Wear Your Firearm, And Exercise Your 2nd Amendment Right

reply to post by tjack


There is not one single case of an open carrier being a primary target due to OC in the real world. It has plain and simple never happened and we do have lots of folks with lots of OC time.

opencarry.org has several threads about this fallacy.

The NRA are sold out and useless. They are always willing to give away some rights and compromise.

Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership are they way to go.

Well what can I say, the NRA class was one way to fulfill a requirement to get my permit, and I was just passing along what they taught. My bad for assuming they knew what they were talking about, I should have done my own homework on that one, I suppose.

reply to post by Plasma applicator

I would not allow the courts to let someone who hurt my family get off with a slap on the wrist, which is the current nature of our court system. I can assure you I am not the only one with this attitude. I can also assure you that I do not have to carry a firearm to accomplish that end.
You see, my friend, I am a realist.

reply to post by creaton91


Ouch, a year per casing...ouch. Mexico is similar to that, but South of there guns are permitted with license.

reply to post by Paroxysm


Yikes, it's amazing how some idiots can not only screw up their own lives, but that of their children by listening to the PTB; regarding how to handle a child.

My sister, and bro' in law have more than screwed up their just turned 18 year old sons life. He's got a rap sheet a mile long now, and it is due exclusively to my Sis, and her hubby; of course everything they did was for his own good; forget about the rest of his life. They are good Christians, and feel the need to force their religion on my nephew, and forget his life, they are saving his soul!

The entire thing with my nephew sounds incredible similar to Your experiences. Any ways I wouldn't sweat the background checks. I've got a clean record, and have been harassed by them many times. I've got FFL buddies, and they've said many times it is the mood of the day that qualifies, or denies a Person.


reply to post by Paroxysm


Your correct, the FFL dealers can only sell to People in their states, and that is supposed to be imposed on p2p, but many p2p sell across state lines.

reply to post by merkaba93


Interestingly enough I let my CCW's for Idaho, Washington, and Montana go. I found when getting pulled over I was harassed more for having those licenses than not.

I had less problems with my 45 on the dash, or on the seat next to me after that, but with the CCW it was pat down city, and made me feel like some kind of dangerous felon.

reply to post by Xtrozero


Hi Xtrozero!

In response to your earlier post, I honestly have no idea how many of the 9,300-odd getting murdered by firearm are "Bad Guys", but I would suggest that in a modern civilised society, 9300 people murdered by firearms is possibly about 9300 too many?

I'm actually wondering where you got your Violent crime figures from?? (You haven't provided a link to the source?)
If it was from nationmaster.com (the site in my earlier link), then I can't see the category for "violent crime per 100,000".

But looking closer at the actual violent crimes that are listed there; like Murder, Rape, Robbery and Assault... then the comparitive results are as follows;

Murder per capita
(# is actual rank in each list)
# 24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
# 46 United Kingdom: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people

Rapes per capita
# 9 United States: 0.301318 per 1,000 people
# 13 United Kingdom: 0.142172 per 1,000 people

Robberies per capita
# 8 United Kingdom: 1.57433 per 1,000 people
# 11 United States: 1.38527 per 1,000 people

Assaults per capita
# 6 United States: 7.56923 per 1,000 people
# 8 United Kingdom: 7.45959 per 1,000 people

Link to source of crime stats

So, you are over 3 times more likely to be murdered,
(27 times more likely to be murdered by firearm),
Over twice as likely to be raped,
Just under 0.88 times as likely to be robbed,
and about 1.01 times more likely to be assaulted, in the USA as opposed to the UK?

I don't think that those figures, in any way tie in with your earlier assertion, that the UK has 2034 violent crimes per 100,000 people, and the US only has 466 per 100,000? (The assault figures alone suggest there are almost 757 assaults per 100,000 people annually in the USA!)

Can you provide a source for your figures please?

In any case, this is a "right to bear firearms" thread, which is why I was quoting the Murder by Firearm stats earlier. In response to an inaccurate and misleading linked article, from an earlier poster, which implied that "England" had much more crime as a result of not having the right to bear firearms.

In case there is any mis-understanding here, I am not passing judgement on the American constitution or any right to bear arms there. That is entirely up to you guys in the USA.
I am merely pointing out that the article linked to, by an earlier poster (Endisnighe) is slightly innacurate and misleading, and I've provided, what I believe to be a reliable source of factual information, to back up my point.

peace,
G

Well said Godi the Drummer - and I don't say that often to a Scotsman...

