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
Vincent Ardolino July 29th, 2014 at 00:24
I have a fear of tomatoes. Every time I see them in the store I want to throw up. My fear is real so when another person walks in and orders a salad with tomatoes on it, i’m just walking out without paying. Does that works right professor?
JIMMY July 29th, 2014 at 00:30
NO….Stupid
hellboundbuddha July 29th, 2014 at 00:46
with all due respect to your fear of tomatoes. i highly doubt that someone will use it to end your life. what the professor is getting at is a non-confrontational (with the pro-carry people) way to send a message to establishments that they won’t stand for it, which they have just as much a right to do as those carrying rifles do. the point is that carrying around assault rifles is rather absurd. there are no holsters on these things, how does one determine threat from someone that just walks in with a rifle on display and finger near the trigger? they can’t, hence the fear. i’m all for C&C laws, however, I don’t personally see the need for non-law enforcement to have Open Carry anything because it makes the public nervous and especially in the case of these rifles it crosses over into that realm of not using common sense. the majority of gun owners that i know and have spoken to feel this same way. this is america, it’s clearly a hot topic and everyone’s voice should be heard on the matter. maybe if both sides take time listen to the others views they can come to an understanding the satisfies both.
GammaRae July 29th, 2014 at 00:48
Typical childish wingnut response. “I WANT MY WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY!!!!!!”
You’re the kind of fool I hope never has his hands on a firearm. And please: don’t jump into the gene pool.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 01:04
As history has it, widespread belief used to be that tomatoes were poisonous. They thought that tomatoes killed people. We now know that tomatoes are not poisonous, and they are commonplace in any salad. Times change as people learn.
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:22
well yes that is true and we know that is not the case. history also shows both idiots with guns and crazy people with guns kill people either by being stupid or crazy… i dont think you have offered a valid rebuttal…
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 04:02
It’s not my analogy to defend. Don’t respond to me, dude.
The only thing that I’ll dabble about what you just said is that just because something can be used to kill, doesn’t mean that it should be resented looked at with a phobia. It would be incredibly narrow minded to hold such a belief.
Wingsfan81 July 29th, 2014 at 01:20
So you’re afraid someone will kill you with a tomato?
Raphael Torres July 29th, 2014 at 01:29
your comparison is ridiculously stupid..but if your ordered with a gun on you….i would moron!
Raphael Torres July 29th, 2014 at 01:30
it amazes me how you people think!
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:19
it seems that the post you are replying to is not an example of thinking….
nunya July 29th, 2014 at 00:39
That fat, gun-toting slob above lol so preoccupied with some notion that he is together with the founding fathers, has left him no time to tend to his morbid obesity lol the priorities of so many just lost souls. I’d like to tell him suck my dick.. right to his face as he has his faux-penis tethered ’round his neck.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 01:00
So let me get this straight, everyone here is 100% okay with the concealed carry of a handgun? Right?
Joi Owen July 29th, 2014 at 08:10
Nope. Why do you make that assumption? Unlike you on the right, we on the left think for ourselves and have a great variety of diverse, thoughtful opinions. This is why the democrats in congress can’t stand up to the GOP… they are worse then herding cats.
LS July 29th, 2014 at 12:38
I think you are confusing “rights” with “stupidity”. Yes, we have the right to be stupid, but it has its consequences. A person has the right to walk from place to place, but when people step in front of cars mid-street then we implement controls like crosswalks and jaywalking. These dictate where and when we can excersize our rights. You still have you rights, but there are restriction placed on them to ensure we all can enjoy ourt rights in areas of conflict.. When folks taunt the general public by faunting thier assult rifles in public places and causing conflicts with the core human right of feeling safe, then the public reacts by placing limitations on when and where you can open carry. I do NOT want a law that says “right to bear arms is limited to single shot muskets with a barrel length not less than 48 inches”.
That said – I have no issue with concealed carry, or even non-concealed carry. Walking into a resteraunt like you are walking onto a battlefield is another thing.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:05
I instantly upvoted your reply. Thank you for being the first to respond and for being open-minded about it.
I am not confusing anything, LS. Are the people in the photograph exercising their rights? Yes, and I believe that they are doing so in a stupid manner, but that is merely my opinion. The bottom line is that they are not threatening anyone in any tangible way, and they are not violating the law; they are not flaunting “assault rifles”.
I think you are confusing “rights” with “privileges”.
Being able to walk on sidewalks paid for by community, drive cars on taxpayer-funded roads… these are all privileges. One can argue that these things wouldn’t be built were it not for the community’s commitment to infrastructure. That being said, our infrastructure can only take so much of a load at any given time without restricting others. From this standpoint, just the simple act being of being present on a roadway obstructs others from engaging in commerce and transportation. However, the stupid people at Chipotle, who we all love to poke fun at, are not obstructing anyone else from doing anything. And it’s not like gun ownership has the same limitations that our roadways have; by being on a roadway, that instantly means that someone else can’t be (just look at an on-ramp during rush hour traffic). On the other hand, having a gun on your person does not disable anyone else from doing the same. Literally everyone could carry a rifle tomorrow and there would not be a “traffic jam” from too many people trying to exercise their rights except for in those crammed subways in Tokyo :)
LS July 29th, 2014 at 14:20
Here is a guy that crossed the line. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/29/1317499/-Arizona-man-arrested-in-Phoenix-Sky-Harbor-Airport-after-open-carry-protest-terrifies-travelers
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:29
Already read this story, but if it is true then yes I agree. He should be arrested and prosecuted if he brandished a firearm and threatened people.
LS July 29th, 2014 at 15:34
My point in this is that it is easy to go from “stupid” to “jail”, and can even be done by accident. I am sure we can all come up with examples where it is perfectly legal to do something, but the details dictate that it is not always a good idea.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:57
Yeah and I agree that the open carry demonstrations are pretty stupid. But nonetheless I support an individual’s right to safely carry a loaded firearm in public 100%, whether open or concealed.
That being said I was not there that day. I can only speak about the picture above, and from the picture, I can’t come to the conclusion that they were doing anything unsafe. Just stupid.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 01:00
So let me get this straight, everyone here is 100% okay with the concealed carry of a handgun? Right?
Joi Owen July 29th, 2014 at 08:10
Nope. Why do you make that assumption? Unlike you on the right, we on the left think for ourselves and have a great variety of diverse, thoughtful opinions. This is why the democrats in congress can’t stand up to the GOP… they are worse then herding cats.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:23
Perhaps I should clarify: You have no issues with the legality of a person concealing a handgun on his person? Meaning nobody is forced to have a handgun, but they should have the right to make that choice for themselves.
