Watch: A Professor’s Amazing Idea On Dealing With Open Carry Activists
A philosophy professor offers an amazing response to open carry activists who enter family-friendly establishments with guns strapped to their backs. He notes,”As many have pointed out, there is no way for bystanders to know whether the people with guns are “good guys” or “bad guys.” It is rational to be afraid of someone with a weapon, especially if you know nothing about them.”
That’s been my argument for awhile when gun activists claim there’s nothing to fear from an “inanimate object” but we don’t know the person whose hand is on the trigger. We do see their blatant disrespect for others though.
Jack Russell Weinstein, professor of philosophy and director of the Institute for Philosophy in Public Life at the University of North Dakota, came up with a solution as to how we should respond when witnessing these gun toting groups entering a store.
Weinstein writes:
My proposal is as follows: we should all leave. Immediately. Leave the food on the table in the restaurant. Leave the groceries in the cart, in the aisle. Stop talking or engaging in the exchange. Just leave, unceremoniously, and fast.
But here is the key part: don’t pay. Stopping to pay in the presence of a person with a gun means risking your and your loved ones’ lives; money shouldn’t trump this. It doesn’t matter if you ate the meal. It doesn’t matter if you’ve just received food from the deli counter that can’t be resold. It doesn’t matter if you just got a haircut. Leave. If the business loses money, so be it. They can make the activists pay.
Following this procedure has several advantages. First, it protects people. Second, it forces the businesses to really choose where their loyalties are. If the second amendment is as important as people claim, then people should be willing to pay for it. God knows, free speech is tremendously expensive.
Watch:
A YouTube commenter writes, “The best way to react is to thank them for supporting your rights and the Constitution. Advocating theft at restaurants is not a moral argument.”
We can thank our founding fathers, not gun carrying gangs, thank you very much. As for the allegation of “theft,” the professor covered that topic in the video.
There’s nothing to thank these two young men for after their group entered a Chipotle restaurant in Texas.
While activists have certain “rights” — which they have abused — nowhere on our favorite restaurant’s menu does it read, “Cheeseburger with a side of gangsta, yo.”
H/T: Shamelessly stolen from Wonkette.
Image: Crooks and Liars.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Anomaly100
B Jones July 27th, 2014 at 21:06
Just what level has a society sunk to in which these fools feel they need to carry around such powerful weapons? Really, what does that say for a society?
okieggma July 27th, 2014 at 23:47
Not very much……71 year old tiny little greatgrandmother and still don’t feel the need to pack a gun…..I am not afraid of my neighbors.
B Jones July 27th, 2014 at 21:06
Just what level has a society sunk to in which these fools feel they need to carry around such powerful weapons? Really, what does that say for a society?
okieggma July 27th, 2014 at 23:47
Not very much……71 year old tiny little greatgrandmother and still don’t feel the need to pack a gun…..I am not afraid of my neighbors.
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 21:16
When I open carry, I open carry a pistol in a secure holster on my belt. You are going to look pretty silly running out of a restaurant because of that. Actually, in my experience, you are unlikely to even notice — black pistol in a black holster on a black belt around black jeans. Just a thought — why don’t you find something real to worry about instead of all this drama?
B Jones July 27th, 2014 at 21:58
Why do you need to carry one? No really, give me a better argument than some rights crap. What has your society become in which you feel the need to walk around armed?
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:25
Because my safety is important. You never know what will happen out there. Look at the hospital in PA. A shooter showed up, and a GOOD GUY with a gun saved the day. Bam, problem solved!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:21
The problem with your “logic” is that the same lack of regulations that Gun Nuts demand to permit them to own any guns they want for any reasons they dream up…give criminals the same access to guns.
You’re trying to “solve” the problem too far downstream. Sure, another Gun Nut pulled out his own gun (illegally, I might add, as having a gun there was not permitted by his employer), but only AFTER the first Gunman shot and killed another person. Yeah! The Gunman was stopped before he killed again, but BAM, he had already killed someone. Your second Gunman wasn’t much good to the first victim, was he?
So how about regulations that prevent would-be criminals from obtaining guns in the first place? Or is your fetish too strong to permit such rational thought?
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 02:00
I’ve lived in three nations with gun control and nobody whines about the possibility of random loon opening fire. Why are you so worried about it in the USA?
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:25
Because my safety is important. You never know what will happen out there. Look at the hospital in PA. A shooter showed up, and a GOOD GUY with a gun saved the day. Bam, problem solved!
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 23:48
I also wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle — even though I have ridden tens of thousands of miles without hitting my helmet on anything. Maybe it is my old Boy Scout “Be Prepared” training.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 01:59
So you are comparing a motorcycle helmet to a gun?…hmm…
Fritz July 29th, 2014 at 02:05
Yes. Both are equipment meant to deal with low-probability high-risk situations.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 10:15
A helmet is made to save a life. A gun is made to take a life.
John Micheal July 27th, 2014 at 23:28
I have always thought to myself this and even more now then ever after reading your comment. Scared people carry guns and they do so out of fear or to cause it. Have you ever been attacked? Do you live in a dangerous area? Have you been a victim of a crime? If you answered yes to any of these questions then Fear is why you carry nothing more and nothing less and if the answer is no, then it apply again. I survived 20+ years in Chicago without a gun and lived in the hood where they were all around me, pointed at me and even shot at, yet you live in a most likely fairly good area and you carry. So why again? My brain kept me safe and alive, what’s your excuse again to carry?
John Micheal July 27th, 2014 at 23:28
I have always thought to myself this and even more now then ever after reading your comment. Scared people carry guns and they do so out of fear or to cause it. Have you ever been attacked? Do you live in a dangerous area? Have you been a victim of a crime? If you answered yes to any of these questions then Fear is why you carry nothing more and nothing less and if the answer is no, then it apply again. I survived 20+ years in Chicago without a gun and lived in the hood where they were all around me, pointed at me and even shot at, yet you live in a most likely fairly good area and you carry. So why again? My brain kept me safe and alive, what’s your excuse again to carry?
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 23:46
I carry tools. I also always have a Leatherman’s and a flashlight on me at all times. Why do I need an excuse? I carry an extra 20 pounds of fat — a pound or two of pistol is not exactly inconveniencing me.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:17
Paranoid much? What are you so afraid of that you need to carry a gun around all day long?
Fritz July 28th, 2014 at 21:16
I don’t think I’m paranoid. Basically there is no reason not to carry a pistol in many circumstances. The marginal cost to me is effectively zero.
Also, carrying a weapon is a good tool for meditation. I believe in following Baba Ram Dass’ dictum “Be Here Now”. Carrying a weapon assists me in staying in the moment and aware of my surroundings.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 21:42
What carrying a gun does is give you a false sense of security. In addition, those with guns are more likely to be killed because gun owners are less likely to flee, instead choosing to engage a potential enemy.
PHILADELPHIA – In a first-of its-kind study, epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that, on average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.
The study was released online this month in the American Journal of Public Health, in advance of print publication in November 2009.
“This study helps resolve the long-standing debate about whether guns are protective or perilous,” notes study author Charles C. Branas, PhD, Associate Professor of Epidemiology. “Will possessing a firearm always safeguard against harm or will it promote a false sense of security?”
What Penn researchers found was alarming – almost five Philadelphians were shot every day over the course of the study and about 1 of these 5 people died. The research team concluded that, although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year, the chances of success are low. People should rethink their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures, write the authors. Suggestions to the contrary, especially for urban residents who may see gun possession as a defense against a dangerous environment should be discussed and thoughtfully reconsidered.
http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2009/09/gun-possession-safety/
Fritz July 28th, 2014 at 22:00
Yeah, I read that study. It didn’t control for “who carries a gun”.
I have also read other studies that say that people who fight instead of flee come out better in assaults. You pay your money, you take your chances. Me — I prefer having tools and options at my disposal. Others may have other preferences.
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 21:16
When I open carry, I open carry a pistol in a secure holster on my belt. You are going to look pretty silly running out of a restaurant because of that. Actually, in my experience, you are unlikely to even notice — black pistol in a black holster on a black belt around black jeans. Just a thought — why don’t you find something real to worry about instead of all this drama?
B Jones July 27th, 2014 at 21:58
Why do you need to carry one? No really, give me a better argument than some rights crap. What has your society become in which you feel the need to walk around armed?
