Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Open Carry Advocates: Shooting Themselves in the Foot
Pajamas MEdia ^ | April 29 | Bob Owens

Posted on 04/29/2010 10:38:21 AM PDT by AJKauf

Open carry advocates, as a gun rights subgroup, are the continuing negligent political discharge of the shooting community. Their disastrous nationwide campaign to normalize the open carrying of firearms alienates Americans from coast to coast, even among those who champion the concealed carry of weapons.

You only need to look at examples of the media incompetence of these groups in the past year to understand how this theoretically pro-gun movement has managed to cause the public to recoil in horror and actually set the movement back on its heels. It is enough to make you wonder if the group isn’t the operation that “Crash the Tea Party” wanted to be, executed by the otherwise inept anti-gun harpies.

Other than small-scale displays primarily consumed by the local news, the open carry movement is known to most people for precisely two awkward public displays: an August 17, 2009, protest in Phoenix and one this past Sunday on the Potomac’s Virginia shores....

(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; barf
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-163 next last
To: Sherman Logan

>My point is that it isn’t a good idea to give your enemies extra ammunition, even if it’s your legal and constitutional right to do so.

Perhaps... but there is a time to fight things. Consider this, New Mexico’s Constitution contains a Right to Keep and Bear arms which, in no uncertain terms, forbids the state from passing laws to abridge “the right of the Citizen” to defense. {Not even ‘self-defense’ exclusively; the portion on inherent rights of man (as recognized by the state) contains a portion on the right to defend one’s PROPERTY.} Furthermore, it prohibits any “county or municipality” from “regulating, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.” This means that, strictly speaking, using “disturbing the peace” as an excuse to prohibit people from carrying openly is forbidden.

Now, keeping the previous in mind, the state has a State Statute [30-7-2.4] which prohibits firearms on campus.

So now New Mexican citizens are disbarred the use of their guns on campus despite a CONSTITUTIONAL injunction against it. You may see where I’m going with this, it is the Law of Non-Contradiction; the axiom in Logic which says that a statement cannot be both true and false at the same time.

If I take my Glock on campus, open carry, would the following statement [uttered by me] be true, or would it be false:
“I am not doing anything illegal.”

It cannot be both, it must be one or the other; the answer is if vital importance. {And no BS on ‘it depends on how you look at it.’}

If it is true, then the problem is that there is a lie about the legality of firearms on campus. If, however, it is false then the State Constitution doesn’t matter. If the State Constitution doesn’t matter, then the State Legislature & Judiciary have no [legitimate] authority... in which case ALL [state] laws are invalid.

>I can guarantee you that a large majority of Americans view this behavior as scary and radical. I don’t agree, but the majority wins in this case.

Maybe it’s time for something “scary and radical.” I’m tempted to take my gun on campus and press the issue. If I win then the contradiction will be cleared up; if I lose it’s only a petty misdemeanor.


101 posted on 04/29/2010 5:23:16 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

But you ignore a page from the democrat playbook - incrementalism. We still have a large number of people who are terrified of firearms. Hoplophobia is not rational. It’s the product of decades of effort to demonize self defense. The propaganda machine against us is remarkably powerful and it won’t give up so easily. Any opportunity to demonize shooters will be exploited. Those two Associated Press stories demonstrate that.

The N.R.A. said that it didn’t want to argue the second amendment in court because it wanted to change the thinking of legislators, else they would find ways to weasel around any other gains we’d made. They’re already doing that in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

The strategy was working. Gun owners used the crime wave of the 1980s to change a relatively insignificant gun law in Florida and reflect the progress on the national news. Now you can carry a loaded gun in your car in Florida. No shootouts happened. Now you can get a concealed carry permit in Florida. No shootouts happened. Now you can get a non-resident carry permit in Florida. No shootouts happened. In the 25 years since those changes were made, concealed carry became an issue that carried in all but the most dank, liberal hellholes.