I’m not sure how you can conclude both that I am A) “On the right” and close-minded. And that everyone here who is B) “On the left” is”[full] of diverse, thoughtful opinions.” Just by scrolling down I read a comment advocating imprisonment without due process of law, I caught a person resolutely stating that he would have killed a person in the photo, I see nunya’s comment below stating “That fat, gun-toting slob…I’d like to tell him suck my dick.. right to his face as he has his faux-penis tethered ’round his neck.” Are these the diverse, thoughtful opinions to which you are referring?
If you are in fact a liberal, I make the reasonable assumption that you do not have reservations about the right to keep and bear arms. I make the reasonable assumption that you would resent any attempt by the government to discriminate amongst the law-abiding who can carry a concealed handgun, and who can’t. I make the reasonable assumption that you would oppose any unwarranted search leading to the discovery of a handgun on one’s person.
lib·er·al
ˈlib(ə)rəl/
adjective
(in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform.
LS July 29th, 2014 at 12:38
I think you are confusing “rights” with “stupidity”. Yes, we have the right to be stupid, but it has its consequences. A person has the right to walk from place to place, but when people step in front of cars mid-street then we implement controls like crosswalks and jaywalking. These dictate where and when we can excersize our rights. You still have you rights, but there are restriction placed on them to ensure we all can enjoy ourt rights in areas of conflict.. When folks taunt the general public by faunting thier assult rifles in public places and causing conflicts with the core human right of feeling safe, then the public reacts by placing limitations on when and where you can open carry. I do NOT want a law that says “right to bear arms is limited to single shot muskets with a barrel length not less than 48 inches”.
That said – I have no issue with concealed carry, or even non-concealed carry. Walking into a resteraunt like you are walking onto a battlefield is another thing.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:05
I instantly upvoted your reply. Thank you for being the first to respond and for being open-minded about it.
I am not confusing anything, LS. Are the people in the photograph exercising their rights? Yes, and I believe that they are doing so in a stupid manner, but that is merely my opinion. The bottom line is that they are not threatening anyone in any tangible way, and they are not violating the law; they are not flaunting “assault rifles”.
I think you are confusing “rights” with “privileges”.
Being able to walk on sidewalks paid for by community, drive cars on taxpayer-funded roads… these are all privileges. One can argue that these things wouldn’t be built were it not for the community’s commitment to infrastructure. That being said, our infrastructure can only take so much of a load at any given time without restricting others. From this standpoint, just the simple act being of being present on a roadway obstructs others from engaging in commerce and transportation. However, the stupid people at Chipotle, who we all love to poke fun at, are not obstructing anyone else from doing anything. And it’s not like gun ownership has the same limitations that our roadways have; by being on a roadway, that instantly means that someone else can’t be (just look at an on-ramp during rush hour traffic). On the other hand, having a gun on your person does not disable anyone else from doing the same. Literally everyone could carry a rifle tomorrow and there would not be a “traffic jam” from too many people trying to exercise their rights except for in those crammed subways in Tokyo :)
LS July 29th, 2014 at 14:20
Here is a guy that crossed the line. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/29/1317499/-Arizona-man-arrested-in-Phoenix-Sky-Harbor-Airport-after-open-carry-protest-terrifies-travelers
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:29
Already read this story, but if it is true then yes I agree. He should be arrested and prosecuted if he brandished a firearm and threatened people.
LS July 29th, 2014 at 15:34
My point in this is that it is easy to go from “stupid” to “jail”, and can even be done by accident. I am sure we can all come up with examples where it is perfectly legal to do something, but the details dictate that it is not always a good idea.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:57
Yeah and I agree that the open carry demonstrations are pretty stupid. But nonetheless I support an individual’s right to safely carry a loaded firearm in public 100%, whether open or concealed.
That being said I was not there that day. I can only speak about the picture above, and from the picture, I can’t come to the conclusion that they were doing anything unsafe. Just stupid.
Wingsfan81 July 29th, 2014 at 01:19
Walking out without stopping is exactly what I have said I’d do and I have told my kids to do the same thing. Put down whatever you have and leave, immediately. I’m not waiting around to see if this is a “good guy”, or some trigger happy idiot who wants to make some point or someone who is planning on shooting the place up.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 01:56
Why would you have any reason to believe this would happen? Is it simply because you “see” a gun?
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:17
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/17/us/gunman-kills-22-and-himself-in-texas-cafeteria.html
http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/23951423/police-1-injured-in-shooting-at-dearborn-benihana-restaurant
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/07/police-gunman-kills-miami-area-restaurant-wounds-killing/
a quick google search of “Gunman restaurant” gave me these 3 links
so as to your question why anyone would have any reason to think someone may shoot up a restaurant if they are toting a gun, it has happened in the past…
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 02:23
You are debating a new sockpuppet account, made for the purposes of derailing the discussion with inane questions that deny reality. Like this guy has never heard of restaurant shootings…
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:52
poe’s law
greenfloyd July 29th, 2014 at 03:16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:49
I encourage you to scour the years of history on my timeline.
https://www.facebook.com/joe.kenda11
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 11:26
You discuss the many mass shootings in the US there?
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:54
Not unless somebody forces be to do so by asserting that the tragedies indicate a need to put limitations on gun rights.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 15:50
Good to know. The right itself is not being limited in any way whatsoever.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 16:00
Sarcasm? It is every day all over the world and across the US.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 16:06
So, no examples. I’ve noticed that your arguments on this page simultaneously condemn and employ generalizations. I’m not interested in debating vague blanket statements. Thank you for your time.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:38
Touche. Sorry for not being more specific.
National Firearms Act of 1934
Gun Control Act of 1968
Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1994
“Assault Weapons” Ban of 1994
Along with the restrictions set forth in my home state NJSA 2c:39, 2c:58, 13:54.
I can go into detail but I believe it would be futile given the nature of the responses that I’ve been receiving.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 20:46
Exactly, so the right itself has not been infringed, but the list of what arms are on it is shorter. That’s not the same thing, unless the 2A reads “right to bear any and all arms.” Is that what you’re saying? You have the right to bear any and all arms? If not, then the right has not been infringed. The right itself exists and is not infringed by enumerating weapons that may not be borne, any more than a law against slander, libel, or defamation is an infringement on speech. Not all speech is free, and not all weapons are available. I doubt you often argue that anyone should be allowed VX nerve agent, napalm, nuclear weapons, or weaponized anthrax. Congress has the right under the Elastic Clause to pass legislation that is “necessary and proper,” including bans on certain weapons.