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:25
Because my safety is important. You never know what will happen out there. Look at the hospital in PA. A shooter showed up, and a GOOD GUY with a gun saved the day. Bam, problem solved!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:21
The problem with your “logic” is that the same lack of regulations that Gun Nuts demand to permit them to own any guns they want for any reasons they dream up…give criminals the same access to guns.
You’re trying to “solve” the problem too far downstream. Sure, another Gun Nut pulled out his own gun (illegally, I might add, as having a gun there was not permitted by his employer), but only AFTER the first Gunman shot and killed another person. Yeah! The Gunman was stopped before he killed again, but BAM, he had already killed someone. Your second Gunman wasn’t much good to the first victim, was he?
So how about regulations that prevent would-be criminals from obtaining guns in the first place? Or is your fetish too strong to permit such rational thought?
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 02:00
I’ve lived in three nations with gun control and nobody whines about the possibility of random loon opening fire. Why are you so worried about it in the USA?
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 23:48
I also wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle — even though I have ridden tens of thousands of miles without hitting my helmet on anything. Maybe it is my old Boy Scout “Be Prepared” training.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 01:59
So you are comparing a motorcycle helmet to a gun?…hmm…
Fritz July 29th, 2014 at 02:05
Yes. Both are equipment meant to deal with low-probability high-risk situations.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 10:15
A helmet is made to save a life. A gun is made to take a life.
John Micheal July 27th, 2014 at 23:28
I have always thought to myself this and even more now then ever after reading your comment. Scared people carry guns and they do so out of fear or to cause it. Have you ever been attacked? Do you live in a dangerous area? Have you been a victim of a crime? If you answered yes to any of these questions then Fear is why you carry nothing more and nothing less and if the answer is no, then it apply again. I survived 20+ years in Chicago without a gun and lived in the hood where they were all around me, pointed at me and even shot at, yet you live in a most likely fairly good area and you carry. So why again? My brain kept me safe and alive, what’s your excuse again to carry?
Fritz July 27th, 2014 at 23:46
I carry tools. I also always have a Leatherman’s and a flashlight on me at all times. Why do I need an excuse? I carry an extra 20 pounds of fat — a pound or two of pistol is not exactly inconveniencing me.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:17
Paranoid much? What are you so afraid of that you need to carry a gun around all day long?
Fritz July 28th, 2014 at 21:16
I don’t think I’m paranoid. Basically there is no reason not to carry a pistol in many circumstances. The marginal cost to me is effectively zero.
Also, carrying a weapon is a good tool for meditation. I believe in following Baba Ram Dass’ dictum “Be Here Now”. Carrying a weapon assists me in staying in the moment and aware of my surroundings.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 21:42
What carrying a gun does is give you a false sense of security. In addition, those with guns are more likely to be killed because gun owners are less likely to flee, instead choosing to engage a potential enemy.
PHILADELPHIA – In a first-of its-kind study, epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that, on average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.
The study was released online this month in the American Journal of Public Health, in advance of print publication in November 2009.
“This study helps resolve the long-standing debate about whether guns are protective or perilous,” notes study author Charles C. Branas, PhD, Associate Professor of Epidemiology. “Will possessing a firearm always safeguard against harm or will it promote a false sense of security?”
What Penn researchers found was alarming – almost five Philadelphians were shot every day over the course of the study and about 1 of these 5 people died. The research team concluded that, although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year, the chances of success are low. People should rethink their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures, write the authors. Suggestions to the contrary, especially for urban residents who may see gun possession as a defense against a dangerous environment should be discussed and thoughtfully reconsidered.
http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2009/09/gun-possession-safety/
Fritz July 28th, 2014 at 22:00
Yeah, I read that study. It didn’t control for “who carries a gun”.
I have also read other studies that say that people who fight instead of flee come out better in assaults. You pay your money, you take your chances. Me — I prefer having tools and options at my disposal. Others may have other preferences.
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:23
Good thinking, you’re basically telling people to commit a crime (theft) because someone else MIGHT commit a crime. (That was sarcasm). This is the stupidest f*cking idea I’ve ever heard in my life. All you’d have to do to steal a meal at a restaurant now is say “Well I didn’t pay because I thought I saw someone come in open carrying, which I know is legal, but I decided to break the law because I’m a spineless p*ssy.” Yeah, great plan genius. And make the open carriers pay? LMAO good luck with that, moron! They have no responsibility whatsoever to pay for another person’s meal, groceries, etc. You anti-gun freaks crack me up. Keep trying, because NOTHING you’ve come up with so far has any merit!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:16
Here’s another idea. If I’m in a Stand Your Ground™ State, I could legally blow an Open Carry Gun Nut™ away because he presents a very real threat…or at least I can claim that and get away with it because Stand Your Ground™ is a license to kill.
There are two caveats to that of course. One is, it’s easier to get away with murder if you kill a non-white male. And the same logic I just used to justify murdering you can be used against me if I’m carrying a gun too.
The Gun Nutter “logic” is that if EVERYONE has a gun, then everyone will be too afraid to use those guns out of fear of being shot by everyone else. It’s called “Mutually Assured Destruction,” the same concept that led the US and USSR to the brink of war in the 1960s. I suppose it could work, only, once the shooting starts in your Utopia, there’s no way to know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. The shooting will indeed stop at some point once most of us are dead.
Kelli July 28th, 2014 at 16:06
I have to wonder, why would someone with such strong conservative views come and post comments on a site named Liberaland. I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, and see if maybe that person were simply trying to provide an alternative point of view.
But then I see such angry and dismissive language used in virtually every single post by that person, and I begin to think that maybe my first impression was correct, and his only intention is to create conflict. So then, I want to know: Why? Is it simple sadism, getting off on the upset reactions of others? Is it more deep-seated, a form of compensating for feeling powerless in his personal life? Or is there perhaps a ‘cycle of abuse’ thing going on, where he was hurt badly by parents and other authority figures and is just perpetuating the same behavior on the basis of having defined the abuse as ‘normal’ and therefore appropriate: “It was good enough for me growing up, it’s good enough for them!” What motivates a person who calls himself a ‘man’ to act so… childishly?
I fully expect to see him lash out against me for even asking those questions. Real men just DO stuff, they don’t THINK about WHY they’re doing it, and anyone who does ask them why is a worm and less than human and yet another target for the abusive treatment for being such a namby-pamby liberal who thinks too much.
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 19:14
Nice job.
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:23
Good thinking, you’re basically telling people to commit a crime (theft) because someone else MIGHT commit a crime. (That was sarcasm). This is the stupidest f*cking idea I’ve ever heard in my life. All you’d have to do to steal a meal at a restaurant now is say “Well I didn’t pay because I thought I saw someone come in open carrying, which I know is legal, but I decided to break the law because I’m a spineless p*ssy.” Yeah, great plan genius. And make the open carriers pay? LMAO good luck with that, moron! They have no responsibility whatsoever to pay for another person’s meal, groceries, etc. You anti-gun freaks crack me up. Keep trying, because NOTHING you’ve come up with so far has any merit!
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:23
Good thinking, you’re basically telling people to commit a crime (theft) because someone else MIGHT commit a crime. (That was sarcasm). This is the stupidest f*cking idea I’ve ever heard in my life. All you’d have to do to steal a meal at a restaurant now is say “Well I didn’t pay because I thought I saw someone come in open carrying, which I know is legal, but I decided to break the law because I’m a spineless p*ssy.” Yeah, great plan genius. And make the open carriers pay? LMAO good luck with that, moron! They have no responsibility whatsoever to pay for another person’s meal, groceries, etc. You anti-gun freaks crack me up. Keep trying, because NOTHING you’ve come up with so far has any merit!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:16
Here’s another idea. If I’m in a Stand Your Ground™ State, I could legally blow an Open Carry Gun Nut™ away because he presents a very real threat…or at least I can claim that and get away with it because Stand Your Ground™ is a license to kill.
There are two caveats to that of course. One is, it’s easier to get away with murder if you kill a non-white male. And the same logic I just used to justify murdering you can be used against me if I’m carrying a gun too.
The Gun Nutter “logic” is that if EVERYONE has a gun, then everyone will be too afraid to use those guns out of fear of being shot by everyone else. It’s called “Mutually Assured Destruction,” the same concept that led the US and USSR to the brink of war in the 1960s. I suppose it could work, only, once the shooting starts in your Utopia, there’s no way to know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. The shooting will indeed stop at some point once most of us are dead.
