1. New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hot Topics is open from 8:30 AM - 4 PM ET Mon - Fri.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Friday and 8:30am ET Monday.
    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

Open Carry Texas, the NRA and Freaky, Crazy Crud.

Discussion in 'Other Hot Topics' started by Sigmund, Jun 9, 2014.


    GNTLGNT The idiot is IN

    ...in this kind of case, it's a penile substitute...the 'Bangers are waving their wee-wee's around metaphorically speaking...I see inmates all the time that are STG(Security Threat Group-prisonspeak for a gang member), that claim to have been shot multiple times, and boast about it..."I been shot SEVEN times!!!", but they quickly shut-up when I reply "Not by anybody that knew how to shoot!"...and yeah, it's the equivalent of "peace through intimidation" with open carry...
    hossenpepper and DiO'Bolic like this.
  2. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    You definitely have more violence in your history, but that doesn't mean you have to embrace it and use it as an excuse for the extremes you go to now. (I do not mean you personally, but the greater you.). And it was a long gun registry as in hunting rifles, not semi-automatic used to buy cookies. Anyone I know that hunts actually eats what they kill.

    Google "Toronto summer of the gun". We had a horrible and scary summer here about 7 years ago. I really don't know how people live with that year after year. And did you hear about the three RCMP officers killed last month? It was just days before the two officers were killed in the states. Well, in New Brunswick, this guy went walking down the road wearing cammo and guns. People called the police. He was hunting police. He didn't shoot anyone else, just RCMP. But here, nobody felt he had the right to walk down the road armed like Rambo. (I don't even know what to say about Americans that feel all Americans have that right. Part of the reason is your right to stand armed against your government. Aren't police officers part of the enforcement of the government? So....it's OK to shoot them? Or not? I really don't know where the line is. When it's OK. I am not trying to make light of it, I just really don't know.)

    Within the last 20 years, I received the Long Form at census time. Ours asks where your ancestors come from, and you can select as many as apply. I checked Other and wrote Canada. At that time, Canada was not a choice.
    DiO'Bolic and GNTLGNT like this.
  3. Elijah Sattler

    Elijah Sattler Well-Known Member

    Hey. Hey. Heeeeyyy. Just joking. This place is really weird. None of you ever come here, it's weird.
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  4. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Yes, but those have to be Terry searches. In other words, to stop what the officer perceives as an impending crime. It cannot be to gather evidence, as in to find if they have an illegal gun on them. The cases where there was no present evidence of an impending crime, the cases have been thrown out.

    If this was an attempt to paint the issue with a broad brush of liberal hypocrisy because it's in New York, you're missing a key thing here: NYC cops aren't liberals. In fact, I'd say most police officers aren't. Though in the past, the sensibility has been anything collectivist is liberal and collectivism is oppressive generally speaking, the driect oppression of our individual freedoms is usually the over reach of overzealous LEOs. So the idea of using harsh means to enforce the law, isn't some liberal ideology. Last time I checked, liberals were the peace loving hippie types, not the one who would bash the heads of said hippies with a billy club...

    But honestly, I don't understand your point beyond a discussion of the issue. You're OK with violation of the 4th amendment to save the 2nd? Maybe you can clarify what the position is you're trying to take here. You, of all folks, should get that it starts with the "criminal" element when it comes to these things and quickly spreads to a thing everyone should have to face. As was pointed out regarding the Whiskey rebellion in the thread about the Cliven Bundy thing, the government has a history from the first president on that if you try to push the law with them, they will crush your head and quickly. This open carry crap is just silly and will only lead to people saying we need to put that stuff down to die. They are simply turding up the punchbowl for legitimate, responsible gun owners.
    skimom2 and GNTLGNT like this.
  5. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    I don’t believe that is quite right about a Terry Stop, in that it's limited to “what the officer perceives as an impending crime.” There were 684,000 people stopped in New York City under the law in 2011... That would be a whole lot of impending crimes by your definition. Actually I believe under the law police may briefly detain a person whom they reasonably suspect is involved in “criminal activity.” And since it is well established that gang members often carry illegal weapons an/or drugs, reasonable suspicion that a gang member might be armed and dangerous, or involved in illegal drug activities, would fall into the criteria IMO.

    And I picked NYC because of it’s historical high rate of crime, and the effectiveness of the Stop-Question-and-Frisk program had on reducing crime there. Nothing at all to with any liberal hypocrisy mumbo jumbo… Sorry to disappoint.
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  6. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Look it up. This program is based ENTIRELY on Terry vs Ohio. Impending criminal activity is the exact wording of that very draconian decision. I think the fact that cops can shoot first and ask questions later, effectively, is giving them more than enough power as it is. THIS is EXACTLY the kind of thing that leads to the police state your handlers are so paranoid about...
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  7. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    I did look it up. I think you are interpreting the Stop-Question-and-Frisk program in New York City incorrectly.
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  8. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Perhaps, but if it goes to court it'll be judged on the Terry decision, which is pretty clear in the language.