The strategy is working. I see no reason to change it. We have not carried the whole country yet.


102 posted on 04/29/2010 5:40:23 PM PDT by sig226 (Mourn this day, the death of a great republic. March 21, 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

The police receive training on weapons retention yet many are killed every year with their own weapon, so open carry will just produce easier targets for the criminals and let the bad guys know who is armed and who is not, makes their work safer for the criminal.

*************

It is obvious you don’t know your fact, because I have the 2009 officer memorial list in front of mepublished by the American Federation of police and concerned citizen, and not a single officer was killed with his own firearm in 2009.in the Memorial a listing of110 officers were killed in the line of duty, 42 by assailants firearms.

Since I know these reported facts it is obvious you’re pulling your opinion out of thin air. It is disingenuous on your part to spread such inaccurate information.


103 posted on 04/29/2010 5:46:41 PM PDT by CHICAGOFARMER ( “IThf you're not ready to die for it, put the word ''freedom'' out of your vocabulary.” – Malcol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usurper; Pessimist

>>And any cop shop that would make a patrolman conceal must be in some Worker’s Paradise.
>
>I know literally hundreds of LEOs across the country and I have never met one who would open carry off duty unless they were out in the woods hunting or something.

There is an ancient Chinese saying that may apply here:
“A foolish idea held by thousands, is still a foolish idea.”

To connect this to your point about knowing hundreds of officers; imagine how they would react to the following scenario:
- Someone is open carrying on campus.
- There is a state statute forbidding firearms on campus.
- The State Constitution clearly states that “No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms”
- The officer responding knows all the above.

Would the officer arrest him?
Would the officer ignore him?
Would the officer talk to him about “scaring people”?
Would the officer intimidate him about ‘breaking the law’?


104 posted on 04/29/2010 5:48:36 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey

LOL / Awesome story; thank you for sharing it.


105 posted on 04/29/2010 5:50:56 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Spok
Open carry is not assault, brandishing, or disorderly conduct in any jurisdiction in the US according to the USSC. Simply open carrying isn't even a legal basis to ask a person for ID and many police and their agencies have been sued for doing just that.

Open carry is the act of law abiding citizens who are not ashamed of their rights or criminally inclined.

There is a special kind of insanity that believes that a hidden gun will deter a criminal attack but a visible one will not. Concealed carry makes for a slower draw adn increases the likelihood that a criminal will be successful.

It's strange that there are so many stories of concealed carriers being attacked by criminals and so few of open carriers. The sight of a gun deters criminal actions.

106 posted on 04/29/2010 6:15:46 PM PDT by Dayman (My 1919a4 is named Charlotte. When I light her up she has the voice of an angel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
we cave in on issues in order to not “offend” others

It's not a question of caving. It's a question of not scareing the hell out of them before you try to convince them.

It's just a question of being smart, that's all.

107 posted on 04/29/2010 8:34:05 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
If you think you can carry openly in anywhere but a very deserted, hunting or such area and you can look at people and know somehow that you do not scare them, then you need to see a physician.

Eye doctor or headshrinker; I'll let you decide.

108 posted on 04/29/2010 8:38:01 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
Please do not tell me what I am saying. You are often be wrong, as you are here.

I have not expressed an opinion on open carry.

All I've said is that if open carry advocates do not understand that open carry scares most people, then their thinking process needs a close evaluation.

One does not convince people by scareing them.

One other thing. If you advocate completely Open Carry, then you are defending the “rights” of a convicted child molester to follow your 8 year old daughter or granddaughter home from her school bus stop, with a pistol in his hand, as long as he stays on public property, such as a sidewalk, and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

Go for it.

109 posted on 04/29/2010 8:44:08 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

So, how do you convince people that concealed carry or open carry is safe unless you demonstrate that it is safe?


110 posted on 04/29/2010 8:46:33 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
So, how do you convince people that concealed carry or open carry is safe unless you demonstrate that it is safe?