Kelli July 28th, 2014 at 16:06
I have to wonder, why would someone with such strong conservative views come and post comments on a site named Liberaland. I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, and see if maybe that person were simply trying to provide an alternative point of view.
But then I see such angry and dismissive language used in virtually every single post by that person, and I begin to think that maybe my first impression was correct, and his only intention is to create conflict. So then, I want to know: Why? Is it simple sadism, getting off on the upset reactions of others? Is it more deep-seated, a form of compensating for feeling powerless in his personal life? Or is there perhaps a ‘cycle of abuse’ thing going on, where he was hurt badly by parents and other authority figures and is just perpetuating the same behavior on the basis of having defined the abuse as ‘normal’ and therefore appropriate: “It was good enough for me growing up, it’s good enough for them!” What motivates a person who calls himself a ‘man’ to act so… childishly?
I fully expect to see him lash out against me for even asking those questions. Real men just DO stuff, they don’t THINK about WHY they’re doing it, and anyone who does ask them why is a worm and less than human and yet another target for the abusive treatment for being such a namby-pamby liberal who thinks too much.
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 19:14
Nice job.
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:37
This website is hilarious. Might as well call it “irrationally-terrified-of-gunowners.com” because that’s what most of you are. I like how so many of you are proposing what gun owners should and should not do when you have no idea what the law actually says for gun owners. WE DO. We learned the rules, the laws, the principles before legally carrying, NOT YOU. So stop telling us what we SHOULD and SHOULD NOT be doing because you simply have NO CLUE. You want to see what gun owners are actually doing? Go to the range. Watch us. We are safe. We are competent. We know what we are doing. You do not. You want to know what we are doing? Get involved in the gun culture, don’t just sit behind your computer screen fretting, plotting, posting. Actually GO OUT AND SEE! I bet you will be shocked to see that your fears are unrealized.
arc99 July 27th, 2014 at 23:47
and crude spiteful remarks like yours are why this liberal gun owner wants absolutely nothing to do with the fetishists who populate the NRA.
I know exactly what I am doing with my Bersa .380 ACP and I do not need to parade around Target like some juvenile show-off to demonstrate that.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:45
Liar, liberals can’t own guns. It’s against their ideology to have anything to do with them… Ask your spokesperson, Shannon Watts. She’ll set you straight
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:48
Wow. YOu really are an idiot.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:51
You really need to get some new material. *yawn*
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:04
Liar, I am a liberal and I own a weapon and I know what to do with it, lock it up unless I need it………..:-)
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:27
“guN cULTURE”….roflmao……..Guns are tools…nothing more. KInd of like the idiots who post on the internet proclaiming that they and their “culture” are the only people who know about gun safety and small arms handling protocols.
Yeah, I am irrationally terrified by myself every time I pick up one of my weapons….You, SIr, I respectfully call an idiot.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:44
isn’t that like the pot calling the kettle black? You’re not the one proclaiming that people should up and leave. I call your insult and raise you one, you clueless, self-righteous douche
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:48
“clueless, self-righteous douche”…Wow, all from one post on the internet. THank you for confirming my assumptions of your character.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:50
Hey, you started the insults, I ended it. Can’t take it, don’t dish it out, p*ussy
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:50
Oh, big scary guy with a penis extender on his back threatening me on the internet. …yawn…….
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:54
Not sure what you mean by penis extender, but I don’t watch those kinds of movies, perv. I don’t have the patience to argue with someone as clearly less intelligent than I am, so good day and have fun being a hoplophobe. (look it up, it’s a real thing). Later, tool.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:02
“someone as clearly less intelligent than I am,”….said the guy who said this:”Liar, liberals can’t own guns. It’s against their ideology to have
anything to do with them… Ask your spokesperson, Shannon Watts.
She’ll set you straight”
You can’t even tell the difference between RWNJ stereotypes and the real world……I recommend professional help.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:05
I recommend you stfu and go to bed, you have to get in line for your welfare and food stamps early in the am, and I have to work so you can have that stuff. Enjoy my money. Good night
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:09
” Enjoy my money” ROFLMAO….what, the $.30 you get per post to shill for the NRA on Liberal websites? I bet you are real fun at parties…..
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:13
I thought you were going to bed. Nothing you’ve said on any reply to any post has had any merit, at all. You’ve come up with no new ideas, no ways to make guns safer, all you’ve done is spew the same liberal rhetoric that we always hear. Why don’t all 30 of you people get together and maybe try to come up with SOMETHING!? It’s really getting quite sad. Take care, buh bye.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:30
What same LIberal rhetoric? All I have done is point out what an idiot you are.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:10
There is something. It’s called The Second Amendment.
The Founders didn’t want this nation to have a standing military so they wrote Article One, Section 8, Line 12 to prevent it. A Federal Government without a standing military is no threat at all, except legislatively, and we have the power of the vote for that.
In the absence of a standing military, they wrote The Second Amendment to provide the mechanism by which We the People could DEFEND our government from foreign enemies whenever Congress declares an Act of War.
I’d like to see how well all those NRA guns will do against the four branches of the United States Military Industrial Complex. Heck, let’s see these buffoons use their NRA guns against the fleet of nuclear subs. I’d buy tickets to watch that debacle.
If Conservatives are truly that afraid of “the government,” then they’d have better long-term success at protecting themselves from it by working to draw down the standing military and establishing the intended system of well regulated Militias that disperse military power among We the People. All those NRA guns aren’t protecting anyone FROM “the government” and never will. All NRA guns do is endanger all of us because of their juvenile paranoia.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:16
And you upvote your own posts……Really???!!!! I am laughing so hard I am crying…you would be funnier if you were not so pathetic in your need to feel superior…no wonder you identify with the guys walking around with Bushmasters on their backs…that’s the ONLY “Bushmastering” you will EVER do!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:07
It’s interesting/funny that the most extreme Conservatives believe that any Liberal must be a lazy moocher.
Of course, that’s not true in any way. Conservatives just can’t fathom a world in which some of us have real empathy and sympathy for others. Conservatives live by the ideology, “I got mine, you get yours, and if you can’t get enough, F*** YOU!” Sociopathy like that isn’t part of the Liberal gene.
But to the CAUSE that leads real people to need the social safety net or private charity, that would be Conservative economic and trade policies which have allowed more than 50,000 factories to leave the USA since 2001 alone. Greedy selfish Corporate CEOs have decided that their personal bank accounts are more important than the livelihoods of millions of Americans who want to work an honest day to raise their families. Then those same Corporations and Billionaires park their profits in offshore tax havens, to the tune of $32 Trillion at last count. Those Conservatives abandoned real workers as well as the nation they call home. Exactly when is that “Trickle Down” that Reagan promised going to start?
So who’s the true Patriot? The Liberals who want everyone to have a true chance to pursue life, liberty, and happiness without fear of homelessness and starvation? Or the Conservatives who are working to destroy true democracy in favor of Corporatism/Fascism in a Wild West Gun culture more akin to a post-apocalyptic Mad Max world?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 10:59
Gun=Penis Extender
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:32
Why are you interested in his penis?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:42
Adam Lanza was a responsible gun owner too right up to the moment when he shattered his mother’s skull with a Freedom Bullet™ using a Heller Decision Gun™. Then this “responsible gun owner” took those guns to a school and slaughtered a classroom full of little kids.
The point is, NONE of you are formally trained nor members of a “well regulated Militia” as the Second Amendment clearly mandates. You are neither uniformed nor regulated adequately. So we don’t know what alleged training a Gun Nut on the street has or doesn’t have. We don’t know if he’s just wandering around looking for a cup of coffee or if he’s about to open fire on a crowd.
But you Gun Nutters expect all of us to just assume that EVERY armed person out in public is 100% innocent every time. Our FEARS are very real and you’d know that if you pay any attention at all to the news of late.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:02
And criminals with guns look just like you (a normal citizen that is) and are not safe
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:37
This website is hilarious. Might as well call it “irrationally-terrified-of-gunowners.com” because that’s what most of you are. I like how so many of you are proposing what gun owners should and should not do when you have no idea what the law actually says for gun owners. WE DO. We learned the rules, the laws, the principles before legally carrying, NOT YOU. So stop telling us what we SHOULD and SHOULD NOT be doing because you simply have NO CLUE. You want to see what gun owners are actually doing? Go to the range. Watch us. We are safe. We are competent. We know what we are doing. You do not. You want to know what we are doing? Get involved in the gun culture, don’t just sit behind your computer screen fretting, plotting, posting. Actually GO OUT AND SEE! I bet you will be shocked to see that your fears are unrealized.
