Controversial gun activist arrested with 'silencer.....................

[hermannr]

>>So, a cop that confronts you for having your cellphone on while he arrests you is "just doing his job"?
If you think that, given recent events and the current political climate, walking down the street with a cellphone is comparable in any way to walking down the street with an AR-15 then you are just being dishonest with yourself. Being dishonest with yourself is not a good way to formulate a winning political strategy. Both things are legal, but they are NOT the same. That's just reality, and reality can be ignored but cannot be made to go away. If you want to keep your rights and get the rights you have already lost back then you need to consider how acts like this represent our community to those who have little or no interaction with us because their opinions matter at the polls. Whether you like it or not, your rights CAN and HAVE been abridged and the only way to stop the erosion is to for us to use our heads and be smart. We must change the tone of the national discussion and win the hearts of minds of the "middle ground" voters. If we lose them, we will continue to lose our rights and that is the reality we must deal with.

There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE in the eyes of the WRITTEN LAW. Pistol, rifle, cellphone, or a pokadot hat...all legal to carry /wear, in public... no matter what some self righteous person may think. Cops carry AR's (full auto no less), the last murder with an automatic weapon was by a cop, killing a cop (his wife no less)...he is in prison now, doing his hard time.. Don't give me the line that the uniform makes a difference.

 

[Squidly]

...Both things are legal, but they are NOT the same....

You are right. They are not the same. But they are both legal activities, and they are both protected by the constitution. Until the constitution is changed I will have to side with the open-carrier and the cell-phone-videographer.

 

[meener777]

Delaware v. Prouse

Thanks for link. Yes, probable cause, and I agree with the decision and I get your point. People shouldn't be harassed for this, but I never said they should be and my point is still being missed.

My point is simple. There is little to be gained from these actions (i.e. they are largely ineffective at adding voting persons to the pro-gun side of the table) but they have a real cost in terms of how we are perceived by those who are not familiar with our community (i.e. they scare people and make us look bad, sorry but its a fact, these actions may in fact add voting persons to the anti-gun side of the table). Although I FULLY support your right to walk down the street with an AR-15, I don't think its wise to. It is legal, and I am FINE with it, but others are not and despite what you want to think their opinions of us MATTER when it comes time for votes to be cast, legislation to be written, and supreme court justices to be chosen. I am all about winning the war, and I consider these to be inconsequential battles in the grand scheme of things. That's my opinion YMMV.

 

[Squidly]

Thanks for link. Yes, probable cause, and I agree with the decision and I get your point. People shouldn't be harassed for this, but I never said they should be and my point is still being missed...

Discretion is the better part of valor. I get it. But remember, there was a time in the not so distant past that seeing people carrying rifles and side arms brought no attention. When I was a high school kid in the... 70's boys would carry their hunting rifles in their gun racks to go hunting after school. Nobody gave it a second thought. Nobody shot each other. Nobody was suspended from school. During hunting season it was common to see a hunter with his rifle on his (or her) shoulder or back in the grocery store. Last minute supplies for that hunting trip. Nobody raised and eyebrow. Has the anti propaganda been THAT effective? To undermine our 2A rights under our noses? How do you suggest we tip the scales back in our favor? By caving in further?

 

[meener777]

I really wish it was like that, but in the 70's there hadn't been an Aurora, a Columbine, a Newtown, etc.. There are several dumb asses per year who get their hands on AR-15's and go play real life Call of Duty with them in some bizarre form of narcissistic suicide. For you and me, who know about firearms and understand how rarely these events occur, they are tragic events we would love to help avoid in any way that doesn't infringe on our rights. For people who don't own firearms and find no personal value in their ownership, even the small risk of these events is more than they want to deal with. It is understandable if you put yourself in their shoes, and that is where we need to start in order to change their minds. When you couple the "I don't need it, why should I accept this risk" mentality with the all-out propaganda war being waged by big money with an agenda, yeah, we have a serious problem in my opinion.