Open Carry demonstrates nothing other than you can scare people.

How?

You start a good PR campaign. Begin with free gun safety classes for kids. Promote then through the private schools first. More likely to have conservative business owner parents.

Then get media involved. First find the most conservative MSM in town. Probably the local Fox affiliate.

Be prepared for lots of flak. Counter it with education, not Wyatt Earp.

There is much more you can do, and win, but scareing the hell out of people is not how to do it.

111 posted on 04/29/2010 8:58:42 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

Got news for ya - those who are “scared” about open carry or concealed carry will not be moved by your “education”.


112 posted on 04/29/2010 9:00:25 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

Soon we will all be forced to carry...


113 posted on 04/29/2010 9:16:44 PM PDT by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AJKauf

“Recoil in horror” - maybe wet themselves, too.


114 posted on 04/29/2010 9:22:35 PM PDT by little jeremiah (http://lifewurx.com - Good herb formulas made by a friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spok

There’s a difference between “brandishing” and having a nice little holster strapped on.


115 posted on 04/29/2010 9:23:32 PM PDT by little jeremiah (http://lifewurx.com - Good herb formulas made by a friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey

You live in a different state/county than I do, for sure.

Obviously America (at least the part you’re referring to) needs to change its conditioning.


116 posted on 04/29/2010 9:25:42 PM PDT by little jeremiah (http://lifewurx.com - Good herb formulas made by a friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
Here's a good one. Can only be drawn straight up, which makes it difficult for anyone to snatch it.


117 posted on 04/29/2010 9:34:39 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

Check my # 117. GMTA!


118 posted on 04/29/2010 9:38:04 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
Looks pretty close to the Blackhawk Serpa.
That's what I have for my G 17. I've been looking for something like the Serpa or similar that would sit 3 to 4 inches lower and still accommodate a Glock safely.
119 posted on 04/29/2010 9:45:41 PM PDT by The Cajun (Mind numbed robot , ditto-head, Hannitized, Levinite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: The Cajun
Something like this? Looks like it's slung a few inches lower.


120 posted on 04/29/2010 10:19:36 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
Maybe an inch or an inch and a half lower.
Trouble with me is before the Glock, all I ever used was western style holsters and revolvers where the palm of your hand normally rested pretty close to the handle of the pistol.
After 4 months of practice I'm starting to get kind of comfortable with the "High" holster.
Anyway I figure 17 in a clip is a lot better than 6 in the cylinder ;^)
121 posted on 04/29/2010 10:36:50 PM PDT by The Cajun (Mind numbed robot , ditto-head, Hannitized, Levinite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

Perhaps not, but they will call their state reps and senators and get open carry declared illegal ASAP.

Open Carry demos are simply stupid.


122 posted on 04/29/2010 10:59:44 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

agree to disagree.


123 posted on 04/29/2010 11:07:38 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

In case I didn’t make it clear, my remarks were not primarily about individuals choosing to open carry in their private lives. This gets little publicity and unless it becomes a lot more common than it has, is well below most people’s radar.

I was referencing the mass armed protests that have occurred in the last few months, which I believe severely damaging politically to the 2nd Amendment rights cause. I’ve spoken to perhaps a dozen people recently about the issue, from all varieties of political belief. Every single one of them was aghast that this was happening and thought it showed the fanaticism of the gun rights people. Not a representative sample, of course, but interesting.

YMMV


124 posted on 04/30/2010 4:34:06 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

>One other thing. If you advocate completely Open Carry, then you are defending the “rights” of a convicted child molester to follow your 8 year old daughter or granddaughter home from her school bus stop, with a pistol in his hand, as long as he stays on public property, such as a sidewalk, and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

Interesting position; I reject it. A child molester who has served their sentence should have ALL rights and privileges restored, period. {Whether or not the sentence is just is another, separate matter.} So, in that sense I _MUST_ be for the ex-convict being allowed to be armed, true.