Which is why nunchucks are illegal in Oregon, but open-carry activists have no problem with it.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:51
I interpret infringe to mean to following “encroach on somebody’s rights or property: to take over land, rights, privileges, or activities that belong to somebody else, especially in a minor or gradual way”. It is my opinion that an arbitrary ban on a commonly owned firearm certainly encroaches on the right to bear arms.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 20:54
Yes, but your interpretation is irrelevant, unless I’m corresponding with a Supreme Court Justice. Am I?
What you deem “arbitrary” isn’t necessarily so, either. Somehow, you’ve elevated your personal opinions to the level of applicable to everyone. That is a mistake.
Like I wrote before, the right to bear arms remains. The right to bear any and all arms that man may contrive never was.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 21:08
To each interpretation, his own. But I was not speaking in a constitutional context. I agree that the right to keep and bear arms is timeless and perpetual. Whether or not it will be eternally recognized is up for conjecture.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:40
First link covered a mass shooting that happened in 1991 in which two handguns where immediately drawn and fired indiscriminately at people. Nowhere in the article does it say that the gunman was open carrying his handguns, and if he was, he would be doing so illegally given open carrying a pistol has been illegal in Texas for decades. Nowhere does it say that he was “toting”.
Second link covers an escalated argument which led to one of the involved drawing a concealed handgun and immediately shooting the other, the waived the handgun around presumably pointing it at others in the restaurant.
The third link was about a shooting that happened in a Miami restaurant where the man was arguing with his girlfriend, pulled a concealed handgun, shot and killed his girlfriend and then 3 other women.
Important differences: The stories you gave me question all involved handguns. Furthermore, the firearms used were not being open carried prior to the shootings.
Sidenote: I hope you like stop and frisk because without it, there is no way for you to tell for sure whether or not someone walking into a restaurant is carrying a handgun.
I don’t care what irrelevant stories you bring me, it doesn’t change the fact that the right to keep and bear arms applies to all who haven’t had that right taken away from them. Even if it disgusts people and it makes people on the internet feel uncomfortable when they see pictures of a chubby and skimpy dude “tote” around their rifles, a right is a right. The extent to which a fundamental right can be exercised is not dependent on who will be offended. It is not even limited by the fact that, yes – Some people will overstep their freedoms and aggrieve others with their actions. We also have rights against illegal searches and seizures which allow us to live our lives in dignity and without unwarranted scrutiny from stop and frisk among other martial law style tactics. Will this right be abuse? You betcha.
You can deny my authenticity all you want, while you accuse me of denying something that I have freely acknowledged. You can let the media influence your imagination to paint a picture to represent your perception of reality. You can also arbitrarily believe anything you want to without sound reasoning. But what you can’t change is the fact that there will be a time when open carry won’t be so taboo, the same way blacks and whites sharing facilities is expected today, and the same way that woman marrying a woman or a man marrying a man is not as farfetched as it once was made out to be.
Soon enough, you too will learn to not demand conformation from others for your personal dislikes based on ill-conceived prejudices.
Tom Stewart July 29th, 2014 at 02:19
You ever read the news? the mass shootings that happening nearly daily? I see no reason to wait and see if the heavily armed men mean fair or foul. Leaving the building immediately is a sane and rational response.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 02:47
I’m inclined to ask you the same thing.. If you read the news, you’d know that the frequency of mass shootings do not occur anywhere close to daily. You’d also know that mass shootings only happen in Gun Free zones (with the exception of the Giffords shooting which was committed with a handgun that was concealed until the shooting began).
Chapter C Cavanaugh July 29th, 2014 at 03:17
That’s a falsehood. Just like the argument that if we take guns away the shooters will then use knives, if everywhere were ok to carry guns, gunmen would still shoot people there too. How many times have we had shootings on Military bases? They happen even with sharp shooters around.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:42
What part of what I said is false?
FYI military bases are considered “Gun Free” zones. Nobody except for law enforcement is permitted to possess firearms.
David Crass July 29th, 2014 at 17:00
Military personnel on military bases are generally not allowed to be armed, except for the MPs. Not a valid comparison.
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:38
Joe get you head out of your ass. You’re just ignorant.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:06
Thanks for the insightful comment, angelfire!
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:37
I would get me and my granddaughter the heck out of there….I’m not waiting to find out their intentions. I read the papers…..I’m leaving.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 00:09
Basing your daily life on hyperbole and lies is in no way “sane and rational”.
Boner July 29th, 2014 at 07:32
yeah because it happens all the time.
Wingsfan81 July 30th, 2014 at 02:18
If YOU want to walk/sit around and wait to see if they are a good guy or a bad guy, you go right ahead. I personalIy think anyone who feels they need to carry an AR15 into a store is mentally unstable. And I’m not about to wait around to see if they are there to rob the place or shoot the place up. People shoot places up all the time. Why WOULDN”T I think that might be what they’re up to? On that note, it’s obvious you would be the kind of nut to walk into a Walmart fully packed, just to see if you could scare people. And you feel no one should have their own opinion. So any further replies will be ignored. You’re not worth my time.
Joe Kendall July 30th, 2014 at 11:41
>”On that note, it’s obvious you would be the kind of nut to walk into a Walmart fully packed just to see if you could scare people.”
You are obviously prejudiced. What have I said anywhere on this thread to even suggest that I would want to scare people? I am not an intimidating person, and on a side note, I have never open carried in public.
>”And you feel no one should have their own opinion.”
When have I said that? I have said multiple times that support everyone’s right to an opinion, as well as the right to leave a restaurant that they don’t feel comfortable in.
The only observations I make of you is that you are a prejudiced, narrow-minded person. To the best of my knowledge, I have never insulted anyone and if I have I am sorry. That doesn’t change the fact that you immediately jumped to conclusions without giving me the time of day.
Nicole Girard July 30th, 2014 at 15:36
Yeah, the key is to get out *before* you get shot.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 15:07
If you were going to get shot, the likeliest occurrence would result from somebody who was concealing a firearm – not open carrying it for a stupid demonstration. Just because you don’t see a gun being carried, doesn’t mean that there isn’t one being carried…
That being said, would you run out of a store if somebody came in concealing a firearm? Would you even know if somebody come into a store with a concealed weapon?
Nicole Girard August 1st, 2014 at 09:46
Well a gunman has to pull his gun out at some point before he begins shooting doesn’t he? And anyone stupid enough to want to carry an unconcealed weapon in these places is not to be trusted. I see a gun. I’m out.