How can, in this day and age, walking about with a loaded weapon, equate, in ANY way shapr or form, to hundreds of years ago when your founding fathers asked you to take up arms against us with today?

How?

PLEASE. Someone from the USA, who is NOT a redneck racsist, PLEASE explain to me this issue because I just can't get my head around it.

Now, I don't care if you all go outside and shoot each other, in the heads and kill your whole race but I just need to understand by being given a rational, reasonable and argued case for american citizens to be allowed to carry guns.

Over to you Yanks....

Crichton

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer


Hi Xtrozero!

I'm actually wondering where you got your Violent crime figures from?? (You haven't provided a link to the source?)
If it was from nationmaster.com (the site in my earlier link), then I can't see the category for "violent crime per 100,000".


In any case, this is a "right to bear firearms" thread, which is why I was quoting the Murder by Firearm stats earlier. In response to an inaccurate and misleading linked article, from an earlier poster, which implied that "England" had much more crime as a result of not having the right to bear firearms.

In case there is any mis-understanding here, I am not passing judgement on the American constitution or any right to bear arms there. That is entirely up to you guys in the USA.
I am merely pointing out that the article linked to, by an earlier poster (Endisnighe) is slightly innacurate and misleading, and I've provided, what I believe to be a reliable source of factual information, to back up my point.

I actually forgot where I got it from so I just Google “UK 2034 per 100,000” and randomly grabbed one of the 19,000 hits for you…

Random Google

Yes I understand this is gun post, but I was trying to suggest I'm much safer here than there from violent crime, and that might be because people here have guns.... I don't think a gang of thugs in England would be so quick to beat me up and take my wallet as I headed to watch a match if there was a chance I had a gun....

Also when you look at 9300 killed out of 300 million people I think I'll take my chances with those odds even not factoring in high risk places and more importantly people, hence why I wonder how many of the 9300 were the type that have a lifestyle that leads them to dangerous situations i.e. gang members, criminals etc...



[edit on 20-9-2009 by Xtrozero]

Originally posted by crichton13
How can, in this day and age, walking about with a loaded weapon, equate, in ANY way shapr or form, to hundreds of years ago when your founding fathers asked you to take up arms against us with today?

The world is full of wolves and we do not want to be the sheep.....

reply to post by Xtrozero


Hi Xtrozero!
Thanks for the link, it did give me a good giggle!
(You do know what type of newspaper "TheSun" is right??)

peace
G

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

Hi Xtrozero!
Thanks for the link, it did give me a good giggle!
(You do know what type of newspaper "TheSun" is right??)

peace
G

ya.... I know, that is why I picked that one but there are a bunch of other sites with the same numbers

Originally posted by crichton13
Well said Godi the Drummer - and I don't say that often to a Scotsman...

How can, in this day and age, walking about with a loaded weapon, equate, in ANY way shapr or form, to hundreds of years ago when your founding fathers asked you to take up arms against us with today?

How?

PLEASE. Someone from the USA, who is NOT a redneck racsist, PLEASE explain to me this issue because I just can't get my head around it.

Now, I don't care if you all go outside and shoot each other, in the heads and kill your whole race but I just need to understand by being given a rational, reasonable and argued case for american citizens to be allowed to carry guns.

Over to you Yanks....

Crichton

The majority of gun crime in the U.S. is commited by those who own their guns illegally (convicted felons, stolen guns, etc.). In no way will outlawing or further regulating guns stop gun crime here.

Since the above is true, there is no reason why a law abiding citizen should not be allowed to own a gun. I don't expect someone not from here to understand the culture of gun ownership; it's a way of life passed down from our forefathers.

Originally posted by crichton13
Well said Godi the Drummer - and I don't say that often to a Scotsman...

How can, in this day and age, walking about with a loaded weapon, equate, in ANY way shapr or form, to hundreds of years ago when your founding fathers asked you to take up arms against us with today?

How?

PLEASE. Someone from the USA, who is NOT a redneck racsist, PLEASE explain to me this issue because I just can't get my head around it.

Now, I don't care if you all go outside and shoot each other, in the heads and kill your whole race but I just need to understand by being given a rational, reasonable and argued case for american citizens to be allowed to carry guns.

Over to you Yanks....

Crichton

Here's a video of a redneck racist carrying a firearm....



Yup, looks like a redneck to me.

I don't see any reason for any American to justify anything to anyone living in limey land. You people have dug your own hole as far as loss of rights are concerned, don't even begin to suppose to drag us down with you.

reply to post by SpacePunk


Hi SpacePunk!