As I said before, I suggest that a winning strategy would focus on getting the "middle of the road" voters to come to our side. We cannot change the minds of the Bloombergs of the world, but we can wage propaganda wars of our own, by just telling the truth. They constantly tell lies and misrepresent the facts - when this happens we must be right there to calmly and carefully explain that they are wrong. They exaggerate and get things wrong constantly. There are real legitimate arguments against gun control that should be publicly spread with TV campaigns (for example, if gun control laws work then we should see evidence in homicide rates when gun control laws are enacted, but we don't, ergo theory destroyed). We should educate the public on the fact that CHL holders and gun owners in general only rarely commit crimes, and show that other tactics (such as anti-gang programs and enforcement of existing laws) can be more effective at reducing violence. We should educate people about our heritage and what a great thing it is to live in a country with individual liberty and responsibility. We should be public and loud about the fact that Bloomberg is a tyrant who is using his money to spread his policies across the land. We must show the good parts of our community, the fun parts like competitions, and show ourselves as helpful members of the community. All these things and more, to create a message that tells the truth and shows that we are, by vast majority, just good American citizens having fun and being responsible with these tools. We should take people to the range, show them what "gun culture" is really like, and tone down the part that is about shooting people. That is of course and aspect of gun ownership, but its not the one that is going to win hearts and minds.

I'm just spit balling here, but you get the picture. IMHO, that kind of approach is the only one that is going to change minds and get more voters on our side of the table. That doesn't mean you cave in. I think that our energy is better spent on messaging, campaigning and lobbying, and on court battles. Carrying rifles down the street just wont have the same impact.

 

[Kwikrnu]

I think that our energy is better spent on messaging, campaigning and lobbying, and on court battles.

So by handing out leaflets with the message that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed will sufficiently inform people that the open carry of a rifle is not illegal?
Campaigning to elect legislators who will make the open carry of rifles legal again?
Lobbying legislatures to make the open carry of a rifle legal where already legal?
Courts have already said that open carry of rifles is legal and cannot be the basis for a stop.

Your strategy might work if the bearing of arms was outlawed, but the right to bear arms is not a thought, it is a real fundamental right. The open carry of rifles is already legal. Now it is up to people to exercise the right to carry or it will be lost. It does not help the right to criticize my lawful carry because that is rights are taken. If you remember I legally open carried an ak pistol into a state park and was held a few hours. The SAF filed an amicus against me agreeing with the brady campaign. they filed the brief that says ak pistols are dangerous arms and not protected by the 2A. Now it is case law that anyone with an 11.5 inch length pistol barrel may be stopped. It is now unclear if state parks are sensitive areas. That is what happens when gun owners and the SAF fight against the right to bear arms.

 

[meener777]

You just don't get it dude. There are bigger things at stake here than your right to carry your Ak around without having to talk to a policeman to put his mind at ease that you aren't out to do something horrible. Such as the right for you to even own that weapon, or the magazine it has. You getting asked to identify yourself is no big deal compared to nation wide bans on so-called assault rifles and magazines wit more than effing SEVEN bullets in them. If you have been paying attention you will realize that we under massive attack here and not really winning. We are losing major rights an inch at a time, and you are pissed off because a cop asks you your name? That isn't harassment, its just doing their job. Get a freaking CLUE.

 

[hermannr]

You just don't get it dude. There are bigger things at stake here than your right to carry your Ak around without having to talk to a policeman to put his mind at ease that you aren't out to do something horrible. Such as the right for you to even own that weapon, or the magazine it has. You getting asked to identify yourself is no big deal compared to nation wide bans on so-called assault rifles and magazines wit more than effing SEVEN bullets in them. If you have been paying attention you will realize that we under massive attack here and not really winning. We are losing major rights an inch at a time, and you are pissed off because a cop asks you your name? That isn't harassment, its just doing their job. Get a freaking CLUE.

Until OC of any legal weapon is normalized (common occurrence) we will continue to be under attack. When such activity has been normalized (that is, draws no, or very little attention BY ANYONE) we will continue to be under attack.

There is no way to NORMALIZE an activity except by exercising it. What the heck of you think gay pride parades and hempfest are all about? It has one purpose, and only one purpose... NORMALIZE the activity.

Instead of hiding your carry, how about helping to normalize the activity and OC... Eh?

