Gun owners will be the demise of 2nd Amendment

[Modeler]

I am pro gun but...

All you need to know about a person's beliefs right there

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

The thing that really bothers me is that because of my "don't tread on me" attitude I immediately get lumped into the same category as "irresponsible gun owner," and "the vocal minority that is going to get my rights taken away."

Look, the simple fact of the matter is that on the rate we are going 100 years from now we are going to look like Canada, and not because of me or people that are like minded. In the previous 100 years we have given up our rights because we were afraid of black people, we have given up our right to carry without registering with the state, and in some places we have to come up with bubblegum like thisView attachment 91973 to be legal.

Not to be to bold, brash, or bothersome, but what good are RIGHTS if you are afraid to use them?
With respect YOUR RIGHTS ARE ALREADY GONE, you just don't know it yet.

and it really is that simple.



The only things you can do is
1) each month take a new friend to the range
2) FOR GOD SAKE TEACH YOUR CHILDREN, PASS IT ON
3) Lobby your legislature
4) Make sure you follow safe firearm practices
5) Smile , engage and be a fun person to be around

Show them that normal people love guns. I did this where I worked in the food industry for 3 years. In that time I have gotten 1 dude and 3 women into and to go and buy their first guns, showed them how to safely use them, and I regularly go shooting with them. It is really that simple, show your passion while being likeable. That simple.




Eagle

I think this falls under the category of policing/ teaching ourselves and others which is good as we have enough laws now. No new laws will prevent idiots and rude/ dangerous behavior.

About being afraid to use Rights. I still feel open carrying in a restaurant is just rude. I'm eating, I don't want to be on guard watching if some punk is muzzle sweeping me or his finger is on the trigger. It's disruptive plain and simple.
I'm on the fence about organized O/C group protests, maybe away from businesses on a busy intersection? If the goal is to change minds/votes most open carry in non traditional places will turn a neutral into an anti in my opinion.
As I said before, save it for when you need it, like the Koreans in the LA riots! Keep walking into Burger King with your rifle to "normalize it" and there will be a law against it real soon.

 

[Martini_Up]

Not to be to bold, brash, or bothersome, but what good are RIGHTS if you are afraid to use them?

and it really is that simple.

Eagle

BOOM!!

 

[Riot]

Saying "Bomb!" in an airport can be argued a 1st Amendment Right for free speech just as carrying a loaded, slung AR-15 can be argued as a 2nd Amendment Right.

If you don't want more regulation then stop trying to prove a point about how other people need to accept that your guns are an inalienable right...it's like seeing someone protesting for gay rights by wearing assless chaps and a gag ball...you want to be gay, fine- don't cram it down MY THROAT and I'm fine with it. You want to have an AR-15? Fine, just quit cramming it down everyone's throat then screaming "discrimination!" when people see you as a threat or nuisance.


If you want to sling an AR-15 to make a point, go to a 2nd Amendment rally and prove to your legislators that they are the minority...but please stop walking into a freeking WalMart or down your block with an AR and a video camera to prove a point! All you are doing is making the rest of us look like nutjobs.

 

[1337BaldEagle]

This thread went off the rails, didn't it?

@Eagle - I took your five points as the general gist of what the OP was trying to say. Well said sir.

I just don't think open caring is rude. Everyone that knows me well or asks why, knows why I do what I do.

I guess what I'm saying is when I see a guy walk down the street with an AR, or stand at attention with an evil "assault weapon" it doesn't put me in panic mode. If you are fearful because of the sight of a gun, you are irrational, illogical, and just plain need to be on medication. The likelihood of you being in a shooting is actually rather slim though it greatly fluctuates on where you are. But if you see a guy WALKING, OR STANDING in plain view, he's probably not a threat. If you see a dude with a gun WITH A SIGN, he's probably not a threat. If you see a guy with SMILING with a gun, he's probably not a threat. Basically, if a guy isn't shooting or raising their firearm, THEY PROBABLY ARE NOT A THREAT. I don't think it is where, when or what we carry that is the problem, it is the manner in which we hold ourselves when we carry. If we are insulting Everytown people as they scurry out the capital, if we follow them harassing them with cameras, those are actions that should be avoided, those are the actions that are rude, not because of the gun but because of harassment. Those are the people that give us a bad name. But no one, I repeat, not one, should be ashamed to carry their firearm of choice ANYWHERE they choose. Please just do it safely, and hold yourself in a polite and charming manner.




