.
 
2014-08-04 09:24:45 AM  
" it is a custom more honor'd in the breach than the observance "

I am fine with someone carrying a weapon as long as they don't have mental issues. Unfortunately, I feel that the need to carry a weapon around in day to day life is a strong sign of mental illness (in most cases). I am into guns in the same way that I am into aircraft. I appreciate the design and utility, but I understand that they have limited usefulness outside of specific instances.

/owns two guns
 
2014-08-04 09:26:05 AM  

imfallen_angel: gotta love the dickless 'muricans with their guns.


Close enough. DRINK!!
 
2014-08-04 09:26:40 AM  

I alone am best: lilbjorn: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

Drop what charges?  What do you imagine he is charged with?  Did you even read TFA?

I didnt read the article. What did they charge him with? My guess is obstruction because that is what they always charge people with right before they get sued and settle it out of court.


This kid has no lawyer and isn't suing anybody. He has nobody to sue, and nothing to sue them for.
 
2014-08-04 09:26:43 AM  

Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.


What you seem to be missing is that the more people do this, the more likely it is that the constitution will be altered to make doing this illegal...

They don`t pass laws to stop people doing stuff that nobody is doing. Every law has some people who want to do the banned action. If more people want it banned than want to do it, guess what is likely to happen?

Enough random members of the public where he was already thought he should get arrested for his actions whether it was a crime or not. That percentage will increase over time.

I support this teen in his drive to ban guns in public places.
 
2014-08-04 09:27:38 AM  

LemSkroob: When my aunt was goring up in Brooklyn, she around age 13, would take a rifle and her little brother (age 6) on the New York City subway, to go to and from a shooting range fairly frequently.

total number of farks given by everyone else: 0


I doubt that
 
2014-08-04 09:27:59 AM  
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
i.imgur.com
media.giphy.com
 
2014-08-04 09:27:59 AM  

pendy575: Perhaps the proximity of the shootings is the reason his teenaged brain told him to do this. I would think proximity to that type of event in a young persons life combined with access to firearms could easily lead to this type of thought process.

The police did not have any right to stop him and so the request for id is harrassment. They did not stop him to check for id at all and most of is know that. The check for identification was simply a form of harrassment. He was under no obligation to provide identification unless they told him exactly why he was being asked. Did they inform him they were checking identification to determine his age in relation to possession of a firearm? Nope

They ginned up a charge when they realized he was within his rights and they had screwed up. He should sue the city


You have entirely too much faith in police.  They "ginned up a charge" (I like that) when he decided to be a dick.  That's how police really work.  Be pleasant and don't harm anyone/anything and they won't arrest you.  Be a dick and they'll find an excuse.

As they tend to have several gun nuts on the force and they all go to ranges to practice, I'm sure the police were very aware that was legal.  They came up, asked why he was walking around with a gun (a perfectly reasonable security measure) and he proceeded to be a dick yelling about his rights instead of actually talking to the police.  Things are escalating with an armed man.  Time to show a little concern.

They ask for ID.  Hey, this guy is being combative maybe he's crazy/violent/illegally in possession of a firearm.  Actually, I'm not entirely sure that last one is possible in CO.  He continues to dick up their day, so they decide to dick his up.

That's how police work.  They are tired and annoyed and will go out of their way to ruin your day if you are a dick.  It doesn't matter what the situation is, they can always find an excuse to at least fine you.  They probably would have allowed him to continue if he'd cordially introduced himself when the police walked up.
 
2014-08-04 09:28:43 AM  
Thunderpipes (ITG Editor in Chief): You liberals sound exactly like the old school boys when the Civil Rights marches were going on, you know that, right?

That's a fascinating comparison, can you expand on that?
 
2014-08-04 09:28:46 AM  

Hawnkee: imfallen_angel: gotta love the dickless 'muricans with their guns.

Close enough. DRINK!!


I think we're up to four penis references and a Godwin - pretty impressive for a Monday morning.
 
2014-08-04 09:29:25 AM  

MyRandomName: PreMortem: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

And if you had a lick of sense you would know most liberals are against stop and frisk, police checkpoints, voter ID laws, illegal searches and seizures, etc... . Conservatives have the market cornered on the desire for a police state.

