Oly bans OC at committee hearings

[Monica Cowles]

Compound that with the unsafe gun handling that was going on? Yeah, no kidding they banned O/C. We can thank providence fortunate that no AD's happened. It surely wasn't the result of proper gun safety.

'twoulda been an "ND"....

 

[mjbskwim]

But if he had a uniform on you would drop to your knees, right?

James Madison and Thomas Jefferson would be proud.

So you just trust anyone you don't know,at the ready,and wouldn't think twice about them coming into your establishment or home?
Seems real practical to me.Hope your wife and kids are smarter and will live thru a mistake like that
I never said I'd be on my knees.Your wife has trained you go at reading things into what has been said to you

I have been around guns my whole life.I have seen and met some great people.I have also met some real dumb a$$es that maybe shouldn't have had guns at all.
I don't trust anyone with a gun until I have seen how responsible he can act while holding a live firearm.
Sheesh,maybe I'm just a coward and should be on my knees for the gubment for this.

Maybe I'll stay alive to fight another day?

 

[oli700]

I have been around guns my whole life.I have seen and met some great people.I have also met some real dumb a$$es that maybe shouldn't have had guns at all.
I don't trust anyone with a gun until I have seen how responsible he can act while holding a live firearm.

in case anyone is wondering what wisdom looks like.....and a dash of common since

 

[Dave Workman]

http://seattletimes.com/html/editorials/2025586772_editfirearmslegislature30xml.html

 

[Gunguy45]

http://seattletimes.com/html/editorials/2025586772_editfirearmslegislature30xml.html

Yep... thanks a lot guys. This is what your antics gets us.

 

[Gunguy45]

I'm an SAF life member, but I think Gottlieb's calling these people "extremists" -- like Classic's calling them "lunatics" -- is not helpful to our cause, either. As people elsewhere have said, we should be looking for ways to work together, not driving wedges between us. If certain OCers were handling their firearms in an unsafe manner, then Gottlieb's calling them "stupid" is deserved, but calling them "extremists" because they espouse a more free society than your view deserves an apology.

I don't like to call anyone names as a rule. But frankly the display in question was radical, involved a lot of unsafe gun-handling and a lot of theatrics that hurt the cause A LOT.

I happen to be a supporter of gay rights. I called out ACT UP for exactly the same kinds of over-the-top antics because they took even people sympathetic to the general cause over to the other side.

There is an argument that basically the more radical people do us a service by serving as a contrast. So "moderates" can get progress by saying "Deal with me or deal with THEM." I get the argument. But ACT-UP as far as I can tell, set back the gay rights movement rather a lot. I feel the same about the long-gun open carriers that feel it necessary to carry loaded guns at low ready, fingers on the trigger guards, cycling actions in a crowded public area and wearing gas masks.

"Lunatics" may be a strong word. But even if you believe in the "radical makes conservative look palatable to liberals" argument, calling them out is exactly what we should be doing.

Reagan is famously quoted as saying "We have no enemies to the right." But then he wasn't faced with Outright Nazis** demonstrating for his cause at every event he held. Remember, even BILL BUCKLEY savaged the John Birch Society. Sometimes you have to call a spade a shovel.

**No, I'm not comparing O/Cers with Nazis. I'm comparing one group of radicals with another group who in context is comparatively radical. So for you Godwin's Law fanatics, it's an illustration, not a comparison.

 

[1Asterisk]

OC'ers are their own worst enemy. IMO if ya want to carry then get a CHL/CPL or whatever your state wants to call it. Open carrying is just asking for confrontation and makes gun owners look bad. The Patrick Henry society is a bunch of lunatics!

At least the SAF is attempting to deflate 594 which is more than any other organization had done.

'They' said the same about the Sons of Liberty. The Coercive Acts" (also known as Intolerable Acts by the Colonial Americans) was enacted by the British Parliament in retaliation for the Boston Tea Party.

'They' were wrong too. You, sir, are part of the problem.

 

[Dave Workman]

Seattle Times: Do as we say, not as we do

When the Seattle Times yesterday published an editorial applauding the ban on open carry in the visitors' galleries of the House and Senate chambers, and then in public hearings, it warned readers leaving comments that there would be "No personal attacks or insults, no hate speech…"


<broken link removed>

 

[shootnscoot]

http://seattletimes.com/html/editorials/2025586772_editfirearmslegislature30xml.html

The black panthers played the same game in California in 1967 and decided it would be a good idea to go into the Capital building fully armed. The end result was open carry being banned statewide. As the saying so aptly goes, those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[Dave Workman]

I have an idea. Let's stop bickering amongst ourselves. Fighting one another doesn't accomplish anything

 

[Caveman Jim]

For God sake people, can't we set aside our petty differences and get together and fight these British idealists!!!
We sound like the party-line gossip makers of the 50's!!!
We have the fight of our generation going on, lets take it to the enemy!!!!

 

[timac]

So what have you learned? Your frustrations are misdirected, you should be upset at your Masters. They showed their disdain for your rights and freedoms. They punished you from exercising rights and freedoms in the peoples house (Capitol). Still think you're free?

 

[Dave Workman]

So what have you learned? Your frustrations are misdirected, you should be upset at your Masters. They showed their disdain for your rights and freedoms. They punished you from exercising rights and freedoms in the peoples house (Capitol). Still think you're free?

