Disgusted over idiotic gun advocacy comments

You claim that you do not want to offend anyone but by stating that 'most' firearms owners 'dont seem to have 2 brain cells to rub together' lumps most of us (by your very definition) into that category so I am not buying your lame mea culpa.

You took an off the rack comment and have felt like it was tailored just for you.
If you choose to lump yourself in with my definition of most thats your choice.
Someone somewhere will be offended by anything you say so whether you buy my "lame mea culpa" or not is irrelevant to me.

Stay on topic and harden up a bit mate

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
You took an off the rack comment and have felt like it was tailored just for you.

It was not 'off the rack' and was the premise of your post, that 'most' firearms owners do not have 'more than two brain cells'.

If you choose to lump yourself in with my definition of most thats your choice.

I was not the one doing the lumping, that was you.

Stay on topic and harden up a bit mate

Addressing your over-generalizations is on target.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You do seem to enjoy judging people and the art of broad-brush painting, so much so that I think you may be the Pablo Picasso of fact less over-generalizations.

I think Ill do what you have, Ill ignore most of what you say, deliberately misinterpret it and then respond.

I thank you for your compliment comparing me to a master artist
And here I was thinking you didnt like me

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Here's the problem I have with people who post two examples of people (not even the most egregious examples) openly carrying firearms in states that have open-carry allowances in their laws--they are doing nothing wrong.

With that fact in mind, there are two sides to each story:

(1) The political climate concerning the 2nd Amendment and carry laws in individual states is getting to a fever pitch, and guys like the "Rambo" and the "Doc" are doing something that they see as a reminder to all individuals who see them--it's legal to do this, and just because they are doesn't mean that anyone is in any more danger than if they did not have the weapons at all. No one will get shot or physically injured, because the person with the rifle has it slung over their shoulder without a finger near the trigger. I'm willing to bet in both instances that the weapons were on safe, too.

So, I can see where they're coming from--even knowing that it causes backlash--because it shows that there are gun owners/advocates out there capable of owning and possessing firearms in public without a damn thing illegal happening to anyone.

(2) The people who are upset over this to the point of flipping out are just as big of a piece of the problem puzzle as are the gun owners doing this. The reason they are so prone to getting upset and scared over this is because it's not a part of normal life--you don't generally walk/drive around town and see people with rifles strolling past your college. I get that--really, I do--but does that mean that people need to call the police, who then show up and put these people through lengthy and costly legal battles for doing something completely legal? I would submit that they do not.

So, I can see where this side is coming from as well--it's not a normal thing, and it's a deadly tool/weapon strapped to someone's back in the eral of 24-hour media mass-shooting coverage. But, this fear and (most times) ignorance that this is 100% legal to do on the gun owner's side is what leads to the problems and the sensationalism over these instances.

--------------------------

I don't fault either side of the coin, here. I understand where the Rambos and the Docs are coming from, but I also understand the sensitive nature of things for those ignorant to gun laws and leary of people with guns. But, I don't feel like the ignorant/leary population should win out over someone exercising their rights in a peaceful way. Both of your examples scream out "legal" and "harmless," yet they are used in this instance as such terrible things.

I simply just don't understand why the whiners in society get treated like those with legal and moral superiority just because their feelings get hurt by someone carrying a weapon.

BUT, with that said, I carry a weapon almost every day--concealed--and I wouldn't do what these people did, but it doesn't boil down to a "responsibility" problem, as you state, but a respect issue. I respect that some, if not the majority, of people are nervous around people with weapons. I know for a fact I handle them safely, holster them properly, and am trained to use them well, but not everyone is. I get nervous at a gun range when people I've never shot with are around me, so I really do get it.

The conundrum is that both sides need to respect the other. People need to respect gun owners'/carriers' rights and legalities when it comes to carrying a weapon in public (which means drop the ignorance and know the laws), and the owners/carriers need to respect the fact that not everyone feels safe when they do that--regardless of intentions--and that sometimes it's better to conceal than reveal.

Plus, who want to show a possible bad guy with a gun that you're the first one they should try to take out in an attack? For that reason alone, I don't do what these guys do.

Best Regards.

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

Ignore your comments that desiring to own a firearm was a sickness.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I'm really struggling to understand the argument you're making. In the NLBS thread, you expressed your concern that the actions of these idiots are going to lead to a public outcry for stricter open carry laws in states that still have them.

Are you suggesting that in order to preserve the right to open carry around schools or airports, people shouldn't open carry around schools or airports?

a reply to: Bone75

Every time there a mass shooting the gun advocates say, "It's not the guns. Do something about mental illness." Well, I don't think it shows a sound mind to be pacing back and forth in front of a school with a rifle and a vest. Taking a firearm into an airport is just plain stupid.

a reply to: intrepid

Agreeing with you on a gun subject make me feel so......dirty. But there it is.