Eagle

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

^^^^^^^^^^^
" If you are fearful because of the sight of a gun, you are irrational, illogical, and just plain need to be on medication. "

About half the country falls into at least one of those categories!
And they vote too.

 

[1337BaldEagle]

^^^^^^^^^^^
" If you are fearful because of the sight of a gun, you are irrational, illogical, and just plain need to be on medication. "

About half the country falls into at least one of those categories!
And they vote too.

sad but true. The only thing we can do is, like I said earlier. The swing votes only swing if you aren't showing that your fellow man can be trusted. Show them that they are lunatics for their distrust in their fellow man. Show them they are more paranoid than the average gun owner.
Eagle

 

[Riot]

^^^^^^^^^^^
" If you are fearful because of the sight of a gun, you are irrational, illogical, and just plain need to be on medication. "

About half the country falls into at least one of those categories!
And they vote too.

And they call the cops...and they videotape, take pictures and send them off to Liberal, anti-gun propaganda sites...

 

[Fisher Bill]

Here's a parody, if you do see a person toting a long gun over the shoulder and this threatens you because you don't know their intentions, you don't know if he's just using his rights or if he's on the edge of criminal behavior, either way you may see it as a physical and possible deadly threat on you or your loved ones in the same proximity.

Do you just Stand your Ground?

So please let me just ask this once and forgive if I irritate but why would anyone need to wear a long gun in public in the first place?

I carry concealed for the reason of nobody knowing I'm armed so I can have an upper hand in case I need an edge but to me broadcasting a long gun over the shoulder in a Starbucks just is not practical.

Of course this is just my personal opinion so that's why I ask, not looking for trouble or trying to piss off anyone, just looking for a good reason (within reason) so I can understand the desire other than grandstanding in public.

Bill

 

[Doc In UPlace]

This is almost as pointless as a thread about religion. A few sentences on a web site forum isn't going to change the minds of those who are willfully blind to the fact that it's not all about THEMSELVES. I, ME, MINE, MYSELF.

These are often the favorite terms of self-centered individuals who see life from no other perspective than how they feel and think. Heck with the consequences of how their behavior becomes fallout for everybody else, because it's about ME.

Well, no it isn't, unless you are a hermit living on an island.

It's about how we affect others and how their emotional responses shape some of the worst, counterproductive anti-gun laws ever written.

This is what emotional reaction produces: laws that make no sense, laws that make no difference other than to be able to say, "we're doing something".

How do we get laws like the idiotic 10-round magazine limit? They are written as a panicky, opportunistic emotional response to fear and ignorance.
Figuratively shoving a rifle under somebody's nose is not going to magically wise them up and cure them of their fears, in fact, the opposite.

How many times do we have to see the same reaction to a certain set of circumstances to understand that the results will not change?

Again, I repeat, we're not going to solve this problem using the same type of thinking that got us into it in the first place.

It's way past time for a more mature, wider view that gets beyond the frankly selfish and childish, to objectively consider the society we have, as it is, and decide how we are going to fit into it.

Words and deeds have consequences. We are responsible. That is, we are able to choose our responses. Only humans have this ability; we should use it to our benefit and stop shooting ourselves in the foot (so to speak) by alienating people even more by inappropriate, counterproductive demonstrations.

 

[Riot]

To Summarize...

 

[Znztivguy]

Can't please everyone...but we can always point to history because it repeats itself in never ending fashion.
I just wouldn't want to live in a society I cannot protect or try to protect myself in.

 

[RB87]

I am pro gun but anti idiot. And too many Idiots have guns. I am a realist and realize this system doesn't work and invite change for the better good. I don't think wide open doors makes it hard and I have no feeling nw that my rights are even close to being infrindged upon. Anything that keeps guns out of idiots hands I will vote for any day even if it means passing a test.

I am also anti alcohol. I would vote prohibition again. I don't see any benefit to it. Hell without alcohol around I might not be so inclined to speakk out against idiots owning guns because there would be a lot less people doing as stupid of things. But again people will go back alley becuase their alcohol and guns are a right dammit haha

Say, what are your thoughts on abortion? Tests maybe? Sonagrams before permission to abort?

