Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/09/2012 11:56:18 AM PST by Sasparilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Sasparilla

Note to liberals. Get over it, get use to it, and get a life.


2 posted on 03/09/2012 12:02:07 PM PST by kempo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
The blogger here needs an editor, or at least a proof reader.

Otherwise a good information piece to keep liberties and 2A in the conversation.

3 posted on 03/09/2012 12:06:51 PM PST by Tenacious 1 (With regards to the GOP: I am prodisestablishmentarianistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

Isn’t New Mexico an open carry state?

Do people who open carry also have to have a concealed carry permit?


6 posted on 03/09/2012 12:14:03 PM PST by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
Out of the millions of firearms there are in America, the left has to do actual research to find examples of nutcases who misuse them.

With the wussification of America in play, I'm not sure how strongly people will stand to retain their 2nd Amendment rights, but I wouldn't want to be the one who tries to cancel it.
7 posted on 03/09/2012 12:19:11 PM PST by FrankR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
As long as open carry is a “political statement” about the “right of individual self defense”, most of those arguments don't apply.

However, if it becomes form of “political coercion” (”Lets put a quarter of a million peaceful armed demonstrators on the streets of Washington and show the politicians who they work for” or “We intend to patrol the border, and we will shoot-to-kill anyone attempting to cross it illegally”) then a new rule applies:

“All functioning governments maintain an effective monopoly on the use of armed force for political ends.”

Governments many be more or less subtle in the way they enforce this monopoly, but they *will* enforce it, ask the Black Panthers (the real, 1960-70s ones) or the Hutaree - because when they fail to do so, the result is a state of “armed revolution”.

The tricky part is the intermediate situation of “political intimidation”.

An example would be a situation where members of one group announced they were going to show at polling places to “maintain order”, and it was reasonable to suppose that as a result members of some other group would be frightened of showing up at the polls at all.

This isn't an act of “insurrection”, and arguable its not even an instance of “political coercion”(this is likely what members of the first group would claim).

But if the government allow it to happen, you are now living in a country run at least in part by warlords. Sometimes, even this line get pretty blurry, for example, suppose a group of armed pro-life protesters in an open carry state started showing at an abortion clinic and "counseling" people not to enter. To maintain legitimacy government would have to require that restraint be placed on such behavior, even though it was "individual" rather than "political" coercion. That restraint might only be in the form a "show of force" (armed representatives of the government present to "maintain order"), but it would have the be strong enough, and ready enough to enforce the rule of law, to conclusively demonstrate that the government was setting and maintaining the rules.

8 posted on 03/09/2012 12:45:04 PM PST by M. Dodge Thomas (million)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

The only good thiings about libs is that their arguments are so simple and easy to defeat.

Simple arguments from simple minds.


10 posted on 03/09/2012 1:05:17 PM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
He was asked to leave immediately after voting.

What's new about that? One of the signs provided by the county board that we post (I work a polling place) says NO LOITERING. Not "NO LOITERING WHILE ARMED"!

11 posted on 03/09/2012 1:06:04 PM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
"... It seems like guns carried openly are seen almost everywhere in Arizona. It’s safe to say that the overwhelming majority of Michigan residents have no idea whatsoever that openly carrying a firearm is legal there. And, that’s where the problem lies."

Metro-area liberals on vacation in the Western US states sometimes encounter open carriers and have no idea whatsoever that openly carrying a firearm is perfectly legal.

They come out to canoe/kayak the rivers or mountain bike the trails, driving here in their Subaru Outbacks or Nissan X-Terras with the Thule® rack/hardshell on the roof, then while they're out in the wilds they encounter a local steer-roper or sheep hunter from Yerington who's packing a sidearm. Great concern occasionally is exhibited.

There's one incident that I'm personally aware of where a Californian over on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe dialed '911' to report a man with a gun, to which the Nevada NHP responded and determined that the man was a NV resident with a CCW. In one case, the NHP found the Californian who'd summoned them and said "What he's doing is lawful, so don't do that again please. Have a nice day".

I've had recommended to me that if you have a CCW in an area that's used by out of town liberals as a vacation spot, you might want to get one of those official-looking badges for your belt that sits right next to your gun and merely says "CCW Holder" in case somehow a liberal spies your gun. They'd see the badge and automatically presume you're some kind of local yokel law enforcement agent and not give you a second thought: City folk are conditioned to just accept the fact that anyone with an official looking badge is some kind of cop and not question anything they do.

12 posted on 03/09/2012 1:07:14 PM PST by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

Open carry makes you as dangerous as doughnut-eating dog shooters...


14 posted on 03/09/2012 1:12:15 PM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

Gabby Giffords carried a gun. Why didn’t he mention her?


16 posted on 03/09/2012 2:16:13 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla
Open Carry Makes You As Dangerous as John Wilkes Booth, Tim McVeigh, Sharon Angle, and Ted Nugent?

Thanks for the tip. I was wondering what I needed to do.

19 posted on 03/09/2012 7:09:52 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

Did she mean John Wayne Gacy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Ted Kaczynski?


20 posted on 03/09/2012 7:11:38 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sasparilla

Citizens with no criminal record should be able, at will, to carry, concealed or open, any firearm they please, hand gun or long gun, anywhere they please without let or hindrance by government authorities.


21 posted on 03/09/2012 7:50:17 PM PST by W. W. SMITH (Obama is Romney lite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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