Paying Atention to London??? How about Wisconsin??

mjbskwim · Aug 11, 2011

This will not end very good.The repercussions may be more than the initial assaults.

<broken link removed>

When the Rodney King riots happened,I said they stayed in their own neighborhood as to not get mowed down in the streets.

I don't think this will go very well.I think a lot of innocent people will suffer for this.
But,you have to educate your piers as to what is acceptable and what is not

Father of four · Aug 11, 2011

The type of violence (I believe it to be racially motivated) has been going on for years.

Most of the time when whites beat blacks its racism..but, when blacks beat on whites its almost always anything but a racists attack and charges are lessened. Why? Scared of a response? Riot?

Maybe people are finally waking up to the horror of what has happened.

This serious issue is something that needs to dealt with on a National level.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0809/Flash-mob-attacks-Rising-concern-over-black-teen-involvement

mjbskwim · Aug 12, 2011

I forgot Milwaukee has some CC issues,don't they?

coastal steelheader · Aug 12, 2011

Did anyone notice the lack of video of this incident? From every description of this incident the group of attackers was gigantic, yet all I have seen are videos of cops standing around, and one video of two black women having an impromptu boxing match. I'm not trying to venture into tin foil hat territory but it seems to me that there is some kind of blackout going on in regards to video of this incident.

RVTECH · Aug 12, 2011

Paying Attention to London???

I was until I heard some 'sound bites' this morning from some of the rioters that will "Most likely get away with it" as the reporter stated. They (the interviewed rioters) basically have no remorse or guilt over their actions, described happily how they looted for themselves and others and one said "Christmas came early" This is nothing more than "Shark Ethic" - eat the wounded - or rabid dog mentality. There is no amount of rational to explain this behavior all started over the shooting of a drug dealer. Anyone who will digress to this level of behavior in such a short amount of time is little more than a non-mainstream, anti-social thug/punk/wastrel who requires elimination from society.

Scott · Aug 12, 2011

I will be back there for deer season. I am from Milwaukee and talked to people yesterday and everything is fine.

Guns and plane ride all booked. Can't wait.

The report is worse than what really happened. From a person that was there. Love WI wife would not move back there because of my people in my family and I don't blame her but when I retire thats where I am going married or not.

Awesome hunting and fishing.....

Scott · Aug 12, 2011

WI it is legal to open carry. There are really only 2 small cities Milwaukee, and Madison that are liberal and the rest of the are gun owners and a lot of people drive around with them in there care. It's easier to shoot there than here meaning more places to shoot.

At least you can open carry which is fine.

This is where I will piss off people. The right to bear arms is totally seperated for concealed carry.

The right to bear arms is a right and concealed carry is a priviledge. You have to take a course, fingerprinted, background check and then issued an ID card that expires like a drivers license and they can take it a way just like a drivers license if you screw up.

Most people think driving is right but it is not it a privledge just like a conceal carry. Let the beat down began.

But what I said is true........

phathom · Aug 13, 2011

Did anyone read this and make any sense from it?

"As we got closer to the street, we looked up the road, and we saw a quite a bit of commotion going on and there was a guy laying in the road, and nobody was even laying there,"

So he was laying in the road, and nobody was even laying there? How does that work? That entire sentence just contradicted itself. :huh:

coastal steelheader · Aug 13, 2011

phathom said:
Did anyone read this and make any sense from it?

"As we got closer to the street, we looked up the road, and we saw a quite a bit of commotion going on and there was a guy laying in the road, and nobody was even laying there,"

So he was laying in the road, and nobody was even laying there? How does that work? That entire sentence just contradicted itself. :huh:

Just part of the wierdness about this one. I'm still looking for video, still pics, cave paintings of the mob but still haven't found any. I'm convinced they exist but they aren't being posted anywhere

Riot · Aug 13, 2011

I knew their was a reason I put Scott on my ignore list...

Forcing people to go through any type of "qualifications", "training", or any type of scrutiny (i.e. need permission from the Sherriff to have a permit issued) is an infringement of your rights to bear arms. California found a loop hole by saying if you want to carry open you have to have it unloaded...then the police harrass anyone with a gun on their hip to make it undesireable to do.