 

[Kwikrnu]

You just don't get it dude. There are bigger things at stake here than your right to carry your Ak around without having to talk to a policeman to put his mind at ease that you aren't out to do something horrible. Such as the right for you to even own that weapon, or the magazine it has. You getting asked to identify yourself is no big deal compared to nation wide bans on so-called assault rifles and magazines wit more than effing SEVEN bullets in them. If you have been paying attention you will realize that we under massive attack here and not really winning. We are losing major rights an inch at a time, and you are pissed off because a cop asks you your name? That isn't harassment, its just doing their job. Get a freaking CLUE.

My rights are important to me. If you don't want to sue cops because they infringe on your rights then that is your choice. I happen to believe that I have fundamental rights and am tired of cops violating those rights. I was detained, searched, property seized, battered, charged, arrested, sent to jail, had expenses related to the charges, and placed on unpaid leave until this is resolved. My rights were violated and I am not taking it anymore.

You can fight the 7 round limit in a magazine, if you have standing.

 

[hermannr]

Added comment:

You all do realize that a KID back in the 50's and 60's could take his rifle or shotgun and walk into a store and no-one would even raise an eyebrow? If you wanted to go hunt ducks down at the local duck pond, you could strap your shotgun on, jump on your bike and ride through town...and no-one would even notice. They might see, but would definitely not be concerned.

So what happened? It was a NORMAL activity back then...but the anti's used the 60's race riots to scare the poor sheep...AND WE LET THEM DO IT! Now it is time to take our rights back, and the only way we will ever win is to NORMALIZE the activity.

What does that mean? It means that it is so common place that when the anti's spout their fear, everyone ignores them because they see the activity every day and know the fear mongers are lying by personal experience.

 

[meener777]

>> So what happened?
You may not know this but in the 1960's we had a massive increase in the number of mass murders in this country. This has remained roughly steady at about 20 or so incidents per year since about 1980. A majority of these incidents involve firearms, and many publicized incidents involve rifles with large magazines. Obviously, by simply reading the news and watching tv, it is easy to see that these things have changed the dynamic when it comes to walking down the street with your rifle on your back.

Re: "normalizing"
Given the current climate, tts extremely unlikely that we are going to go back to the days where carrying an AR-15 down the street does not cause alarm anytime soon. As unfortunate as it may be, its reality and we need to deal with reality in order to form strategies that are going to win this war. For the time being, the net benefit of alarming people by strolling through their neighborhood with your rifle is zero or negative and it is an activity that should not be encouraged. I think that parades or group demonstrations are different and you should go for it if you want to make a point about it. Just dont walk down the street by yourself with your AR and a camera, its going to scare the bubblegum out of people and doesnt help us one bit.

 

[hermannr]

>> So what happened?
You may not know this but in the 1960's we had a massive increase in the number of mass murders in this country. This has remained roughly steady at about 20 or so incidents per year since about 1980. A majority of these incidents involve firearms, and many publicized incidents involve rifles with large magazines. Obviously, by simply reading the news and watching tv, it is easy to see that these things have changed the dynamic when it comes to walking down the street with your rifle on your back.

Re: "normalizing"
Given the current climate, tts extremely unlikely that we are going to go back to the days where carrying an AR-15 down the street does not cause alarm anytime soon. As unfortunate as it may be, its reality and we need to deal with reality in order to form strategies that are going to win this war. For the time being, the net benefit of alarming people by strolling through their neighborhood with your rifle is zero or negative and it is an activity that should not be encouraged. I think that parades or group demonstrations are different and you should go for it if you want to make a point about it. Just dont walk down the street by yourself with your AR and a camera, its going to scare the bubblegum out of people and doesnt help us one bit.

You make my point exactly... you have even bought into the lies. 40 people die in a bus accident and it is local news, but 20 people die because some loony wants to be someone, and it is national news for months.

I will carry whatever I want that is legal, where ever I want, when ever I want. You know what, I have had 3 (three) conversations with LE in 43+years of OC. Not one included a camera, not one included any violation of the constitution. No-one asked me for ID, no-one asked me for my CPL, and no-one impeded my journey. The first incidence involved one word spoken directly to me "hunting?" after my answer of "yep" the conversation was over. That is how it should be. (the other 2 were more conversational about guns (my carry in particular, and if I was going to join the local gun club)

 

[meener777]

You make my point exactly... you have even bought into the lies. 40 people die in a bus accident and it is local news, but 20 people die because some loony wants to be someone, and it is national news for months.