Regarding open carry, I'll care about people's feelings on the subject the day I don't have to get a permission slip from nanny government to conceal carry a firearm. That and the average police/government agent patrols the streets unarmed.

 

[GrpCapMandrake]

Say, what are your thoughts on abortion? Tests maybe? Sonagrams before permission to abort?

Regarding open carry, I'll care about people's feelings on the subject the day I don't have to get a permission slip from nanny government to conceal carry a firearm. That and the average police/government agent patrols the streets unarmed.

I suppose what you have to ask yourself at the time of taking any action, OC in this case, is "Am I helping or hurting the cause?" I know, far be it from you to question yourself. However, this country has a two elected bodies (let's call them the Senate and the House of Representatives.) Additionally in your own State there are elected bodies encompassing the same job function, but on a more local level. If you open carry like a brainless donkey (see above posted picture from the Great Chipotle Cockup of 2014) then your "rights" will be slowly, and in some cases, rapidly restricted. You see those bodies we spoke of earlier, have the right to enact laws and restrictions. They also surprisingly give a crap about what others think, mainly because they want to get re-elected (they don't really care, they just don't want the gravy train to end). If you gin up a plurality of support against your "rights", see aforementioned donkey like state, then your rights will begin to be restricted. Don't believe me, lets see some examples.

look at the following states California, New York, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Hawaii. Look at initiatives such as I594.

You are right sir there is a 225 year old document that is called the Constitution of which the first 10 amendments comprise what we commonly refer to as the Bill of Rights. Most specifically to this discussion is the issue of Amendment 2 which encompasses the right to bear arms. Yes you are right that it says that right shall not be infringed. Yes there was that Heller decision from that other government body The U.S. Supreme Court. But this is the other item that demonstrates why you need to give two flying figs about what someone else thinks.

In the summary of the decision, we see the following:

" 2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54-56." (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html , emphasis added)

Now I know, you are one of the good ones. You are not like the Chipotle Bonehead Posse of 2014. You don't bother others and they don't bother you. However, since you have stated you don't care what others think, how would you know?

Now I know this brings forth the question of my patriotism and some will think I have "secret shame" about carrying or owning a gun(s). Some may rail against the need for community consensus to carry a gun. However all of these would be missing the point. I am not saying you need community consensus, and I have no "secret shame". What I am saying, what the OP is saying, what others have also joined in saying is that people who choose to OC need to be cognizant that they are a very visible representation of gun owners in the community. Is it fair, no, but life is not fair. If you OC in a way that reflects negatively on the rest of us then you bear some responsibility for the erosion of rights. If we all act in a responsible manner, and not make a spectacle of ourselves, then we make it harder to make a case for further restriction.

 

[etrain16]

I suppose what you have to ask yourself at the time of taking any action, OC in this case, is "Am I helping or hurting the cause?" I know, far be it from you to question yourself. However, this country has a two elected bodies (let's call them the Senate and the House of Representatives.) Additionally in your own State there are elected bodies encompassing the same job function, but on a more local level. If you open carry like a brainless donkey (see above posted picture from the Great Chipotle Cockup of 2014) then your "rights" will be slowly, and in some cases, rapidly restricted. You see those bodies we spoke of earlier, have the right to enact laws and restrictions. They also surprisingly give a crap about what others think, mainly because they want to get re-elected (they don't really care, they just don't want the gravy train to end). If you gin up a plurality of support against your "rights", see aforementioned donkey like state, then your rights will begin to be restricted. Don't believe me, lets see some examples.

look at the following states California, New York, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Hawaii. Look at initiatives such as I594.

You are right sir there is a 225 year old document that is called the Constitution of which the first 10 amendments comprise what we commonly refer to as the Bill of Rights. Most specifically to this discussion is the issue of Amendment 2 which encompasses the right to bear arms. Yes you are right that it says that right shall not be infringed. Yes there was that Heller decision from that other government body The U.S. Supreme Court. But this is the other item that demonstrates why you need to give two flying figs about what someone else thinks.

In the summary of the decision, we see the following:

" 2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54-56." (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html , emphasis added)

Now I know, you are one of the good ones. You are not like the Chipotle Bonehead Posse of 2014. You don't bother others and they don't bother you. However, since you have stated you don't care what others think, how would you know?

