NRA blasts Open Carry Texas after San Antonio incidents

a reply to: macman

Another key thing to remember here is that the restaurant is PRIVATE PROPERTY .. your right to open carry ends at the door if they decide it does.. A lot of businesses have strict no weapons rules.. You can be asked to leave, and if you refuse to leave then they have the right to contact authorities to HAVE you removed..

originally posted by: miniatus

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 )

Exactly. What the hell do you need an assault rifle for in a restaurant? Are you going to shoot the top of the ketchup bottle off? I've eaten at a lot of diners in the US and I can tell you that if I saw an assault rifle in any of them I'd presume that it's a robbery and then try and get my wife under the table whilst I rang 911 and gibbered with panic.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

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.

No, by all means, comment away.

Just realize that your voice doesn't mean much, as you are not a US citizen.

Your uneducated opinion is just that.

But, opinion away.

a reply to: miniatus

Yes, as addressed to another member, I am fully aware of this.

And what is your point?

The topic is that the NRA first blasted, then backtracked their blast about people open carrying firearms.

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

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.

No, by all means, comment away.

Just realize that your voice doesn't mean much, as you are not a US citizen.

Your uneducated opinion is just that.

But, opinion away.

I see. So - common sense in the USA is a different type from the sort we have in the UK. How interesting. Let's go back to the picture that's been going around. It's legal to carry those guns in public in the US. Is it a good idea to go into a restaurant wielding the guns like the twits in that picture are? Is it sensible gun practice? Would it alarm people? Would it put people off from going in? I'd go with no, no, yes and yes.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I like the use of the word "twit" to describe fellow American's. Thanks for that.

Now, what were you saying about "common sense"?

Yeah, seeing again, that we have a right, and people are exercising that right, the issue rests with those that are more fearful of someone with a rifle and think that their "fear" trumps a right being exercised.

If you or others fear a US citizen with a firearm, maybe you and those scared people should stay home.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I like the use of the word "twit" to describe fellow American's. Thanks for that.

Now, what were you saying about "common sense"?

Yeah, seeing again, that we have a right, and people are exercising that right, the issue rests with those that are more fearful of someone with a rifle and think that their "fear" trumps a right being exercised.

If you or others fear a US citizen with a firearm, maybe you and those scared people should stay home.

??? My wife's Oregonian family uses the word 'twit' as well. I've heard it on US TV. But you seem to think that I'm Bertie Wooster or something?
We're not discussing the right to bear arms. Tell me again - do you think that it's sensible to turn up in a restaurant with an AR-15 or something else like that? What's the point???? You're turning up and scaring people just to make your point? How childish is that? How immature? You put inverted comments around the word fear - what's to stop people from leaping to the conclusion that the restaurant is being robbed?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

??? My wife's Oregonian family uses the word 'twit' as well. I've heard it on US TV.

And that means what to me?
So, US TV is your source?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
But you seem to think that I'm Bertie Wooster or something?

Umm sure I guess???

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
We're not discussing the right to bear arms.

Yeah actually we are. You seem to want to argue using a platform that removes the very very obvious thing of...drum roll please......... US citizens have the right to bear arms and can exercise that right.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Tell me again - do you think that it's sensible to turn up in a restaurant with an AR-15 or something else like that?

Ah the use of the term "Sensible" again.
It is "Sensible" that I or anyone else can exercise the rights that we have. If we can't exercise the right, then we don't have the right.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
What's the point???? You're turning up and scaring people just to make your point?

No. People are scared of their own accord. These people did not force them to do anything. They chose to be scared.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
How childish is that? How immature?

What, to expect someone to understand laws and get over being scared of fellow citizens exercising a right??

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
You put inverted comments around the word fear - what's to stop people from leaping to the conclusion that the restaurant is being robbed?

Nothing stops them. They are free to think that.

Maybe, instead of acting upon a fear, they take in and analyze the situation as a whole. Or, know the laws.

Nah.....let's not expect people to know and understand the laws that govern them. Lets have groups like MDA and such tell us what the laws should mean or be changed to mean.

a reply to: macman

Have I stated ANYWHERE that I want to see the Second Amendments repealed? No, I have not. I am little bemused that so much anger tends to be stirred up by this topic, but no, I have not called for it to be repealed.
You seem to be bemused yourself that anyone would see an armed person in a restaurant and be scared. Well, I've got some news for you - yes, they're going to be scared. Would they all be familiar with weapons like that? No! Why should they? What about the tourists, who are automatically going to panic and call 911? What are you going to do - give them a lecture on what it's like to be American? Or even laugh at them for any perceived weakness?
Surely you should arm yourself if you are a) hunting or b) are in a situation where you might have to protect yourself. Why in hell's name would you need an assault rifle in a restaurant? Why? We both come from countries where we are lucky enough to have the right of free speech and the right to vote. Should we exercise those rights at the drop of a hat in a restaurant? Should we go to the nearest Wendy's and announce that we're holding an immediate plebiscite on what colour hat the mayor should wear? No, of course not, not unless you want to get turfed out on your ear by the annoyed management!
What the hell is wrong with people having a sense of proportion and using their common sense???