HOWEVER, stalking IS illegal; and you have attached that into your scenario. Why should my advocacy of human rights, such as self defense, be linked to the condoning of a crime?


125 posted on 04/30/2010 5:05:34 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I don’t think we want to “brandish” our firearms. All (not most, not 99%, but all) of the gun owners I know are responsible, trained, and reasonable.

You carry a firearm as insurance. If it is there, you probably won’t need it. When you are being sized up by a criminal, they will move on down the food chain. They won’t want to mess with someone that will give them any trouble.

Gun owners are not nuts.

People with an unreasonable fear of firearms, brought about by the movies and TV culture, are nuts.


126 posted on 04/30/2010 5:10:44 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (This nation, of the people, by the people, and for the people has perished from the land.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Walking down the sidewalk behind someone, with no communication of a threat or verbal contact, hardly constitutes stalking.


127 posted on 04/30/2010 5:21:16 AM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26; SoldierDad

>>So, how do you convince people that concealed carry or open carry is safe unless you demonstrate that it is safe?
>
>Open Carry demonstrates nothing other than you can scare people.

Really? Then the open-carry environment at basic training demonstrates only that our armed forces have the ability to “be scary.” Obviously.

Prior to Basic, I had absolutely NO experience with firearms; today I find them fairly natural and have no animosity towards the tool. And virtually ALL of my past decade’s experience with firearms is from military training; I only got into private firearms the last year or so of my enlistment, after being deployed to Iraq.

But maybe you’ll say that the military is different, or that it, as my introduction to firearms, makes my experience invalid as anecdotal evidence that much of the fear of firearms is resultant of ignorance thereof.

Open carry demonstrations are certainly a way to alleviate some of that ignorance.

>How?
>
>You start a good PR campaign.

Question: how is a PR campaign of more substance than actual experience? That is, if you were on a jury hearing the testimony of someone who only “heard about” ‘people with guns’ versus a testimony by someone who interacted with ‘people with guns’ who would you be inclined to believe? {Here’s a hint, the former is called ‘hearsay’ and is inadmissible in a court of law.}

>Begin with free gun safety classes for kids. Promote then through the private schools first. More likely to have conservative business owner parents.

Again, this is EXPERIENCE, not PERCEPTION which you are advocating.

>Then get media involved. First find the most conservative MSM in town. Probably the local Fox affiliate.

Really, do we really want the media involved? Isn’t that the thing that is “making people wet themselves” over open carry right now? The media is _NOT_ your friend, they do not want “good, happy endings” they want “SENSATIONAL NEWS STORIES!!” Isn’t it their hearsay on ‘guns are evil’ that is saturating the country? {Along with the school-systems it makes for a very good social indoctrination/engineering program.}


128 posted on 04/30/2010 5:25:20 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Ignoring your snide remark about me being wrong often, let's address what you said.

I have not expressed an opinion on open carry.

Oh, you didn't? I must be illiterate then. I'm sure you didn't here either. Where did we get the idea that you want to force others to give up their right to openly carry? I don't know, how about your outrageous comparison to the pro-life movement?

One does not convince people by scareing them.

As I've said countless times, but you choose to ignore, my job is complete when I can go anywhere with my Glock on my hip and I don't scare them. That doesn't happen by hiding it. It happens by openly carrying to the point that it's an everyday thing.

And as for your "if the people have rights, they will abuse them, therefore they shouldn't have rights" crap, OneWingedShark did a phenomenal job of debunking it in post #125, so I'll defer to him.

You sound like a totalitarian. If you don't like it, no one should be able to. And before you snidely dismiss me as "wrong," let's take a look at your phrasing, shall we?

If you advocate completely Open Carry

What's the opposite of "completely Open Carry"? Open Carry for cops only? For the privileged? Or for a ban on open carry?