Wingsfan81 July 29th, 2014 at 01:19
Walking out without stopping is exactly what I have said I’d do and I have told my kids to do the same thing. Put down whatever you have and leave, immediately. I’m not waiting around to see if this is a “good guy”, or some trigger happy idiot who wants to make some point or someone who is planning on shooting the place up.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 01:56
Why would you have any reason to believe this would happen? Is it simply because you “see” a gun?
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:17
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/17/us/gunman-kills-22-and-himself-in-texas-cafeteria.html
http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/23951423/police-1-injured-in-shooting-at-dearborn-benihana-restaurant
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/07/police-gunman-kills-miami-area-restaurant-wounds-killing/
a quick google search of “Gunman restaurant” gave me these 3 links
so as to your question why anyone would have any reason to think someone may shoot up a restaurant if they are toting a gun, it has happened in the past…
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 02:23
You are debating a new sockpuppet account, made for the purposes of derailing the discussion with inane questions that deny reality. Like this guy has never heard of restaurant shootings…
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:52
poe’s law
floyd[@]greenfloyd.org July 29th, 2014 at 03:16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:49
I encourage you to scour the years of history on my timeline.
https://www.facebook.com/joe.kenda11
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 11:26
You discuss the many mass shootings in the US there?
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:54
Not unless somebody forces be to do so by asserting that the tragedies indicate a need to put limitations on gun rights.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 15:50
Good to know. The right itself is not being limited in any way whatsoever.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 16:00
Sarcasm? It is every day all over the world and across the US.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 16:06
So, no examples. I’ve noticed that your arguments on this page simultaneously condemn and employ generalizations. I’m not interested in debating vague blanket statements. Thank you for your time.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:38
Touche. Sorry for not being more specific.
National Firearms Act of 1934
Gun Control Act of 1968
Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1994
“Assault Weapons” Ban of 1994
Along with the restrictions set forth in my home state NJSA 2c:39, 2c:58, 13:54.
I can go into detail but I believe it would be futile given the nature of the responses that I’ve been receiving.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 20:46
Exactly, so the right itself has not been infringed, but the list of what arms are on it is shorter. That’s not the same thing, unless the 2A reads “right to bear any and all arms.” Is that what you’re saying? You have the right to bear any and all arms? If not, then the right has not been infringed. The right itself exists and is not infringed by enumerating weapons that may not be borne, any more than a law against slander, libel, or defamation is an infringement on speech. Not all speech is free, and not all weapons are available. I doubt you often argue that anyone should be allowed VX nerve agent, napalm, nuclear weapons, or weaponized anthrax. Congress has the right under the Elastic Clause to pass legislation that is “necessary and proper,” including bans on certain weapons.
Which is why nunchucks are illegal in Oregon, but open-carry activists have no problem with it.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:51
I interpret infringe to mean to following “encroach on somebody’s rights or property: to take over land, rights, privileges, or activities that belong to somebody else, especially in a minor or gradual way”. It is my opinion that an arbitrary ban on a commonly owned firearm certainly encroaches on the right to bear arms.
Mo Reno July 29th, 2014 at 20:54
Yes, but your interpretation is irrelevant, unless I’m corresponding with a Supreme Court Justice. Am I?
What you deem “arbitrary” isn’t necessarily so, either. Somehow, you’ve elevated your personal opinions to the level of applicable to everyone. That is a mistake.
Like I wrote before, the right to bear arms remains. The right to bear any and all arms that man may contrive never was.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 21:08
To each interpretation, his own. But I was not speaking in a constitutional context. I agree that the right to keep and bear arms is timeless and perpetual. Whether or not it will be eternally recognized is up for conjecture.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:40
First link covered a mass shooting that happened in 1991 in which two handguns where immediately drawn and fired indiscriminately at people. Nowhere in the article does it say that the gunman was open carrying his handguns, and if he was, he would be doing so illegally given open carrying a pistol has been illegal in Texas for decades. Nowhere does it say that he was “toting”.
Second link covers an escalated argument which led to one of the involved drawing a concealed handgun and immediately shooting the other, the waived the handgun around presumably pointing it at others in the restaurant.
The third link was about a shooting that happened in a Miami restaurant where the man was arguing with his girlfriend, pulled a concealed handgun, shot and killed his girlfriend and then 3 other women.
Important differences: The stories you gave me question all involved handguns. Furthermore, the firearms used were not being open carried prior to the shootings.
Sidenote: I hope you like stop and frisk because without it, there is no way for you to tell for sure whether or not someone walking into a restaurant is carrying a handgun.
I don’t care what irrelevant stories you bring me, it doesn’t change the fact that the right to keep and bear arms applies to all who haven’t had that right taken away from them. Even if it disgusts people and it makes people on the internet feel uncomfortable when they see pictures of a chubby and skimpy dude “tote” around their rifles, a right is a right. The extent to which a fundamental right can be exercised is not dependent on who will be offended. It is not even limited by the fact that, yes – Some people will overstep their freedoms and aggrieve others with their actions. We also have rights against illegal searches and seizures which allow us to live our lives in dignity and without unwarranted scrutiny from stop and frisk among other martial law style tactics. Will this right be abuse? You betcha.
You can deny my authenticity all you want, while you accuse me of denying something that I have freely acknowledged. You can let the media influence your imagination to paint a picture to represent your perception of reality. You can also arbitrarily believe anything you want to without sound reasoning. But what you can’t change is the fact that there will be a time when open carry won’t be so taboo, the same way blacks and whites sharing facilities is expected today, and the same way that woman marrying a woman or a man marrying a man is not as farfetched as it once was made out to be.
Soon enough, you too will learn to not demand conformation from others for your personal dislikes based on ill-conceived prejudices.
Tom Stewart July 29th, 2014 at 02:19
You ever read the news? the mass shootings that happening nearly daily? I see no reason to wait and see if the heavily armed men mean fair or foul. Leaving the building immediately is a sane and rational response.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 02:47
I’m inclined to ask you the same thing.. If you read the news, you’d know that the frequency of mass shootings do not occur anywhere close to daily. You’d also know that mass shootings only happen in Gun Free zones (with the exception of the Giffords shooting which was committed with a handgun that was concealed until the shooting began).
Chapter C Cavanaugh July 29th, 2014 at 03:17
That’s a falsehood. Just like the argument that if we take guns away the shooters will then use knives, if everywhere were ok to carry guns, gunmen would still shoot people there too. How many times have we had shootings on Military bases? They happen even with sharp shooters around.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:42
What part of what I said is false?
FYI military bases are considered “Gun Free” zones. Nobody except for law enforcement is permitted to possess firearms.