Matthias Dankert July 27th, 2014 at 23:37
This website is hilarious. Might as well call it “irrationally-terrified-of-gunowners.com” because that’s what most of you are. I like how so many of you are proposing what gun owners should and should not do when you have no idea what the law actually says for gun owners. WE DO. We learned the rules, the laws, the principles before legally carrying, NOT YOU. So stop telling us what we SHOULD and SHOULD NOT be doing because you simply have NO CLUE. You want to see what gun owners are actually doing? Go to the range. Watch us. We are safe. We are competent. We know what we are doing. You do not. You want to know what we are doing? Get involved in the gun culture, don’t just sit behind your computer screen fretting, plotting, posting. Actually GO OUT AND SEE! I bet you will be shocked to see that your fears are unrealized.
arc99 July 27th, 2014 at 23:47
and crude spiteful remarks like yours are why this liberal gun owner wants absolutely nothing to do with the fetishists who populate the NRA.
I know exactly what I am doing with my Bersa .380 ACP and I do not need to parade around Target like some juvenile show-off to demonstrate that.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:45
Liar, liberals can’t own guns. It’s against their ideology to have anything to do with them… Ask your spokesperson, Shannon Watts. She’ll set you straight
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:48
Wow. YOu really are an idiot.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:51
You really need to get some new material. *yawn*
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:04
Liar, I am a liberal and I own a weapon and I know what to do with it, lock it up unless I need it………..:-)
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:27
“guN cULTURE”….roflmao……..Guns are tools…nothing more. KInd of like the idiots who post on the internet proclaiming that they and their “culture” are the only people who know about gun safety and small arms handling protocols.
Yeah, I am irrationally terrified by myself every time I pick up one of my weapons….You, SIr, I respectfully call an idiot.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:44
isn’t that like the pot calling the kettle black? You’re not the one proclaiming that people should up and leave. I call your insult and raise you one, you clueless, self-righteous douche
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:48
“clueless, self-righteous douche”…Wow, all from one post on the internet. THank you for confirming my assumptions of your character.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:50
Hey, you started the insults, I ended it. Can’t take it, don’t dish it out, p*ussy
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:50
Oh, big scary guy with a penis extender on his back threatening me on the internet. …yawn…….
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:54
Not sure what you mean by penis extender, but I don’t watch those kinds of movies, perv. I don’t have the patience to argue with someone as clearly less intelligent than I am, so good day and have fun being a hoplophobe. (look it up, it’s a real thing). Later, tool.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:02
“someone as clearly less intelligent than I am,”….said the guy who said this:”Liar, liberals can’t own guns. It’s against their ideology to have
anything to do with them… Ask your spokesperson, Shannon Watts.
She’ll set you straight”
You can’t even tell the difference between RWNJ stereotypes and the real world……I recommend professional help.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:05
I recommend you stfu and go to bed, you have to get in line for your welfare and food stamps early in the am, and I have to work so you can have that stuff. Enjoy my money. Good night
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:09
” Enjoy my money” ROFLMAO….what, the $.30 you get per post to shill for the NRA on Liberal websites? I bet you are real fun at parties…..
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:13
I thought you were going to bed. Nothing you’ve said on any reply to any post has had any merit, at all. You’ve come up with no new ideas, no ways to make guns safer, all you’ve done is spew the same liberal rhetoric that we always hear. Why don’t all 30 of you people get together and maybe try to come up with SOMETHING!? It’s really getting quite sad. Take care, buh bye.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:30
What same LIberal rhetoric? All I have done is point out what an idiot you are.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:10
There is something. It’s called The Second Amendment.
The Founders didn’t want this nation to have a standing military so they wrote Article One, Section 8, Line 12 to prevent it. A Federal Government without a standing military is no threat at all, except legislatively, and we have the power of the vote for that.
In the absence of a standing military, they wrote The Second Amendment to provide the mechanism by which We the People could DEFEND our government from foreign enemies whenever Congress declares an Act of War.
I’d like to see how well all those NRA guns will do against the four branches of the United States Military Industrial Complex. Heck, let’s see these buffoons use their NRA guns against the fleet of nuclear subs. I’d buy tickets to watch that debacle.
If Conservatives are truly that afraid of “the government,” then they’d have better long-term success at protecting themselves from it by working to draw down the standing military and establishing the intended system of well regulated Militias that disperse military power among We the People. All those NRA guns aren’t protecting anyone FROM “the government” and never will. All NRA guns do is endanger all of us because of their juvenile paranoia.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:16
And you upvote your own posts……Really???!!!! I am laughing so hard I am crying…you would be funnier if you were not so pathetic in your need to feel superior…no wonder you identify with the guys walking around with Bushmasters on their backs…that’s the ONLY “Bushmastering” you will EVER do!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:07
It’s interesting/funny that the most extreme Conservatives believe that any Liberal must be a lazy moocher.
Of course, that’s not true in any way. Conservatives just can’t fathom a world in which some of us have real empathy and sympathy for others. Conservatives live by the ideology, “I got mine, you get yours, and if you can’t get enough, F*** YOU!” Sociopathy like that isn’t part of the Liberal gene.
But to the CAUSE that leads real people to need the social safety net or private charity, that would be Conservative economic and trade policies which have allowed more than 50,000 factories to leave the USA since 2001 alone. Greedy selfish Corporate CEOs have decided that their personal bank accounts are more important than the livelihoods of millions of Americans who want to work an honest day to raise their families. Then those same Corporations and Billionaires park their profits in offshore tax havens, to the tune of $32 Trillion at last count. Those Conservatives abandoned real workers as well as the nation they call home. Exactly when is that “Trickle Down” that Reagan promised going to start?
So who’s the true Patriot? The Liberals who want everyone to have a true chance to pursue life, liberty, and happiness without fear of homelessness and starvation? Or the Conservatives who are working to destroy true democracy in favor of Corporatism/Fascism in a Wild West Gun culture more akin to a post-apocalyptic Mad Max world?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 10:59
Gun=Penis Extender
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:32
Why are you interested in his penis?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:42
Adam Lanza was a responsible gun owner too right up to the moment when he shattered his mother’s skull with a Freedom Bullet™ using a Heller Decision Gun™. Then this “responsible gun owner” took those guns to a school and slaughtered a classroom full of little kids.
The point is, NONE of you are formally trained nor members of a “well regulated Militia” as the Second Amendment clearly mandates. You are neither uniformed nor regulated adequately. So we don’t know what alleged training a Gun Nut on the street has or doesn’t have. We don’t know if he’s just wandering around looking for a cup of coffee or if he’s about to open fire on a crowd.
But you Gun Nutters expect all of us to just assume that EVERY armed person out in public is 100% innocent every time. Our FEARS are very real and you’d know that if you pay any attention at all to the news of late.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:02
And criminals with guns look just like you (a normal citizen that is) and are not safe
okieggma July 27th, 2014 at 23:44
that is exactly what I do and I have done it twice since open carry came to Oklahoma.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:56
So you’re a thief. You just admitted to stealing because you can’t deal with someone NOT breaking the law. LMAO, liberal “logic” for ya folks!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:37
Gun Nuts are Terrorists.
LMAO, Conservative “logic” for ya folks!
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 02:03
He also upvotes his own posts…..ROFLMAO…….
okieggma July 27th, 2014 at 23:44
that is exactly what I do and I have done it twice since open carry came to Oklahoma.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:56
So you’re a thief. You just admitted to stealing because you can’t deal with someone NOT breaking the law. LMAO, liberal “logic” for ya folks!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:37
Gun Nuts are Terrorists.
LMAO, Conservative “logic” for ya folks!
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 02:03
He also upvotes his own posts…..ROFLMAO…….