The average citizen, gun advocate or not, probably feels uneasy with someone carrying an AR-15 in front of a school. Blame it on the news, human nature, whatever, but if it make you cringe and squint, then maybe it isn't the best way to exercise those rights. I think it's about respect for others. If someone got in my face with an anti-gun sign and wanted to tell me how evil I am, it might piss me off. Luckily, I would find a way to be nowhere near that guy. That way, I don't have to worry about him at all.

originally posted by: network dude
Agreeing with you on a gun subject make me feel so......dirty. But there it is.

I have a wire brush ready for your Karen Silkwood scrub down.

originally posted by: Bone75
Are you suggesting that in order to preserve the right to open carry around schools or airports, people shouldn't open carry around schools or airports?

In the first place…

Are you suggesting that it's appropriate to open-carry high-powered weapons while loitering around a school or airport. And that doing so ensures preservation of laws that allow it?


To answer your question -- the over-arching point is that gun advocates need to exercise both restraint and responsibility in public-facing protests. Taking into account that a large number of people will be shocked by someone with a rifle in the street across from a high school, and not doing so, is restraint and responsibility. Instead of seeking shock-factor, he could have volunteered to speak on gun safety and gun rights at the school, which is not only restraint and responsibility, but logical and productive.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
To answer your question -- the over-arching point is that gun advocates need to exercise both restraint and responsibility in public-facing protests. Taking into account that a large number of people will be shocked by someone with a rifle in the street across from a high school, and not doing so, is restraint and responsibility. Instead of seeking shock-factor, he could have volunteered to speak on gun safety and gun rights at the school, which is not only restraint and responsibility, but logical and productive.

I agree with your sentiments. People will be more likely to understand and accept your viewpoint if you are not acting like a jackass.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

The important thing to remember, is that having rights means that one also, automatically, gains responsibilities. The right to speak freely, comes with a responsibility to speak for best effect, and with a purpose greater than purely to aggravate ones neighbours.

The right to keep and bear arms, comes with a responsibility to do so with common sense, and with respect for other human beings.

Parading oneself around, outside a school, with a rifle at port arms, and a sidearm hanging of each hip, just to prove a point, is an abandonment of the responsibility that comes with the right. It also increases the likelihood that the right one has now, will be eroded and eventually taken away.

The people who do these things, deploy their rights, without taking responsibility in hand as well, and that is a mistake which they MUST learn to avoid in future, for the sake of their precious rights.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

Are you suggesting that it's appropriate to open-carry high-powered weapons while loitering around a school or airport. And that doing so ensures preservation of laws that allow it?

Did you miss the part where I called these guys idiots? Your entire response is indicative of someone who's preparing to run for public office and is scared to take a position one way or the other. To me its simple, either people should be allowed to open carry around schools and airports or they shouldn't.

I say they shouldn't, and I happen to love my Bushmaster. Concealed carry is a different story though.

a reply to: TrueBrit

a reply to: network dude

Thanks!?

I think?

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

As soon as the government puts its guns away then I will be anti gun. Until then we keep the balance. The government uses its guns to kill millions. What part of that does not scare you and why?!?

originally posted by: Bone75
Did you miss the part where I called these guys idiots?

You're question in the form of a position, made your position unclear: "Are you suggesting that in order to preserve the right to open carry around schools or airports, people shouldn't open carry around schools or airports?"

Being in Arizona. I'm in favor of open carry, not open stupid.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
Thanks!?
I think?

I have a spare wire brush. I think you may need it.

originally posted by: LoneGunMan
As soon as the government puts its guns away then I will be anti gun.

The problem with that position of advocates of broad gun rights, is that the balance of armament that existed to some extent when the second amendment was written in 1791, no longer exists. It's no longer primarily muskets on both "sides."

While I'm generally on the side of reasonably broad gun rights, I don't see the "necessary to the security of a free State" as valid any more: in the context of an armed citizenry to protect against a tyrannical government.

We have a tyrannical government, and the second amendment was no help. That point is moot.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
Take the 2 Morons linked in the OP for example, I doubt very much that either of them are terribly bright

One was "bright" enough to be a medical doctor, that takes a few brain cells.

I think the issue is more common sense and responsibility.

Has it occurred to you that maybe it's really an issue of perception and fear? What they did wasn't illegal, it's just that some people are so scared of their own shadow that they freak out at the sight of a gun. I could have just as easily seen a person with a gun, see that they aren't on a shooting spree, and go on about my business without giving it a second thought.

A person carrying a gun around a school? OH NO! Panic! He's going to kill someone! Same situation, but the person is wearing a uniform. No big deal, carry on.

Somebody at a protest with a rifle slung on their shoulder? What an idiot! He's obviously there just to start trouble! A line of cops pointing rifles at protesters? Well, that's just normal. No need for concern.

If seeing someone carrying a gun frightens you, just imagine they are wearing a cop's uniform. See if that alleviates your fear. Of course, for some people, that would just heighten the fear.

--------------------

To be honest, though, I'm guilty of the same sort of prejudice. When I see someone with their pants down to their knees, more tattoos than skin, and holes the size of quarters in their earlobes, I think to myself, "What an idiot." Sure, it's legal, but good luck in the job market.