David Crass July 29th, 2014 at 17:00
Military personnel on military bases are generally not allowed to be armed, except for the MPs. Not a valid comparison.
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:38
Joe get you head out of your ass. You’re just ignorant.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:06
Thanks for the insightful comment, angelfire!
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:37
I would get me and my granddaughter the heck out of there….I’m not waiting to find out their intentions. I read the papers…..I’m leaving.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 01:09
Basing your daily life on hyperbole and lies is in no way “sane and rational”.
Boner July 29th, 2014 at 07:32
yeah because it happens all the time.
Wingsfan81 July 30th, 2014 at 02:18
If YOU want to walk/sit around and wait to see if they are a good guy or a bad guy, you go right ahead. I personalIy think anyone who feels they need to carry an AR15 into a store is mentally unstable. And I’m not about to wait around to see if they are there to rob the place or shoot the place up. People shoot places up all the time. Why WOULDN”T I think that might be what they’re up to? On that note, it’s obvious you would be the kind of nut to walk into a Walmart fully packed, just to see if you could scare people. And you feel no one should have their own opinion. So any further replies will be ignored. You’re not worth my time.
Joe Kendall July 30th, 2014 at 11:41
>”On that note, it’s obvious you would be the kind of nut to walk into a Walmart fully packed just to see if you could scare people.”
You are obviously prejudiced. What have I said anywhere on this thread to even suggest that I would want to scare people? I am not an intimidating person, and on a side note, I have never open carried in public.
>”And you feel no one should have their own opinion.”
When have I said that? I have said multiple times that support everyone’s right to an opinion, as well as the right to leave a restaurant that they don’t feel comfortable in.
The only observations I make of you is that you are a prejudiced, narrow-minded person. To the best of my knowledge, I have never insulted anyone and if I have I am sorry. That doesn’t change the fact that you immediately jumped to conclusions without giving me the time of day.
Nik July 30th, 2014 at 15:36
Yeah, the key is to get out *before* you get shot.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 15:07
If you were going to get shot, the likeliest occurrence would result from somebody who was concealing a firearm – not open carrying it for a stupid demonstration. Just because you don’t see a gun being carried, doesn’t mean that there isn’t one being carried…
That being said, would you run out of a store if somebody came in concealing a firearm? Would you even know if somebody come into a store with a concealed weapon?
Nik August 1st, 2014 at 09:46
Well a gunman has to pull his gun out at some point before he begins shooting doesn’t he? And anyone stupid enough to want to carry an unconcealed weapon in these places is not to be trusted. I see a gun. I’m out.
danah gaz July 29th, 2014 at 01:35
I really don’t think that a bunch of soft-targets with beer guts and issues with their masculinity LARPing with loaded rifles in public is such a good idea, but then I wasn’t dropped on my head when I was little.
THX-1138 July 29th, 2014 at 15:37
Comment of the DAY!
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 17:06
1: You know they have issues from this picture and story, please what these issues your so actively afraid of?
2: Actually LARPing doesn’t use real weapons.
3: Perhaps you were and are now just to stupid to realize it.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 17:17
Oh look, a tiny little man! I almost didn’t see you there.
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 18:31
I like how you still didn’t state any facts about how you know these things you said. I shall leave this battle of wits as you are clearly unarmed.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 18:45
Sorry cupcake, there’s a bar for entering into debate with me.
You didn’t make the cut.
danah gaz July 29th, 2014 at 01:35
I really don’t think that a bunch of soft-targets with beer guts and issues with their masculinity LARPing with loaded rifles in public is such a good idea, but then I wasn’t dropped on my head when I was little.
THX-1138 July 29th, 2014 at 15:37
Comment of the DAY!
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 17:06
1: You know they have issues from this picture and story, please what these issues your so actively afraid of?
2: Actually LARPing doesn’t use real weapons.
3: Perhaps you were and are now just to stupid to realize it.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 17:17
Oh look, a tiny little man! I almost didn’t see you there.
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 18:31
I like how you still didn’t state any facts about how you know these things you said. I shall leave this battle of wits as you are clearly unarmed.
danah gaz July 31st, 2014 at 18:45
Oh you liked that did you? Well, then you’re in luck! You see, there’s a bar for entering into debate with me.
You didn’t make the cut.
sustainabel July 29th, 2014 at 02:10
The professor’s point is predicated upon the fact that we all make choices, some good, some bad. Making the choice to leave a business without paying for whatever transaction you are making will likely result in arrest if the police are called. An attorney may be able to get the charges dropped the first time you do this – if your fear is legitimate. It is a misdemeanor in my state, so it will cost about $3,500. Telling a judge that you committed the crime because the establishment allowed open carry – in their establishment, which they operate, and where you chose to do business – will not help your case. However, has anyone been reading these posts? I am seeing a trend – when someone has a coherent argument that is contrary to the anti-gun folks, the moderators jeer and ban them. I normally wouldn’t bother to point this out, but I am pretty left leaning and a few of these folks are embarrassing themselves and everyone to the left a Genghis Kahn. If you are going to have a political conversation, then……converse. Don’t marginalize the arguments with childish behavior. And please critically think before you follow the advice of this professor and the people that are contributing to this conversation. Or the advice of people that walk around in restaurants with rifles.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 02:29
Best comment all day.
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:47
if you leave with the fear that the person with the gun may be a threat to your life and you do believe this to be true then most likely you could be made to pay after the fact. if an earth quake hit the proper move is to occupy a sturdy space or exit the building, polite people would pay after the fact. but you can find penty of places where people with guns have entered an establishment and started shooting. if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to take steps to protect yourself.
in my experience those who op[en carry are either idiots or crazy and in either case that put me at an increased risk.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:45
>”if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to take steps to protect yourself.”
Not if you can’t rationalize your fear.
eebro July 29th, 2014 at 08:05
Someone bringing a tool meant to kill and threaten close to you is a rational reason for fear. Then we consider what tools most Americans are otherwise too.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:27
So if you saw an on-duty police officer in a restaurant you would behave the same way, right?