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 00:32
Leave AND dial 911 immediately. No sense in waiting until after a GUNMAN blows people away. Better be safe than sorry.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:53
And what are you going to tell 911? “Hi, there’s a guy here legally carrying a gun, not pointing it anyone, with his finger off the trigger and doing nothing threatening, but I’m so scared that I need the police here immediately!”? Yeah, you’ll look pretty stupid when the cops show up, don’t arrest the “gunman” and possibly cite you for making a ridiculous 911 call. At least that’s my hope!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:35
I’m going to tell the 911 operator that someone is in public brandishing a gun and there is no way to know if he intends to hurt anyone or not.
By your logic, we should all wait until AFTER a Gunman blows people away until we step in to stop him. I prefer to avoid tragedy in any way possible.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:19
And by saying it’s brandishing, when it’s not, you made a false statement to the police and subjected to arrest.
Likewise you really do need to learn the ‘rules of engagement’ for self defense.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:34
Again, should we wait until AFTER a Gunman kills a few people before calling the police or should we attempt to PREVENT the loss of life before the shooting starts?
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:57
Nah…just shoot them. THen YOU will be the “good guy with a gun”!
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:09
Just like a liberal. This is how you sound: I’m afraid that someone legally carrying a gun not threatening anyone is going to commit an act of violence so I’m going to shoot him first so he can’t commit an act of violence first.
Basically, you’re saying I’m going to kill someone first before they can MAYBE kill someone. You threaten us all day long with beatings, shootings, arrest, etc. for simply carrying a gun, minding our own business, but WE’RE the violent ones. Yeah, right.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:31
You really are a CONservative aren’t you? Gun humper, paranoid fantasist and does not get irony. A trifecta.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:34
Brandishing a gun in public IS threatening. These Gun Nuts know that they are intentionally causing distress. They are terrorists, plain and simple, and should be dealt with accordingly.
If one of these Gun Nuts just happened to be Muslim, I have to wonder how all the Gun Nuts here would react?
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:42
Yup….I am waiting for the brothas to start “open carrying”. Then we will see what this is all about.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:17
I know several ‘brothas’ that open carry. But then we’re the racists, not you. (rolleyes)
sugarpuddin July 28th, 2014 at 12:37
Would you give me one specific case of beatings, shootings or arrest etc. for simply carrying a gun where it is legal. That begs the question is why do they feel the need to do this? Are they afraid of being attacked by a non gun carrying individual, What are they afraid of? What are they protecting themselves against? Or do they just need this way to show that they are “men”?
planetxan July 28th, 2014 at 13:35
That wasn’t an intentional beating. My fist just accidentally discharged in your face. Accidents happen. Sorry dude. But it is my legal right to bear arms.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:10
Hopefully the police with tire of the all unnecessary 911 calls on people NOT breaking the law in any way, shape or form and start arresting the people calling 911 for no reason. THAT’S
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 01:57
Matthias, I am going to ask you a reasonable question. How do I, as a normal citizen, know the harmless ones on site. Most serial killers have been known to appear harmless to their neighbors and families, a lot of the shooters lately? The same. So how do I determine whether I should worry or not? So far no one has been able to answer that question and I am really afraid that some mass shooter is going to take advantage of all this open carry bullshit and is going to walk right in an establishment in a state that allows open carry and it will be the biggest slaughter ever.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:15
You use your eyes and see if they are doing anything illegal. If they aren’t doing anything illegal you don’t call 911. Is open carry legal? Then they are NOT doing anything ILLEGAL.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 11:35
That does not answer my question. They could walk in not doing anything illegal and halfway through a meal open fire. The point is, there is NO WAY to legitimately tell if it is a good guy or a bad guy. A bad guy dresses like the good guy, can be charming, can seem very non-threatening. The dude that did the shooting in California, when checked on by the police, was deemed to be “meek and harmless” even though his therapist knew otherwise. So explain that one? I will ALWAYS err on the side of caution when it comes to me and my family, so if you, personally walked into a place with a weapon and I were there, I will ALWAYS call 911 and report an individual with a gun and that I am afraid for my life. Now if someone has a gun that is holstered, I do not consider that as much of a threat because it takes a few seconds to get a gun out of one, it also says they are not trying to make a statement. But if you have any kind of a long gun, I WILL call, every time. ANd if I own a business, I will assume that you are there to rob me
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 12:42
Case in point: http://www.wsmv.com/story/26094990/woman-accused-of-threatening-to-shoot-kroger-employee
This lady looks fairly normal, if she weren’t crying that is……
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:35
So…we wait until the Gunman kills someone before we call the police?
Liberals are really into PREVENTION of suffering, tragedy, and death.
Conservatives REQUIRE suffering and tragedy to justify their own sociopathic ideology.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 11:36
AMEN, Brian……….
Mo Reno July 28th, 2014 at 14:02
How do we know if the ammo they are carrying is legal?
Best to call the cops, just to be sure. There’s just no way
to tell…
sara July 28th, 2014 at 16:24
So we should wait until after we’re dead to call? Sounds practical.
Cactus_Wren July 29th, 2014 at 00:55
Like Jared Lee Loughner? He wasn’t doing anything illegal. Right up until he pulled the trigger.
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:28
Did you know it is illegal to make unnecessary 911 calls?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:32
It’s not unnecessary when a non-uniformed person is parading around with a gun.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 01:53
And if I see someone with a gun who is not a uniformed officer, I will assume my life is in danger. It is very irresponsible to suggest someone NOT call 911 if they see someone with a gun.
Mo Reno July 28th, 2014 at 14:01
No, it’s illegal to make false 911 calls.
Gregory Petersen December 4th, 2014 at 12:10
Sure, try making calls that your mother folded your T-shirt wrong and report back to me, Okay?
Mo Reno December 4th, 2014 at 20:36
That would still be a false 911 call, since she hasn’t folded any shirt of mine in 30 years. Okay?
(Sheesh, you had four months to think up a response and that was your best shot…)
Gregory Petersen December 6th, 2014 at 22:22
No, I just commented on a different thread and for the first time noticed response after clicking on the red flag. BTW it is illegal to make UN-Neccessary 911 calls
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:34
So you are going to call good guys with guns because good guys have guns. LOL
John Peate July 28th, 2014 at 12:41
There are no ‘good guys’ with guns. Only cowards, idiots and gang members carry guns and those with psychological hangups. Guns of any kind have no place in civilised socieities other than for hunting, protection in the wild and law enforcement. With some leeway for sport, target use.
Gregory Petersen December 4th, 2014 at 12:11
You are an idiot
OldLefty December 4th, 2014 at 12:19
They are “good guys with guns” before they become “bad guys” or “crazy guys” or “irresponsible guys” with guns.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 00:32
Leave AND dial 911 immediately. No sense in waiting until after a GUNMAN blows people away. Better be safe than sorry.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 00:53
And what are you going to tell 911? “Hi, there’s a guy here legally carrying a gun, not pointing it anyone, with his finger off the trigger and doing nothing threatening, but I’m so scared that I need the police here immediately!”? Yeah, you’ll look pretty stupid when the cops show up, don’t arrest the “gunman” and possibly cite you for making a ridiculous 911 call. At least that’s my hope!
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:35
I’m going to tell the 911 operator that someone is in public brandishing a gun and there is no way to know if he intends to hurt anyone or not.
By your logic, we should all wait until AFTER a Gunman blows people away until we step in to stop him. I prefer to avoid tragedy in any way possible.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:19
And by saying it’s brandishing, when it’s not, you made a false statement to the police and subjected to arrest.
Likewise you really do need to learn the ‘rules of engagement’ for self defense.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:34
Again, should we wait until AFTER a Gunman kills a few people before calling the police or should we attempt to PREVENT the loss of life before the shooting starts?
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 00:57
Nah…just shoot them. THen YOU will be the “good guy with a gun”!
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:09
Just like a liberal. This is how you sound: I’m afraid that someone legally carrying a gun not threatening anyone is going to commit an act of violence so I’m going to shoot him first so he can’t commit an act of violence first.
Basically, you’re saying I’m going to kill someone first before they can MAYBE kill someone. You threaten us all day long with beatings, shootings, arrest, etc. for simply carrying a gun, minding our own business, but WE’RE the violent ones. Yeah, right.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:31
You really are a CONservative aren’t you? Gun humper, paranoid fantasist and does not get irony. A trifecta.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:34
Brandishing a gun in public IS threatening. These Gun Nuts know that they are intentionally causing distress. They are terrorists, plain and simple, and should be dealt with accordingly.