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
What the hell is wrong with people having a sense of proportion and using their common sense???

What's that like the 35th time you've use that term?

It's great because it doesnt mean anything but everybody who uses it think it means only what they want it to mean and wields it like an absolute.

Love it.

originally posted by: thisguyrighthere

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
What the hell is wrong with people having a sense of proportion and using their common sense???

What's that like the 35th time you've use that term?

It's great because it doesnt mean anything but everybody who uses it think it means only what they want it to mean and wields it like an absolute.

Love it.

???? I thought that there was a relatively common base for the phrase, like the inadvisability of juggling with chainsaws or something.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

???? I thought that there was a relatively common base for the phrase, like the inadvisability of juggling with chainsaws or something.

See? You got it.

ETA: I suppose I should flesh this response out a bit.

The smaller and closer the group the more a thing like "common sense" seems to exist. The further and more spread out that group the less a thing like "common sense" seems to exist.

There is no universally applicable "common sense". It just doesnt exist. Certainly not the way you are using it some 3,000 miles away from the poster you are demanding agree with your concept of "common sense."

As a close to home example see "gun-free" zones. Two people in the same town regarding the same "gun-free" zone. One believes it is obvious "common sense" to not allow guns in said zone while the other believes it is obvious "common sense" that a sign won't stop a criminal.

Both are working with "common sense."

Oh, folks juggle chainsaws all the time if you didn't already know that. It's a common act. Common sense? Maybe.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Have I stated ANYWHERE that I want to see the Second Amendments repealed? No, I have not. I am little bemused that so much anger tends to be stirred up by this topic, but no, I have not called for it to be repealed.

Well, that is a load off my mind. Glad to here that a foreign national hasn't called for the repealing of a US law.

But, no need to repeal it though. Just inject buzz words like "Sensible gun control", "Common sense" and such to force people to not be able to exercise the right.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
You seem to be bemused yourself that anyone would see an armed person in a restaurant and be scared.

I am neither.
The person has the freedom to be scared or not scared. I don't look to control others, unlike those that push for people to not exercise a right.
Be scared, be frightened. It is not my problem.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Well, I've got some news for you - yes, they're going to be scared.

Well, good for them I guess. They have fallen for the Progressive trap of being scared on someone with a firearm, who, doesn't make any action other then walking in.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Would they all be familiar with weapons like that? No! Why should they?

So, ignorance is the excuse. Very interesting.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
What about the tourists, who are automatically going to panic and call 911? What are you going to do - give them a lecture on what it's like to be American? Or even laugh at them for any perceived weakness?

How about the operator inform the uneducated person that it is lawful for a US citizen to carry a firearm, or is that too much to ask? Is the frightened tourist not able to understand and accept laws in the foreign land they are visiting?
Again, you pitch ignorance as your example.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Surely you should arm yourself if you are a) hunting or b) are in a situation where you might have to protect yourself. Why in hell's name would you need an assault rifle in a restaurant? Why?

Because we have the right to do so. Don't need any other explanation than that.
Why must people speak their minds as a street preacher? Because they have the right to do so.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
We both come from countries where we are lucky enough to have the right of free speech and the right to vote. Should we exercise those rights at the drop of a hat in a restaurant? Should we go to the nearest Wendy's and announce that we're holding an immediate plebiscite on what colour hat the mayor should wear? No, of course not, not unless you want to get turfed out on your ear by the annoyed management!

You have the right to do so, and I do not work to control this.
Of course, with private property rights, Wendy's can ask you to leave.
Should we exercise those rights???? Ahhh yeah. I think that is the whole point of having said rights.


What the hell is wrong with people having a sense of proportion and using their common sense???

a reply to: macman

I suspect that we are not going to be able to agree on this as we are coming at this from two different perspectives. I think that you are failing to understand the opposing viewpoint. Yes, those people can legally take their assault rifles into the restaurant. Personally speaking I think that doing so is utterly ridiculous and that the management were right to ask them to leave at once. Just because you have the right to do something does not mean that you should do it, especially if it frightens people. Wasn't there also a case where a complete moron was seen walking around in a car park by a kids baseball pitch, simply because he had the right to do so? Why? The parents were freaked, the kids were scared.
Just because you have the right to bear arms, that doesn't mean that you need - need - to do it all the time! Where's the need for a gun in a restaurant?
Why are you mocking people who would be frightened by the arrival of people with guns? Why are you so sneering about outside viewpoints about this?
My brother in law is a former deputy in Oregon who likes his guns. His view on that photo? I'll give you a direct quote: "Assholes who are trying to compensate for a shortage of something."

I wish someone would have set off a ton of firecrackers

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

I suspect that we are not going to be able to agree on this as we are coming at this from two different perspectives.