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:36
Different story….he’s got on a uniform and an obvious law enforcement officer. These kids all look like the two from Columbine……hard to tell the good guys from the bad. Personally I could see a cop shooting them and then getting off Scott free…..if you behave dangerously…stuff happens.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:48
How do they actually know that he is a law enforcement officer? Why are people perfectly okay with somebody in a uniform open carrying? Does it mean we are okay with the government “flaunting guns”? Furthermore, what is stopping a mass murderer from concealing several firearms until half a second before mowing people down?
kkseattle July 30th, 2014 at 23:41
Troll.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 14:52
Call my critical thinking whatever you want, simpleton.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 00:05
I have to ask: in the light of recent events, do you still feel the same way?
eebro August 1st, 2014 at 09:11
Police, again this has nothing to do with my first argument, are trained how to use their weapons and when to use them. The job of the police is to keep order and not to show off guns.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:25
You have an interesting Authoritarian-worship trend there…..
eebro December 3rd, 2014 at 14:49
That was completely irrelevant to what I said. Also a major logical fallacy, you must be a troll or just a plain idiot.
PavePusher December 4th, 2014 at 11:12
The failure of logic is yours. You want to trust only uniformed government agents with firearms. Ponder that.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:24
What are your internet psychological-diagnosis qualifications, and on what evidence do you make your claim?
sustainabel July 29th, 2014 at 02:10
The professor’s point is predicated upon the fact that we all make choices, some good, some bad. Making the choice to leave a business without paying for whatever transaction you are making will likely result in arrest if the police are called. An attorney may be able to get the charges dropped the first time you do this – if your fear is legitimate. It is a misdemeanor in my state, so it will cost about $3,500. Telling a judge that you committed the crime because the establishment allowed open carry – in their establishment, which they operate, and where you chose to do business – will not help your case. However, has anyone been reading these posts? I am seeing a trend – when someone has a coherent argument that is contrary to the anti-gun folks, the moderators jeer and ban them. I normally wouldn’t bother to point this out, but I am pretty left leaning and a few of these folks are embarrassing themselves and everyone to the left a Genghis Kahn. If you are going to have a political conversation, then……converse. Don’t marginalize the arguments with childish behavior. And please critically think before you follow the advice of this professor and the people that are contributing to this conversation. Or the advice of people that walk around in restaurants with rifles.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 02:29
Best comment all day.
Kevin Bruce July 29th, 2014 at 02:47
if you leave with the fear that the person with the gun may be a threat to your life and you do believe this to be true then most likely you could be made to pay after the fact. if an earth quake hit the proper move is to occupy a sturdy space or exit the building, polite people would pay after the fact. but you can find penty of places where people with guns have entered an establishment and started shooting. if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to take steps to protect yourself.
in my experience those who op[en carry are either idiots or crazy and in either case that put me at an increased risk.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 03:45
>”if you feel your life is in danger you have the right to take steps to protect yourself.”
Not if you can’t rationalize your fear.
eebro July 29th, 2014 at 08:05
Someone bringing a tool meant to kill and threaten close to you is a rational reason for fear. Then we consider what tools most Americans are otherwise too.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:27
So if you saw an on-duty police officer in a restaurant you would behave the same way, right?
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:36
Different story….he’s got on a uniform and an obvious law enforcement officer. These kids all look like the two from Columbine……hard to tell the good guys from the bad. Personally I could see a cop shooting them and then getting off Scott free…..if you behave dangerously…stuff happens.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:48
How do they actually know that he is a law enforcement officer? Why are people perfectly okay with somebody in a uniform open carrying? Does it mean we are okay with the government “flaunting guns”? Furthermore, what is stopping a mass murderer from concealing several firearms until half a second before mowing people down?
kkseattle July 30th, 2014 at 23:41
Troll.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 14:52
Call my critical thinking whatever you want, simpleton.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 01:05
I have to ask: in the light of recent events, do you still feel the same way?
eebro August 1st, 2014 at 09:11
Police, again this has nothing to do with my first argument, are trained how to use their weapons and when to use them. The job of the police is to keep order and not to show off guns.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:25
You have an interesting Authoritarian-worship trend there…..
eebro December 3rd, 2014 at 15:49
That was completely irrelevant to what I said. Also a major logical fallacy, you must be a troll or just a plain idiot.
PavePusher December 4th, 2014 at 12:12
The failure of logic is yours. You want to trust only uniformed government agents with firearms. Ponder that.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:24
What are your internet psychological-diagnosis qualifications, and on what evidence do you make your claim?
Andy Sprouse July 29th, 2014 at 04:51
thats exactly what I will do. walk out of the establishment. I will not remain in the presence of assault rifles
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:25
What is an assault rifle?
LS July 29th, 2014 at 15:16
From wikipedia:
The term assault rifle is a non-direct translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally “storm rifle”, “storm” as in “military assault”). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler as a new name for the Maschinenpistole 43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first assault rifle that served to popularize the concept and form the basis for today’s modern assault rifles.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 00:03
So, not the type of rifle carried in the pictured incident. Got it.
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 16:51
An assault rifle is actually a weapon capable of full-auto fire. What these people are carrying is what politicians claim as assault weapons. Termed by them to try and garner support against guns as something extra dangerous due to some asthetic characteristics that do not effect function or capability. IE – a handle on top to carry, pistol grip, bayonet mount etc.
Actual assualt rifles are military use and available to people only with fedeal permits. The vast majority of people do not own these and they are not the people in these demonstrations.
Bennet Deliduka July 29th, 2014 at 15:18
Andy, with very few exceptions it is illegal for the average citizen to own an “assault rifle”
the weapons that are commonly carried by those in the “open carry” community are Rifles that are sometimes referred to as “assault style weapons”. These are semi-automatic, just like every double action pistol since Colt made the first one…
I am a proponent of responsible gun ownership. This includes insuring firearms are secured at all times and treated with the care and respect that any potentially hazardous object should be treated.
THX-1138 July 29th, 2014 at 15:42
I wouldn’t really want to be in a store if a group of people had Bowie knives and axes strapped to their backs either. It’s not so much the guns as it is groups of people whose arms training is in serious doubt carrying weaponry in public.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 15:58
So then don’t go into the store! You are free to make that decision yourself! And if you are worried about people carrying weapons than that’s your problem, not everyone else’s.
Martina Patrick July 29th, 2014 at 17:44
The thing is, there are many, many people like THX-1138 so it’s going to be the store’s problem. Thank you for your concern.
Joe Kendall July 30th, 2014 at 16:16
To be quite frank, I don’t think the majority of customers care, or is even aware of what a store’s weapons policy is. I will give you this, that if some people were offended by the demonstrators, that those people will be less likely to return. So yes some business will be lost to those people, no doubt.
kkseattle July 30th, 2014 at 23:32
Until now, most gun owners didn’t feel the compunction to act like antisocial, attention-grabbing idiots by strapping rifles to themselves when they go to a local store or restaurant. If this keeps happening, you can absolutely guarantee that virtually all stores and restaurants will ban these morons. (Is that what gun owners really want?) These, after all, are the establishments that are punished every year by so-called conservatives for waging a war on Christmas by wishing their patrons happy holidays.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 14:57
You can bet that a complete company ban on firearms will hurt business more than it helps. A ban on open display of firearms? I think patrons could live with that.
