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

Skip to comments.

Kroger Gun Stunt Sparks 2nd Amendment Debate
NBC28 ^ | 1/28/2013 | Amy Vu

Posted on 01/29/2013 11:46:30 AM PST by 1912comeback

Charlottesville police say the man who showed up at a Kroger grocery store with a loaded gun wanted to make a point. On Sunday, an unidentified 22-year-old man carried a loaded AR-15 into the Kroger store on Emmet Street and Hydraulic Road, sparking not only a scare for customers and employees but also a 2nd Amendment debate.

(Excerpt) Read more at nbc29.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; US: North Carolina
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; guns; nra; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-72 last
To: Dead Corpse

Trigger happy? I don’t know what to say if you don’t think someone taking a rifle into a totally inappropriate location is not something to pay extreme attention to. Maybe you’ve forgotten the news they’ve been beating us over the head with for months now. Three punks with uncased rifles in locations they had no business taking them into? Ring any bells? Yeah, you stand there and let him shoulder the weapon. This kid’s stunt was reckless in the extreme.


51 posted on 01/29/2013 5:56:05 PM PST by Trod Upon (Civilian disarmament is the precursor to democide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ZX12R

So then would you let a shooter take the first several shots before acting? Where would you draw the line? For me, in that environment, it’s an attempt to shoulder the rifle. Who knows...maybe I’d just run, but I’d do something if that’s what I believed was happening. Taking a rifle into a grocery store in general is needless, and in the current climate it is a dangerously provocative act.


52 posted on 01/29/2013 6:07:45 PM PST by Trod Upon (Civilian disarmament is the precursor to democide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: servo1969

I’m completely pro-gun but I wouldn’t walk into Target or Walmart with a shotgun slung over my shoulder.

+++++++++++++
Then you’re part of the problem.........you would be poliiiiiiiiiiiiitically pro-gun. Putz.


53 posted on 01/29/2013 7:51:18 PM PST by S.O.S121.500 ( Nothing so vexes me as a Democrat above ground...ENFORCE THE BILL OF RIGHTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Am I off base in that recollection?
------------- Yep. Foul ball in fact. An arm was an accoutrement like a hat when you ventured forth.
54 posted on 01/29/2013 7:59:35 PM PST by S.O.S121.500 ( Nothing so vexes me as a Democrat above ground...ENFORCE THE BILL OF RIGHTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Well, if you’re old enough to recollect expecting trouble from the redcoats, we can forgive you for getting a little off base from time to time.
At least you have an excuse...
;)


55 posted on 01/29/2013 10:17:47 PM PST by Apogee (All done with sleepless contemplation of jus ad bellum and jus in bello, for now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
"He is lucky a thinking gun owner didn’t blow his head off."

A "thinking" gun owner who shoots someone who is NOT threatening anyone with a gun is not in fact a "thinking" gun owner he is an idiot.

The article said he had the gun slung over his shoulder. He was legal. Case closed.

56 posted on 01/29/2013 10:24:00 PM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
"You do not brandish it around in a store to ‘prove a point’."

Apparently you have not a clue as to what the word "brandish" means especially when referring to a gun.

bran·dish

1 : to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly

2 : to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner

He had it slung over his shoulder according to the story and the police said he was legal.

He didn't "brandish" it.

And your reaction is why the gun grabbers can get so much traction with their "concern trollage" try not having such a knee jerk reaction and think it through.

He wasn't menacing or brandishing or any other thing. He was doing what the 2nd Amendment gives him the right to do, keep and bear arms!

57 posted on 01/29/2013 10:33:31 PM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
"Am I off base in that recollection?"

Yep. Many folks in those times carried weapons with them constantly. Brigands, Indian attacks, and all around personal protection were always a concern. When you traveled on the road there were no phones or radios, help was days away. You were armed or you were at risk. Hell even traveling from the farm into town was an ordeal and not being armed was a risk for those few hours. So it was nothing to see people who had arms on them walking into businesses. See they didn't have car trunks to lock them in.

58 posted on 01/29/2013 10:42:18 PM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Good points all. I will consider them.

Do you think there was ever a time when one of the founders thought “I’ll just leave the gun behind”?


59 posted on 01/30/2013 3:07:44 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

“I carry concealed all the time, but I absolutely would not have an issue carrying open; and I would be carrying at least a rifle or shotgun AND a pistol. It’s not for “attention” or to be noticed. It’s my RIGHT to protect myself and my family.”

So in other words your 2nd amendment rights trump private property rights?


60 posted on 01/30/2013 4:24:21 AM PST by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Where in the story does it say he had it slung over his shoulder? Nowhere. I’m assuming then because he was there to ‘prove a point’ that he was displaying it ostentatiously, or brandishing it.