129 posted on 04/30/2010 5:26:19 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise. -The Great One)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey
And open carry just lets the criminal element target you before you are aware you are their target.

I'd just like one example of this happening.

130 posted on 04/30/2010 5:27:55 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise. -The Great One)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Spok
Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. - L. Neil Smith. The Atlanta Declaration

I don't care if you are "intimidated". It's a RIGHT.

You need to figure out what that means instead of trying to weasel your way around to supporting gun control.

131 posted on 04/30/2010 5:37:15 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
When you are being sized up by a criminal, they will move on down the food chain. They won’t want to mess with someone that will give them any trouble.

This. I don't know why this is so hard for those on here that want to revoke our Open Carry rights (there, I said it. There is at least one person on this post that would gladly revoke that right).

They keep shouting "tactical! concealed" element of surprise!" but it's totally bogus. They cannot point to one story of an open carrier being attacked, either with his or someone else's weapon.

132 posted on 04/30/2010 5:45:06 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise. -The Great One)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
I found that my EAA Witness fits just about perfectly in a SERPA CQC. The Sig 220 apparently has very close contours to the Witness/CZ type pistols, at least as far as the designers at Blackhawk are concerned.

Adjustable for clip on, belt slide, and cant. Also has a passive resistance adjustment screw.

A good belt and a light cover garment and I forget I'm carrying a full sized pistol.

I've been to a couple of open carry picnics. Good folks for the most part. These events are good as the "public" sees folks exercising their Rights peacefully, we get a boost from being around like minded folks, and freedom gains a little of it's lost ground back.

It's all worth being called a few names by the anti-gun pols, their media lapdogs, and the outright p*ssies on "our" side of the political fence.

133 posted on 04/30/2010 5:47:05 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
People with an unreasonable fear of firearms,

Hoplophobes.

134 posted on 04/30/2010 5:49:10 AM PDT by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

>In case I didn’t make it clear, my remarks were not primarily about individuals choosing to open carry in their private lives. This gets little publicity and unless it becomes a lot more common than it has, is well below most people’s radar.

Then how would you suggest to put it on people’s radar?

>I was referencing the mass armed protests that have occurred in the last few months,

Isn’t the individual the weakest group? What is the fundamental difference between a peaceful armed individual and a peaceful armed group? Is it merely the number involved? If that is the case, what is the number where that change occurs: 500? 100? 50? 10? 5? 2?

>which I believe severely damaging politically to the 2nd Amendment rights cause.

What about state rights, as in the State Constitution I mentioned in an earlier post? It clearly states that counties and municipalities cannot “regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.” So, if such a rally were denied on the city-level on the grounds that it might frighten someone [”public disturbance”] simply because firearms were involved is ILLEGAL; in this case the only way to tell if the city is following the law is to try to do what is legally permitted and see if they try to stop you.

Now, having recognized that, what of the case where a county or city IS regulating [incidents of] the right to keep and bear arms? How would you go about seeking redress?

>I’ve spoken to perhaps a dozen people recently about the issue, from all varieties of political belief. Every single one of them was aghast that this was happening and thought it showed the fanaticism of the gun rights people.

Kind of like how the SWAT team being called out on the bunch of granny Tea Party-types proves that they are nothing more than barely restrained, violent, seditionists? You know, the incident where they looked like they would have given the SWAT team cookies and milk in the EVIL PLOT to fatten them to the point where they ARE NO LONGER ABLE TO BE POLICE!! *GASP*

[/ridicule]

>Not a representative sample, of course, but interesting.