I'm sitting here, more than a little confused! (Not Unusual!!!)
But Crichton13 asked for someone to explain to them, why Americans still feel the need to be armed... and you provide a video in which, the armed person says;

"It aids me in my resistance efforts"
He carries a gun to resist....? The Government?

"Taxation is theft... All Taxation"
So, what pays for the street lights, the garbageman, the sewage, the social care, the fire service, the police, the roads, the social services etc etc etc?

So, this is an American saying that he has to be armed at all times because it's "a dangerous world we live in"???

and "This is Arizona and it's the wild wild west"???

And you choose to use this video, as a response to Chrichtons earlier question?

OK. The guy in the video may not be a redneck.... but ???
I'm confused as to what you are trying to convey here?

And btw, the use of the term "Limey" could be considered derogatory, to those of us who are neither English, nor in the Navypeace,
G

reply to post by endisnighe


I suggest everybody that would ever think they would want to carry a handgun check with a licensed concealed handgun instructor in their county to find out the laws there AND how they are applied.

Despite what some have said on this list, not all states have open-carry laws. My understanding is that only 47 do. I know that Texas (I live about 20 miles from where Santo wrote about) does not have an open-carry law. But some of the Texas legislators is working for it.

I took the concealed handgun course in May and just received my license the other day. During the course I was told and given a print out of the law which allows a handgun to be carried in an automobile at ANY time in Texas. --Not just when traveling as is the old belief.

Texas Law HB 823 effective Sept. 1, 2005, The Travelers Law should be found on the internet under Texas government laws. In 2007 Texas House Bill 1815 (according to a NRA-ILA statement)was an NRA-backed measure which clarifies once and for all that law-abiding Texas mortists may legally transport a handgun in their vehicle for personal protection without neeeding a CHL (Concealed Handgun License). So, this last one supercedes and clarified the earlier law.

If you have a permit it basically is a free pass sometimes if you get stopped for something minor. You present the permit with your driver's license. It automatically shows the cop that you have never been a bad guy. If you don't have a license and have a gun in the car, tell them about it before the do a search and find it. But even at that, count at the least on a delay as they check you and the vehicle out so they can find something to nail you with.

I'll repeat what I said at the beginning DO NOT TAKE THE WORD about open or concealed carry from anyone unless you know they know what they are talking about, and tha person should be local. My instructor was a former police officer.

Originally posted by crichton13

PLEASE. Someone from the USA, who is NOT a redneck racsist, PLEASE explain to me this issue because I just can't get my head around it.

Now, I don't care if you all go outside and shoot each other, in the heads and kill your whole race but I just need to understand by being given a rational, reasonable and argued case for american citizens to be allowed to carry guns.

Over to you Yanks....

Crichton

One argument for the carry of weapons that I tend to agree with. I believe coercion should be added to the ways people can be made to do something. That might be splitting hairs though.

By Marko Kloos
Reason vs. Force


Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the muggers potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst.

The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

continued

I also like what I was told by a former Marine Gunnery SGT.
"I don't carry a gun hoping to use it. I carry a gun with the prayer that it never leaves its holster. There is no feeling worse than killing a man except seeing the innocent killed."

My Grand-pa once told me...
"The only thing that could haunt me worse than killing a man is knowing I let him kill your grand-ma or one of my grand kids."
He knew what he was talking about he spent three tours in Vietnam.

Law abiding Americans don't carry guns looking for trouble. They carry guns while praying they never have to use them. Believe it or not many of us know how the taking of life can tax the soul. We live our lives trying to avoid the situations where it might be neccesary. Many of us despise war and violence unless the threat is imminent and potentially fatal. However, as long as there are those that wish, to refuse us the right to peace and life, we refuse to be preyed upon.

reply to post by MikeNice81


I agree with this 100%. I just happen to be ex-military (28 years) 280/6'5" man and I understand my chances with two guys that are intent on hurting me are very low that I will come out ok. Just watch an environment where only small knives and physical force is capable, prison. To see a very streetwise, tough guy in prison walk along and have two guys come up to him with the intent to hurt him, it is all over in seconds and the tough guy loses every time, as you said this is not TV…

The old saying that a gun is an equalizer is correct, and when you think about it, I don’t see those of weaker stature helping their situation with a bat or knife if guns were illegal, plus if gun were, then those who are not physically capable of protecting themselves (which is all of us) will have a knife or bat and the bad guy will still have a gun…hehe