If one of these Gun Nuts just happened to be Muslim, I have to wonder how all the Gun Nuts here would react?
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:42
Yup….I am waiting for the brothas to start “open carrying”. Then we will see what this is all about.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:17
I know several ‘brothas’ that open carry. But then we’re the racists, not you. (rolleyes)
sugarpuddin July 28th, 2014 at 12:37
Would you give me one specific case of beatings, shootings or arrest etc. for simply carrying a gun where it is legal. That begs the question is why do they feel the need to do this? Are they afraid of being attacked by a non gun carrying individual, What are they afraid of? What are they protecting themselves against? Or do they just need this way to show that they are “men”?
planetxan July 28th, 2014 at 13:35
That wasn’t an intentional beating. My fist just accidentally discharged in your face. Accidents happen. Sorry dude. But it is my legal right to bear arms.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:10
Hopefully the police with tire of the all unnecessary 911 calls on people NOT breaking the law in any way, shape or form and start arresting the people calling 911 for no reason. THAT’S what I’d like to see start happening!
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 01:57
Matthias, I am going to ask you a reasonable question. How do I, as a normal citizen, know the harmless ones on site. Most serial killers have been known to appear harmless to their neighbors and families, a lot of the shooters lately? The same. So how do I determine whether I should worry or not? So far no one has been able to answer that question and I am really afraid that some mass shooter is going to take advantage of all this open carry bullshit and is going to walk right in an establishment in a state that allows open carry and it will be the biggest slaughter ever.
Steveindeleware July 28th, 2014 at 11:15
You use your eyes and see if they are doing anything illegal. If they aren’t doing anything illegal you don’t call 911. Is open carry legal? Then they are NOT doing anything ILLEGAL.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 11:35
That does not answer my question. They could walk in not doing anything illegal and halfway through a meal open fire. The point is, there is NO WAY to legitimately tell if it is a good guy or a bad guy. A bad guy dresses like the good guy, can be charming, can seem very non-threatening. The dude that did the shooting in California, when checked on by the police, was deemed to be “meek and harmless” even though his therapist knew otherwise. So explain that one? I will ALWAYS err on the side of caution when it comes to me and my family, so if you, personally walked into a place with a weapon and I were there, I will ALWAYS call 911 and report an individual with a gun and that I am afraid for my life. Now if someone has a gun that is holstered, I do not consider that as much of a threat because it takes a few seconds to get a gun out of one, it also says they are not trying to make a statement. But if you have any kind of a long gun, I WILL call, every time. ANd if I own a business, I will assume that you are there to rob me
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 12:42
Case in point: http://www.wsmv.com/story/26094990/woman-accused-of-threatening-to-shoot-kroger-employee
This lady looks fairly normal, if she weren’t crying that is……
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 11:35
So…we wait until the Gunman kills someone before we call the police?
Liberals are really into PREVENTION of suffering, tragedy, and death.
Conservatives REQUIRE suffering and tragedy to justify their own sociopathic ideology.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 11:36
AMEN, Brian……….
Mo Reno July 28th, 2014 at 14:02
How do we know if the ammo they are carrying is legal?
Best to call the cops, just to be sure. There’s just no way
to tell…
sara July 28th, 2014 at 16:24
So we should wait until after we’re dead to call? Sounds practical.
Cactus_Wren July 29th, 2014 at 00:55
Like Jared Lee Loughner? He wasn’t doing anything illegal. Right up until he pulled the trigger.
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:28
Did you know it is illegal to make unnecessary 911 calls?
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:32
It’s not unnecessary when a non-uniformed person is parading around with a gun.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 01:53
And if I see someone with a gun who is not a uniformed officer, I will assume my life is in danger. It is very irresponsible to suggest someone NOT call 911 if they see someone with a gun.
Mo Reno July 28th, 2014 at 14:01
No, it’s illegal to make false 911 calls.
Gregory Petersen December 4th, 2014 at 13:10
Sure, try making calls that your mother folded your T-shirt wrong and report back to me, Okay?
Mo Reno December 4th, 2014 at 21:36
That would still be a false 911 call, since she hasn’t folded any shirt of mine in 30 years. Okay?
(Sheesh, you had four months to think up a response and that was your best shot…)
Gregory Petersen December 6th, 2014 at 23:22
No, I just commented on a different thread and for the first time noticed response after clicking on the red flag. BTW it is illegal to make UN-Neccessary 911 calls
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:34
So you are going to call good guys with guns because good guys have guns. LOL
John Peate July 28th, 2014 at 12:41
There are no ‘good guys’ with guns. Only cowards, idiots and gang members carry guns and those with psychological hangups. Guns of any kind have no place in civilised socieities other than for hunting, protection in the wild and law enforcement. With some leeway for sport, target use.
OldLefty December 4th, 2014 at 13:19
They are “good guys with guns” before they become “bad guys” or “crazy guys” or “irresponsible guys” with guns.
Ivo Suarez July 28th, 2014 at 01:00
The guy lost me within the first minute of the video. I’m not even in favor of open carry, but when you start off by saying that these people often open carry “high-powered automatic weapons”, you have clearly failed to sufficiently research firearms and this issue before voicing your opinion on it. Additionally, advocating for theft and encouraging people to put themselves in situations where they might be arrested and prosecuted is also short-sighted and idiotic.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:06
That’s how liberals work. The facts don’t support their position so they have to make stuff up. Automatic weapons… wow, shows you just how little they actually know about the subject they’re so fired up about! It’s hilarious and sad at the exact same time!
truth_machine July 28th, 2014 at 11:40
There is no one on the planet more stupid than those who blabber about “liberals”.
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:27
That was exactly what gave me reason to know this professor was more of a propagandists rather than a philosopher.
Jesradi July 28th, 2014 at 12:48
“I know more about guns that you do, nyah, nyah”…LOL!
Ivo Suarez July 28th, 2014 at 22:07
Do you find my actual comment or your own poor attempt at mockery hilarious? I think you mistake my criticism of incorrect information for condescension and arrogance. When addressing large groups of people or having the ability to influence the potential outcome of legislation, it’s usually best to have a basic understanding of the subject at hand. Wouldn’t you agree?
Ivo Suarez July 28th, 2014 at 01:00
The guy lost me within the first minute of the video. I’m not even in favor of open carry, but when you start off by saying that these people often open carry “high-powered automatic weapons”, you have clearly failed to sufficiently research firearms and this issue before voicing your opinion on it. Additionally, advocating for theft and encouraging people to put themselves in situations where they might be arrested and prosecuted is also short-sighted and idiotic.
Matthias Dankert July 28th, 2014 at 01:06
That’s how liberals work. The facts don’t support their position so they have to make stuff up. Automatic weapons… wow, shows you just how little they actually know about the subject they’re so fired up about! It’s hilarious and sad at the exact same time!
truth_machine July 28th, 2014 at 11:40
There is no one on the planet more stupid than those who blabber about “liberals”.
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:27
That was exactly what gave me reason to know this professor was more of a propagandists rather than a philosopher.
Jesradi July 28th, 2014 at 12:48
“I know more about guns that you do, nyah, nyah”…LOL!
Ivo Suarez July 28th, 2014 at 22:07
Do you find my actual comment or your own poor attempt at mockery hilarious? I think you mistake my criticism of incorrect information for condescension and arrogance. When addressing large groups of people or having the ability to influence the potential outcome of legislation, it’s usually best to have a basic understanding of the subject at hand. Wouldn’t you agree?
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:24
Here is a philosophical question. If a female, black or gay person comes into the restaurant where you are dining, would it be wrong to assume that they MAY be a dangerous threat thereby giving reason to leave without paying your tab. Anyone MAY be a threat to your safety therefore that excuse (by your reasoning) would justify leaving without paying the tab.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:47
Here’s a philosophical question. If a MUSLIM walked into a restaurant with a gun strapped to his back and a sidearm on his belt, how would all the redneck Gun Nuts react?
But to answer your inane question, sure, anyone can be a threat, but a person with a GUN is carrying a tool designed specifically to kill human beings. It is entirely reasonable to fear anyone who walks around with a tool designed to murder. We make exceptions for uniformed peace officers and military personnel because we have a trust that those people have been trained properly and are regulated heavily. There are no such assumptions for non uniformed people brandishing guns in public.