For starters, we need to change the rhetoric. The people who made the rule are not our "masters" and anyone who suggests they are is fighting to lose.

Like it or not, there can be certain limits placed on constitutional rights. We may not agree with and we certainly don't like it, but that's the way it is. Deal with it.

If we're going to stop fighting amongst ourselves, that kind of rhetoric has to be abandoned. It's quibbling and it gets us nothing.
Question is, what have YOU learned?

Maybe we should put together some kind of summit, an informal get together. I'm not talking about parading around the capitol campus with guns and declaring individual sovereignty, but sitting down for a conversation.

Then again it may not solve a thing. Too many people want to go their own way. That works fine until we all lose something together. Like OC in the capitol and House and Senate office building hearings.

All I know is that I'm tired of everyone being at each others' throats. Somebody via private e-mail asked me if I thought this was the work of plants from the other side. I dunno. But I *DO* know that fighting amongst ourselves makes us weaker and vulnerable.

 

[forefathersrback]

For starters, we need to change the rhetoric. The people who made the rule are not our "masters" and anyone who suggests they are is fighting to lose.

Like it or not, there can be certain limits placed on constitutional rights. We may not agree with and we certainly don't like it, but that's the way it is. Deal with it.

If we're going to stop fighting amongst ourselves, that kind of rhetoric has to be abandoned. It's quibbling and it gets us nothing.
Question is, what have YOU learned?

Maybe we should put together some kind of summit, an informal get together. I'm not talking about parading around the capitol campus with guns and declaring individual sovereignty, but sitting down for a conversation.

Then again it may not solve a thing. Too many people want to go their own way. That works fine until we all lose something together. Like OC in the capitol and House and Senate office building hearings.

All I know is that I'm tired of everyone being at each others' throats. Somebody via private e-mail asked me if I thought this was the work of plants from the other side. I dunno. But I *DO* know that fighting amongst ourselves makes us weaker and vulnerable.

Dave, No disrespect to you sir, you mentioned, "that's the way it is deal with it." I don't agree with that. That view suggests we are fighting to lose. Whenever you compromise your rights away,at that point you do have masters.

 

[BoonDocks36]

I have an idea. Let's stop bickering amongst ourselves. Fighting one another doesn't accomplish anything

@ Dave, I have an idea as Well, Stop Publisizing the internal Bickering!

And no, I do Not NEED, to re-Re-READ your post of: https://www.northwestfirearms.com/t...-on-hunting-rifles.189022/page-2#post-1215088

The point you ask of us in this thread, Is Exactly the POINT, we asked Of YOU, in the thread I quoted you on!!!!

Hipocracy, most often tends to bite the hipocrites axe...

But! We can still be alligned to that common goal, it only takes a Change in Attitudes.

I know, I am Alive, because I continue to Grow, from my errors. Indeed, there are some here, who know what my last 96 hours have been like, and I could not be happier than a tick on a Hunting Dawg, currently, but it took 3 1/2 days of Pure Misery.... (Not to mention the tears, the prayers.. The coveting of Prayers from Friends...) to be a Happy Clam at High Tide, this morning...

So, Mr. Workman, do you want to be Part of the Solution, and drop the Extra's like Needlessly mentioning Websites, to your Readership???

Sincerely,

philip, I am also know as A Tenacious Old Fogey...

 

[PiratePast40]

Call it bickering if you will, but I refuse to support or promote the idea of open carry of long guns, at the ready position , into legislative sessions, restaurants, and other crowded public places as a way to promote gun owners as responsible people. I take this seriously. This is a fight to maintain our constitutional rights. I will not be a part of demonstration by people acting like adolescents with a chip on their shoulders.

 

[Dallas Ken]

Well put..PiratePast40.
The people you mention are gun owners worst enemies.

 

[1Asterisk]

Like it or not, there can be certain limits placed on constitutional rights. We may not agree with and we certainly don't like it, but that's the way it is. Deal with it.

No.

The courts interpret the law. What part of "shall not be infringed" needs interpretation?

 

[Dave Workman]

I have a responsibility as a journalist to report stuff, including bickering in the ranks. Look at it this way, if there was nothing to report, I wouldn't report it.

I never said I liked or go along with limits placed on constitutional rights. I'd hardly be alone if I said the right does not allow promiscuous use of firearms (i.e. shooting out traffic lights, threatening or intimidating people, killing game out of season, etc.) so the right is not "absolute" in the absolute sense.

Philip/BoonDocks...don't have a clue what your malady is/was but I sincerely hope you're feeling much better. It sucks to be ill.

It doesn't suck to stick up for what you believe.

That said:

Rights rally Feb. 7, I-594 repeal referendum bill announced

A proposed referendum to the people to repeal Initiative 594 will apparently be introduced today by State Representative Graham Hunt (R-Second District), as organizers of an "Our Capitol, Our Rights" rally this Saturday are urging people to protest the ban on open carry in Capitol House and Senate visitors' galleries, and during public hearings in nearby office buildings.


<broken link removed>

 

[1Asterisk]

I never said I liked or go along with limits placed on constitutional rights. I'd hardly be alone if I said the right does not allow promiscuous use of firearms (i.e. shooting out traffic lights, threatening or intimidating people, killing game out of season, etc.) so the right is not "absolute" in the absolute sense.

You are right... the Second Amendment does not address how one uses firearms. It only addresses an individuals right to keep & bear arms without infringment. And that is an absolute, unalienable right.