Anyone else have packs of armed dorks roaming wal-mart???

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Ask yourself what party would carry guns to a place they knew would get negative attention towards firearms and you will have your answer.

According to ATA it's people exercising their constitutional rights. So what do you think?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: JoshuaCox

How do you know they're fresh out of high school?

Good point. They could have dropped out years ago.

To me anything is more entertaining than walking around a store.

Could be it is their version of mall walking exercise.

a reply to: intrepid

Here's what I think. No fn gun owner that wants to keep their rights is going to walk around Wamart and scare people to help them keep them.

Get real.

2a, my a@@

This is a smear campaign

Should you be cool with your 17-20 year old circling Walmart for hours at midnight armed???

No sane person would, which is why ATS is fine with it.

a reply to: CB328

You guys equating gun owners to Trump fans because you are so social media influenced is what the insane takeaway from this thread is.

Haha, nope, and there's lots of guns and support for 'em in rural Western Wash., but then again I try to avoid Walmart. Maybe it's just your area.

a reply to: Z32Driver

It is/was a non-event. Definitely something worth noting if I was there, (I'd have been "armed" also, always am), but not worth publishing. The "dorks" did a good job of publishing themselves. In reality and by liberal, commie, socialist theory, these "kids/dorks" are are threat. To whom? They were carrying a machine in a holster. So what? "..., the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed ". That's the "law" and a "right".
What was the OP intent of calling them dorks? Because they "open carried"? At least they were being honest about it.
"Armed dorks"? Half the stuff on any shelf at a Wal-Mart can be a "weapon", let alone a Home Depot.
Sounds crazy doesn't it? At least the "dorks" were open about it.
A machine/weapon or any tool, is not evil by itself. It takes an operator with evil intent to operate it. Chainsaw? Butter knife? One cuts wood. One spreads butter. Or does only do that? How much fear are you willing to be subjected to? Before a "government" approved "social worker", that is "certified", puts butter on your toast?
I'm being ridiculous, for now.
This was/is a non-event, not worth mentioning. And it does nothing to defend freedom. For the OP or anyone else. Obviously the OP was disturbed by this. He/she/it shouldn't be.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: intrepid

Here's what I think. No fn gun owner that wants to keep their rights is going to walk around Wamart and scare people to help them keep them.

I read up on Constitutional Carry. They weren't breaking any laws. Were they idiots? Probably.

This is a smear campaign

Right. Because gun owners can't be idiots like everyone else. Pfft.

originally posted by: CB328

Should you be cool with your 17-20 year old circling Walmart for hours at midnight armed???

No sane person would, which is why ATS is fine with it.

So, we've gone from "dorks" to "stupid" to "insane" in only 6 pages here? Is that the level of sanity evaluation needed to strip them of their rights now that we have deemed them not sane for exercising their rights, and not breaking any laws?

And some wonder why we cannot have intelligent conversation about these things when the escalation of hyperbole becomes the main talking point from a certain segment of society. Yet, bullying and degrading people you don't know and never met, just because they are different is considered OK and "sane" behavior.

Talk about sad....

a reply to: Krakatoa

Does "unwise" work better for you? That's my feeling.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
So, we've gone from "dorks" to "stupid" to "insane" in only 6 pages here?

Seems you have.

Is that the level of sanity evaluation needed to strip them of their rights now that we have deemed them not sane for exercising their rights, and not breaking any laws?

Who said anything about stripping rights? OK I jumped from page 2 to the end because of the above.

And some wonder why we cannot have intelligent conversation about these things when the escalation of hyperbole becomes the main talking point from a certain segment of society.

From the outside looking in it looks like you are the one that took it there.

a reply to: schuyler

Really? How do you know that? Do you have some special telepathic insight into their fantasies? Any documentation to prove that? Or did you just make it up based on what you THINK their fantasies are?

No. It's actually a matter of study by sociologists and such. Ever heard of hero complex mixed with John Wayne syndrome?

That's what we are talking about.

There is a wealth of info out there on the topic and you can find quite a bit if you simply google "good guy with a gun". You can even go to pro-2nd sites and read articles on the issue, such as this one:

www.concealedcarry.com...

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: Krakatoa

Does "unwise" work better for you? That's my feeling.

Yes, it does. Since it is not denigrating their sanity, and not fodder for stripping rights from people (which is the latest push regarding mental health restrictions). I too think is is unwise, and wouldn't do it myself. But I don't think of them as "dorks" or "stupid"....just lacking in wisdom and experience (which is expected at that age).

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Krakatoa
So, we've gone from "dorks" to "stupid" to "insane" in only 6 pages here?

Seems you have.

Is that the level of sanity evaluation needed to strip them of their rights now that we have deemed them not sane for exercising their rights, and not breaking any laws?

Who said anything about stripping rights? OK I jumped from page 2 to the end because of the above.

And some wonder why we cannot have intelligent conversation about these things when the escalation of hyperbole becomes the main talking point from a certain segment of society.

From the outside looking in it looks like you are the one that took it there.

Then perhaps you should read the entire thread and not leap into here without knowledge of the conversation? THat would help your perception and understanding of my post more.

a reply to: intrepid

Are you just arguing with yourself now?

JFC Dude.

I didn't say they were breaking the law, what is your point?

I didn't say some gun owners aren't stupid.

I can speak for myself, I don't need your liberal insanity translation for your team points game.

You guys have really lost your sh!t.

Your not even arguing the point anymore.

How can people be so brainwashed?

SOOOOOOO politically influenced you would give up your rights.

You guys better wake up before you start a civil war that ends the world over political party.

It's more than people being idiots, they are going to a public place to make a scene.

a reply to: Krakatoa

I saw your posts on page 1. You leaped into the hyperbole from the start. I had that much knowledge of the thread before jumping in.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Ask yourself what party would carry guns to a place they knew would get negative attention towards firearms and you will have your answer.

According to ATA it's people exercising their constitutional rights. So what do you think?

It is a constitutional right. I don't need to look it up.

Your moving the goalposts again, surprise.

It's a "negative attention getter" towards guns.

Bottom line

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Krakatoa

I saw your posts on page 1. You leaped into the hyperbole from the start. I had that much knowledge of the thread before jumping in.

Did you read the thread title too, where the OP judged them as "dorks" without even knowing them or speaking with them? That prejudice is the point being discussed in the following pages. I still suggest you red on, it will educate you.

Education and knowledge is a good thing, and not to be feared.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
I can speak for myself...

That much is apparent. Can we ask if you could do it with at least some lucidity though?

I don't need your liberal insanity translation for your team points game.

No idea what you're talking about. I'm a Niners fan.

a reply to: Krakatoa

"Intelligent conversation", is based on "intelligence". It is not rocket science.