Fear is an instinct that keeps us alive longer. It is a valuable human reaction to potential threats and is entirely valid whenever a non uniformed person is nearby with a gun.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:21
If they were carrying a weapon in the open, yes. I don’t mind holstered handguns because that says that someone is at least attempting to be responsible, but a gun slung over your back in a restaurant with possible curious children running around, well that is just plain stupid
truth_machine July 28th, 2014 at 11:39
Gregory, not being a moron, I don’t find unarmed women, blacks, or gays inherently dangerous but I do find armed anyone inherently dangerous.
Gregory Petersen December 4th, 2014 at 12:22
Actually, you are wrong, the article is about a PERCEIVED threat with disregard to reality and my point was exactly that.
truth_machine December 17th, 2014 at 02:41
Actually you’re an idiotic piece of right wing slime.
Gregory Petersen December 19th, 2014 at 13:15
Actually, you are just another anusbrain liberal who requires others to think for you
Gregory Petersen December 27th, 2014 at 15:49
Actually you are an anus brain liberal but you can fix that by pulling your head out of your ass
truth_machine December 30th, 2014 at 20:00
I see that you don’t disagree that you’re an idiotic piece of right wing slime. Even your attempt at a copycat insult is stupid.
Jesradi July 28th, 2014 at 12:43
All guns are designed and manufactured to be dangerous. People – female, black, gay or otherwise – are not. Your ‘philosophical question’ is nonsense.
Ymmit Sebrof July 29th, 2014 at 01:57
False argument. People are very dangerous. With or without guns…
Jesradi July 29th, 2014 at 11:11
“false argument” your own self — people are not designed with triggers that fire metal projectiles at deadly speeds with the twitch of a finger
Ymmit Sebrof July 29th, 2014 at 17:53
No, still a valid argument. People don’t need guns to kill. If you knew the first thing about self defense, you would know that. A gun can’t kill without a person, but a person CAN kill without a gun. Mother nature designed us very well to kill with many weapons at our disposal. Your argument is still false…and you have failed to prove mine otherwise. Care to try again?
Jesradi July 29th, 2014 at 18:43
Don’t have to. My point still applies…people’s chests are NOT mortars and the human heart is NOT a speeding metal projectile. And I do know a thing or two about self-defense, and that’s more than enough to know that I can’t outbalance, outpace or outfox a bullet.
Ymmit Sebrof July 30th, 2014 at 00:55
Your point (as I understood it) was that people are not dangerous and guns are. I submit that a gun is an inanimate object and therefore not dangerous without an operator (guns do not just aim themselves and fire). However, a human is VERY dangerous WITHOUT a gun and therefore your point is invalid.
Now, I understand that this is an emotional issue for you, but a mortar is an entirely different class of weapon, and makes your counter argument seem silly and rather vapid (a mortar is an explosive, NOT a firearm and as such enjoys no constitutional protections). We are debating firearms. Please stick to those.
As far as your knowledge of self defense, I am led to believe by your statements, that it is EXTREMELY limited! You do not “outbalance, outpace or outfox a bullet.” That is just silly! Bullets have no capacity to think. They fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target. Even the most basic course teaches defense from the PERSON (out-think your opponent, NOT their weapon). Incapacitate the attacker and the weapon (knife, gun, mace, baseball bat, etc) is useless. The absolute BEST weapons you have ARE your heart and mind.
Please stick to facts and relevant arguments or stay out of the debate.
Further, most actual law enforcement people (I’m not talking about political appointees or elected officials, but they also follow this) think that responsibly armed citizens are a positive, NOT a problem. Sadly, the clowns doing these open carry demonstrations tend not to be the responsible type. They are looking to rile “sensitive” types such as yourself…ignore them and they’ll go away (or, as we say to the kids, “flex your ignore muscle. They’re just trying to get a reaction from you. If they don’t, they’ll move on.”). Besides, as my training officer likes to say, “You wanna display your piece? Fine! The crazies (bad guys with guns) will target you first.” That should give you a bit of comfort!
Jesradi July 30th, 2014 at 06:22
Oh hogwash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the “debate” someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable…regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
For the record: “then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it” is from Moby Dick, and it describes what most people are not, which are weapons in and of themselves.
“Out think your opponent”? That’s not self-defense advice, that’s
unarmed combat advice. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned “Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious “self-defense” skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This “debate” is all in your head.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 16:58
Hey, Liberaland is there a reason I can’t post a response? Such a shame too, it was a great post!
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:04
Ok, maybe it’s too big, or there’s some word a filter is objecting to…so piecemeal, and we’ll see…last bit first, lol!
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:23
Page 3, really Liberaland?
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:24
Moby Dick
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:26
Well, this is almost silly. Liberaland’s filter appears to object to the name of Herman Melville’s most famous book, Moby D__k. LOL!! y’all have a nice day.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:06
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious ‘self-defense’ skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This ‘debate’ is all in your head.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:07
“Out think your opponent”? That sounds like unarmed combat. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned
“Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:09
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable… regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:11
Oh hogwash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the ‘debate’ someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
Jesradi August 1st, 2014 at 16:19
Oh hogwash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the ‘debate’ someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable…regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
For the record: “then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it” is from Herman Melville, and it describes what most people are not, which are weapons in and of themselves.
“Out think your opponent”? That’s not self-defense advice, that’s unarmed combat advice. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned “Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious ‘self-defense’ skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This ‘debate’ is all in your head.
Brendan Bassett July 28th, 2014 at 14:43
You are profoundly confused about philosophy. The key is justification. Fear of guns is entirely rational. Fear of difference is not. It is something else, an unkind person would speak of misogyny, racism and homophobia.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 02:04
Oh man! You use a racist, homophobic and sexist point to try and confuse the issue of somebody carrying a weapon that can kill masses? Yeah, that’s a real philosophical point indeed…pfft!
Gregory Petersen July 28th, 2014 at 01:24
Here is a philosophical question. If a female, black or gay person comes into the restaurant where you are dining, would it be wrong to assume that they MAY be a dangerous threat thereby giving reason to leave without paying your tab. Anyone MAY be a threat to your safety therefore that excuse (by your reasoning) would justify leaving without paying the tab.
Brian July 28th, 2014 at 01:47
Here’s a philosophical question. If a MUSLIM walked into a restaurant with a gun strapped to his back and a sidearm on his belt, how would all the redneck Gun Nuts react?
But to answer your inane question, sure, anyone can be a threat, but a person with a GUN is carrying a tool designed specifically to kill human beings. It is entirely reasonable to fear anyone who walks around with a tool designed to murder. We make exceptions for uniformed peace officers and military personnel because we have a trust that those people have been trained properly and are regulated heavily. There are no such assumptions for non uniformed people brandishing guns in public.
Fear is an instinct that keeps us alive longer. It is a valuable human reaction to potential threats and is entirely valid whenever a non uniformed person is nearby with a gun.
Ymmit Sebrof July 29th, 2014 at 02:01
I would shit bricks if a military person walked in with a weapon! Think back…you have NEVER seen a US military person with a working gun on American soil. It happens to be highly illegal for them to carry while in uniform. Please know your facts.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:21
If they were carrying a weapon in the open, yes. I don’t mind holstered handguns because that says that someone is at least attempting to be responsible, but a gun slung over your back in a restaurant with possible curious children running around, well that is just plain stupid
truth_machine July 28th, 2014 at 11:39
Gregory, not being a moron, I don’t find unarmed women, blacks, or gays inherently dangerous but I do find armed anyone inherently dangerous.
Gregory Petersen December 4th, 2014 at 13:22
Actually, you are wrong, the article is about a PERCEIVED threat with disregard to reality and my point was exactly that.
truth_machine December 17th, 2014 at 03:41
Actually you’re an idiotic piece of right wing slime.
Gregory Petersen December 19th, 2014 at 14:15
Actually, you are just another anusbrain liberal who requires others to think for you
Gregory Petersen December 27th, 2014 at 16:49
Actually you are an anus brain liberal but you can fix that by pulling your head out of your ass
truth_machine December 30th, 2014 at 21:00
I see that you don’t disagree that you’re an idiotic piece of right wing slime. Even your attempt at a copycat insult is stupid.
Jesradi July 28th, 2014 at 12:43
All guns are designed and manufactured to be dangerous. People – female, black, gay or otherwise – are not. Your ‘philosophical question’ is nonsense.