Indeed. I think it is more indicative of the widespread ignorance of guns than anything else; and the sample is quite small. If we were going on small samples, the one, and ONLY, time I have had a problem open carrying in a restaurant is after picking up a rifle (.22/.410 double barrel over-under) and went into Burger King for lunch as it was about noon. I ordered, with the rifle in my hands, got the food, sat at the table, ate and read a portion of a book before an employee confronted me about it. They said that the gun was scaring people and that it was illegal for me to have the gun in the restaurant. {As previously stated, my state Constitution PROHIBITS laws abridging the right to keep and bear arms for defense, AS WELL AS prohibiting the counties and cities from harassing people about exercising that right.}

So, my only experience with a problem in restaurants with open carry is that they are ignorant at best, liars at worst. Would it be just to characterize all restaurants that way, or even JUST Burger King? {BTW, I’ve open carried handguns in Burger King with no problem.}


135 posted on 04/30/2010 5:50:14 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

>Walking down the sidewalk behind someone, with no communication of a threat or verbal contact, hardly constitutes stalking.

Then why should you be concerned at all?


136 posted on 04/30/2010 5:51:45 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn; RedMonqey

>>And open carry just lets the criminal element target you before you are aware you are their target.
>
>I’d just like one example of this happening.

Columbine, Virginia Tech, the National Mall... ALL of the shooters took out the armed targets present first.

Ah, vacuously true statements; the key to winning any argument! ;)


137 posted on 04/30/2010 5:58:43 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

You are zotted. I never argue with little people who just want to argue and drag you down to their level.


138 posted on 04/30/2010 7:05:13 AM PDT by MindBender26 (Prezdet Obama is what you get when you let the O.J. jury select a president !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

>You are zotted. I never argue with little people who just want to argue and drag you down to their level.

Says the guy who cannot coherently argue his point and relies only on the visceral emotionality of his presented scenarios?

(Or, how is using reasoning dragging you down to my level?)

I agree that I like to argue, in the philosophical sense, but since when has philosophy (the love of wisdom) become something of “the little people” to be so belittled?


139 posted on 04/30/2010 7:14:15 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Have you looked at his home page?


140 posted on 04/30/2010 8:25:37 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

>Have you looked at his home page?

His Freeper profile page?


141 posted on 04/30/2010 8:33:08 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

“You need to figure out what that means instead of trying to weasel your way around to supporting gun control.”

You conclude that anyone who advocates discretion and common sense thinks it must be legislated. Helmets and seatbelts are good ideas that make bad laws. Jumping to the conclusion that any problem or criticism must automatically be solved with a law is a hysterical, emotional liberal response; yours, not mine.


142 posted on 04/30/2010 8:40:28 AM PDT by Spok (Free Range Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Spok
You conclude that anyone who advocates discretion and common sense thinks it must be legislated.

Common sense is that peaceable people carrying firearms, as it is their Right to do so, don't need your fear mongering.

When you start off on the wrong foot, you won't get very far.

143 posted on 04/30/2010 8:45:33 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

“don’t need your fear mongering.”

I apologize. I didn’t mean to frighten you.


144 posted on 04/30/2010 8:49:40 AM PDT by Spok (Free Range Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Spok
What do I have to be frightened of? I carry a gun.

Run along now and see if you can't find some more VPC talking points to bring up...

145 posted on 04/30/2010 8:56:43 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Yes


146 posted on 04/30/2010 9:06:20 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

“What do I have to be frightened of? I carry a gun.”

And sleep with a light on?


147 posted on 04/30/2010 9:06:39 AM PDT by Spok (Free Range Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Spok
Don't project. Again, why do I have to be afraid of the dark? I'm ARMED.

Open. Concealed. Long arm or pistol. Full auto or single shot. Blade, firearm, cudgel...

It's none of your damn business. Certainly none of the governments.

148 posted on 04/30/2010 9:09:43 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

I didn’t until you asked. But what about it, specifically, are you referring to?


149 posted on 04/30/2010 9:44:54 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

I find it interesting that on his home page he comments about being an advocate for CCW, but on this thread he’s engaging in fear-mongering (IMHO) regarding the issue of carrying weapons.


150 posted on 04/30/2010 11:34:23 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud Papa of two new Army Brats! Congrats to my Soldier son and his wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-163 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson