It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Open Carry your pistol - on the 4th of July - Exercise your Rights

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:11 AM
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

I think this is a case of "I love guns"
Well think what you want. I have enough guns and ammo to pretty much take out a zombie apocalypse. (yah I saw that movie last night lol) and yah I have more than eight registered weapons.
As far as taking my weapons anywhere else than a gun range? Or a far flung gravel pit?
No. I'm not stupid. Or unconsiderate to others and others safety.
Taking my guns to a parade? That (honestly) is the dumbest # I've heard all week.
edit on 27-6-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:36 AM

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Very illegal and in a litigious society you'd be opening yourself up to crazy lawsuits.

Just leaving a rake out where some trespasser could step on it could cost you everything you've ever had and everything you ever will have.

Of all the gun alternatives that get thrown around like booby-traps and rubber bullets the vast majority are illegal.

I once lived in a state where mace and less-than-lethal ammunition were outlawed but I could walk around with handguns and keep an AR by the door without issue.

Laws would be hysterical in their absurdity if they werent so dangerous to break.

I wanted to do tire spikes at the end of my driveway and according to my lawyer all the signage and warnings in the world wouldnt have protected me from a lawsuit should somebody run over them.
edit on 26-6-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)

Thank you for pointing out the technicalities of putting up actual physical defenses around one's house.
That's all well and fine, but, a bit beside the point.
The point being illustrated was, if OP wants to "protect" or "defend" their family, then, there's certainly other ways of going about it than waving around firearms at celebrations where children are present, where such provocative displays could result in altercations with over amp'd elements of law enforcement, putting family and children literally in the line of fire.

OP could buy one of those surplus underground missile bases, or simply build their own cement bunker to live in full time if they're really THAT concerned about some pressing all-consuming need to protect and defend their family.
More practical and budget sensible, there's a number of home security/defense/lockdown solutions available for any market from simple burglar bars, on up to 24/7 remote monitoring with electronically controlled steel roll-down all-entry-points barriers with secure safe-room inside home and private armed security on-call.

The majority of everyone else gets along fine without having to resort to such conspicuous displays.

If you have guns, fine. Have your guns.
Waving them about in public is just silly. Not only is it false bravado, but, it lets anyone that might be interested in criminal activity know that you've got a gun they can steal when you're not waving it around in public or home to use it against them.
Further, as hinted at before, if police will tazer an 11 year old autistic girl walking naked on the side of the road, or shoot an unarmed man in a wheelchair to death, what might happen when some of these sorts of police come across an open carry person?
Emphasis on "sorts" of police.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:42 AM
reply to post by whyamIhere

Looks like you will be having a lot more fun than us...

i would redirect you to:

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262 “If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.”

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426, 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603 "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no 'rule making' or legislation which would abrogate them."

states can make whatever rules they want, but it doesn't mean that they must be followed. only lawful rules must be followed.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:02 AM
I have several side arms, my favorite being my .40 PK 229 Sig and I open carry it any time it is in my possession. I do not have nor do I want a CCW, my reason for not getting a CCW is simple, if a potential criminal that wants to do harm to myself or family sees a side arm on my hip they will be much more deterred from commencing with their plan when a visible side arm is present and readily available. When you have a concealed weapon it is not a deterrent and is not as easily accessible.

Over the last 2 years of regularly carrying my side arm open and visible I have only had one experience where a LEO has had a problem with it and that was a US Fish and Wildlife officer when I was on a federal management area fishing, and he was a complete jerk about it.

My children and I had been fishing and he was doing a license check when he walked up to us. When I turned to him and he saw the gun he put his hand on his side arm and immediately told me to put my hands on my head, which did. He then asked me for my ID, which I had along with my fishing license and asked why I had a firearm on my person to which I replied simply, "The second amendment".

He asked why I felt the need to have a firearm to which I replied again "The second amendment" and asked him if my act of talking showed a "need" to exercise my first amendment right. I told him that the exercising of a right does not have a prerequisite of showing a need to do so and that since the area we were fishing in is known to have coyotes and cougars the gun was for security.

Now this is the kicker, he said that if we saw a coyote or cougar we could call his department to handle it. I asked if he would be here within the 30 seconds it would take for a cougar to become aggressive and attack myself or children to which he said he couldn't guarantee that. I told him I could guarantee that I could have my sidearm drawn and 3 rounds placed in center mass of the animal if that scenario were to in fact happen.

He checked my fishing license and left. In ND we are not required to have a permit for a gun or to open carry and our LEO's here are always very respectful of this. However he was a federal officer and I guess he had to prove his authority, to which I respectfully allowed him to do. Funny thing is about 6 months later I was called to assist in an out of season harvest of pheasant on the same management area and he was the federal officer on duty and he wouldn't even look at me once he realized I am a reserve deputy for our county.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:09 AM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

I love the Miranda ruling, many people do not know of that and it is a ruling that is still standing with the USSC since it hasn't been over written by any case law that has followed it.

Good to see you are aware of that ruling. I know a friend of many years in FL that won a court case for possession of a firearm by a felon with the Miranda ruling. The case went to the FL DCA and his original conviction was overturned, it's a shame he had to spend 18 months in jail while doing so though.

The Miranda ruling makes all federal restrictions on firearms null and void since it specifically states that the exercising of a right cannot be criminalized. It really shows how corrupt our USSC is and the rest of the courts that lock people up for violating various "gun laws".

The problem with America today is we use a set of laws based on legal or illegal instead of lawful and unlawful, there is a huge difference between them.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:18 AM

Originally posted by whyamIhere

Looks like you will be having a lot more fun than us...

I wouldn't be going to that park. I've seen signs that "we may search your backpacks" to make sure you aren't carrying in your own food/drinks but that sign is way to open for violations. Common to see though so we have all grown accustomed to it to one extent or another. The sign makes it look like you live in the hood (not that you do) and that the city is completely paranoid.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:55 AM
biggest problem i see with that sign in No Beers.
That's a deal breaker.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 07:04 AM
reply to post by canucks555

biggest problem i see with that sign in No Beers. That's a deal breaker.

well you're in luck! you can ignore it completely as being unconstitutional. here's more common law for you if they argue "but this is a park with rules":

"Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135

you can tell them that it is public property and you have the right to travel, transport your property, and be protected.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 11:57 AM
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

The obvious fact that you feel more whole as a human being while displaying a deadly weapon, even in a completely safe environment, is a very sad comment on the US citizens capacity to fulfill intent of the second amendment.

It's because of the lowest common denominator in a society, that virtue dies. All the deadly force in the world won't save you from that curse.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:42 PM
I'm quite certain the American posters on here are tired of discussing guns with Brits, but - if you'll indulge me - the subject of this thread is a good example of why it's so hard to understand from our perspective.

It should be said firstly that there is no reason in the world why the OP shouldn't open carry within the law, and like most American gun owners, I am virtually certain that he's a responsible gun owner who respects his weapons. I don't imagine for one second that any harm will come from his proposed open carry.

However, from the British perspective, it's hard to understand why the celebration of a great American day should be affirmed by the visual inference that "I can kill you instantly and at a second's notice". 4th July is all about what's great about America, but using the event to exercise such a right seems to be an implicit acceptance that your fellow man can't be trusted, and you live in fear of him. Surely the 4th of July would be better celebrated by leaving weapons at home and enjoying the company of your fellow Americans. After all, the lot of y'all working together would be just as important in overthrowing a tyrannical government than your guns would be. Maybe more so, in fact.

I realise that's unrealistically idealistic, but we Brits kind of see America's people (if not government) as being idealistic types - which is a great thing. It might be early, but happy 4th and God Bless America!

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:47 PM

Originally posted by canucks555
You have the right to write love poems to your pistol and hold it intimately to your bosom as well.
Doesn't mean that it isn't weird.

This is my rifle. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my rifle is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy, who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will. Before God I swear this creed: my rifle and myself are defenders of my country, we are the masters of our enemy, we are the saviors of my life. So be it, until there is no enemy, but peace. Amen.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 12:58 PM

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
reply to post by Druscilla

But all of those things pale in comparison to Defending your Family. It's not just about exercising a right for exercising a rights sake. It's about exercising a right that allows you to protect yourself and your loved ones. That's why this is so important.

Jesus, where are you going to celebrate the 4th? Afghanistan? Go enjoy some fireworks with the family sans gun - trust me, there's about a 99.999% chance that nothing will happen to you but fun..

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:05 PM
reply to post by KingIcarus

However, from the British perspective, it's hard to understand why the celebration of a great American day should be affirmed by the visual inference that "I can kill you instantly and at a second's notice".

that is not what guns represent to americans. what are rights worth if they aren't useable, and how does one keep their rights from those that wish to take them? guns.

many people enjoy guns as a hobby, hunting or plinking, but that is not the reason why the second amendment exists.

independence day is about celebrating freedom, but how free is someone if they cannot keep their rights (through force, if necessary). america would not exist without guns, both in the past and in the present.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:15 PM
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

You make a fair point, but America's existence (and success) is down to a hell of a lot more than simply guns. If the OP wants to open carry on the 4th, than that's his right as an American, and I don't blame him one iota - I just think it would be more appropriate to celebrate such an occasion with something that spoke more positively about America and it's achievements since 1776. That's simply my opinion though, of course.


I also think July 4th is a good time to question what 'freedom' actually means in the globalised world of 2013. I would perhaps suggest freedom is more related to expression than any right to bear arms, but that's another thread entirely. I have no wish to derail the good work of the OP in this one.

edit on 27-6-2013 by KingIcarus because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:18 PM
People seem to often think negative toward Texas and guns but our state is one where open carry, except one one's property, business or vehicle, is not legal.

In Texas, trespass with a firearm is a felony. I am wondering if in state with some form of open carry, is there a similar law. In other words, might a person accidentally break a more severe law by carrying a weapon. Hopefully gun owners are aware of the law.


Actually in a vehicle, a handgun must be concealed.
edit on 6/27/2013 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:24 PM
Do they have any laws in Louisiana about brandishing a firearm? Usually as long as it is holstered the brandishing doesn't apply.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:26 PM
reply to post by roadgravel

Surely you'd have to be holding the gun for it to be 'in play' (so to speak).

If holstered then I guess it'd be simply a possession like your keys or phone.

I have to admit, I'd love to fire some guns at a range, but I'd be nervous as hell actually carrying one.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 01:50 PM
reply to post by KingIcarus

As far as trespass, it would not need to be in hand.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 02:11 PM
reply to post by roadgravel

Ah, my apologies... I slightly misunderstood what you were saying. Whilst I'd obviously advise against lethal force, I have little sympathy for a home invader who encounters an armed homeowner. You would of course hope the simple threat would be enough to send him on his way though. I see no reason to shoot if the tresspasser beats a hasty retreat.

Whilst guns aren't common in the UK, I keep my cricket bat under the bed (how English?) just in case. An intruder in my home would be struck for six if he threatened me or my girl. Unlikely to kill, but he wouldn't be getting up quickly, put it that way.

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 08:03 PM

Originally posted by Archie
Is this an attempt to over shadow the "Restore the Fourth" rallies or part of them because you will have two very diverse groups of people protesting about very different things.

I fear one will divert attention from the other but perhaps that's the whole aim of the game.

What? Er.. No.. I cant make one of those rallies because I have previous commitments as I'm sure lots of other people have. Besides, they don't even have my area on a list for those rallies.This is just a small thing people can do along with whatever else they are doing.. I suppose many who go to those rallies can open carry and thus have an extra avenue to show their support for the Constitution.

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in