Now I know this brings forth the question of my patriotism and some will think I have "secret shame" about carrying or owning a gun(s). Some may rail against the need for community consensus to carry a gun. However all of these would be missing the point. I am not saying you need community consensus, and I have no "secret shame". What I am saying, what the OP is saying, what others have also joined in saying is that people who choose to OC need to be cognizant that they are a very visible representation of gun owners in the community. Is it fair, no, but life is not fair. If you OC in a way that reflects negatively on the rest of us then you bear some responsibility for the erosion of rights. If we all act in a responsible manner, and not make a spectacle of ourselves, then we make it harder to make a case for further restriction.

+1

 

[3MTA3]

...So please let me just ask this once and forgive if I irritate but why would anyone need to wear a long gun in public in the first place?...

Bill

I can tell you of an experience I had a long time ago. When I was in my early 20's I worked in the produce section of a large grocery store. For whatever reason we were the people that store security would turn to if they had issues with shoplifters or any other stolen item, so if there were security problems when security wasn't on shift the person in charge would call us.

One day I get a call from the PIC that a man had just walked in the store with a rifle (turned out later to be a shotgun). I went to an observation area upstairs where I could take a look at him. It was an older gentleman, and he did indeed have a shotgun. He didn't appear to be threatening and by this point was in my department, so I went back down to the shopping level and approached him and started the conversation with something along the lines of "That's a nice looking shotgun".

Turns out he had some work done on the shotgun and was just returning from the gunsmith. Being retired with plenty of time on his hands had decided to walk to get the exercise, and on his way home decided to stop by the store and pick up a few things. I could tell that he had no idea his armed presence could cause anybody to worry, and I never brought the subject up. I contacted the PIC to let her no there wasn't any danger and explained the situation. The gent completed his shopping and went on his way.

Where I see an issue with public carry is when its in your face and intended to intimidate our opposition to gun rights. That makes us all look just the way the left wants the moderate voters to see us.

 

[The Heretic]

It really comes down to the fact that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

If you do stupid things like insisting on open carry of military looking long guns in a commercial establishment where this is extremely rare, given the hype about "mass shootings" and the fear the common populace has regarding firearms in general and military like firearms specifically, you shouldn't be surprised if stupid things happen to you - like laws passed to restrict your gun rights.

If it was just you that the law applied to, I would be so angry, but the law applies to me to and I am sick and tired of having my rights infringed because some stupid person insists on being an anal orifice and a stupid one at that.

Stop it! Just stop! Don't do that!

One of these times someone is going to walk into some business somewhere with a long gun, some place they shouldn't do that, and they are going to get shot. Then all hell will break loose, and no good will come of it.

 

[The Heretic]

Where I see an issue with public carry is when its in your face and intended to intimidate our opposition to gun rights. That makes us all look just the way the left wants the moderate voters to see us.

exactly - it plays right into their hands and it harms our cause

 

[Dave Workman]

I guess if me wanting more required testing showing competency and controls making it harder for any idiot to acquire a gun and carry it in public makes me anti gun then I guess I'm anti gun. 21 doesn't make you able to own and properly use a weapon. Pure and simple and anyone who thinks that is enough to pass the test is either ignorant or stupid and so pro gun they could. Be considered an extremeist and I stop listening.

I don't trust people. I have no faith in people and arming everyone on the streets doesn't make me feel safer.

Then you picked the wrong forum to join.

 

[Dave Workman]

Oh yes. Because a simple range test would just inihibit soooo many people from owning a gun. Seriously? If you cant pass a simple test then you shouldn't have one. You are the same kind of person that says there should be no drinking age or anything. Basically an anarchist. With freedom comes sacrifice

Hmmmm. If you can't pass a simple test...then you should not be allowed to vote.

Q. How many members of Congress?

Q. Name them.

That sort of nonsense went away with the voting rights act. Like it or not, the 2A protects a fundamental, individual civil R-I-G-H-T. One does not have to pass a test or demonstrate a need, or even justify why to exercise that R-I-G-H-T.

A CIVIL RIGHT dilineated in the BILL OF RIGHTS is not a heavily-regulated government privilege.

Nobody's advocating giving guns to crazy people or violent criminals with a demonstrated penchant for mayhem. But don't penalize the population for the acts of a relative handful of people.