    But besides all that, are you saying that you're OK with this? Because it really contradicts many of your other stands on government over-reach and evolution of oppressive laws.
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  9. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    A federal judge already ruled against the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program. And in unrelated news, Bill de Blasio was clueless as to why statistics revealed an alarming rise in gun violence that followed the ruling.

    Yeah, I’m okay with it as it pertains to gang activity, as most gang activity is crime related, wouldn't you agree?
    GNTLGNT likes this.
  10. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Sure. But the term "gang activity" is the problem. Who decides that? Is a group of black guys hanging out in Harlem with the same color shirt automatically justification to search them all? So if in the West, everyone who dresses like a cowboy starts carrying guns and some are found to be illegal, should we then start searching all cowboys too? The real issue with this for me is expansion of police power. I agree over expanding federal, presidential, etc., power, as you've often argued, can be a slippery slope, but this is direct local and WAY more dangerous to broach. Without local police able to act essentially as a military force, the other over-reaches you're paranoid of can't have much weight.

    And yeah, dammit, I knew this had gone to court. I meant the SCOTUS and should've clarified. Didn't they cite Terry v Ohio in that ruling?
    GNTLGNT and kingricefan like this.
  11. rudiroo

    rudiroo Well-Known Member

    Good point: I always assume gun. . fans(?) are white.

    Sorry sorry sorry - I live in the UK.
    We don't understand the gun thing - remember, not even our police are locked & loaded, unless it's a life-or-death situation.
    These are our arguments against gun ownership:
    BBC ON THIS DAY | 19 | 1987: Gunman kills 14 in Hungerford rampage
    BBC ON THIS DAY | 13 | 1996: Massacre in Dunblane school gym

    And, of course. .
    Judy Murray on the Dunblane massacre: 'I just left the car and ran' | Sport | The Guardian

    I do try to understand, seriously.
    But I keep hearing the lyrics of Steve Earle's The Devil's Right Hand & Sting's I Hung My Head. . :confuse:
  12. Lily Sawyer

    Lily Sawyer B-dazzled

    I do, too. And I'm a white American.
    rudiroo, GNTLGNT and kingricefan like this.
  13. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    kingricefan likes this.

    GNTLGNT The idiot is IN

    ...it is ironic, but stupidity abounds...whether it's carrying agun or not...first rule taught in any credible gun safety course is to treat any weapon as if it's loaded, and always check and double check...and the NRA won't fight about that-not enough press for the "suits"...the "rank & file" NRA members like me, are for the most part-are salt of the earth types...
    skimom2 and kingricefan like this.
  15. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    Actually, GNTLGNT, I do not think every card carrying member of the NRA is crazy. I think the ones that intentionally get themselves a lot of press (doing things like acting like they need that giant phallic symbol to buy their Oreos....those ones I do think are crazy and dangerous.

    But what I find ironic is they fight for their second amendment rights everywhere except....where they sell guns.


    As well as check and double check, I was also taught never point it at anything you do not want to shoot. (OK, it was never point it at a person.)
    GNTLGNT and kingricefan like this.
  16. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    I was planning at being at the show that day with a couple of law enforcement friends. I was interested in checking out some WWII items, but bagged out of the trip in order to supervise a pool party my young teenager was throwing for her friends.

    And everyone is all over Hawk around here. And much more from the gun rights groups than the gun control groups in these parts. We take gun safety very seriously here. And even though it was a stupid honest mistake I can pretty much guarantee the police intend to charge him for negligence. He should have been using a demonstration plastic model and not a real gun, and will most probably lose his license. All the other vendors at the show have been up in arms over the incident and that vendor because they say safety should always come first.

    The young lady who was shot says her heart goes out for the vendor because she feels it was just a horrible accident and she intends to go back to the show again next year.
    GNTLGNT, AnnaMarie and kingricefan like this.
  17. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    I agree with your entire post DiO'Bolic. It was a dumb mistake and nothing more. I've seen the woman's tweet and she does feel bad for him.

    But what I 'm questioning is, why do groups fight for the right to carry semi-auto rifles in to a grocery or toy department, but respect a gun show's right to ban?


    In case anyone has not yet seen Target's pr release, today I think.

    Target Addresses Firearms in Stores | A Bullseye View
    GNTLGNT, kingricefan and DiO'Bolic like this.
  18. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    I dunno. Stupid is as stupid does I guess. Personally I don’t understand the idea of open carry for no good reason when concealed carry doesn’t produce anguish with the general public, as they don’t realize someone is armed. I think people who “carry semi-auto rifles in to a grocery or toy department” do more harm than good when it comes to debate surrounding the 2A.

    I respect Target's decision regarding their own stores. If some feel strongly against Target's decision, then they can shop elsewhere IMO. Protesting with your feet can be very effective at times.
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2014
    GNTLGNT and skimom2 like this.
  19. AnnaMarie

    AnnaMarie Well-Known Member

    The why is simple to figure out. What good is a phallic symbol if nobody can see it.

    And I am not saying everyone that owns a long gun owns a phallic symbol. But when you need to stroke it in the department store....that's exactly what it is.
  20. DiO'Bolic

    DiO'Bolic Not completely obtuse

    What about the gals who open carry? Penis envy? ;) :)

Share This Page

Misery: Signed, Limited Edition