I will carry whatever I want that is legal, where ever I want, when ever I want. You know what, I have had 3 (three) conversations with LE in 43+years of OC. Not one included a camera, not one included any violation of the constitution. No-one asked me for ID, no-one asked me for my CPL, and no-one impeded my journey. The first incidence involved one word spoken directly to me "hunting?" after my answer of "yep" the conversation was over. That is how it should be. (the other 2 were more conversational about guns (my carry in particular, and if I was going to join the local gun club)

You're just sticking your head in the sand bro. Being stubborn is not a good strategy.

 

[Stevenav]

Meener777, I think you're wrong and to be honest, I'm actually surprising myself by agreeing with the OC people here... but your stance is kinda weak.

From what I can see, you're rolling over and presenting your belly on the issue of OC. That people should just accept what rights the anti gun crowd want to allow them and feel grateful that they don't take all our guns away.

I'm sorry man... I personally don't carry openly or even concealed... but I'm getting a CPL now. I'm frankly sick and tired of the anti gun crowd failing to see that we have the 2nd A to protect all the other rights we have. And part also.. if having people openly carry scares some people... good. They deserve to be scared... Those that give up liberty for a little temporary security and all that.

We only have the rights that we protect... and while I don't personally agree with the idea of carrying an AR around in the streets... I do believe we need to have the right to do so free and unharrassed if we so choose... because it's NOT illegal.

 

[meener777]

>> while I don't personally agree with the idea of carrying an AR around in the streets...
Well at least we agree on that point, which is the only point I was trying to make.

>> I do believe we need to have the right to do so free and unharrassed if we so choose...
Yeah so do I as I have said above if you read any of my posts. However you need to understand that carrying a weapon down the street that has been used recently to kill tons of people is likely to scare the crap out of folks, depending on the neighborhood you are in. If you choose to open carry, you are representing the rest of us. So please represent us well.

The rest of your post is bubblegum:

Did I say this?

"people should just accept what rights the anti gun crowd want to allow them and feel grateful that they don't take all our guns away."

No I did not. Not even close. Those are your words, not mine.

>> They deserve to be scared...
If you want to keep your rights you had better get your head on straight. Those people may be wrong but they have a say in what your rights are so you would be wise to consider representing our community in the best light possible at all times.

 

[Father of four]

Discretion is the better part of valor. I get it. But remember, there was a time in the not so distant past that seeing people carrying rifles and side arms brought no attention. When I was a high school kid in the... 70's boys would carry their hunting rifles in their gun racks to go hunting after school. Nobody gave it a second thought. Nobody shot each other. Nobody was suspended from school. During hunting season it was common to see a hunter with his rifle on his (or her) shoulder or back in the grocery store. Last minute supplies for that hunting trip. Nobody raised and eyebrow. Has the anti propaganda been THAT effective? To undermine our 2A rights under our noses? How do you suggest we tip the scales back in our favor? By caving in further?

Great Post!!!!

That is how I grew up and now today its totally different. Our rights and Our free American way of life is being replaced with fear mongering backed motives and unconstitutional laws, rules, regulations and court decisions. I shake my head almost daily at the anti-American ways America is turning. Our Founding Fathers and the Patriots of old would be disgusted in what America has become and the path it is on.

 

[Stevenav]

>> while I don't personally agree with the idea of carrying an AR around in the streets...
Well at least we agree on that point, which is the only point I was trying to make.

>> I do believe we need to have the right to do so free and unharrassed if we so choose...
Yeah so do I as I have said above if you read any of my posts. However you need to understand that carrying a weapon down the street that has been used recently to kill tons of people is likely to scare the crap out of folks, depending on the neighborhood you are in. If you choose to open carry, you are representing the rest of us. So please represent us well.

The rest of your post is bubblegum:

Did I say this?

"people should just accept what rights the anti gun crowd want to allow them and feel grateful that they don't take all our guns away."

\

No you said this.
>>>If you have been paying attention you will realize that we under massive attack here and not really winning. We are losing major rights an inch at a time, and you are pissed off because a cop asks you your name?

and this

>>>Just dont walk down the street by yourself with your AR and a camera, its going to scare the bubblegum out of people and doesnt help us one bit.

