Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
what would you call mandatory notification? i'd call it asking for permission. you will make the claim that it is not mandatory, but then why suggest
it be done? i remember a time when protests could legally be held without giving "notification" first, but now one must stay within ze designated
Protests are fine, any time, anywhere, all the time, I suppose is how you'd prefer such. Freedom of assembly and all, right?
Let's say you live in an urban area and you suddenly have 5000 protesters camped out on your neighborhood street, using you lawn and garden as a
bathroom for both kinds of bodily purges, leaving all their trash on the street, blowing into your yard, chanting and yelling all hours of the day and
night, blocking the road and your driveway, harassing you at every turn with "you're either with us or against us" tactics, with miscreants and
opportunists drawn by the crowd breaking into homes after the owners leave for either work, or to rent another house for the duration of the protest,
all of this going on for weeks and months similar to the Occupy movement, all of them protesting against something you personally are in complete
I'm sure you might feel a little differently about putting protests in ze designated zones.
Freedom of assembly? It's America? They're technically protesting on public/community property (your neighborhood street).
That is, of course, entirely theoretical, and certainly nothing like that could happen to you, or anyone else, correct?
does one have to say "let everyone be aware that i am notifying everyone within hearing distance of my intent to use the first amendment"? no, it
would be ludicrous.
Actually to some extent, people DO, especially when they're being disruptive, vulgar, loud, obnoxious, foul, unruly, insulting, rude, and altogether
I'm sure you'd feel really comfortable with non-convicted child molesters following around your family broadcasting what kind of speculative
fantasies they have about your children.
Freedom of speech, right? They're JUST talking. It's quite fine and okay for your children to hear all about it too, what with being in public and
would you rather have a society where there was no example of how to responsibly carry a gun, or a society where children and curious adults were
shown what it looks like to be a responsible gun owner?
I'd actually prefer a society where no one ever felt the need or desire to own a gun, except, perhaps for sport shooting, hunting, or protection from
large predators during deep wilderness excursions.
no. i truly don't see what you were going for. you've substituted one term for an equal term. i never spoke of martyrdom, nor did i hint at
That wasn't necessarily for you personally, as none of this is necessarily for you personally. These discussions are read by more than just you and
I. I often frame my responses as responses to the overall readership, so, please accept my apologies for any personal confusion you had there.
There, are, however, people, one, I think even voiced something along the lines of dying to fight for their right to bear arms, so, I thought the
martyrdom/jihad aspect might shed an interesting perspective.
... you are attempting to set up a strawman so that you can kill it and look like the victor. you wish to set up gun owners as inherently
irresponsible for defending a right that everyone has, for defending all rights that we enjoy.
I'm fairly sure you're misrepresenting/misinterpreting my argument there.
You may have missed it, but, I myself am also a gun owner. I own an old Browning M1911 .45 pistol handed down from my grandfather that I think was
his service side arm during WWII.
I even Open Carry this pistol when I go on my deep wilderness entirely off-trail excursions for duration of a week or more.
My points are all about responsibility, not only for yourself, but for others as well. Further, while Open Carry may be legal in your area, it's
abnormal behavior to run around with a weapon in civilized society. It's even a little rude and frightening. What's your situational awareness like?
What kind of holster do you carry, and in what position? How easy would it be for someone to take your weapon out of its holster if, for any reason
you were incapacitated? Like with a double dose of mace and taser gun?
Will your example spur irresponsible owners to carry around their arsenals irresponsibly, thus putting other people in danger due your influence?
We have certain inalienable rights, sure, but, there's such a thing as abuse, and such a thing as having something and not needing it, and there's
such a thing as socially acceptable behavior regardless of legality.
I own a gun, yet have no need, desire, or requirement to carry it around in civilized public. Why would anyone else?
edit on 4-7-2013 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)