THX-1138 July 30th, 2014 at 15:35
Isn’t that what I just said? Perhaps you thought my comment was directed at you, or perhaps other open carry advocates. It was not. It is a position that wish I to make known to businesses that support open carry in their stores. Perhaps they can increase profits by catering to crowds of people who go about with obvious weaponry in view. My guess is that it’s my money (and those of like minds) that they would rather pursue. I own two successful businesses and I have a large family. Losing me as a customer might not have any impact but I am fairly certain that my sentiment is the majority, and that wouldn’t be good to any businesses bottom line.
Bennet Deliduka July 29th, 2014 at 17:51
I agree… wearing an AR-15, a Hunting Rifle (especially out of season) or a Machete to a dining establishment (where harvesting your own meat is not considered ‘the norm’ does call into question the mental state of the individual who believe that it is prudent and necessary to be armed in public…
I’m perfectly comfortable around firearms (grew up in a house with NO TOY GUNS. (all the guns were REAL) and somehow never ended up playing with them… or shooting a sibling… or feeling the need to carry one openly in public.
Do I carry a concealed firearm? sometimes.
Why?
sometimes I feel like it, sometimes I’m traveling to/from the range and I feel more comfortable with the gun under my control than leaving it un-supervised in a locked automobile even when hidden from view.
I am responsible for my guns at all times… that is a responsibility I take very seriously. I don’t want to be filing a theft report and trying to explain how one of my firearms is now “missing” or worse yet, finding out that one was used (accidentally or otherwise) to injure an innocent person.
Personally… any group that feels the need to walk around armed needs to closely evaluate the nature of the fear they experience…
Kevin Bruce July 30th, 2014 at 02:59
so much win in this thread. i wish more responsible gun owners were as articulate as you.
i have not talke CC classes but have taken hunter safety. it is a similar problem there where idiot hunters ruin hunting for those who are responsible. i am just lucky i have private land to hunt on rather than deal with the crazies on the public lands.
THX-1138 July 30th, 2014 at 15:28
And that is where I agree. I own guns myself. But of course since I’m not all “Rah rah let’s go to town with our guns on our back” I must be some hippy freak. I have known many folks who carry concealed weapons and for each and every one of them I knew what their motivations are: protection from perceived threats. I work in a line of business that put’s me in threatening situations and I have from time to time made sure that I was armed. On one occasion it ensured my own safety. I have to call into question the intelligence and rationality of people who feel compelled to go parading around with guns on their back. It’s nothing more than trying to puff out your chest and show your alleged manliness. And that is juvenile and borderline dangerous behavior.
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:32
Thing is….how do you know the good guys from the nuts? You don’t. Best to get out quick and hope you’re wrong but be glad when the crazy ass starts killing.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:21
No-one has been carrying ‘assault rifles’.
Andy Sprouse July 29th, 2014 at 04:51
thats exactly what I will do. walk out of the establishment. I will not remain in the presence of assault rifles
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 14:25
What is an assault rifle?
LS July 29th, 2014 at 15:16
From wikipedia:
The term assault rifle is a non-direct translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally “storm rifle”, “storm” as in “military assault”). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler as a new name for the Maschinenpistole 43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first assault rifle that served to popularize the concept and form the basis for today’s modern assault rifles.
PavePusher December 29th, 2014 at 01:03
So, not the type of rifle carried in the pictured incident. Got it.
Ty Barr July 31st, 2014 at 16:51
An assault rifle is actually a weapon capable of full-auto fire. What these people are carrying is what politicians claim as assault weapons. Termed by them to try and garner support against guns as something extra dangerous due to some asthetic characteristics that do not effect function or capability. IE – a handle on top to carry, pistol grip, bayonet mount etc.
Actual assualt rifles are military use and available to people only with fedeal permits. The vast majority of people do not own these and they are not the people in these demonstrations.
Bennet Deliduka July 29th, 2014 at 15:18
Andy, with very few exceptions it is illegal for the average citizen to own an “assault rifle”
the weapons that are commonly carried by those in the “open carry” community are Rifles that are sometimes referred to as “assault style weapons”. These are semi-automatic, just like every double action pistol since Colt made the first one…
I am a proponent of responsible gun ownership. This includes insuring firearms are secured at all times and treated with the care and respect that any potentially hazardous object should be treated.
THX-1138 July 29th, 2014 at 15:42
I wouldn’t really want to be in a store if a group of people had Bowie knives and axes strapped to their backs either. It’s not so much the guns as it is groups of people whose arms training is in serious doubt carrying weaponry in public.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 15:58
So then don’t go into the store! You are free to make that decision yourself! And if you are worried about people carrying weapons than that’s your problem, not everyone else’s.
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:33
How do you know if they are just exercising their 2nd Amendment right or if it’s a gun nut bat shit crazy person? You don’t until the bullets start killing people and then it’s too late.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 20:43
Do you still want a response from me despite my ignorance?
“Joe get you head out of your ass. You’re just ignorant.”
Martina Patrick July 29th, 2014 at 17:44
The thing is, there are many, many people like THX-1138 so it’s going to be the store’s problem. Thank you for your concern.
Joe Kendall July 30th, 2014 at 16:16
To be quite frank, I don’t think the majority of customers care, or is even aware of what a store’s weapons policy is. I will give you this, that if some people were offended by the demonstrators, that those people will be less likely to return. So yes some business will be lost to those people, no doubt.
kkseattle July 30th, 2014 at 23:32
Until now, most gun owners didn’t feel the compunction to act like antisocial, attention-grabbing idiots by strapping rifles to themselves when they go to a local store or restaurant. If this keeps happening, you can absolutely guarantee that virtually all stores and restaurants will ban these morons. (Is that what gun owners really want?) These, after all, are the establishments that are punished every year by so-called conservatives for waging a war on Christmas by wishing their patrons happy holidays.
Joe Kendall July 31st, 2014 at 14:57
You can bet that a complete company ban on firearms will hurt business more than it helps. A ban on open display of firearms? I think patrons could live with that.
THX-1138 July 30th, 2014 at 15:35
Isn’t that what I just said? Perhaps you thought my comment was directed at you, or perhaps other open carry advocates. It was not. It is a position that wish I to make known to businesses that support open carry in their stores. Perhaps they can increase profits by catering to crowds of people who go about with obvious weaponry in view. My guess is that it’s my money (and those of like minds) that they would rather pursue. I own two successful businesses and I have a large family. Losing me as a customer might not have any impact but I am fairly certain that my sentiment is the majority, and that wouldn’t be good to any businesses bottom line.
