NRA blasts Open Carry Texas after San Antonio incidents

a reply to: DelMarvel

The photo shows a good example of a bad example...

The two people in the photo cause problems for the normal gun owners.

In every village you have idiots.

The words banishing a weapon comes to mind as they are close to pointing a weapon and not just carrying one.

The short dude is holding his weapon in the low ready and the other is not.

If either of them were to point the muzzle toward me when I was a cop, I would have shot him.

It is a fine line between bravery and stupidity.

The one is very close to that line!

originally posted by: waltwillis


The two people in the photo cause problems for the normal gun owners.

It looks like all these Open Carry Texas protestors are causing problems for gun owners. They have already limited the number of businesses which will permit weapons on the premises.

originally posted by: waltwillis

If either of them were to point the muzzle toward me when I was a cop, I would have shot him.

I think that's one major issue with these protests. Anyone with a CC permit in the restaurant, those who are unarmed and law enforcement would all be prudent to be on alert in a situation like that so the situation escalates to a certain degree simply by them walking into the building.

Maybe you could answer a gun question for me? There is a news photo of the Home Depot protest of a woman holding two children with a long gun slung across her back. It is not facing directly down but points out an angle. I've seen this described elsewhere as a dangerous violation of the protocol for handling weapons.

Is that true?

FYI, NRA renegs: Article with video

Yesterday, NRA-ILA jefe and NRA Veep-apparent Chris Cox took to Cam and Company to issue a retraction. Cox called the alert as a “mistake.” “It shouldn’t have happened,” Cox said, blaming the statement as a “staffer’s personal opinion.” “It was a poor word choice,” the NRA-ILA Director added.

But goes on to say the carrying long guns into restaurants is still bad PR.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: waltwillis


The two people in the photo cause problems for the normal gun owners.

It looks like all these Open Carry Texas protestors are causing problems for gun owners. They have already limited the number of businesses which will permit weapons on the premises.

originally posted by: waltwillis

If either of them were to point the muzzle toward me when I was a cop, I would have shot him.

I think that's one major issue with these protests. Anyone with a CC permit in the restaurant, those who are unarmed and law enforcement would all be prudent to be on alert in a situation like that so the situation escalates to a certain degree simply by them walking into the building.

Maybe you could answer a gun question for me? There is a news photo of the Home Depot protest of a woman holding two children with a long gun slung across her back. It is not facing directly down but points out an angle. I've seen this described elsewhere as a dangerous violation of the protocol for handling weapons.

Is that true?

YES! The price for being stupid is prison, but that should not be applied to all responsible gun owners!

a reply to: links234

Socialist and Progressives will never get it. No one here expects you to get it either.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: links234

Socialist and Progressives will never get it. No one here expects you to get it either.

Republicans and right wingers don't either. This one isn't about your right to drive a tank or fly an Apache attack helicopter down the main drag but common sense and manners when wanting to parade the right to bear arms.

Edit: parade because that is what this is, nothing more. An ego trip with a long gun and not in any way a protest with resonance. Before you go questioning my post motives, read previous retorts and you will see I am balanced on the issue — generally. When the world looks on what does it see?

a reply to: LarryLove

Ahhh, the "common sense" argument. Pardon me while my eyes roll all the way up the the top of my head.

I either have a right that is exercisable, or I don't.

And....and the NRA seems to have changed their stance on this statement and retracted it.

So.........maybe call the MDA and the Ex-Monsanto mouthpiece for some more group think.

a reply to: macman

No, keep on wanting the right to fly your Apache on the weekends and tank to work. Loggerhead attitudes prevail and will if the Team America protest stance to gun ownership continues. The world is no longer ruled by one countries rules and times have changed. We all got to adjust to that.

Edit: and by the look of your avatar I don't want to hear the whole war/soldier rhetoric in response. It is tiresome.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: LarryLove

Ahhh, the "common sense" argument. Pardon me while my eyes roll all the way up the the top of my head.

I either have a right that is exercisable, or I don't.

And....and the NRA seems to have changed their stance on this statement and retracted it.

So.........maybe call the MDA and the Ex-Monsanto mouthpiece for some more group think.

Sorry, are you seriously saying that the idiots in the picture posted are in any way shape or form sensible? They walked into a restaurant with assault rifles just because they had the legal right. Forget the fact that people freaked out, forget the fact that I'd been there I'd have automatically assumed that they were there to rob the place and would have majorly freaked out myself. Come off it, those people are taking things to the extreme.

originally posted by: LarryLove
a reply to: Asktheanimals

It is about perception. At least I keep hearing that across these boards and these egocentric acts do nothing but cast the cause in the wrong light. This exemplifies a particular moronic mindset not good PR.

Imagination is everything when it comes to making a point and that is what these gun "nuts" are doing.

That said, I think they are acting out of frustration with the push to take away the second article of the "Bill of Rights".

If it were not for the action of the left they would not need to react like fools.

If or when the left stops messing with the U.S. Constitution the angry defenders of the "Bill of Rights" will stop the protest.

Give it some thought as to who started this fight!

Preserve, Protect, and Defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies, Foreign and Domestic!

Read and understand the LAW and you may see who is in the right!

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: LarryLove

Ahhh, the "common sense" argument. Pardon me while my eyes roll all the way up the the top of my head.

I either have a right that is exercisable, or I don't.

Well, you obviously don't have a right that is exercisable on private property. Try standing in Chili's with a sign that says "the food here sucks" and see how far the first amendment gets you.