It seems to me you have a lot more concern for his right to carry a shotgun than the cops demanding an ID. I wonder how you feel about stopping brown people and asking for their papers. Well, not really.

Counterpoint. Chicago, NYC, Baltimore... you liberals talk a big game yet the cities you dominate say differently.


Counter-counter point: as a diehard liberal, I have no problem with right to bear arms. That horse is already out of the barn. I have a problem with cops harassing people without cause. I also respect the rule of law even if I don't agree with it.
 
2014-08-04 09:30:12 AM  

jso2897: PreMortem: Trailltrader: What people are missing here is- this teenager is 1: obeying he law  2: has committed no crime  3: and if you persecute him you are in violation of his 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, 4th Amendment, and 5th Amendment.

If you liberals had a lick of sense you'd drop those charges before a Constitution Attorney shows up on his doorstep, files a HUGE (relatively speaking) lawsuit against the city.  The police will have to show just cause to believe he was committing a crime- and the video doesn't show that.

And if you had a lick of sense you would know most liberals are against stop and frisk, police checkpoints, voter ID laws, illegal searches and seizures, etc... . Conservatives have the market cornered on the desire for a police state.

It seems to me you have a lot more concern for his right to carry a shotgun than the cops demanding an ID. I wonder how you feel about stopping brown people and asking for their papers. Well, not really.

I'm quite sure that he, and all the other stalwarts who think they are defending the second amendment here, wouldn't be in the least pertrurbed if these fellows were exercising their rights out in front of their kid's school.
[i18.photobucket.com image 464x304]


Pardon the ignorance, but they look like some sort of sports team wearing the team's colours. Why would I worry if they wanted to play baseball?
 
2014-08-04 09:30:17 AM  

FightDirector: serpent_sky: I also can't see how open carry laws (regarding walking down city streets just holding a shotgun or what-have-you) don't somewhat contradict laws against inciting a panic or the used to cover anything we don't like "makingterroristic threats". It could just be the raised in NY, living in CT me, but I'd be pretty panicked if I headed out to the stores later and a guy was walking down Post Road with a shotgun, and I imagine most people would.

On a tangental note, does a a right that people are too afraid to exercise actually mean anything?

If you have the right to open carry, but are put off of doing it because you're afraid of public outcry and/or the potential criminal penalties you mention, does that right really mean anything in a practical sense?

Among other things, open-carry laws help protect folks who are lawfully carrying concealed, but have their shirt ride up accidentally (bend over or reach for something high).  In many states, that accident - of which you may not be aware - can instantly move you from "concealed carry" to "open carry" status.  I would very, VERY much like to have a law banning open carry as per "intent to attention whore", while leaving people like hunters (who do, in fact "open carry" their weapons), but I'm pretty sure that it's an impossible law to write and an even more impossible law to enforce.

/this is why we cannot have nice things


One needs to look to history as to what started the limits on open carry in this country before they start making suggestions.

img.fark.net
 
2014-08-04 09:30:22 AM  
Oh, you're applying for a job? Yeah, we saw you on the news and it turns out you like to be an asshole. I'm sorry sir we have a no asshole policy at work. You would cause way to many problems for us.
 
2014-08-04 09:31:00 AM  
See??? No one got shot.
I feel much more comfortable about guns now.
Thanks, kid!
 
MFK
2014-08-04 09:31:57 AM  

Headso: MFK: You want to walk down the street with your rifle at the ready - willing and able to confront danger wherever you perceive it? Sorry that's brandishing.

In rural areas during hunting season it's common for people to walk down the roads with rifles or shotguns or even stop into a store for coffee. People who have never stepped foot out of a suburb should know that gun laws appropriate for their part of a state might not be applicable in other areas.


Easiest thing in the WORLD. If you're hunting you are probably wearing some sort of hunter's camo plus the ALREADY required bright orange pieces that would easily identify the carrier as either hunting or on his way to go hunting. No one gets upset and no cops get called because everyone says "oh, that guy's hunting" and zero farks are given.
 
Displayed 50 of 1161 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report