Scott · Aug 13, 2011

Riot said:
I knew their was a reason I put Scott on my ignore list...

Forcing people to go through any type of "qualifications", "training", or any type of scrutiny (i.e. need permission from the Sherriff to have a permit issued) is an infringement of your rights to bear arms. California found a loop hole by saying if you want to carry open you have to have it unloaded...then the police harrass anyone with a gun on their hip to make it undesireable to do.

2 peoples ignore list alright. Lets have some more............ Common sense hurts................

Scott · Aug 13, 2011

titsonritz said:
Incorrect analysis. The 2A says nothing about the privilege to carry concealed it does, however, specifically state shall not be infringed. Do you honestly think the architects of the Bill of Rights (not the Bill of Privileges) did not carry concealed? Vermont, Alaska, Arizona and Wyoming have Constitutional Carry, it is called that because thats what it is.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Yes and were is that quote does it mention concealed carry. I am with you that people should be allowed to carry and on the other hand I go many places because it is just to risky to be there because they thought they were Clint Eastwood, John Wayne and others plus watched to much tv.

A right is something we are all allowed to do and just some of the population.

Riot · Aug 13, 2011

titsonritz said:
What part of "shall not be infringed" are you failing to grasp? It means not to be screwed with, dictating what, where, when, how or why is screwing with it.

Exactly...I think this is one of the few times you and I agree on something.

Scott, just think for a minute. You're dissabled, rolling around in a wheel chair and would like to carry a gun for protection but your state says you need to be able to run a mile and shoot ten targets in 15 seconds to qualify....then even after all that the Sherriff has to approve it if he feels your need is enough.

You don't think that is unreasonable?

mjbskwim · Aug 13, 2011

Riot said:
Exactly...I think this is one of the few times you and I agree on something.

Scott, just think for a minute. You're dissabled, rolling around in a wheel chair and would like to carry a gun for protection but your state says you need to be able to run a mile and shoot ten targets in 15 seconds to qualify....then even after all that the Sherriff has to approve it if he feels your need is enough.

You don't think that is unreasonable?

He's on your ignore list and you think he cares what you have to say?
Oh yeah I'm on that list too.

But Scott,maybe gun ownership isn't for you.maybe you don't think anybody should own or carry
That's fine,but you won't get too far on a gun site like this.

Do you really think they had all the great holsters we have now? I would assume many carried in their coat pockets and their purses (since it was OK for men to carry purses or satchels back then)

The right to bear arms wasn't to open carry,it was to carry ,period.

Father of four · Aug 13, 2011

titsonritz said:
What part of "shall not be infringed" are you failing to grasp? It means not to be screwed with, dictating what, where, when, how or why is screwing with it.

Exactly right!!!!!

Scott · Aug 13, 2011

mjbskwim said:
He's on your ignore list and you think he cares what you have to say?
Oh yeah I'm on that list too.

But Scott,maybe gun ownership isn't for you.maybe you don't think anybody should own or carry
That's fine,but you won't get too far on a gun site like this.

Do you really think they had all the great holsters we have now? I would assume many carried in their coat pockets and their purses (since it was OK for men to carry purses or satchels back then)

The right to bear arms wasn't to open carry,it was to carry ,period.

No gun ownership? I have more than the average person. I spent 12 years in the military, and been hunting since I was 12, NRA life member and I used to compete with them.

So I don't know how you came to the point I don't think people should have guns? I did not say anybody should not be allowed firearms. In fact I don't care who has firearms.

Scott · Aug 13, 2011

Riot said:
Exactly...I think this is one of the few times you and I agree on something.

Scott, just think for a minute. You're dissabled, rolling around in a wheel chair and would like to carry a gun for protection but your state says you need to be able to run a mile and shoot ten targets in 15 seconds to qualify....then even after all that the Sherriff has to approve it if he feels your need is enough.

You don't think that is unreasonable?

I would sue under the The Americans with Disabilities Act................. I am almost in a wheel chair too from combat LOL. Almost 10 neck and back surgeries and a bullet.

But that would be a good start for every police department to start doing everyweek.