Bottom line - guns are serious tools. As I said, I grew up in the rural areas and guns are brought out to use, to clean, or to transport. They aren’t some neo-60’s hippie protest statement, and you don’t walk around with one to prove a point. He didn’t do anything illegal, but he sure didn’t use good gun handling protocol either. Like several said here, if I was carrying I would have had safety off ready to put the guy down if he made a wrong move.


61 posted on 01/30/2013 4:25:36 AM PST by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! [You can vote Democrat when you're dead]...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

Non sequitur, Van. There’s no mention of signage banning this young man from carrying in the Kroger. As a matter of fact, there’s an account stating that he idled around the front of the store appearing to look for a “Gun Free Zone” sign. Kroger made a statement later stating that the safety of their patrons is important but did not clarify if they were “Gun Free.”

If a business decides to post a sign banning me from carrying on their property, then I will not patronize that business. It is their right to do so as it is my right to choose not to patronize them. If they do not post a sign explicitly stating that they do not permit lawful carrying of a firearm, they cannot deny me my right to carry.

If they wish to file trespassing against me after-the-fact, that also is their right, but one cannot trespass if one does not know that the property is private or otherwise prohibited to specific persons.


62 posted on 01/30/2013 4:32:45 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: 1912comeback
JCP [Utah] copycat.


63 posted on 01/30/2013 4:37:54 AM PST by Daffynition (The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. — D.H.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
If you open your business to the public, then expect the public to come in to your business with whatever they happen to be carrying.

If you want to keep your business a private club, you can do that too. You can post a sign saying what is acceptable to you. Etc...

So no, it has less to do with one Right trumping another's Rights. It has more to do with mutual respect for those Rights or a lack thereof.

Post your business as a Victim Disarmament Zone or just get over it that your patrons are providing additional FREE security for your business.

64 posted on 01/30/2013 5:48:25 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Trod Upon
We obviously have completely different expectations for what is an "appropriate location". I've been to a number of carry rallies, 3-gun matches, Zombie shoots, etc where the attendees are better armed than most 3rd World dictatorships.

I've rarely felt safer.

Don't buy into the stupidity of the Left's hoplophobia.

The solution to random shooters, and even sudden Jihad syndrome, is for more people to carry. Open, concealed, pistol, or rifle. Whatever your personal choice is.

The Israelis figured this out. The Founders figured this out. Heck, even the Swiss figured this out.

Why is it so hard for you?

65 posted on 01/30/2013 6:24:18 AM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
In Michigan, one can Open Carry in more places than one can go Concealed and so long as there isn't a sign posted outside the establishment specifically alerting folks to NOT carry weapons inside, then it's perfectly legal to do so. Grocery stores, the malls, barbershops, restaurants (check laws) and a whole lot of other places. The catch is transporting the weapon once you want to leave. Gotta be careful there.
66 posted on 01/30/2013 9:26:51 AM PST by Mathews (Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

As long as the establishment is not Posted or Designated as a Weapons Free Area... then yes, 2nd and State Law would trump.


67 posted on 01/30/2013 9:32:59 AM PST by Mathews (Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

..and had you shot yourself in the foot because you got overly nervous while finger a loaded weapon with the safety off, you would not only get a ride to the hospital, but you would be in trouble for unlawful discharge and whatever else the law could come up with.


68 posted on 01/30/2013 9:36:22 AM PST by Mathews (Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
It's difficult for me because I am a rational adult who understands that with rights come responsibilities. Just because you are lawfully able to do something doesn't excuse you from questioning whether or not it is the right thing to do under the circumstances at hand. This kid did what he did in order to shock people, and that's why he had the note in his pocket--he fully expected something to happen to him because he knew how provocative his actions were going to be. He has accomplished nothing but to further inflame the anti 2A crowd with his irresponsible behavior. I also understand that our threat level is not even remotely close to that faced by the good people of Israel. It's just not even comparable. I'm curious. What is the practical purpose, beyond pulling a provocative political stunt, for an American to take a rifle into a grocery store in the middle of a city? No, It is not "self defense"...even Detroit is not that bad.
69 posted on 01/30/2013 12:45:59 PM PST by Trod Upon (Civilian disarmament is the precursor to democide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Trod Upon

Sounds like you’re looking for a fight.


70 posted on 01/30/2013 12:49:35 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Trod Upon

>> “This kid’s stunt was reckless in the extreme.” <<

.
You’re nuts!

I personally would feel more comfortable if people carried rifles around much more freely. That would prevent the crazies from getting the upper hand.


71 posted on 01/30/2013 1:22:28 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Trod Upon
He did it to make a point. He did it because it IS legal and should be perfectly acceptable to any rational adult you takes their responsibilities seriously.

A Right not exercised is more easily taken. A little bit of wisdom you seem to be over looking in your rampant rush to judge and to be seen as not scaring the sheep.

72 posted on 01/30/2013 1:41:09 PM PST by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-72 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