The "common sense" view of all this is that one national chain after another is banning the carrying of guns in their business. Seems to me this is only serving to limit gun owners' ability to exercise their rights.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

The "common sense" view of all this is that one national chain after another is banning the carrying of guns in their business. Seems to me this is only serving to limit gun owners' ability to exercise their rights.

Not exactly.

This is what Starbucks, Sonic and Chipotle have done:

"We are respectfully asking that customers not bring guns into our restaurants, unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel," the statement read.

So the most they'll do is ask you to leave. At that point if you do not leave you are trespassing but until they ask you to leave it's not an issue. Which means it will be up do the discretion of the management at any given location.

I should correct that, Starbucks' policy is even weaker. The corporate chain asks you do not bring a gun in but the same memo says employees should not ask anyone carrying to leave. So it's basically a null set.

Hardly a ban by any stretch.

Cool story bro.

I have not stated this is something for the NON-US citizen to consume, understand or even opine on.


Funny, as we can own and fly apaches and tanks and such.

And again, we have the right to Bear Arms. It is a right outlined in OUR documents. It is very clear for US.
It is a shame that you don't understand OUR laws and would like to apply YOUR outsider based feelings on what should happen inside of a country you have nothing to do with.

And what in the hell does

The world is no longer ruled by one countries rules and times have changed.

mean in regards to this?

Oh, I get it. You think that you get to inject YOUR stance on firearms into US concerns. How very nice.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Sorry, are you seriously saying that the idiots in the picture posted are in any way shape or form sensible? They walked into a restaurant with assault rifles just because they had the legal right.

So, we have move from the talking point of "common sense" to "sensible". You moved from MDA to Giffords speak.
I never said it was or it wasn't.
Sensible is not outlined, addressed or even mentioned in the 2nd.
I bet you can't tell me why "sensible" isn't? I will give you a hint. Sensible is subjective.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Forget the fact that people freaked out, forget the fact that I'd been there I'd have automatically assumed that they were there to rob the place and would have majorly freaked out myself. Come off it, those people are taking things to the extreme.

And people have no right not to be freaked out.
So, let me get this straight. These people have a right to bear arms, and exercise this right.
They should stop exercising said right, because you are freaked out.

Basically, people must act according to how you want them to act, so you are not made to feel freaked out.

WOW. The term narcissist comes to mind.

originally posted by: DelMarvel


Well, you obviously don't have a right that is exercisable on private property. Try standing in Chili's with a sign that says "the food here sucks" and see how far the first amendment gets you.

Ummmm, no, I do have a clear understanding of private property.
Chili's and Sonic, has the right to deny service to anyone. But, since several states have non discrimination laws in place, it appears that they might not be able to do this.
But, having been in LE and gone through Criminal Law, I do understand private property laws.
I have never stated that any business should not have the right to deny service and/or request they leave.

originally posted by: DelMarvel
The "common sense" view of all this is that one national chain after another is banning the carrying of guns in their business. Seems to me this is only serving to limit gun owners' ability to exercise their rights.

"Common Sense" huh...
And the snowball actions of this is displayed by what???? Chipotle asking a group to leave, due to Texas alcohol laws and MDA claiming a fake victory.
Or Sonic maybe?? How about Starbucks asking people to abide by local laws and would "prefer" that people not do this, not banning people out right.

Got anymore talking points you would like to throw out?
How about

Funny as the NRA has backtracked on their statement as well.

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Sorry, are you seriously saying that the idiots in the picture posted are in any way shape or form sensible? They walked into a restaurant with assault rifles just because they had the legal right.

So, we have move from the talking point of "common sense" to "sensible". You moved from MDA to Giffords speak.
I never said it was or it wasn't.
Sensible is not outlined, addressed or even mentioned in the 2nd.
I bet you can't tell me why "sensible" isn't? I will give you a hint. Sensible is subjective.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Forget the fact that people freaked out, forget the fact that I'd been there I'd have automatically assumed that they were there to rob the place and would have majorly freaked out myself. Come off it, those people are taking things to the extreme.

And people have no right not to be freaked out.
So, let me get this straight. These people have a right to bear arms, and exercise this right.
They should stop exercising said right, because you are freaked out.

Basically, people must act according to how you want them to act, so you are not made to feel freaked out.

WOW. The term narcissist comes to mind.

Right. So you want people to walk into churches and libraries and schools equipped with assault rifles??? Why can't people use common sense? Here in the UK it's still legal for an Englishman to kill me if I set foot in the city of Chester after dark, because I'm Welsh. Am I in any actual danger? Of course not. Should people walk into a restaurant with an assault rifle? Why would they need one there????

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Here in the UK

That is really all I needed to know.

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Here in the UK

That is really all I needed to know.

I see. So you think that we Brits cannot comment on this? Are we below your lofty standards? My wife is American by the way.

originally posted by: CB328

why is it a big deal?

It's a big deal because it brings embarrassment and ridicule to the gun lobby.

In a world where mass shootings take place, it's also a big deal because it can cause a public panic .. If I'm sitting in a restaurant to eat lunch with my family, I would be very on edge if someone came in with tactical weapons for no good reason whatsoever .. What normal person would think "Hey, lets go to eat.. don't forget to bring your weapons!"

I get it that it's a form of demonstration/protest but that doesn't help make everyone else at ease.. I can absolutely see how that could be disorderly conduct, or inciting panic which is also against the law ( at least where I live )