Bennet Deliduka July 29th, 2014 at 17:51
I agree… wearing an AR-15, a Hunting Rifle (especially out of season) or a Machete to a dining establishment (where harvesting your own meat is not considered ‘the norm’ does call into question the mental state of the individual who believe that it is prudent and necessary to be armed in public…
I’m perfectly comfortable around firearms (grew up in a house with NO TOY GUNS. (all the guns were REAL) and somehow never ended up playing with them… or shooting a sibling… or feeling the need to carry one openly in public.
Do I carry a concealed firearm? sometimes.
Why?
sometimes I feel like it, sometimes I’m traveling to/from the range and I feel more comfortable with the gun under my control than leaving it un-supervised in a locked automobile even when hidden from view.
I am responsible for my guns at all times… that is a responsibility I take very seriously. I don’t want to be filing a theft report and trying to explain how one of my firearms is now “missing” or worse yet, finding out that one was used (accidentally or otherwise) to injure an innocent person.
Personally… any group that feels the need to walk around armed needs to closely evaluate the nature of the fear they experience…
Kevin Bruce July 30th, 2014 at 02:59
so much win in this thread. i wish more responsible gun owners were as articulate as you.
i have not talke CC classes but have taken hunter safety. it is a similar problem there where idiot hunters ruin hunting for those who are responsible. i am just lucky i have private land to hunt on rather than deal with the crazies on the public lands.
THX-1138 July 30th, 2014 at 15:28
And that is where I agree. I own guns myself. But of course since I’m not all “Rah rah let’s go to town with our guns on our back” I must be some hippy freak. I have known many folks who carry concealed weapons and for each and every one of them I knew what their motivations are: protection from perceived threats. I work in a line of business that put’s me in threatening situations and I have from time to time made sure that I was armed. On one occasion it ensured my own safety. I have to call into question the intelligence and rationality of people who feel compelled to go parading around with guns on their back. It’s nothing more than trying to puff out your chest and show your alleged manliness. And that is juvenile and borderline dangerous behavior.
angelfire July 29th, 2014 at 17:32
Thing is….how do you know the good guys from the nuts? You don’t. Best to get out quick and hope you’re wrong but be glad when the crazy ass starts killing.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:21
No-one has been carrying ‘assault rifles’.
nitridr July 29th, 2014 at 05:40
I am with this writer. If the establishment is so unsafe that people need to arm themselves to be there, then it is so unsafe for me to be there also. I do not need to be in unsafe environments. It is a problem the establishment must make if they want to allow patrons to frequent their establishment with weapons or NOT. So the risk is to the establishment for any loss caused by those that feel unsafe. This would not be theft as I left due to unsafe environment. I am not obligated to pay for anything when the establishment is part of making me feel unsafe.
nitridr July 29th, 2014 at 05:40
I am with this writer. If the establishment is so unsafe that people need to arm themselves to be there, then it is so unsafe for me to be there also. I do not need to be in unsafe environments. It is a problem the establishment must make if they want to allow patrons to frequent their establishment with weapons or NOT. So the risk is to the establishment for any loss caused by those that feel unsafe. This would not be theft as I left due to unsafe environment. I am not obligated to pay for anything when the establishment is part of making me feel unsafe.
pjm19606 July 29th, 2014 at 11:15
Love reading the posts from all the gun nuts! Fact is, all your cherished firearms would never save you if I had a reason to take you down. You would NEVER see me coming. This renders all gun owners potential killers!
felix72 July 29th, 2014 at 11:36
Tell the restaurant owner you’re a Philosopher as your walking out and everything will be ok. Then the gun owners say the same thing as they walk out and suddenly the restaurant goes under. This is philosophical dine and dash.
Nicole Girard July 30th, 2014 at 15:35
Or just don’t and leave.
felix72 July 29th, 2014 at 11:36
Tell the restaurant owner you’re a Philosopher as your walking out and everything will be ok. Then the gun owners say the same thing as they walk out and suddenly the restaurant goes under. This is philosophical dine and dash.
Nik July 30th, 2014 at 15:35
Or just don’t and leave.
yannaro July 29th, 2014 at 11:49
Big guns, little…….
PavePusher December 4th, 2014 at 11:29
…need to cry and whine about imagined fears on the internet.
Finish your thoughts, please. Incomplete sentences are soooo untidy.
yannaro December 4th, 2014 at 13:31
I have no fears, imagined or otherwise. That’s one of the reasons I don’t need to carry a gun, because I’m not paranoid. What can I say to someone who doesn’t “get” it regarding the unfinished sentence.
yannaro July 29th, 2014 at 11:49
Big guns, little…….
PavePusher December 4th, 2014 at 12:29
…need to cry and whine about imagined fears on the internet.
Finish your thoughts, please. Incomplete sentences are soooo untidy.
yannaro December 4th, 2014 at 14:31
I have no fears, imagined or otherwise. That’s one of the reasons I don’t need to carry a gun, because I’m not paranoid. What can I say to someone who doesn’t “get” it regarding the unfinished sentence.
THX-1138 July 29th, 2014 at 15:32
I have witnessed people in department stores in my area carrying their firearms openly. I informed the workers in the store that I left my cart with items for purchase in the aisle, gave them a description, and was taking my family out of the store immediately. I didn’t run or act like I had a bee in my shorts. I then called the cops and let them know that there was a man in the store with a gun strapped to his side and gave them a description. And then I left. The store missed out on about $100 of mine and I never returned. You protest with a gun on your back and I’ll protest with my $$$.
Joe Kendall July 29th, 2014 at 15:58
I support your right to do so.
Patty Ramirez July 29th, 2014 at 17:57
Good for you!
fentoozler July 29th, 2014 at 18:23
Wow, what a baby.
THX-1138 July 30th, 2014 at 15:19
Wow, what a moron.
PavePusher August 3rd, 2014 at 23:21
You delicate flower, you.
PavePusher December 4th, 2014 at 11:28
Your unreasoned fear and bigotry are noted.
THX-1138 December 4th, 2014 at 15:00
Your timely response has been noted as well. Happy Holidays!
John Crawford December 28th, 2014 at 16:46
The person with his firearm is also voting with his wallet. It’s nice to not have to bump into one more crazed shopper.
Semper fi
THX-1138 January 6th, 2015 at 12:04
Wal Mart is all yours.