Yes.
Me being a US citizen, and knowing the US based laws.

You, not being a US citizen.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
I think that you are failing to understand the opposing viewpoint.

Failing to understand and not agreeing with are 2 mutually separate things.
Just because you ask really really nicely, does not mean you get what you want.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Yes, those people can legally take their assault rifles into the restaurant.

Great. You are starting to get it.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Personally speaking I think that doing so is utterly ridiculous and that the management were right to ask them to leave at once.

And that is grand. Good for you.
The Owner or representative of the place has the right to ask them to leave. You know, discriminate against those that are exercising a right.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Just because you have the right to do something does not mean that you should do it, especially if it frightens people.

People being frightened are the problems of those frightened people.
I am sure that people are frightened of airplanes. That does not mean airplanes should cease to exist, or fly around.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Wasn't there also a case where a complete moron was seen walking around in a car park by a kids baseball pitch, simply because he had the right to do so? Why? The parents were freaked, the kids were scared.

And what was this the "moron" doing? Are you sure he wasn't a "twit"? I mean, moron is just so harsh.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Just because you have the right to bear arms, that doesn't mean that you need - need - to do it all the time!

People don't need to do a lot of things, shall we go over those as well?
If someone has the right to do this, they have the right to do so. Very simple.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Where's the need for a gun in a restaurant?

Why does someone need to have $200 shoes?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Why are you mocking people who would be frightened by the arrival of people with guns? Why are you so sneering about outside viewpoints about this?

Who is mocking them???
I find it repulsive that due to ignorance, people think that their fears trump a granted right.
And this differing viewpoint is like someone stating 2+2=Crayon.
I don't go through life worrying about what other people fear or do or think.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
My brother in law is a former deputy in Oregon who likes his guns. His view on that photo? I'll give you a direct quote: "Assholes who are trying to compensate for a shortage of something."

That is nice. He is aware of the correlation between his "assholes" comment and the sphincter itself?

And I do value the thoughts of a Former Deputy in Oregon. Any reason why it is "former" and not "Active"?

a reply to: macman

Can I ask if you really think that those two people in that restaurant holding those guns were acting responsibly? Did they need to have those guns there?

EDIT: my brother in law had a disagreement with the incoming chief of police (who he knew to be a moron) and was forced out. I love America, but why do you elect policemen? Not that we have a better system, after looking at some of the idiots who have screwed things up here.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Can I ask if you really think that those two people in that restaurant holding those guns were acting responsibly? Did they need to have those guns there?

SO, you want me to think like a Progressive?
It isn't my call to judge if they are being responsible.
But, responsible is having the safety on.
And again, There is no requirement to address Need for a Right being exercised.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
EDIT: my brother in law had a disagreement with the incoming chief of police (who he knew to be a moron) and was forced out. I love America, but why do you elect policemen? Not that we have a better system, after looking at some of the idiots who have screwed things up here.

So, what made the new Chief a Moron. Was it not sharing the same view of citizens being armed and exercising their rights?

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

Can I ask if you really think that those two people in that restaurant holding those guns were acting responsibly? Did they need to have those guns there?

SO, you want me to think like a Progressive?
It isn't my call to judge if they are being responsible.
But, responsible is having the safety on.
And again, There is no requirement to address Need for a Right being exercised.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
EDIT: my brother in law had a disagreement with the incoming chief of police (who he knew to be a moron) and was forced out. I love America, but why do you elect policemen? Not that we have a better system, after looking at some of the idiots who have screwed things up here.

So, what made the new Chief a Moron. Was it not sharing the same view of citizens being armed and exercising their rights?

I'm sorry, but asking if those two men needed to bring assault rifles to a restaurant is thinking like a progressive? Surely responsible gun ownership means fitting the right to bear arms to the circumstances of the immediate situation? By your argument gun owners should take their weapons everywhere - the swimming pool, the ocean, the local bars, hotels? The logical extension of your argument is that you should even take your assault rifle to bed. Are some of these areas a good idea to have a gun with you? No. Should they think that going to the local square to hear a band fits the need? Why would they need a gun there? It's not a toy, it's a deadly weapon. Every day people in America - and elsewhere around the world - get killed because of sloppy handing of firearms. Why am I, a Brit, having to point out the need for responsible handling of guns to you? You might be the safest person ever when it comes to your firearm - but how is everyone around you supposed to know that? Telepathy?
As for my brother in law, why do you think that he disagreed with the incoming chief over the Second Amendment? He didn't. He'd met him before and knew that he was very photogenic but also a complete moron. If I recall correctly the chief was later dismissed for abuse of his powers, proving my brother in law to have been 100% right.

a reply to: macman

If someone was in the restaurant concealing a handgun and someone walked in with a riffle, and the person with the handgun turned around and shot them in the head, they would be justified in doing so if they claimed it was self defense right, if they felt their life was in jeopardy? Lets say the person with the riffle was wearing a hood.