Ymmit Sebrof July 29th, 2014 at 01:57
False argument. People are very dangerous. With or without guns…
Jesradi July 29th, 2014 at 11:11
“false argument” your own self — people are not designed with triggers that fire metal projectiles at deadly speeds with the twitch of a finger
Ymmit Sebrof July 29th, 2014 at 17:53
No, still a valid argument. People don’t need guns to kill. If you knew the first thing about self defense, you would know that. A gun can’t kill without a person, but a person CAN kill without a gun. Mother nature designed us very well to kill with many weapons at our disposal. Your argument is still false…and you have failed to prove mine otherwise. Care to try again?
Jesradi July 29th, 2014 at 18:43
Don’t have to. My point still applies…people’s chests are NOT mortars and the human heart is NOT a speeding metal projectile. And I do know a thing or two about self-defense, and that’s more than enough to know that I can’t outbalance, outpace or outfox a bullet.
Ymmit Sebrof July 30th, 2014 at 00:55
Your point (as I understood it) was that people are not dangerous and guns are. I submit that a gun is an inanimate object and therefore not dangerous without an operator (guns do not just aim themselves and fire). However, a human is VERY dangerous WITHOUT a gun and therefore your point is invalid.
Now, I understand that this is an emotional issue for you, but a mortar is an entirely different class of weapon, and makes your counter argument seem silly and rather vapid (a mortar is an explosive, NOT a firearm and as such enjoys no constitutional protections). We are debating firearms. Please stick to those.
As far as your knowledge of self defense, I am led to believe by your statements, that it is EXTREMELY limited! You do not “outbalance, outpace or outfox a bullet.” That is just silly! Bullets have no capacity to think. They fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target. Even the most basic course teaches defense from the PERSON (out-think your opponent, NOT their weapon). Incapacitate the attacker and the weapon (knife, gun, mace, baseball bat, etc) is useless. The absolute BEST weapons you have ARE your heart and mind.
Please stick to facts and relevant arguments or stay out of the debate.
Further, most actual law enforcement people (I’m not talking about political appointees or elected officials, but they also follow this) think that responsibly armed citizens are a positive, NOT a problem. Sadly, the clowns doing these open carry demonstrations tend not to be the responsible type. They are looking to rile “sensitive” types such as yourself…ignore them and they’ll go away (or, as we say to the kids, “flex your ignore muscle. They’re just trying to get a reaction from you. If they don’t, they’ll move on.”). Besides, as my training officer likes to say, “You wanna display your piece? Fine! The crazies (bad guys with guns) will target you first.” That should give you a bit of comfort!
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 16:58
Hey, Liberaland is there a reason I can’t post a response? Such a shame too, it was a great post!
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:04
Ok, maybe it’s too big, or there’s some word a filter is objecting to…so piecemeal, and we’ll see…last bit first, lol!
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:23
Page 3, really Liberaland?
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:24
Moby Dick
mea_mark July 31st, 2014 at 17:29
Certain words throw the comment into moderation, it’s the filters. Dick happens to be one of them even though it is a name. And if we are busy or away sometimes it takes awhile to get it approved.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:26
Well, this is almost silly. Liberaland’s filter appears to object to the name of Herman Melville’s most famous book, Moby D__k. LOL!! y’all have a nice day.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:06
Response to Ymmit Sebrof, page 5:
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious ‘self-defense’ skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This ‘debate’ is all in your head.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:07
Response to Ymmit Sebrof, page 4:
“Out think your opponent”? That sounds like unarmed combat. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned
“Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:08
Response to Ymmit Sebrof, page 3:
For the record: “then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it” is from “Moby D__k”, and it describes what most people are not, which are weapons in and of themselves.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:09
Response to Ymmit Sebrof, page 2:
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable… regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:11
Response to Ymmit Sebrof, page 1:
Oh hogwash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the ‘debate’ someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
Jesradi July 31st, 2014 at 17:01
Oh h o g wash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the ‘debate’ someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable…regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
For the record: “then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it” is from Moby Dick, and it describes what most people are not, which are weapons in and of themselves.
“Out think your opponent”? That’s not self-defense advice, that’s unarmed combat advice. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned “Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious ‘self-defense’ skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This ‘debate’ is all in your head.
Jesradi August 1st, 2014 at 16:19
Oh hogwash. You’re just full of opinions about me, my point, and my skills. And you can stick your rules for joining the ‘debate’ someplace uncomfortable. I’m not in a debate. I was voicing an opinion about the two-fold innuendo in the “female, black or gay person” comment.
If this hypothetical person is apparently unarmed, it is unreasonable to fear them, regardless of sex, race or love-life. If this person is carrying a long gun, it is eminently reasonable…regardless of sex, race or love-life. The gun is the difference between a person with one and a person without one, so I think his what-if is nonsensical.
For the record: “then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it” is from Herman Melville, and it describes what most people are not, which are weapons in and of themselves.
“Out think your opponent”? That sounds more like unarmed combat advice. In my world, self-defense is when a guy 6″ taller and 80lbs heavier already has you by the hair. Get loose, get away, get help. And hope he doesn’t pull out a gun, because, as you mentioned “Bullets…fly in a straight line from the barrel to the target.”
Please notice that I’ve made not one assumption or disparaging remark about your emotional state, your ‘sensitivity’, nor your, I’m sure, prodigious ‘self-defense’ skills. In fact, I’ve not even voiced an opinion about the professor’s ‘amazing idea’ at all. This ‘debate’ is all in your head.
Brendan Bassett July 28th, 2014 at 14:43
You are profoundly confused about philosophy. The key is justification. Fear of guns is entirely rational. Fear of difference is not. It is something else, an unkind person would speak of misogyny, racism and homophobia.
B Jones July 29th, 2014 at 02:04
Oh man! You use a racist, homophobic and sexist point to try and confuse the issue of somebody carrying a weapon that can kill masses? Yeah, that’s a real philosophical point indeed…pfft!
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:40
Is this idea good, bad, remotely viable? I do not know, but if it gets people thinking about the issue beyond the insane NRA talking points and the Ban em all crowd, it will have been worthwhile. Any suspicious looking types enter where I am, whether they are armed or not, I do what I always do: locate near an exit, keep the suspect in sight and try to maintain a clean line if anything goes bad. There are many people out there doing just that every day. But you don’t see them parading around with a Bushmaster on their back.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:00
I think it’s a fabulous idea and I think many business owners would agree. I was on the site that this was originally posted and I saw many business owners comment that if someone came into their establishment with an open carry weapon, they would call 911 and evacuate their customers, no questions asked and immediately!
John Peate July 28th, 2014 at 12:35
That is sad. You miss the whole point. That you respond in that way and that many people do merely shows what a parlous state exists in America. Living in fear of “suspicious looking types” is fear because they may be caryring weapons. The causes of that fear have been removed almost everywhere in the world but America with its perverse (and insane) love affair with guns and violence.
concreteblue July 28th, 2014 at 01:40
Is this idea good, bad, remotely viable? I do not know, but if it gets people thinking about the issue beyond the insane NRA talking points and the Ban em all crowd, it will have been worthwhile. Any suspicious looking types enter where I am, whether they are armed or not, I do what I always do: locate near an exit, keep the suspect in sight and try to maintain a clean line if anything goes bad. There are many people out there doing just that every day. But you don’t see them parading around with a Bushmaster on their back.
Margie Bateman Osgood July 28th, 2014 at 02:00
I think it’s a fabulous idea and I think many business owners would agree. I was on the site that this was originally posted and I saw many business owners comment that if someone came into their establishment with an open carry weapon, they would call 911 and evacuate their customers, no questions asked and immediately!
John Peate July 28th, 2014 at 12:35
That is sad. You miss the whole point. That you respond in that way and that many people do merely shows what a parlous state exists in America. Living in fear of “suspicious looking types” is fear because they may be caryring weapons. The causes of that fear have been removed almost everywhere in the world but America with its perverse (and insane) love affair with guns and violence.
concreteblue July 29th, 2014 at 11:41
I missed nothing. I am a gun totin pot smokin peace lovin hippie. I learned how to shoot when I was 8. I was taught you NEVER pick up a gun unless you intend to use it, and to NEVER point it at something / one unless you mean to kill it. A lifetime of playing music in bars and seeing all kinds of crazy shit informs my attitude, not fear, loathing, or penis insecurity.