Let's say we're talking 1st amendment rights. If we translate your argument into that we'd end up with
"Hey, just because it's legal to speak your mind and exercise your right to free speech... it doesn't mean that you should use it and invite the censors to question you. We're not making friends by being controversial"

Rights require exercise and education.

I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of Constitutional power. - Thomas Jefferson

Or more clearly, the way you prevent tyranny is through the people having and knowing their rights, and for them to educated others in their rights and the rights of others.

Your ACTIONS speak louder than your words. That we should just accept infringements of our rights to get a half loaf. That's Bubble-gum pure and simple.

Your actions are saying we should partially cave to accept whatever will satisfy the antis now out of fear of losing more. That Maybe later we can regain our sacrificed rights if we're lucky.

Well I'd like to point out that in the entire history of never has anyone gotten rights BACK once they give them up.

If it weren't for the NRA going on the attack against anti gun rights people following the massacre of school kids in Newtown we'd have a seriously worse situation on our hands right now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/14/u...man-sticking-to-his-cause.html?pagewanted=all

The effectiveness of going on the attack when all looked black confirmed that frequently the only way you can defend your rights is by seizing them and reminding others that they are RIGHT... not wants.

I'm firmly convinced that continued and future concessions to the fears of antis will only encourage anti gun people to act more boldly. It's took aggressive tactics that outraged the antis to the point of incredulity to beat them back, but beat them back it did. They were calling people names on twitter and villifying nra members on face book... but look at the result of standing firm; The gun bills got kneecapped and shut down. Do you think that would have happened if gun owners and the NRA had just adopted a passive defense?

Yes, we're under attack... but playing defense when you're behind is suicide. The best way to get people on our side is to recruit allies and show the enemy that we don't fear them. If that means a few situations where cops get educated that they can't harrass OC gun owners... well that's fine.

 

[Father of four]

Well said, Stevenav.

Or we could just accept any rules and regulations they put on us now or in the future and ask for a CHL. That would be a whole lot easier.

 

[meener777]

>> The best way to get people on our side is to recruit allies and show the enemy that we don't fear them.
Exactly. We dont disagree that much if you would just listen to what I am saying instead of being purposefully obstinatnt. I am talking about strategy while you are talking about tactics.

Let me explain.

Peoples thoughts on gun rights are generally complex, with a full spectrum ranging from pro to anti that varies across a variety of issues, but for the purpose of analyzing our strategy lets put people into three buckets:

1. Pro-Gun - These people are on our side and will vote or campaign to protect our rights.
2. Undecided - These people are unsure or dont care about gun issues.
3. Anti-Gun - These people are against guns and gun rights and will vote to restrict our rights.

The people in categories 1 and 3 are not very much worth worrying about. They are polarized already. Those that are pro-gun are already on our side so, obviously there is not much to do there. Those in category 3 are against us and it's pretty much a waste of time arguing with them (I have wasted many, many hours trying so I know this to be true.)

Its the folks in category 2 that are interesting. As you said above, winning this battle is about recruiting more of those people to support gun rights. But we have to remember that these arent gun people as a rule. Some may own guns but arent particularly passionate about the issue, while others know very little about guns except what they see in the media. In order to win their hearts and minds we have to understand them.

What do these people think when they see a guy carrying an AR-15 down the street?

Do you really think that most of these category 2 people think to themselves "Wow I just learned that carrying an AR-15 down the street is legal, that is awesome! Cool how that guy is standing up for his rights! I am going to vote pro gun next time!" No that is not what happens. The only people who think that are category 1 people and we arent trying to change their minds. Do you understand now?

There is a much bigger war here than just the "battle" that is open carry of Ar-15's. When you are fighting a war you need to reduce the enemies ability to do battle. We can do that by converting category 2 voters into category 1 voters. Scaring the crap out of them will NOT do that. Sometimes you have to use your head and NOT do something just because you can, to choose your battles, so that you can win the war.

 

[Father of four]

Those in category 3 are against us and it's pretty much a waste of time arguing with them (I have wasted many, many hours trying so I know this to be true.)

Are you a congressman? Or is that you Obama?

Please no more executive orders!!!!!